umad?
-
Posts
99 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Forums
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by umad?
-
-
single subject - single point.
Using zone for such a subject is just not the way to go
-
Crop is 3:4 symmetrically, so you know what you will get.
No exposure control?! Dude, you got a RAW converter build into your camera
-
yes , in X100 the 2 rear lens was calculate to be very close to sensor , perhaps 3mm
it's 5.6mm
But your main point is valid: the X100 is small, because the lens is inside the camera.
Of course the whole lens construction (and optical design) of the X100 lens is different to a lens for an ILC. Aperture, ND filter, flange distance, mount diameter, focus motor.
In the end it comes down to this:
1. you can build a lens, that (together with the camera) is the size of the X100. But it will suck
2. you can build a lens with the quality of the X100 lens (probably even better) and it will be bigger. How much? a bit.
-
I'm getting it from my own images.
And you got more than 0.5% distortion?
Because that it's probably out of spec. The X100 is optically corrected for distortion and that's as good as it gets for such a compact camera. The XF23 /2.0 will have more and be electronically corrected.
-
Lenses and camera not broken? That it was a human error. Sorry to say so
-
And I suspect the XT2's release price will be exactly the same at the XT1, $1299.
Won't
-
either you had your hands too close to the subject or the lens is broken. Personally I'd go for the 35mm f/1.4 if shooting low light is a priority. The X-Pro2 really gave new life to that old lens. Very fast and accurate now.
-
That's a really silly comparison.
No, it isn't.
The only real size comparison we can make with the Fuji 35 F1.4 and the 35 F2, same manufacture, same focal length, not much difference in size. The 23/f2 will be the same as the 23/1.4 with a smaller diameter front element. You heard it from me first.
The f/2.0 has internal focussing (which makes it bigger), the f/1.4 not
The f/2.0 has weather sealing, the f/1.4 not.
The f/2.0 has a new AF motor
All those things make a lens bigger. But then again: it wasn't the ideal to build the lens as short as possible, but to not interfere with the optical viewfinder of the X-Pro2.
Also, the lens in the X100 series suffers from some serious distortion (compared to the XF23mmF1.4 and the XF35mmF2) and softness wide open.
That's true. Not sure if I want to pay the distortion price.
Don't know where you are getting the distortion idea from, but the X100 lens is optically corrected for distortion. It's somewhere around 0.5%.
And the XF23 f/2.0 will have distortion (though electronically corrected)
-
1. is normal. thats the sound of those AF motors
2. is not but probably can be fixed by Fuji (if the lens is optically very good I would think about that option)
-
Haven't done it with the new sensor, but the old 16MP Sensor was really good.
And also the cameras. Focussing would be similar to the Sony. Either with magnification (and some light source) or a bit of trial and error (I have marked just the infinity spot on my lens).
The sensor doesn't produce a lot of dark current noise and the few hot pixels will mostly be removed by the dark frames.
With the viewfinder you can set it (with a button on the body) to: LCD only, EVF only, Eye Sensor and EVF and Eye Sensor (all displays are off until the eye sensor detects something and activates the EVF.
Personally I have just turned down the brightness on the LCD.
Lenses for those kind of shots would be:
Samyang 12mm f/2.0
Fujinon 14mm f/2.8
Zeiss 12mm f/2.8
Fujinon 16mm f/1.4
Fujinon 10-24mm f/4
The Samyang is often said to be one of the best lenses for this kind of stuff. It's sharp and bright. However it doesn't focus at infinity where the focus ring says (you have to try it and mark it). And there is very little coma.
The Fujinon 14mm is just as good, but 1 stop slower.
The Fujinon 16mm is acceptable sharp wide open (not as sharp in the middle as the samyang or 14mm wide open), however it suffers from quite some coma on the edges.
The 10-24 works too, however it's an f/4.0 lens - that's not really what you probably want to go for.
