X-T2 is out, (offically) Who is interested

[scooby70]

Surely high resolution cameras only make movement blur more noticeable because they have the resolution to allow it to be seen whilst lower resolution cameras don't have the resolution to allow you to see it. I'd assume that if you take a high resolution picture that displays blur and resize it to that of the lower res picture which doesn't the high res image would then magically not display the blur?

[scyth]

I don't know for sure but considering it goes to 1/8000 vs 1/4000 it might be less dampened.

the speed of focal plane shutter blade's movement depends on x-sync... X-T1 = 1/180, X-T2 = 1/250 ... more impact to dampen and correct me if I am wrong but Fuji dSLM still don't have EFCS

[MBehrens]

resize it to that of the lower res picture which doesn't the high res image would then magically not display the blur?

I suppose so. But that really isn't the point. The message is that the X-T2 is incredibly sharp, I think this is more than likely always an assessment of the SOOC JPG files which have the in-camera X-Processor Pro sharpening applied to them. It seems the default LR 25/1.0/25 Sharpening settings are not as effective with the new 24MP files. This may also be an artifact of the LR demosaicing of X-Tran RAW files, if this were true though I'd expect to see the same results with the 16MP files.. the pattern has not changed. But I don't, so I don't think this applies.

I'm off to shoot some RAW+JPG shots and do some comparisons to get a grasp of how far off the LR default sharpening is from the SOOC X-Processor Pro sharpening. I have not done this yet. I have not changed any of the in-camera JPG adjustments so this should be a true SOOC comparison. It may be part of Fuji's whole faster, better, focusing solution is to ratchet up the sharpening in the JPG processor.

[MBehrens]

Here is the results of the test shoot today. The X-T1 with the 18-55 and the X-T2 with the 55-200, both set to 55mm. I know it would have been better to use the same lens on each camera, but I'm not a fan of switching lenses in the field. Settings on both: ISO 200, f10, Auto SS.

X-T2 JPG 1-1 processed in camera


X-T2 RAF 1-1 LR Default Sharpening, Provia Camera Calibration profile


The LR processed image doesn't quite live up to the JPG but there is not a lot of difference. However the big difference is when we look at the X-T1 image below. This is what I am used to and the X-T2 images just seem soft compared to it. It is SOOC JPG.


The X-T1 JPG is significantly sharper and what I am used to getting consistently from the camera.

Is anyone else seeing this much of a difference between their X-T1 and X-T2 images?

I'm beginning to think I have a bad copy.

[Zorki5]

Here is the results of the test shoot today.

All I see is "Content Protected by Owner"...

[MBehrens]

How about now?
My first time including images in a post... Permissions in Zenfolio are Visible to Everyone.

[Zorki5]

How about now?

Works now, thank you -- but only after I hit Ctrl-F5 (clear browser cache).

(simply reloading the page did not help)

[mdelrossi]

"I know it would have been better to use the same lens on each camera,"
You can't judge the cameras this way.
Same lens, shutter, ƒ stop, iso, focus point, processing software (either in camera or lightroom.
Otherwise you're just spinning your wheels.

[MBehrens]

I know. My original intent was to see how far off the LR Sharpening was from the In-Camera - just in the X-T2 - and I guess I proved that it is not that far off. I threw the X-T1 image in as an indication of what I'm seeing across my lenses. I'll do the proper comparison...

[David Sutton]

What mdelrossi said.
It's hard to judge with  images posted on the web, but it looks like firstly there is a contrast difference more than a sharpness one. 
Secondly, I wouldn't use LR to pull detail out of an X-Trans file.
David

[rdonson]

The Adobe Lr default sharpening settings for X-T1 and X-T2 are notoriously inferior IMHO.