Jump to content

X-T3 SOOC jpgs look like they are fallen appart


User

Recommended Posts

Hello, I just got an X-T3 after I have owned X-T1 and X-T20.

So far it seems like X-T1 is king regarding jpeg quality, followed by X-T20.

I have tried some film recipes from fujixweekly and on XT1 and XT20 they look normal, but something on XT3 looks way off and I don't know what is happening. If I have the same settings on XT20 as on XT3, the XT20 looks nice and usable but XT3 seems that it was over edited with strange contrast and blown highlights even when underexposed. Looks to me like its processed in less than 8bit somehow. 

Is there anyone here who can help me understand what is happening? 

 

1. here are settings from XT20

IksdtV1ZSnsYgG1zn6VXvp7uBMpN66Om0gQw7BQDfpxFSQ1crBTs2UHbD7eMSs-FVy8Ss28Qt1s2QLt8mNgMSrr4TwkI0z10MroSm3qEmOJhBN2x70AF_FM8qVJF4jrLrW7hWloEeuua94Lkz3RqXOeyV6jmD2vEP0Jd_z1FiZ7C4e6TXnJ_jZcoYbP5ejNtiIOvt_TBaV4lz49lAzoq-_zZyj3wOSCB6pPc-aU9yiQ-BAVqJfEtkIwxphBujIk2P3TF8uEeID3C5Baegf_uyfmvW5ZXVSxvtIa7i-AnFrQFKVEGj263SBWXzMIV0G8r05olVwAw3-RUFhi834m9Im0kveRNh07fPiFlwRQLfdXjPigwNKJqJLSPnUQzYmr8vTNxA_lH8THUx9TCvDWM4CfiMRQlFMeSZlrS_C_Z_-Xd8WZsz999sKT4b_o6VPSkMMJKSWHhF7LaFrY6fSv5PpxyO0y7JyHWUENrXes0AlQ0BbDQ8j2RKvDjqhJLuzrx_GqC67nx-2oWhzaUxY4OEFcxDiMtO-Pe_6fjOj11bZVfgVuUD9qJsVrXzGpvjIaatGRiW8AgNaPzL4TGKdOhi-x9u0erP2nXvsUAD4w83bZwamPqYckPRkacvTSG5pSmbk5tDzU1QyQEiTThNX09KMpykpLLH54NeXKvS8zSWHfOatiSPT0TFab_J9Cu3SM=w2118-h1589-no?authuser=0

 

- here is an example from XT20

S6WmLgSvm0ATEUxqu0T-_VIo8OQQkHhTmcCNDViblPlwQIuo6UACIS_2eqzeitiV4p8pK5CxYLC6-5Nyx5mt2UO8M2YgT9OC3AOtEWoj6UH1OGfj8I70x4u_eDYmDQU6o-UKeWVEsipp0Mf9RIcm0hlQU0ud_Yb7kpUw5N9bCWtn1x12jt1MMSYq0Ddjkgn1lp6REicUEHCRkxTn7ptHKU7O4Wx1eki2dlRELYDwgTVi0jN9A9Y_fC1reiYCeVS0-zzXrQ95BQgoQQsBqVtv-i6s2Qu1kyEY9g9Z7KHYExOgJlckt4oYueRm2qzxgdKrIX3QvC_Gs1rHexQ5xZUo2O7h5Gn7AA29yKhvLMlXKqhoJsWcoQF5HFtIj1emJ1_wn0WO6ui5Lk315KDjg5Ft2WhEO_8abNECxBX7fvnvstnHZOKHdc2zQcuByrqwPx3abWNYctX1UFPIWtnIEnLoDyaGYdbbpI6hpGnjPBdBAn-yZfXuJFR-uHG5Z7-Roh1ry2ieZhE0NSe0U6aGa94PC9xu9FJ3b-IHN0i0K8yTc5dhWd3TnoNpjdmIjX8d7pRn3x6iFGKVsJmR_URq6STrmgJNI1ApMHd0-PVEFIaEdSWUss56Ksy3QERE5tuZm4NqIQQ_ot1jWtfrIpIfdv6odSxvAxAMKQ8EXabdOHDN9wlY5TPtEV-OCdfYO5aviXU=w1224-h1835-no?authuser=0

 

2. Using the same settings from the XT20, the XT3 jpgs look significant worst. They are not even overxposed. Even underexposed photo looks just bad compared to XT20

qrWEI6fwvO9l9X2W__fjEd_VWnkmvb6KXOBqiuyJGEFgFSouiRcl7wXYvMpIZjcGXMt31gzb9It-dxyLPzGYKYoipDNx80CGCKCiSsM4MM7C9mRLvZNL0KGzl_CvGvas4KTKrW1gUTEFC-rKZkaHVysYf2fp1-AmDHqpfcZDB6vvDdolqxHMjFlsuRf6kv54SPawqwjsSD10u3P3mAp2JQMnigIIGspiwSInhPmDfz47OHFrNGRBFwVzwGUWJ84-49rWelPRAbDGli2boypMlSbr4A9DlMEMCUbBXhfacZ2uczdxN6YENoIrvsXBkl9F0QYSlHKFNMTWu3FpLg6VY7ZwoGgPzw3HFnFa-1rOtXc885PP6F77SkMo8450mwzj0YDBTPIrmtaWejTtcWjDyWuxIJZPl6E_ioRIWkVDK-glZ2A6Re_AKZ8IeFDXCqmuKDiIHGOLi5xfJVqsG_-3QhvxI-TfNmhpkH8Pn9qSgyJrhLdjD-iIasODZrn8WHFw0G457BhEN14eRKJ4LnoDofvbLfLU7Jgpq4_VjdszyiLhM9fYj4ZfPuZfaaKgFKxKeciyWFBBRaQd97_XGUqf4Qr0jaRCasITdjrmm_8_KBLxe4RQH7yvCtK5gtj-0f7Ls9v_KJ6Zc4NRVJxzfbxi2MDhcldPUuCGtOqP9SPz45fPc2LqJbBJu2p43kR5i_I=w1224-h1835-no?authuser=0

