>>3606086Every camera has a color filter array, everyone uses the same "Bayer" pattern, which is "demosaic'd" by your photo editing software, this is basically telling the converter what color filter was over each pixel.
Fuji, in their infinite wisdom decided to use a different pattern, and not provide or allow a correct demosaic algorithm to be written. The result of this is you get color smearing, weird wormy looking noise, and waxy, smooth textures. It also lead to a ton of false color noise, which fuji counter by baking in color noise reduction in the raws, leading to washed out, flat tones.
So why do fuji do this? Well, they use that as the reason to stop objective based review sites from doing apples to apples comparisons of their lenses. To give an example of why they might want to do that, I've attached a photo showing fujis flagship $1000 lens, against one half it's price from sony and a 25 year old film lens.
You will never see someone arguing for fuji objectively, it's always "soul" or "muh retro aesthetic" or "muh jpeg profiles", or worse yet "color science", if you watch Tony northrups video on subjective opinions on each brands color science, guess who comes dead last.
Fuji users will try and say its OK because you can use iridient developer instead of Adobe or dxo, id is a shonky bit of software made by one dude in his garage. Photos from one of the biggest camera brands in the world should never hinge around a guy in his garage. Fuji users will say that xtrans problems aren't real, but they all seem to know about iridient developer and the built in jpeg profile options...
