Jump to content
thomasrdedekam

JPEG Kodachrome/Velvia/Acros vs. Raw - quality differences

Recommended Posts

Hello, this is my first post on this forum. I recently got the X-T2 after shooting (Raw only) with the XT-1 for a while, a camera for which i was very happy with the result i was getting. As i am now in a testing phase of the X-T2 i shot strictly  JPEGs over the weekend, using the Kodachrome, Velvia and Acros settings.  

now, by looking at the results, a lot of them are really not that sharp, and quite a few look like they are "patchy" or noisy - and this is with enough speed, low iso and almost exclusively F2..does anyone have the same experience? or does the JPEG filter process take "over" the image that much that it makes it look almost "animated" in the details

images were all shot handheld

looking forward to your thoughts and comments

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps you can share a few examples here?

I find the X Series camera's default jpeg noise reduction to be a bit too heavy handed, I suggest setting that to -1 or -2 in the Q menu and retesting. It's possible to have the camera apply 'grain' to jpgs as well, verify your settings in the menu.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dem   
2 hours ago, thomasrdedekam said:

and almost exclusively F2..

This might be the problem. What lens are you using? For example, the 23 mm f/2 is rather soft at f/2 especially in close up shots.

Also, how do you assess sharpness? There is a bit of a drop between 16Mpx and 24Mpx image quality if you view them on the computer screen at 100% zoom (as in pixel-to-pixel).

I don't think different film simulations affect the image sharpness enough to notice any difference. Need to look elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Christopher said:

Perhaps you can share a few examples here?

I find the X Series camera's default jpeg noise reduction to be a bit too heavy handed, I suggest setting that to -1 or -2 in the Q menu and retesting. It's possible to have the camera apply 'grain' to jpgs as well, verify your settings in the menu.

Include the Exif too. The Film simulations themselves have no effect on sharpness.

The only way to really check sharpness is with the camera mounted on a tripod and at all apertures (to rule out lack of DoF).

Errors of camera shake, subject movement, lack of DoF etc are all magnified by higher resolution sensors. Some lenses which are fine on 16MP might be lacking on a 24MP sensor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
K1W1_Mk2   

I think if the OP is comparing sharpness with RAW against jpeg he should at least confirm that he is comparing images from the same camera, preferably the same image shot as RAW+jpeg.

The way the first post is written it appears that RAW X-T1 photos are being compared to jpeg X-T2 photos which if correct is a ludicrous thing to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

    • By LazarouINC
      Check these leather lug covers out for Fujifilm cameras 
      Camera Lug Covers (Fujifilm
    • By veejaycee
      Improvement of focus function in MF mode
    • By Kroogle
      I'm considering migrating from a crop-frame DSLR (Nikon D90) to the well-loved mirrorless world of Fuji X. The impetus is my upcoming honeymoon, where we'll be taking our dream vacation to New Zealand and French Polynesia. I can hardly wait to get my eyes on those beautiful landscapes!
      I was looking at full-frame cameras from Nikon and Canon, but after spending an hour with a work colleague who's maniacal in his love for the X100 series, I've changed course. The challenges I face with my current DSLR (bulky for travel/hiking, multiple lenses but never change them, too much effort to let photos happen organically or take the camera out regularly), seem to be addressed with these smaller, but just as powerful, cameras. As I read more, my excitement increased - people are obsessed with the Fuji color, sensor, and engineering.
      I do have a few questions before I make the switch.
      For landscape photography, am I sacrificing up anything major by not going full-frame? Have you been satisfied with your shots in this area? X-T2 vs. X100F - is there one that you would recommend based on my anticipated usage? About me: mid-30's outdoor lover, photo enthusiast, loves photography for travel and capturing lifelong memories of friends/family/moments. As I mentioned, I'm pretty much sold on the smaller profile since I know I'll use the camera more often (vs. pulling out my phone), just wondering about image quality for this once-in-a-lifetime trip! Thanks in advance.


×