Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi All.

Take a look at the photo below.

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!


do you see distinctive white dots on dark area?
(magnified area is 40% brightened for more visibility.)
it was taken in 1/125s , F2 , ISO1600 , DR200% , PROVIA , WB Auto , and other settings at 0.


They really seem like dusts on sensor or lens... but they're not.
Everytime I take pictures, the white dots appear on different locations.


to make it sure, with lens cap closed, they still appear in random locations. And they get more as the ISO goes higher.


Of course I tried in-body pixel mapping. it didn't help at all.


And I also tested noise Reduction setting from -4 to +4. they always appear.
What was worse is that with NR +4, normal noise gets blury but the dots stay still. It's much visible.

 

At first, I thought my camera is defective.  (bought a brand new one and it's been only a month.)
But when I asked people who's using X-T3, some of them were aware of this.


I think this problem is maybe happening on All X-T3s.  (noise reduction algorithm fault?)
But just not widely known because it's not very easy to notice.


if you have X-T3, Please check this out.

Magnify your pictures and tell me if you have same problem.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

yes! it does theyre plenty when you bump up the iso 400-1200 or the sharpness -1 to +4. but not noticeable at iso 2000/3200/6400 or in other color profile beside standard. FUJI what is this? please make this right with your next f irmware. I hope you are concern of your flagship consumer camera?    sample below

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!

      

Link to post
Share on other sites

What program are you using for the photos displayed?

I can look back in my you tube history, I remember something that a you tuber identifyied that the logarithms in programs are not completely accurate for Fuji sensors and it is not the camera that is at fault, but is the program you are using for you Fuji files.

I am being vague about the terminology as I do not have the facts at this time, but just wanted to make you aware.

What do you think?

Jimmy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

Hello all

I am having the same issue. I have noticed that only appears more frequently at 18mm. 
I have some dots that are persistent in many photos but weirdly not in every single one of them (8 of 10 I should say). 

If I move the zoom lens to a closer focal length (23-35mm) sometimes the white pixels moves a couples of pixels offset from the previous one at 18mm.

I did the test with the cap on and it seems that they are always present if you increase the exposure in post.

I also have some white pixel even a normal speed and ISO 160 when is poor lit scene.

Best 

Luis

 

Edited by Liturram
I added information
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 3 years later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • I also use a Nikon to GFX Fringer and it works very well.  24mm f/1.8 vignettes so best used on 35mm mode.  50mm f/1.8 covers the entire frame very well with no issues and is a superb little lens. 105mm Sigma vignettes slightly but is perfectly usable. 300 f/4 likewise the 105.  I have a 70-200 f/20+.8 incoming to test so will report back but I'm expecting a little vignetting.  Even in 35mm mode the image is still 60MP and if you're prepared to manually crop and correct you can get 80-90 MP images.  I also have a C/Y to GFX adapter.  The 24mm Sigma Superwide vignettes strongly. Ditto 28-80 Zeiss Sonnar. 80-200 f/4 Sonnar is perfectly usable. All work fine as 35mm mode lenses.  I also have an M42 adapter which I tried with the Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f/3.5 with good results. 
    • Thank you. I will research it.
    • Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
    • Jerry Thank you very much. That is extremely helpful. It seems that the camera and the lens have the latest firmware update, so it appears that the corrections should be applied automatically. The lens arrived this afternoon and I took some quick test shots, in which the correct lens information appeared in the EXIF files, so that sounds good. I used Adobe DNG converter to convert the Raw (RAF) files, and then opened the DNG files and saved them in PSD format. However, with a beautiful, clear, cloudless blue sky, there were no lines near the edges to check if distortion had been corrected. Another day I plan to photograph a brick wall. Thank you for your help.
    • Typically you need to make sure the lens is compatible with the camera, i.e. check the lens compatibility charts for your camera, then make sure the respective firmwares are updated so older issues are resolved. After that, each lens has a manufacturer’s profile which will be embedded into the raw file meta data for the images captured using that lens. From there, it is up to the raw conversion software to apply the lens correction to the image. Different converters do that differently, some automatically, some only if a setting is turned on. For in-camera jpegs, the on-board converter does the corrections automatically, assuming the camera recognizes the lens, it applies a generic profile otherwise. I do not know if that can be turned off or not.
×
×
  • Create New...