Fuji X-T2 geared towards portraiture? What about mushy landscapes?

mesmerized

Regular
Dear Users,

I keep hearing from video (youtube) reviewers that X-T2 makes a great portrait-work camera, and not necessarily an equally great landscape-work camera. Is it really so? Is X-T2 geared towards portraiture? Has Fuji dealt with the problem X-T1 had, i.e. mushy green areas? I'm really tempted to go back to the Fuji world.
 
I don't shoot a lot of landscapes. But what I have shot with the Pro2 looks really good. I would assume the same of the T2 since they share the same sensor.
 
"Mushy green" foliage, leaves, grass, etc is not the fault of the camera; it's the fault of flawed RAW demosaicing algorithms for converting X-trans RAF files. Use Capture One Pro, Photo Ninja, or Iridient Developer and there are virtually no problems.

Carneros-Mustard-1.jpg
 
"Mushy green" foliage, leaves, grass, etc is not the fault of the camera; it's the fault of flawed RAW demosaicing algorithms for converting X-trans RAF files. Use Capture One Pro, Photo Ninja, or Iridient Developer and there are virtually no problems.

Agreed. I don't have problems with "mushy greens" from my X-T1s, X-T10, or X100T. I use SilkyPix Develper Studio Pro.
 
Thanks for the answers.

Well, it's not like a blindly follow each and every review on youtube, but there used to be quite a lot of chatter about how X-T1 couldn't handle green areas. I remember that some of the pictures taken with my X-T1 weren't too impressive in terms of rendition of foliage.

What about JPEGs?
 
Thanks for the answers.

Well, it's not like a blindly follow each and every review on youtube, but there used to be quite a lot of chatter about how X-T1 couldn't handle green areas. I remember that some of the pictures taken with my X-T1 weren't too impressive in terms of rendition of foliage.

What about JPEGs?
It's about using the right tool for the right job. ACR/LR did not do a good job of rendering foliage, leaves, fine tree branches very well for a long time. The current versions LR CC 2015.6.1 seems to do a better job but I still prefer Iridient.
 
Thank you for the answers and sorry for the typos in the previous post.

I assume that in case of SOOC JPEGs the issue of foliage rendering doesn't exist?
 
Alright, pixel peep all you want but don't judge me, these are all SOOC. I got something from all 3 lenses I used Saturday and Sunday, which does show a difference. The 27 pancake is a little soft wide open. The 35 f1.4 is sharp when it gets up, sharp all day, sharp when it goes to bed. The Rokinon CAN be sharp, if I'm not shooting one-handed while biking at 15mph.

XF27, circular polarizer, SOOC
29914334176_b90b50a222_b.jpg
KBRX0844
by gordopuggy, on Flickr

29322110143_4b7b42abe7_b.jpg
Elk Meadow
by gordopuggy, on Flickr

Rokinon 12mm f2 lens, SOOC
View attachment 27189KBRX1158 by gordopuggy, on Flickr

XF 35. I didn't use it as much, so I didn't have tons of foliage choices here.
29865344401_456088b463_b.jpg
KBRX1210
by gordopuggy, on Flickr
 
Thanks a bunch KillRamsey! Appreciate that! I'm having such a hard time deciding if Fuji is the way to go.

The thing that makes me a bit hesitant is the lack of in-body IS system. Then again, my Olympus has IS but those 16MPixels and a small-sh sensor don't really float by boat either.
 
I don't miss it. I've never HAD it, to be fair, but ... I don't miss it. When I really need stabilization, I have the XF18-55 and the XC50-230. Usually, I don't... no stabilization will stop my subject from fidgeting around. It's a nice-to-have, for sure, but not THAT nice.
 
Back
Top