src="http://www.mirrorlessons.com/wp-content/themes/mirrorlessons Is the Fuji X-T2 dynamic range really that good? – A personal analysis - MirrorLessons - The Best Mirrorless Camera Reviews
MirrorLessons
In Depth

Date: 09/07/2016 | By: Mathieu

Is the Fuji X-T2 dynamic range really that good? – A personal analysis

f/8

Is the Fuji X-T2 dynamic range really that good? – A personal analysis

The new Fujifilm X-T2 was announced two days ago and as usual the hype at the moment is really high. The new camera is making the cover of many websites, magazines and blogs. One of the articles that went viral was published on Thursday by Petapixel. It shows a 2 full stop recovery in Lightroom of a beautiful landscape shot taken by Fuji ambassador and popular travel photographer Elia Locardi.

Many were impressed by this result, while others were more sceptical, saying that the same is possible with other (even cheaper) APS-C cameras. I decided to dig a little bit more into the matter to see if the most recent X-Trans sensor is really that great or if similar results can easily be obtained with other cameras as well.

Important note: this article is a personal analysis inspired by Elia Locardi’s post (you can also check his X-T2 review on his website). I don’t mean to discredit his words in any way or trigger some sort of “battle” between blogs.


The Fujifilm 24MP X-Trans III CMOS sensor: how far can we push it?

I haven’t had the chance to try a Fujifilm X-T2 yet but the sensor and image processor are exactly the same as the ones found inside the X-Pro2 that I currently own and that I reviewed in-depth on this website. So I am going to analyse some of my X-Pro2 images, knowing that the results are identical to the X-T2.

First I would like to say that the dynamic range performance of the X-T2 doesn’t surprise me. In my X-Pro2 review I stated that many times that a single file gives you enough versatility to not bother with AE bracketing and HDR. Here is an example that demonstrates this:

fuji x-t2 dynamic range
X-Pro2, 1/250, f/8, ISO 200
+1.50 exp, +50 contrast, -80 highlights, +50 shadows, -50 whites, +50 blacks
Click on the image to open the full res version.

However in the example above I had a slight advantage. Because the light was partially softened by the thin clouds, it was easier to take a more balanced exposure and adjust everything in post later.

So I went through my Lightroom catalogue to find an image that could match more or less the one shared by Elia. Of course the location is not the same (mine is Cape Cornwall in South England) but the light conditions are more similar (sun near the horizon at sunset). The first picture shows the exposure straight out of camera.

fuji x-t2 dynamic range
X-Pro2, 1/1250, f/8, ISO 200 – Original exposure

I exposed for the sun to preserve the highlights but by doing so, I sacrificed the details in the shadows. How much can I recover then? Here comes the post processed version. I applied the same settings that Elia shows in his article, then made a few more changes to optimise my shot since the conditions were not exactly the same.

fuji x-t2 dynamic range
X-Pro2, 1/1250, f/8, ISO 200 – Post processed
+1.80 exp, +40 contrast, -60 highlights, +50 shadows, -50 whites, +50 blacks
Click on the image to open the full res version.

If we take a closer look at the shadows, we can see a little bit of noise but I would say that the level of detail is good. Note that here I set the noise reduction to 0 on purpose so that there wouldn’t be NR applied by Lightroom.

Now let’s have a look at the same scene but with a middle ground exposure that balances shadows and highlights better. Here I sacrificed some details in the highlights. Then we have the post processed version where I tried to recover the highlights and give an extra boost to the shadows to match the same result as the first image.

fuji x-t2 dynamic range
X-Pro2, 1/320, f/8, ISO 200 – Original exposure
fuji x-t2 dynamic range
X-Pro2, 1/320, f/8, ISO 200 – Post processed
-0.20 exp, +20 contrast, -70 highlights, +50 shadows, 0 whites, +50 blacks
Click on the image to open the full res version.

The first thing we see above is that I couldn’t match the same result concerning the highlights. Perhaps one stop of difference between the two exposures instead of two would have worked better (that evening I was shooting in AE bracketing mode with a ±2Ev difference). If we take a look at the same crop and compare it to the one seen before, we notice less noise. This makes sense since the second time I exposed the sensor to light for a longer period of time.

 

Now let’s add some noise reduction to the first image to see if we can improve the result and match that of the second exposure. The image improves a little but the second example still retains more detail in the shadows.

 

The first conclusion we can draw is the following: if you want to make sure to preserve all the highlights, you need to expose on the left, recover the shadows in post and accept some noise as a consequence. Highlights are weaker on digital sensors and while the X-Trans sensor does a good job indeed, you have more versatility with the shadows (this is a general rule for all digital cameras really).

Can I push the dynamic range even more than 2 stops?

