Jump to content

Video really needs to be top priority for Fuji


val

Recommended Posts

I have been using LR against my XT1 and XT2 raw files since I invested in the Fuji system 2.5yrs ago.  I shoot 1/2 dozen weddings a year and other 'stuff', so I've gone through many thousands of images.

 

I have never had a problem with LR processing my raw files and I think the majority of X-Trans users may be the same.  NOTE ... I'm not talking speed/performance ... I'm talking image rendering.

 

I have two different presets I apply to the XT1 and XT2 raw files when I import.  They are what I consider my own default settings.  This simply entails Astia colour profile and my own version of sharpening.  These two (colour profile and sharpening) are mandatory.  After that, what is applied is simply personal preference.

 

I was curious if I was missing something so I recently downloaded the demo of X-Transformer and Fuji's endorsed Silkypix and the demo of ON1 RAW.   ON1 RAW gave me trouble with the very first image I loaded which was an old Nikon raw file from D3s (when I exported it is when the problems showed up), so I never even got to playing with Fuji raw file.  I just abandoned it.   I opened a ticket with ON1 about it and they told me it is a known glitch in the recently released April 2017 version and they are working on a fix.

 

With my test of X-Transformer and Silkypix I used the same Fuji raw file I did a couple weeks ago of an Osprey bird flying into its nest with a stick as it was next building.  I shot it with XT1 and 50-140/2.8 @ 140mm.   Image is very sharp (shutter was approx 1/1000, ISO was low and lighting was good).   I applied 'fine detail' sharpening in Silkypix and exported to a TIFF.  In X-Transformer I did two DNG files ... one with default X-Transformer sharpening, the other with no sharpening in X-Transformer.  I then opened these 3 files in LR along with the original Fuji raw file, but with my preset applied to the Fuji RAF.  But I then made all copies Velvia colour profile for this shot comparison.  I pixel peeped quite a bit in comparing all 4 images in the side-by-side comparison feature in the Library module.  I compared all versions against all other versions.

 

I know that it is not an exhaustive test as I only used one image and each image opened in software has certain 'characteristics' that a raw processor could process different.  But this was my first true test to see if something other than LR would show me more in this raw image.

 

The end result of this one image was I could see no difference between the output of all 3 products.  I was looking at the birds feathers, face, eyeball, the sticks of the nest, etc.

 

This was simply my experience and why I think you don't hear more people clamoring over it.  

 

I'm not saying you aren't have a problem.  I'm just saying that over the last couple of years Adobe has improved their x-trans processing and it may have reached a point that it only fails in certain images with certain characteristics that a very small percentage of the population would even notice.

I have been doing comparisons in fine detail since I got my X-T1 four years ago, and have tried comparisons of every single update to Lightroom since then, and have used the X-T1, the XPro2, and now the X-T2, and they all have the exact same issue. Fine detail rendering at 100%.

 

At the following link is an image I randomly picked to do a test on. Once rendered through Lightroom, and once rendered through X-Transformer and then brought into lightroom. Download both, and look at them at 100%. Look at the eyebrows, pores, detail in the irises, and hair on her head, and tell me you don't see a difference.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/3m5q9flbl24tm2l/AAC7_f7wPSAZM08QBU8k60Oma?dl=0

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ooh, video, something I can confidently chime in on here!

 

Actually, FujiRumors recently shared an article I wrote regarding shooting video with the X-T2. You can read it here:

 

http://www.fujirumors.com/thoughts-fujifilm-x-t2-video/

 

I would like to point out that I'm a working freelance videographer. I was the main camera op on a show for the Lifestyle network and have also worked in varying capacities with Fox Sports, Time Warner, HGTV, and the Travel Channel. I'm currently in the (very early) process of producing a documentary.

 

I agree that Fujifilm should definitely add more video features. I love having one camera that can take fantastic video and fantastic photos. 

 

Those of you who say you got tired of Canon because they focused so much on video must have left Canon a looooong time ago. They stopped focusing on video after the 5DIII. None of the consumer/prosumer cameras can shoot 4K except for the 5DIV, and even then only in the most archaic and inefficient codec imaginable. Lots of video friends of mine have shifted away from Canon to Panasonic and Sony for this reason.