The Zeiss 12mm would work too, but I don't see the point in this, since there are the Samyang and Fuji 14mm both cheaper and as good (if not better).
There are some reviews about Fuji gear and astro photography on the web. http://www.lonelyspeck.com has some reviews (I think both the X-T1 and Samyang 12mm have been reviewed)
In the end a Sony A7S with the right glass will probably give you a bit better images, but I like the Fuji because it is very capable and also very light and flexible.
-
A few pros and cons
Some of the things that "worry" me about the x-t2's higher pixel count:
- More pixels, means more shaky images. I still remember going from Nikon D50 with 6MP to D90 with 12MP. I had to get used to holding the camera more still.
Only if you view at a higher magnification. At the same there will be no difference. But of course: to get to the best possible image quality not only technology needs an update, so do the users
- More pixels means less impressive high iso improvements from the x-t1. If they kept it at 16MP, which is more than enough for most people/prints, with the new processor the high iso performance would theoretically be otherworldly.
The noise performance is light hitting the sensor and sensor technology and not by the pixel size. If you view the image at the same size, the new sensors has less noise (and it doesn't matter if it has 12 or 24 or 42MP as the A7S vs A7RII shows)
- More pixels require more processor power. The AF will suffer. Think of the AF speed we theoretically would get with 16MP and the new processor
The performance of the processor (EXR II to X Processor Pro) was improved drastically. And so was the readout of the sensor. The new 24MP sensor and processor are much faster than the old combination. And that is only the beginning.
- We are gonna need a bigger SD card. 24MP just takes up more space.
No. The new processor is more powerful and it does lossless compressed RAWs. Those raws are smaller than the once from older 16MP cameras (about 25MB vs 33MB)
There isn't really anything that goes against a jump to 24MP. The pros are, that you can get higher resolution images if you want.
-
I also wonder if Fuji can improve on the implementation of the sensor performance. DPR seem to think (for all that is worth) that the sensor performance of the a6300 is better than the X-Pro2.
DPR is partially right, on some specific shots, the Sony a6300 does outshine the X-Pro2 a tad bit
I read all those DPR articles on the X-Pro2 and A6300 and I couldn't find what you two are talking about. Could you point me there?
-
It's been about a year. I guess the rumour didn't pan out.
And it probably will be a few more months
-
it is. 2 batteries in the grip. It's said the camera is made for sports too. Only with the batterygrip you will (probably) get maximum performance (like max fps).
-
Actually they seem to be legit
-
Tempted.....
I'll carry my X-Pro and instax as back up.
No seriously, I know what you mean.
https://youtu.be/Wm3ewU2FUow?t=388
Zack Arias also loves his printer
I was at a wedding last week as second shooter, my SP1 printer was quite the attraction of a lot of the ppl around.
At weddings, events, parties the instax printer is one of the highlights. People just love printed pictures (especially instant film). The most funny part is, when they photograph their instax prints, and put in on facebook/instagram
-
I didn't get the instax hype either - until I bought one.
It's an incredible experience handing out those prints. I'd recommend every X Shooter to try the SP1 printer -
Of course it's an technical explanation because we are talking about a technical feature.
Hunting of AF has many reasons, only one is, that the working area of the pdaf has been exceeded and contrast detection is being used.
Mostly it's easy: we only have line (and no cross) pdaf pixels in the camera. And those work best with vertical lines.
If you have not much detail (few lines) and low contrast in general, the camera will hunt to achieve focus.
-
it means, that the X-Pro2 (like most other modern cameras) is able to focus, where 99.9% of buyers won't use it. Near complete darkness.
EV0 is defined as LV0 at ISO100.
and LV0 is 1 second exposure with an f/1.0 lens.
So EV0 (rounded from 0.5 in the X100T) means you can shot with f/2.0, 4 second exposure and ISO200. Not really real world scenario I guess
To give you an better example.