What happens if I attempt to perform a more drastic recovery in post production? Let’s see a few examples below, the first being of the same Cornwall scene but underexposed even more.

fuji x-t2 dynamic range
X-Pro2, 1/5000, f/8, ISO 200
+3 exp, +20 contrast, -20 highlights, +60 shadows, -20 whites, +50 blacks
Click on the image to open the full res version

As you can see the amount of noise increases, as does the loss in detail. Even playing with the noise reduction doesn’t solve the problem. The picture might still look good decent for the web or small prints but for bigger prints it won’t work as well as the other two examples shown before.

This tells us that it is important to know how far you can push the files of your camera and not take for granted that the dynamic range is just “amazing” without knowing its limits. It is also important to know that there are situations where you can push the files more than others. Exposure in photography involves some general rules but then it is up to the photographer to analyse the light of each individual scene and choose the appropriate settings.

In the two final examples below, the amount of recovery surpasses three full stops. We can notice noise in the first image but it is less invasive than the image above. In the last image, there is noise on the wooden wall but it is even less noticeable.

fuji x-t2 dynamic range
X-Pro2, 1/1000, f/8, ISO 200
fuji x-t2 dynamic range
X-Pro2, 1/1000, f/8, ISO 200
+3.20 exp, +35 contrast, -50 highlights, +50 shadows, -30 whites, +50 blacks
Click on the image to open the full res version
fuji x-t2 dynamic range
X-Pro2, 1/80, f/8, ISO 200
fuji x-t2 dynamic range
X-Pro2, 1/80, f/8, ISO 200
+2.80 exp, +50 contrast, -90 highlights, +50 shadows, -40 whites, +30 blacks
Click on the image to open the full res version

 


Are the X-T2/X-Pro2 better than other cameras?

With all these mirrorless cameras popping up like “champignons” (French word for mushrooms) it is inevitable that we’ll wind up comparing their performance. One advantage of the X-Pro2/X-T2 is the ability to shoot lossless or uncompressed RAW. The difference between the two settings is hard to detect most of the time but for heavy post-production the latter is always advised.

Not every mirrorless cameras shoots uncompressed RAW and that’s where Fuji cameras can have an advantage.

In our Sony a6300 vs X-Pro2 comparison article, we showed that the Fujifilm camera was capable of retaining cleaner shadows (without any NR applied) in comparison to the Sony camera when recovering shadows. Even with some tweaking to the NR, the Fuji file performs better.

Exposure reference
fujifilm x-t2 vs a6300
X-Pro2, 1/400, f/8, ISO 200
Click on the image to open the full res version
fujifilm x-t2 vs a6300
a6300, 1/400, f/8, ISO 200
Click on the image to open the full res version

 

If the a6300 had an uncompressed RAW option, I am pretty sure that the results would be as good as the Fuji file if not even better since the a6300 is slightly sharper. That’s the same conclusion we came to when Sony implemented uncompressed RAW on the A7r II (read the article here).

Finally, I browsed through some older images shot with previous mirrorless camera models (APS-C and micro four thirds) to show that it is possible to achieve good results with many of them. Of course not all cameras perform in the same way as you will see but it’s just a reminder that good dynamic range starts with a good exposure and not just the sensor capabilities. This is why I wasn’t particularly impressed by Elia’s result, since recovering 2Ev is not unheard of. Actually, going back to some of the Samsung NX1 files reminded me just how good that 28MP BSI sensor is (it’s a shame that the Korean company is pulling the plug on its camera business).

fujifilm x-t2 dynamic range
NX1, 1/250, f/8, ISO 100
Click on the image to open the full res version
fujifilm x-t2 dynamic range
GR II, 1/500, f/8, ISO 100
Click on the image to open the full res version
fujifilm x-t2 dynamic range
X100T, 1/350, f/8, ISO 200
Click on the image to open the full res version
fujifilm x-t2 dynamic range
GX80, 1/500, f/5.6, ISO 200
Click on the image to open the full res version

Last but not least, the best result will always be achieved with the HDR technique and this becomes even more important if your sensor isn’t as good as others.

If I go back to the first example shown with the X-T2 and compare the single post-processed RAW file with the HDR version, we can see how the shadows look cleaner and I didn’t have to sacrifice the highlights.

fujifilm x-t2 dynamic range
X-Pro2, f/8, ISO 200 – HDR (3 shots merged, ±2EV)
Click on the image to open the full res version

 

Additional read:


Conclusion: it’s always about light in the end

To be fair to Elia Locardi, he is not wrong in his conclusion. The X-T2/X-Pro2 have an average of 2 stops of recovery that can be achieved without spending too much time in front your computer screen. That to me is proof that the camera has a good sensor.

However it is also true that other cameras can perform equally well and I managed more than once to achieve good results with cameras that have a smaller sensor like micro four thirds. Most of the time it is also a question of photographing at the right time with the right light. There will always be some noise but what matters is how invasive it is, how much you can reduce it in post and, perhaps most importantly, how sensitive you are to it personally.

How far do you feel you can push the files of your mirrorless camera? Let us know in the comments section below!



Like our blog? Be sure to follow us on Facebook and Twitter! If you’re planning on buying camera gear, you can check out Amazon, B&H Photo and PhotoMADD. Prices remain the same for you, but a small percentage of your purchase value is valued back to us. Thank you!