2oOvSEte1S2KHgzg0E_-l6OfYUdyKOea9FqMLHKaVuqsyrpKKGcA2A7RnnusbwpO11BpnakHfFxePDZKVJ274iBS-YQX4N51IJUla_fn6EcPQxXd7n-T6-yisfAoLV3dRDwGA65IxX0lRPbgcDVQq6YdUYmC52vYSV9WQwCd1pGzSUMsgqb7Y3f_7qDDOx5zcbWKWKUeyVtebebLuDejfpFOJpiuF6gzL__PVr96DXhTSo7xM-iCJclGAjCBOIGd0jzDsLB5ptGn2o8WkDHoPkw5_t_NY-szIaDaqiTRyc5tDBmIQHEdoHP07jmOjts59KqU_VFMxd51qemuMVXi2NegNgXsyUayRW2XnINCJXsIkc3cENzl2yjmuNEwadDQ3yq_-DIliriNixtukjk-mRBQ8PuoabcIG1RmWufY185dCSIyTTdtZFpkUfULUxbIyT6EhOGwqoAGlqU36YgOKPx8X2tQp_IuuYqrj27wONOXgGkB7Nt9yc23EWAMgHTDGxU7RB9zg_iee2qs-h7tCmo2SHRvVOcgGPj6Qxd8Np1xLyE1UdTalR8WrCUix4MDjRa9tSiclkqbnFKTTpXk0VPKG5vDiy3MGKN6mEWyu4HYz9pMSzIX2c9bEBdAAOjJ3Qon6B5ZXkXcSeVnm1yRQC7LlPQAqRkSJC-wiCMrovxi_hiVD910aIq6M7-jRAo=w1224-h1835-no?authuser=0

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly I don't see any of your images.  Could be me, but I'm not sure.  Secondly I agree where the XT1 produces some amazing images -- I still use mine over my XH1 for certain shoots.  I also feel the High ISO on the XT1 is a bit better than the XH1.  My opinion anyway.

As far as your issue goes I wonder if it has to do with the processing engine on the XT3 vs the XT1.  Maybe you need to tweak the recipe's to get what you want.  Have you tried that?

Thanks

J

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have tried to do some tweaks with the Kodachrome recipe  from fujixweekly and it seems that that particular recipe is not playing nicely. I tried another recipe's and they look definitely better

I am not sure why images are not displayed but I will try another way to show them:

1. Settings from XT20: https://1drv.ms/u/s!AtjXfWXuaCC7sDKGpK_AwNnfEhoj?e=7i2knj

2. Sample from XT20: https://1drv.ms/u/s!AtjXfWXuaCC7sDO_6qMHblju74tw?e=5SvZ8f

3. Samples from XT3 with the problematic recipe: https://1drv.ms/u/s!AtjXfWXuaCC7sDcMotzj3dfN_rEJ?e=oylhuR

4. This is just for the love of XT1 color tones which I love so much: https://1drv.ms/u/s!AtjXfWXuaCC7sDqbOIPcaqwiWnMh?e=aDAqEk

 

I really hope the links will work.

I tried different settings for jpg's in XT3. But I don't know what to do in the future though. I will definitely keep the XT3, but somehow XT1 is like a heartwarming camera. It blows my mind with the images it produces overall. This very thing makes me think that Fujifilm evolved for better performance trading the magic of image quality from the older cameras.

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.

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • I didn't use cascable... stayed with just the two fuji apps
    • Buttons Fn1 and Q stopped working
    • Because the sensor assembly is moved electrmagnetically. When there is no power it is essentially free moving.
    • Hi everyone I have a problem while using my xpro3 and strobes, from a day to an other I started to have a black shade on the side of my ID photos so it's kind of problematic. It's like if the speed is to high except it happened even at 1/30s. And the shutter speed seems accurate with ambiant light so I'm a bit disturbed about all of this.   Anyone has an idea about that case ?
    • Ahoy ye hearties! Hoist ye yon Jolly Roger and Cascade away. NGC 1502 The Jolly Roger Cluster:

      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!

      This is the equivalent of 43 minutes, 40 seconds of exposure. NGC 1502 is a neat little cluster located in the Camelopardalis Constellation. This region of space was thought to be fairly empty by early astronomers, but as you can see, there is a lot there. Kemble's Cascade (a.k.a. Kemble 1) is named for Father Lucian Kemble, a Canadian Franciscan friar who wrote about it to Walter Scott Houston, an author for the Sky And Telescope magazine. Houston named the asterism for Fr. Kemble and the name "stuck". NGC 1501 is the Oyster Nebula. A longer focal length telescope is needed to bring this one into good viewing range, but it is well worth the effort. NGC 1502: https://skyandtelescope.org/online-gallery/ngc-1502/ Camelopardalis Constellation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camelopardalis Kemble's Cascade (and NGC 1501: The Oyster Nebula): https://www.constellation-guide.com/kembles-cascade/ Arrrrrr Matey.
×
×
  • Create New...