#185

I’ve often read that Fujis are optimized for taking pictures of people, leading to pictures of other things lacking color and detail. Does that track with people here’s experiences?

#186

I only use a Fuji X100T but haven’t noticed anything like that and I often use the jpegs with Fuji’s film simulations straight out of camera.
The claim in itself sounds a bit strange, I can understand that color profiles maybe optimised for skin tones but shouldn’t details/sharpness be the same regardless of the subject?

#187

i use my fuji cameras for taking non-people photos 99% of the time and would say that the colors,
the detail, and flexibility you have with all of that in camera as well as out of camera is really amazing and would absolutely work for any kind of photo… no way better or worse for anything. i used to have an a7riii camera and much prefer the experience of the fuji xpro3. haven’t missed any of the sony color science or dynamic range.

3 Likes
#188

this does not match my experience with Fuji over the last many years… if feels very much like one of those internet gear forum claims … “oh, you want to take pictures of landscapes? then you need this specific set of equipment or you may as well give up photography for ever”

#189

most of the fuji cameras have a unique color array compared to the rest of the camera world, something that has some advantages and disadvantages.

earlier in the introduction of the x-trans sensor, there was real problems with 3rd-party software failing to translate that color array well. this is would usually manifest in the odd rendering of distant green foliage (small green details were being slightly scrambled). the issue was always less pronounced to nonexistent using the Fuji jpg engine (which is excellent for a bunch of reasons).

over time, I think this has gotten better. I know that adobe has updated their processing algorithm for the fujis several times to some effect. the increased resolution of the cameras has also helped mitigate some issues. I think people still claim they run into the problem occasionally, but I don’t think it’s a big aspect of owning fuji cameras anymore.

edit - I should add that if you’re willing to deal with on-camera jpeg processing, fuji cameras have I think the class-leading color processing and white balance, so long as their color profiles (film simulations) appeal to you. the only instance I wouldn’t recommend them is if you have a robust and complex raw processing flow that demands the most flexible and neutral raw at the start of processing.

4 Likes
#190

I’ve seen comments on the colors in several reviews. This from Ken Rockwell’s review of the X100v:

Like all Fujifilm digital cameras, the X100V’s as-shot JPG color palette and contrasts are quite sedate; optimized strongly for outstanding people photos. (The VELVIA film simulation modes don’t look any better; certainly not like real VELVIA). Even with COLOR turned up all the way as for all these images, the X100V’s rendering is much quieter than I prefer for most of my images. To get wild colors, you really need to go out of your way to find colorful subjects; the X100V won’t amp-up colors if they aren’t strong to begin with. Of course if you shoot raw, then the colors and look you get depends just as much on your choice of software used to decode the raw files.

This is in the context of otherwise glowing reviews, so I was just wondering if this was something other had noticed. I’m debating between a Fuji and a Panasonic, so I’m looking for reasons to pick one over the other!

#191

Whilst sometimes Ken’s reviews are useful he is often more interested in technical details or the sharpness of brick walls than actually using the cameras.

Fuji do as good a job at landscape and still life as they do people for me but what is true is that RAW gives you choice and allows you to take in any direction fairly easily.

#192

I’ll say what others have: as an x100f owner who makes a living taking pictures, these cameras are wonderful. I work with Canon cameras during the day, but the Fuji will always be my choice for a walkaround body. The color science is superb all around.

I am sure there is some histogram blabbedity blah about yadda yadda (these are industry terms). But in real life, the images just usually look really great

#193

I generally wouldn’t recommend listening to Ken Rockwell at all.

I don’t think any camera company nails color right out of the gate and it is all subject dependent. any profile trying to mimic negative color film will, of course, be slightly desaturated, but there are lots of options in post for dealing with that if you want punchier colors (in either jpeg or raw).

1 Like
#194

my least favorite camera gear reviews are the ones where there are 6 pages of histograms and detail crops and all that. let me know if the camera has some real roadblocks or the lens underperforms. let me know if it’s fun to use and makes your work easier and more enjoyable.

a lot of people seem to love shooting Fuji! i’ve said it in the this thread, the native lens selection is great. they look cool even.

#195

Fuji for the colours. Panasonic if you plan to shoot video.

1 Like