About the author: Mathieu Gasquet

Mathieu Gasquet is a professional photographer with French and Italian origins. Besides running his own video and photography studio 3Dit Lab, he is also the official photographer for the National Cinema Museum in Turin. You can follow him on Google+, Twitter or Facebook!

  • Robert Kwolek

    Really great article, thanks for putting the time into it.

  • Silvestro Crino

    There are really no bad system cameras anymore… what is most important is composition and having a point of view and story you want to tell…

  • GaryGarth

    The biggest difference that I noticed between the X-Pro2 and X-T1 was the colour noise at higher ISOs, I tend to push my files and my X-T1 shadows start to fall a part+shift to a ugly purple in the shadows, while the X-Pro2 retained the colour better and was that bit more stretchy before falling a part. Which, along with the rest of the improvements, make the X-Pro2 and now X-T2 worthy getting I reckon.

  • soundimageplus

    ‘However it is also true that other cameras can perform equally well and I managed more than once to achieve good results with cameras that have a smaller sensor like micro four thirds.’

    Absolutely spot on. I use cameras from all kinds of sensors and these days, if you process carefully, it’s possible to get well balanced results from a smartphone up. My preferred option, Photoshop and camera raw, is so good I never have to use HDR or any other artificial dynamic range ‘enhancer’.

    I’ve included a screen shot of the settings I’ve used for years for literally 10’s of 1000’s of images I’ve uploaded to stock picture libraries. Nice dynamic range and still ‘punchy’ I’ve yet to find a camera this doesn’t work for.

  • Alan Paone

    you really end up feeling sony’s 11-bit colour when pushing files like that.

  • Alan Paone

    DR has a lot more to do with the sensor’s design and age than its size, the gx7 in particular is only about a stop behind a D810 (~12 vs ~13 stops), i remember being completely blown away by at least that one aspect of the camera.

  • Alan Paone

    it’s funny that fuji added +/- 2 stop bracketing at the same time as a sensor that rarely needs it. i’m really finding that the extra pixels show focus issues more clearly. I’d really appreciate a quicker, more automated way to do focus bracketing, rather than AE

  • Turbofrog

    Like I said, the best FF sensors are a noticeable improvement. APS-C far less so.

  • Antiduott

    Try the full frame for a while. It is a different league although it might not seem to be a big step it certainly is

  • Turbofrog

    More than once I’ve had comments about my “HDR” shots that have in fact come from a single exposure (shifted left to protect highlights) on my GX7. I admit that I’m impressed when I see the dynamic range that is achievable with the sensors that are the best of the best (D810, A7r) but the dynamic range on Micro Four Thirds is good enough that I’m not particularly tempted by something that’s only a half step up, like APS-C.

    http://i.imgur.com/nCKr8JN.jpg

  • umad?!

    It’s not (only) about uncompressed RAW. Fujis compressed RAWs have just as much dynamic and handle as good as their uncompressed ones. It’s about how you set up the sensor, if you do lossy compression (like the Sonys) and what your color depth is.
    About the last point: all µFT use 12bit and the Sonys reduce their color depth too in some modes (and that is before lossy compression!) in some shooting modes.

  • http://www.drewhopperphotography.com/ Drew Hopper

    Great article. I’m contemplating the switch from Canon full frame to the XT2. One of my concerns was dynamic range after shooting with the Canon 6D for years. I’m confident in th new sensor in th Fuji to get the job done.

  • GoReal

    Thanks! I should say, what matters most AFTER correct exposure is post processing technique.

  • http://www.mirrorlessons.com Mathieu

    Nice shot.
    I agree good post processing is also important.

  • GoReal

    I wasn’t that impressed with the Locardi article myself, as I’ve done much the same with Micro Four Thirds with the GM5 and GX85. What matters most is good post processing technique to minimize the resulting noise and preserve colors.

BACK TO TOP
Disclaimer & Copyright Notice

The owners of this website, Heather Broster and Mathieu Gasquet, are participants in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, B&H Photo Affiliate Program, eBay Partner Network, Macphun Affiliate Program, Peak Design Affiliate Program, The Inspired Eye Affiliate Program, SmugMug Affiliate Program and Mediterranean Photo Tours Affiliate Program, all of which are affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking MirrorLessons (mirrorlessons.com) to Amazon, B&H Photo, eBay, Macphun, Peak Design, The Inspired Eye, SmugMug and Mediterranean Photo Tours properties properties. They are also members of Google AdSense. AdSense publishers must have and abide by a privacy policy that discloses that third parties may be placing and reading cookies on your users’ browsers, or using web beacons to collect information as a result of ad serving on your website.

To see more information, visit our full Disclaimer page. Thank you!

© Heather Broster/Mathieu Gasquet and MirrorLessons, 2016. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Heather Broster/Mathieu Gasquet and MirrorLessons with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
MENU
×