Fujifilm X-E1 vs Nikon D90, 2 panoramas

[armand]

Quite an interesting experiment for me. Shot with 2 different lenses and few minutes between them during the fast fading sunset (so some differences explained by that) but overall very different rendering, particularly on the reds (I compensated partially by playing with the white balance).

[armand]

First pano was shot with the Nikon and the second with the Fujifilm. The reds on the D90 were much more obvious and I didn't have to do much for them. On the X-E1 they were initially very subdued, I had to lower the temperature and increase the tint on the WB to make it look like it is now.
Currently the X-E1 is maybe more accurate on the reds (relative to how the scene was) but I prefer the D90 result, a little punchier and with less work.

PS. 70-300 used on Nikon, 18-55 used on Fujufilm

[armand]

After playing a little more with various files I had I take it back: you can get excellent results from the Fujifilm also, just different expectations. Courtesy of LR you also get some watercolor but unless big prints you probably won't see it, meaning I can see some at 100% but not really at 50%.

As a side note what I noticed is that I sharpen 90% of my X-E1 shots to 52-54 amount and leave everything else default.

[Harald L]

Did you shot in RAW? If so my experience is that LR and ACR doesn't work on this kind of subject very well with X-Trans-Raws. That's why I use C1. I'm curious how your pic (a well done by the way) looks when it's developed by C1. If you would share a RAF I'd be glad to try it.

Harald

[armand]

Did you shot in RAW? If so my experience is that LR and ACR doesn't work on this kind of subject very well with X-Trans-Raws. That's why I use C1. I'm curious how your pic (a well done by the way) looks when it's developed by C1. If you would share a RAF I'd be glad to try it.

Harald

While I shoot jpeg+raw I try to make a habit to work on the raw for the difficult or important shots. The jpeg is for easy sharing and most important to have a point of reference for the colors.
The raf file is 25 MB, kind of big. I'll try installing Capture one this weekend and give it a try, I was planning to do it anyway for a while now.

[Harald L]

While I shoot jpeg+raw I try to make a habit to work on the raw for the difficult or important shots. The jpeg is for easy sharing and most important to have a point of reference for the colors.
The raf file is 25 MB, kind of big. I'll try installing Capture one this weekend and give it a try, I was planning to do it anyway for a while now.

A good idea! Try a subject with delicate branches or white posts or rig of sailing-boats against foliage and you'll discover the difference at once.

Harald

[David Eckels]

The raf file is 25 MB, kind of big.

ACR allows you to export a .dng file at different sizes. Slobodan has helped me with a few images this way. FWIW.

[armand]

Here we go, I just tried Capture One, the full version (although if I would buy it the express would make more sense).
Some headaches as I never used it before but I mostly stayed with the defaults. The color rendering is the default, I just played with clarity and curves.
Sharpness was left at default; I tried a little more aggressive but there were some artifacts without much improvement in sharpness.

The level of details might be better but I'm not that impressed. The initial color rendering and WB is pleasant, similar to what I got with the Nikon although the last version of Fuji is more accurate and started to grow on me.

The crops are from the center of the image.

PS. I printed the LR version almost at 12x18 and the detail is very good. Sadly can't say it's obviously better than the 12 MP with AA filter Nikon D90.

[armand]

PPS. after it was processed in Capture One it went back to LR for a graduated filter as I had no idea how to do it in Capture One

[Harald L]

PPS. after it was processed in Capture One it went back to LR for a graduated filter as I had no idea how to do it in Capture One

Here you are http://help.phaseone.com/en/CO7/Editing-photos/Local-Adjustment.aspx

[armand]

This is the last one. Taken on the same evening as the others.
Processed in Lr 4.4 and Capture One 7 (I probably used only express settings).
After I processed on CO I imported it in LR where I did additional sharpening on top of the default sharpening. For whatever reason in my mind looked better this way. I also adjusted a little the tint.
Same initial rendering characteristics as before: CO boosts the red much more than LR which could be nice or not, depends on the subject of the photo. For this one I felt it was slightly overdone.

On the detail one the CO plus sharpening does give better detail. Or should I say similar detail but without the crunchy digital look. I'm not sure it would be visible in a print.

Samples are posted just in case I'm imagining things.

If you want the full thing I'm sharing for few days the raf and full size jpeg (at 80% quality) from both processing programs: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ebgkby4ng1sluyn/94j4GwX9gJ

[Harald L]

Thanks for sharing. I think that one can produce fine-prints with both converters. I appreciate this freedom of choice because I'm interested in a broad support of Fuji's X-Trans-Technology.

Harald