 

I wholeheartedly disagree with you that the X-T2 has a lack of clarity and detail or moire. I do think that moire is a little more noticeable in 1080 than 4k, but other than that I think the video files look amazing. When I first viewed my footage on my 4K TV, I was stunned by how good the colors looked and how clean the image was. 

 

I will be renting an Atomos Ninja Flame soon and will film a review of my results for Youtube probably in the next month or so. But for now, the 4:2:0 image straight to my SD card from my X-T2 is, in my opinion, fantastic, and I can't wait to see what this rumored "ultimate X series camera" will bring to the table in regards to video.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ooh, video, something I can confidently chime in on here!

 

Actually, FujiRumors recently shared an article I wrote regarding shooting video with the X-T2. You can read it here:

 

http://www.fujirumors.com/thoughts-fujifilm-x-t2-video/

 

I would like to point out that I'm a working freelance videographer. I was the main camera op on a show for the Lifestyle network and have also worked in varying capacities with Fox Sports, Time Warner, HGTV, and the Travel Channel. I'm currently in the (very early) process of producing a documentary.

 

I agree that Fujifilm should definitely add more video features. I love having one camera that can take fantastic video and fantastic photos. 

 

Those of you who say you got tired of Canon because they focused so much on video must have left Canon a looooong time ago. They stopped focusing on video after the 5DIII. None of the consumer/prosumer cameras can shoot 4K except for the 5DIV, and even then only in the most archaic and inefficient codec imaginable. Lots of video friends of mine have shifted away from Canon to Panasonic and Sony for this reason.

 

I wholeheartedly disagree with you that the X-T2 has a lack of clarity and detail or moire. I do think that moire is a little more noticeable in 1080 than 4k, but other than that I think the video files look amazing. When I first viewed my footage on my 4K TV, I was stunned by how good the colors looked and how clean the image was. 

 

I will be renting an Atomos Ninja Flame soon and will film a review of my results for Youtube probably in the next month or so. But for now, the 4:2:0 image straight to my SD card from my X-T2 is, in my opinion, fantastic, and I can't wait to see what this rumored "ultimate X series camera" will bring to the table in regards to video.

I left canon after the 5Dmk3, so your comment about that is accurate.

 

Also, regarding:  "I wholeheartedly disagree with you that the X-T2 has a lack of clarity and detail or moire. I do think that moire is a little more noticeable in 1080 than 4k, but other than that I think the video files look amazing."

I was referring to the photos, not the video. The video looks very nice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ooh, video, something I can confidently chime in on here!

 

Actually, FujiRumors recently shared an article I wrote regarding shooting video with the X-T2. You can read it here:

 

http://www.fujirumors.com/thoughts-fujifilm-x-t2-video/

 

I would like to point out that I'm a working freelance videographer. I was the main camera op on a show for the Lifestyle network and have also worked in varying capacities with Fox Sports, Time Warner, HGTV, and the Travel Channel. I'm currently in the (very early) process of producing a documentary.

 

I agree that Fujifilm should definitely add more video features. I love having one camera that can take fantastic video and fantastic photos. 

 

Those of you who say you got tired of Canon because they focused so much on video must have left Canon a looooong time ago. They stopped focusing on video after the 5DIII. None of the consumer/prosumer cameras can shoot 4K except for the 5DIV, and even then only in the most archaic and inefficient codec imaginable. Lots of video friends of mine have shifted away from Canon to Panasonic and Sony for this reason.

 

I wholeheartedly disagree with you that the X-T2 has a lack of clarity and detail or moire. I do think that moire is a little more noticeable in 1080 than 4k, but other than that I think the video files look amazing. When I first viewed my footage on my 4K TV, I was stunned by how good the colors looked and how clean the image was. 

 

I will be renting an Atomos Ninja Flame soon and will film a review of my results for Youtube probably in the next month or so. But for now, the 4:2:0 image straight to my SD card from my X-T2 is, in my opinion, fantastic, and I can't wait to see what this rumored "ultimate X series camera" will bring to the table in regards to video.

 

 

I agree with you. No lack of detail with the xt-2 video. Every camera I have struggles (codec) with moving water, moving leaves and flames/fire. Just too complex to render with that much compression.

