Fujifilm X-T2

It will be interesting to see if they've finally decided to up the pixel count. I don't think they need too much more honestly, I wouldn't bother with trying to compete with a D800/D810 or 5DS/R. I think 24-28MP would be perfect. I would love it if they went FF, but I kinda doubt that that will happen just due to them needing to come out with another set of lenses to cover an FF sensor.

Other than that, I imagine they will keep tweaking their AF. That is to say, speed it up and add more points. Now that Sony has dropped the A7R II, I'm certain that every other company now knows it is the current standard and is interested in at least making something equivalent if not better. Fuji's challenge is doing it and still being half to two-thirds the cost of Sony's offering. So hopefully much improved tracking. As AF improves generally metering for auto modes gets an improvement as well.
 
I'm not a fan of the X-Trans sensor in the X-T1. If Fuji releases documentation to software developers on how best to handle the X-Trans raw files, or they switch back to the industry standard Bayer array then I'll consider them for my next camera.
 
MN Scout said:
I'm not a fan of the X-Trans sensor in the X-T1. If Fuji releases documentation to software developers on how best to handle the X-Trans raw files, or they switch back to the industry standard Bayer array then I'll consider them for my next camera.
Click to expand...

I will have to disagree with you about moving back to Bayer. X-Trans is one of their competitive advantages. It's why even at 16MP, their sensor out resolves sensors with 4-8 more MP. Bayer throws away a lot of pixels in comparison with X-Trans. It's also why X-Trans is sharper pixel for pixel.

You are right about the issue of RAW decoding though. That isn't Fuji's fault however. Fuji unlike Canon gives away all of their info. It's just Adobe (and other manufacturers) are slow and disinterested in fully supporting a very small subset of the market. They've dragged their feet on everything. However, Adobe Camera Raw and Lightroom both decode X-Trans based RAWs now... albeit not as good as a purpose built one, which once again is because of Adobe's slap-dash implementation.

I think the correct move would be to employ 50-100 people or so with the express purpose of creating RAW conversion software. Similar to Canon's software but more ergonomic. If they can simply make something that will give all the RAW info with some basic sliders and has the capacity to export to any universal RAW format, that would be enough. Alternatively, they could find someway to have the camera record directly to a universal RAW format. That may not be possible though as it may simply be too much processing overhead. With another option of course just outright paying Adobe or Capture One to incentivize them to develop better RAW processing into their software.

They had another hurdle for a long time with professionals, which was the lack of tethering support on any piece of software. They finally developed a plug-in for light room, but that happened less than 12 months ago. Still, that's another step to making their platform a serious contender for professionals, above and beyond enthusiasts. So, what I'm trying to say is they're committed to their platform. Even if it takes them a while they're making the (correct) steps to fully building out their system. Which is hard in such a competitive environment.

===

I have high hopes for Fuji. I'm hoping that their market segment keeps growing and eventually they go back to their roots and release a digital medium format system. Out of all the current entrants in the market, they're one of the few companies that has the optical knowledge, the capacity to build their own sensors and bodies in house, and develop something that is meaningful and supported in the market place. The 4x5 or even 6x7 Rangefinder could return and bring major competition to companies like Phase One and Hasselblad that have been putting an unreasonable price premium on their hardware.

But that's my side tangent from out of nowhere... as it obviously is beyond the scope of what they're doing now with the XT-2.
 
Last edited:
Can you point me to the information Fuji has supplied regarding algorithms for processing the X-Trans raws?

What features do you feel are missing in current raw converters, like Lightroom or Canon's DPP? I think it would be nice if Lightroom would let you select different demosaicing algorithms, maybe super resolution options, noise reduction layering using image stacks, show some raw image statistics like RawDigger. The newest panorama feature was a nice step forward.

I would certainly love a larger sensor like a 6x7.
 
MN Scout said:
Can you point me to the information Fuji has supplied regarding algorithms for processing the X-Trans raws?

What features do you feel are missing in current raw converters, like Lightroom or Canon's DPP? I think it would be nice if Lightroom would let you select different demosaicing algorithms, maybe super resolution options, noise reduction layering using image stacks, show some raw image statistics like RawDigger. The newest panorama feature was a nice step forward.
Click to expand...

I'm having trouble Googling now. But I'm pretty sure that they released an SDK. If memory serves, I read it on passing on one of the various camera review sites. However, I could totally be mistaken. If so, sorry about that.

As far as Adobe/Lightroom conversion, the issue is that Adobe's software seems to kill some of X-Tran's dynamic range. I can't speak to it as much as I only shoot Fuji on rare occasion. But I have a friend who moved from Canon to 100% Fuji (X-T1, X-E2, and X100S), and talked about the necessary use of third party RAW conversion, because Adobe's wasn't cutting it.


MN Scout said:
I would certainly love a larger sensor like a 6x7.
Click to expand...

Here's hoping. I think Pentax could also dominate more of the landscape if they'd just be faster about their lens releases. They DESPERATELY need leaf shutter lenses that can do at least 1/500th flash sync. If they did that, then literally the only thing they wouldn't have in the bag is the ability to tether to CaptureOne (CaptureOne is intentionally not supporting Pentax medium format, as it's obviously a direct competitor to their hardware). That would put Pentax into prime position for medium format at a slice of the price. But their 1/125th focal plane shutter sync speed just isn't going to cut it for a lot of people (including me).

Even if their leaf shutter lenses were twice the price of their regular lenses, most pros would be saving at least $20-30k buying a Pentax than a comparable PhaseOne or Hasselblad system. Pentax did make a few leaf shutters in their film days, so it's not for lack of knowledge. I don't know what is holding them up.

Here's hoping that Fuji gets medium format's rear-into-gear.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top