I would never buy a camera with an X-Trans sensor on it. The new Fujifilm GFX will be an incremental update to Fujifilm GFX100. And you have to define the source with “Source: Fujirumors.com” (working link). Fuji’s X-Trans sensor is unique in that it uses a custom layout for detecting colour on its sensor. Where AA-filterless sensors may have an advantage is when the final image is to be converted to monochrome, and especially when the subject itself is monochrome (i.e. As well as Fujifilm’s continuous improvement philosophy (‘kaizen’) of providing consistent firmware updates to keep their existing product line competitive, they also have a habit of releasing plenty of cameras and accessories each year!. Fuji — who has been a pioneer in sensor technology for decades — has rearranged the color filter array into what they call X-Trans. You can find his work on his website, Instagram, and Bandcamp. DPReview, who can’t be really labeled as a Fuji fanboy site (actually quite the opposite is true), says that their lab tests show the 16MP X-Trans Fujifilm X-T1 (without low-pass filter) has an effective resolution that “is not much lower than 24MP” (compared to Bayer cameras with low pass filter) – we reported here. Annie Leibovitz Shoots the Pirelli Calendar Into a New Direction. In order to test this, we generate a noise image and apply the very same noise image to the raw Bayer and X-Trans data before demosaicking, which simulates how noise occurs in a sensor. In order to remove the complicating factors of optics, base sensor technology, etc., these comparisons are performed with synthesized raw images. The Future Fujifilm APS-C cameras should be. In this time of evolving full-frame cameras with new features that increase the automation of “capturing an image” perhaps it is useful to very briefly review the reasons why those who use a camera with a different sensor continue to believe that a slower and more deliberate workflow has advantages. If we compare it to the A7 III, the Fuji is larger but lighter. I wonder what happened to the magic. However, even with the algorithmic lead, X-Trans appears to offer no advantage over AA-filterless Bayer, and in fact produced a lower fidelity result than Bayer in all but one test case. But, being an entry-level model, it uses a common 16MP Bayer sensor. Even though X-Trans lost the battle, the results were very close. I am merely trying to test if the X-Trans sensor is a good or a bad thing. Of course the 20-30% more computing power required by the X-Trans sensor has consequences on things like heat generation, which Fujifilm partially solved by using larger heat sinks on the Fujifilm X-H1, so that, as Fuji Guy Billy told us here, “the processor can run much higher“, allowing for example the X-H1 to shoot at 200mbps instead of 100mbps on the X-T2. 28 Sep, 2018 If you are an owner of a Fuji camera with an x-trans sensor, you will probably have already read a lot about the post processing of x-trans RAF files. The X-Trans 4 sensor is able to gather considerably more light than the sensor on the X-T2, or any other APS-C Fuji mirrorless camera. Well, so much for that… This example looks far worse with X-Trans! Details are limited at this moment but its a MID range ILC,the "10" designation indicates that.It will include IBIS,the first of the mid range bodies with sensor stabilisation. However, given the amount of noise reduction required to treat the false colors introduced by the omission of the AA filter, it seems unlikely that there is much, if any, net benefit. This was the original case for X-Trans, touted as a superior alternative to AA Bayer…, The Markesteijn algorithm does a better job of interpolating near-diagonal lines than does the AHD alogrithm, but this isn’t directly attributable to anything about X-Trans or Bayer; other Bayer demosaickers perform better in this regard, and other X-Trans demosaickers perform worse. I used to own an X-E1. Whether it’s reduced or not appears to depend on the hue of the subject. First of all read this statement by Top Fujifilm Manager (and official FujiRumors lover ;)) Toshihisa Iida: And now read these 3 statements of other Fujifilm managers: So the managers tell us that processor limitations are often the reason why certain features can not be added to a certain camera and overall speed performance is limited, and that X-Trans is 20-30% more power-hungry than Bayer. The synthetic raw images are generated by filtering the target images through the respective CFA patterns. Now the moiré is significantly attenuated. Raw files processed in other software, such as Photo Ninja and Iridient Developer is a whole other story. Per saperne di più su quello che stiamo facendo. Fujifilm’s is a tightly integrated system, wherein everything is a little bit different. , DPReview says that the 16 MP X-T1 effective resolution is not much lower than 24MP, due to the virtues of the X-Trans sensor, as well as less color noise and moiré, we already explained back in 2013 why it is like this, using larger heat sinks on the Fujifilm X-H1, Fujifilm tried to put the X-TransIII sensor into the small X70, less moiré (an advantage that will become negligible once APS-C sensor go beyond 30MP), sharper compared to cameras with same pixel number and optical low pass filter, unless the processing in camera is very aggressive, like on X-A5 and X-T100, more pleasing “film-like” grain at high ISO, 20%-30% less processing power required (possible benefits listed below), Bayer is better for features and speed, unless Fujifilm can compensate for the extra 20-30% processing power required by the X-Trans sensor with a more powerful processor (present in Fujifilm X-T3), new sensor tech for faster sensor readout (maybe stacked sensor) and better heat management (present in X-H1), more pleasing (some say “film-like”) looking grain at high ISO, 24/26 Megapixel are more than enough for my photography, no need to have 30MP+, Zebra & Co could be implemented using a new and more powerful processor (available on the Fujifilm X-T3), I don’t need 8K video. The filter pattern is 50% green, 25% red and 25% blue, hence is also called BGGR, RGBG, GRGB, or RGGB. I would say this is true. So perhaps what Fujifilm really meant to say is that X-Trans demosaicking is 30% as efficient as Bayer. Please visit their official websites by typing the specific brand name and adding .com after it in your browser. The benefits of the 20-30% saved processing power when using Bayer could be: So at the end of the day I do not need many of the improvements listed above, and most improvements can be achieved by keeping the X-Trans sensor and improving sensor readout speed using a stacked sensor and/or a new processor. These are cameras such as the Leica X2, Fuji X100S and Nikon COOLPIX A, which all feature an ASP-C sensor (23.7 x 15.6 mm) along with a fixed-focal-length lens. It’s also of the same vintage from 4 years ago. But probably it is possible to patch the header of a RAW file of a Fuji camera with the same sensor generation i.e. There can be no more direct a comparison than this. Any apparent larger noise advantage found in other comparisons must be due the confounding factors of underlying sensor technology (Sony makes the sensors, FYI), ISO rating, electronic/thermal noise, and noise reduction baked in to the X-Trans demosaicking algorithm in use. Although google is full of results about Fuji RAF files and how the various RAW processors handle them, there are many misconceptions that lead to wrong conclusions. Well,as if Fuji doesnt have enough different models to choose from in their X mount range,here comes another form factor. Details are limited at this moment but its a MID range ILC,the "10" designation indicates that.It will include IBIS,the first of the mid range bodies with sensor stabilisation.