 

I don't agree with the OP that it should be Fujifilm's #1 priority but nowadays, you can't ignore video. I don't see how making the video better is killing the photo side. That's just plane short sighted. If someone doesn't want to do video, don't....

 

I would like Fujifilm to improve a few things on the video side and if they do, I will be ready to ditch a few Sony's I keep around (a6500) but that I don't like to shoot with. They are not bad but the colors is are an issue. I simply cannot edit footage straight out of camera without doing a lot of grading (not even talking about LOG footage). But the footage out of my XT2 is much closer to where I want it straight out of camera. I'm the one that shot and edited that little film called 

 

I never would have been able to do that (OOC) with my A7rII or A7sII.... 

 

Go Fujifilm and please, make the "impossible" happen; come out with stabilized sensor!!! ....or at least make more lenses available with IS (start with 16-55 f2.8)

 

j

Link to post
Share on other sites

I left canon after the 5Dmk3, so your comment about that is accurate.

 

Also, regarding:  "I wholeheartedly disagree with you that the X-T2 has a lack of clarity and detail or moire. I do think that moire is a little more noticeable in 1080 than 4k, but other than that I think the video files look amazing."

I was referring to the photos, not the video. The video looks very nice.

 

Hah, I wasn't referring to you when I said that. I was talking to Val, the OP, who said "There is just a clear lack of clarity and there is a weird loss of detail with running water but then a moire/digital sharpening look on sticks/fences/wires.". That's where I completely disagree. The footage is, at least in my opinion, is beautiful.

 

And to seventn, that video is great! Motivates me to go out and capture more footage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have an XT2 and video is not a highly ranked need for me.

Reviews suggest to me that if I were mostly interested in video that I would look at the GH5 and a Sony camera - as options. I suspect that I would purchase the GH5 due to lens choice options and cost.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously guys, please don't bite peoples head off about Video.

 

I have an X-T2 and I bought it for stills and I use it 95% of the time for stills, I am very firmly in the stills camp, although I do appreciate and enjoy having 4k available to me.

 

Regardless that is not my point, my point is about this forum, Its always been a friendly place that reflects well on the Fuij user base. I think its very close minded and unfriendly to attack someone for wanting video to be encorporated and improved. 

The reality is that I want Fuji to be successful so that their lens line up continues to grow and they continue to make great strides in the camera. I have also followed the progress of other cameras closely and in my opinion AF for video has to be of a higher quality than for stills and I have seen that hybrid cameras AF has seen greater strides in improvement that stills focused cameras.

 

I think what I am getting at, is did the addition of 4k make the X-T2 a worse camera, no it is still a phenomenal stills cameras, and in fact many of the additions might not have been possible if they could not have justified a bigger processor by the inclusion of 4k.

 

 

I think we should be open to video development as it adds marketability and I am in fact convinced it also brings benefits to still shooters with no penalties.

 

G

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t believe that putting a high quality video and a high quality still camera in the same body is a good choice.

 

It isn’t for me anyway.

 

Even taking into account the fact that some people who shoot stills, occasionally, shoot videos, that is going, at some point,to put the two systems at odds with each other ( because of clashing priorities) and add useless cost for those, like me, never film and don’t want to buy something that they don’t want.

 

I hope that this would be a rational argument.

 

Please bear with me and don’t take this literally but appreciate the spirit in which I am using this analogy to explain my point and try to refrain from snarky remarks.

 

I am a middle aged gentleman and no I am not crossdressing and no, I don’t wear high heels, this is just an example.

 

 

Many women who wear high heeled shoes for their work or social engagements, like to wear sneakers while commuting from home to the place where they use the shoes, but no company selling the high heels offer an extra pair of sneakers with their shoes.

 

Because not everyone wants them, because not everyone who want them would want THOSE sneakers and because they add useless cost to something already expensive.

 

 

So, yes, maybe it would be a good idea for Fuji to develop a Video Cameras separate line

 

One which uses the lenses of the X system (and the much more expensive video lenses) and in so doing pleasing the people whom, like epscott, want this thing that for me is completely and utterly useless.

 

So you can have a good camera for videos and a good camera for stills (with some video capability for those whom really can’t do without).

