Fuji Edge of the World CX

[ean10775]

This weekend was the second race of our local cyclocross series here in Northeastern, Ohio. I thought last week's race was pretty scenic, but this one was even better. I didn't bring the DLSR this week so I shot exclusively with the X100S. Here are a couple shots that I thought turned out ok:

EdgeoftheWorldCX-001 by ericarthur, on Flickr

EdgeoftheWorldCX-002 by ericarthur, on Flickr

EdgeoftheWorldCX-006 by ericarthur, on Flickr

As good as the X100S is, there is something that really bothers me about the way the X-Trans sensor seems to render landscapes or anything where the subject is at a distance. Regardless of how little processing I do to an image, it seems to look more like a painting than a photograph. Images where the subject is relatively close don't seem to have this issue. I'm finding it difficult to get past.

 

[jloden]

This weekend was the second race of our local cyclocross series here in Northeastern, Ohio. I thought last week's race was pretty scenic, but this one was even better. I didn't bring the DLSR this week so I shot exclusively with the X100S. Here are a couple shots that I thought turned out ok:

[...]

As good as the X100S is, there is something that really bothers me about the way the X-Trans sensor seems to render landscapes or anything where the subject is at a distance. Regardless of how little processing I do to an image, it seems to look more like a painting than a photograph. Images where the subject is relatively close don't seem to have this issue. I'm finding it difficult to get past.

I like the last one, dynamic feel and punchy look to it.

I think I know what you mean about the "painting" look... may be related to the "watercolor" effect with X-Trans sensor photos? With the latest LR updates I haven't found any disagreeable smearing type problems with RAWs but I do recall seeing it a few times in the past, usually when shooting a lot of foliage or grass. FWIW, these look fine to me (not sure if you're seeing it here or if you just meant with other shots).

 

[ean10775]

I like the last one, dynamic feel and punchy look to it.

I think I know what you mean about the "painting" look... may be related to the "watercolor" effect with X-Trans sensor photos? With the latest LR updates I haven't found any disagreeable smearing type problems with RAWs but I do recall seeing it a few times in the past, usually when shooting a lot of foliage or grass. FWIW, these look fine to me (not sure if you're seeing it here or if you just meant with other shots).

Thanks Jay - the last photo was taken using the flash which may contribute to the punchy look. I also did some selective sharpening of the rider.

I do see the 'watercolor' effect (at least what I see it as) in the first two photos. Those were shot with a polarizer, which I've found enhances that effect significantly, although its still there in the photos of this scene that I shot without the polarizer.

Here is a different scene, but without the polarizer:

EdgeoftheWorldCX-004 by ericarthur, on Flickr

I'm editing the RAF files in LR4.4 so maybe I need to look at LR5 (though I just bought LR4 less that 6 months ago so that would be a bit annoying). Although I've always been a RAW only shooter (especially with this camera because of the plasticky look of skin tones at high ISOs in the JPEGs) I think I'm going to start shooting RAW+JPEG for a bit just so I can compare.

 

[jloden]

I thought it looked like flash was used there, the added contrast and light fall-off behind the rider was a giveaway

I'm using LR5 but I think there was an update for LR 4.4 too, just make sure you have the latest updates. Also, for the RAW+JPEG you can try putting the RAWs on the card back into the camera and use the in-camera RAW converter to make a JPEG from the same files for a quick test to see if it looks better.

These look ok to me on Flickr, but then it's limited to 2048 max size so it may not be really visible without closer inspection.

 

[ean10775]

Thanks Jay - If you say they look ok to you, maybe I'm just expecting too much as far as detail goes. I've got the latest updates for LR4.4. I'm comparing these primarily against the output from my 5DII so maybe that's an unfair comparison (though I see many people claiming the X-Trans sensor rivals full frame).

Actually, looking that the image of the rider again and the EXIF data, it seems I didn't use flash here, just exposed for the rider who was in a patch of light and then added that selective sharpening to give it a pop. I did shoot some with the onboard flash from this location and I really thought this was one of them, but I guess not. I will say that the ability for this camera to sync at high speeds is nice for sports, especially ones like cyclocross where riders are often riding through wooded or shaded areas, and the AF kept up better than I expected it to, provided I used the AF points around the phase detection part of the sensor.

 

[jloden]

Ahh, I guess it's just a patch of sunlight then


I will agree I don't think the X-Trans is at its best with grasses with the repeating pattern detail. I'm not sure I've ever really noticed it on anything other than foliage actually.

Feel free to take a look at my Flickr stream to compare if you like, there are full res versions posted. Here's a few from X-E1 or X100S with grass or foliage for example:

Greystone
Elk, Jasper National Park, Alberta Canada
Moraine Lake, Banff National Park, Alberta Canada
Balloon Festival 2013

There is a bit of watercolor effect on the grass visible at 100% viewing but it's not objectionable (to me) in normal viewing. I've yet to do really large prints but I'm curious to see how it would print versus on-screen viewing.

 

[ean10775]

Here are a few more from this week's race. I've tried to process these as little as possible (compared to my usual way of processing heavily using curves, split toning, etc). Basically I've just done some highlight recovery, increased the vibrance a small amount to get better color and then conservatively sharpened. The output just looks too cartoonish to me - like its an illustration or painting rather than a photograph. Everything seems fine with photos where the subject matter is relatively close to the camera, but I'm really having problems at any kind of distance. I've reluctantly put the camera up for sale, but I don't mind keeping it as its great for family photos, portraits and that kind of thing - I'll keep working at the processing aspect though(as RAW in camera conversions to JPEGs haven't looked much better in my opinion and I prefer the flexibility of the RAW files).

SnakebiteCX-002 by ericarthur, on Flickr

SnakebiteCX-008 by ericarthur, on Flickr

SnakebiteCX-009 by ericarthur, on Flickr

EdgeoftheWorldCX-007 by ericarthur, on Flickr

EdgeoftheWorldCX-008 by ericarthur, on Flickr

 

[jloden]

Well, they look good to me even full screen on Flickr here. But, if you're not happy with it that's what matters - hope you find a solution one way or the other!

 

[ean10775]

Well, they look good to me even full screen on Flickr here. But, if you're not happy with it that's what matters - hope you find a solution one way or the other!

Thanks Jay, I appreciate the feedback - I will admit that they look much better on my work PC than they do my iMac at home or my iPhone. They just have a different look to what I get from my 5DII or E-PL1 that I'm not sure I'm all that crazy about. As you can tell from the way I typically process my photos I'm far from a stickler for accurate representation of a scene, but something just bugs me about the way certain scenes are rendered with this camera regardless of different approaches I'm taking to the post processing. I love the form factor of the camera though and I enjoy shooting with it more than any other camera I've ever used. I'd consider replacing it with an X100, but wouldn't want to give up the operational speed or the high ISO performance. Ah, first world problems - I should stop complaining.

 

[ean10775]

A few updates from this year's Edge of the World CX. The X100S (which I sold and then repurchased since I made this thread a year ago) is still not the best tool for shooting sports, but I think we all know that. Still, I'm fairly happy with these:

X1004791 by ericarthur, on Flickr

X1004792 by ericarthur, on Flickr

X1004820 by ericarthur, on Flickr

X1004883 by ericarthur, on Flickr

X1004884 by ericarthur, on Flickr

X1004810 by ericarthur, on Flickr

X1004880 by ericarthur, on Flickr

X1004793 by ericarthur, on Flickr

X1004809 by ericarthur, on Flickr

X1004906 by ericarthur, on Flickr