 

 

I don’t even use a video on my otherwise outstanding phone camera! ( Just upgraded and only because the phone I had wasn’t working well anymore) why would I want a video feature of outstanding quality in my still camera?

 

Of course I am resisting (I have a X-T1 ) buying a new body simply because it is there. I have all I ever need and more in my camera body and will use it until it start failing.

 

Even after so many years I still have to find a camera which limits me as an image creator.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t want a special camera made without a video.

 

 

There is no need for that, we have already cameras incorporating video capability.

 

But I don’t want the Fujifilm X cameras, mainly known and used as still photography cameras by the majority of the users, to be made to be videocameras more than they are now already. They may make a special video only model for the peole whom, like you, seem to want more video features. A small minority of the Fuji users.

 

 

I also don’t want the cameras to become any more complex than they are already (seen the great confusion that even at this stage they seem to cause among lots of users who get mixed up in all the menu’s) and I certainly want the cameras to keep their old fashioned character which is what attracted me into the Fuji system, I truly dislike using any Sony camera for example, precisely for those reasons.

 

For me and many others there is no need to go in the video thing any deeper than the Fuji cameras are already. 

 

Since generation1 of the X cameras, there was always, some, albeit limited, video capabilities, nice as an extra feature, and it is already there from the beginning and that’s that.

 

 

I was quite happy with having a video function for incidental use. But this is a still photography camera and I want it to stay that way.

 

As we’ve seen, adding a 4K video has made the camera more expensive ( X-T2 is way more expensive than the X-T1 ever was) and made, in practice, mandatory the use of new more expensive batteries and for those on the X-T2 also a battery grip that makes it the largest small camera on the market.

 

 

A contradiction in his own right. First they go to great length to make a small system then they make it bigger because the sensor needs a lot more energy and needs dissipating heat.

 

Maybe they will make a special video only model. Great for those like you, so we can, each of us, go on doing what we like best without having to pay for things that we don’t want or need.

 

Anyway as usual it will be what it will be.

 

Neither me or you will determine this. Industrial production is not based on democracy. I think that trying to imitate other brands is a bad strategy and being the king of your niche is better than being a participant to a race where others, with much more capital, will always have an edge that you don’t have.

 

Video is NOT a top priority for Fuji X, and it is certainly not for most Fuji camera buyers.

Edited by milandro
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

You all know where I stand lol. Having great video features on Fuji cameras has zero effect on the stills only shooters.

Well, I think I have explained several times how I think it makes the experience for stills photographers less pleasurable.

 

So again:

 

- there is a real chance of the cameras becoming more expensive due to the extra capabilities

- video recording generates heat, which requires better cooling, probably resulting in a bulkier camera

- The time Fujifilm engineers spend on developing video capabilities can not be spent on stills photography improvements

- adding more functionality makes the electronics and software more complicated. There are enough defects right now already.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want a video camera, buy a bloody video camera.

 

This is not why I bought a stills camera!

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by Mike G
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this is part of “ the problem” as the video tribe probably sees it.

 

There isn’t one, yet, based around Fuji X lenses.

 

Since they have now made their expensive video lenses to fit the X system, this could be mean that they are working toward producing a dedicated video camera (only) , since it would be not very wise to put very expensive lenses on camera that have all the limitations of the video function of the still photography cameras by Fuji.

 

I would certainly welcome that move so, the rest of us, would be rid of all these additional problems created by this uncomfortable coexistence in one body.

Edited by milandro
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want a video camera, buy a bloody video camera.

 

This is not why I bought a stills camera!

 

 

 

 

 

To this I replied what Eppscot thought concerned him

 

 

“........Well, this is part of “ the problem” as the video tribe probably sees it.

 

There isn’t one (VIDEOCAMERA), yet, based around Fuji X lenses.

 

Since they have now made their expensive video lenses to fit the X system, this could be mean that they are working toward producing a dedicated video camera (only) , since it would be not very wise to put very expensive lenses on camera that have all the limitations of the video function of the still photography cameras by Fuji.

 

I would certainly welcome that move so, the rest of us, would be rid of all these additional problems created by this uncomfortable coexistence in one body.

..........."
Edited by milandro
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...