Let's say you get a good exposed images with the X100T with the following values: f/2.0, 1/15s (guess, your handholding is very stable
) and ISO6400. The camera focuses. The LV of the subject is somewhere around 1EV. Now you head somewhere it's 3LV darker: you either have to increase the shutter speed (guess a tripod is needed for 1/2s) or increase the ISO. Both cases, the camera won't focus anymore.
The X-Pro2 on the other hand will focus. Staying at f/2.0 and 1/15s you could just increase the ISO to 51200.
But there is another advantage. Mount an f/1.4 lens and you can either go to 1/30s or decrease the ISO. (f/1.4, 1/15s ISO 25600)
But then again: f/1.4, 1/15s and ISO25600 isn't an every day scenario
-
Omg what did they do in the AF test?
Testing outside of the PDAF area on the one hand and forcing the camera into it (pdaf only) on others.
This mainly shows, that the tester had not much idea of what he is doing.
(On the other hand we have to say: cameras are getting so complex, are we blaming the testers for not knowing everything). But at least it's the same with most cameras - there were some mistakes in the Pen F test too.
But if I had to guess I'd say: they will nail the Sony A6300 test
- flysurfer and PoulWerner
-
2
-
Very nice!
Shows what the lens can do in capable hands!
-
We could just ask Fuji, since they measure all their lenses?
There are a few thing we could say without it too.
1. Wide angles are in general faster (less glass needs to be moved)
2. Newer lenses are faster (new motors and algorithms/cpus)
3. There are a lot of different factors in play.
The numbers are the best case, where there is enough light and the phase detect autofocus does the work. In real life AF speed will depend upon light, settings (size of af field, AF-C or AF-S) and a lot of other things.
But generally the list should look something like this:
16-55mm (@16mm)
35mm WR
14mm
18mm
16-55mm (@55mm)
18-55mm (@18mm)
50-140mm (@50mm)
90mm
27mm
55-200mm (@55mm)
23mm
50-140mm (@140mm)
---- (here we have reached 0.23sec according to cipa test standards. Fastest measured value for the 16-55mm is 0.06sec)
35mm
100-400mm (@400)
60mm
Again, this is just phase detection autofocus in the best scenario. As soon as there is more emphasis on contrast detect autofocus things will look differently (and the camera used becomes more important too)
As I said, settings are important too. I noticed the 90mm being incredibly fast with a big AF square, put hunts quite a bit with the smallest in not so good light.
-
16mm is Fujis BEST lens, its stunning, next would be their 35mm F2 for being awesome, cheap, and very useful.
Sure. If there wasn't the 90mm that is.
But this thread isn't about what lens is the best (already existing), but what we wish for to come.
Personally I think a 18mm f/1.4 would be awesome.
Same goes for something like a sub 100mm 1:1 macro (guess that one is coming sooner than many might expect).
a 70mm f/1.4 would be awesome too, but for that one I wouldn't hold my breath.
-
(Note: there is no DxOMark test of this sensor, which is curious. In fact, there is a rumor circulating that DxO leaked, at some point, a score of 101 for it, but later removed the reference. This has almost become a conspiracy theory among Pentaxians, who claim that DxO burried the actual benchmarks. Take this with a grain of salt)
here you go: Pentax 645Z
Too bad we only got this within a comparison. I would have liked to see the FullSNR and other measurements
In conclusion: it is difficult to imagine Fuji releasing a premium priced MFD camera in 2017 with a three year old cropped non-BSI MFD sensor with "only" 50MP resolution, with the intention of keeping this model in production for several years ahead, because small format sensor technology is pressing ahead so rapidly.
What are you expecting - a BSI medium format sensor?
And why would Fuji need that, since they are just starting and won't cripple their mount.
Overall medium format will stay ahead of full frame for quite some time, as full frame stays ahead of APS-C. There just isn't that much that technology can do anymore. The light itself is the main source of noise.
So the medium format camera will deliver better images. The questions are: whom is it aimed at and what exactly is it capable of.
GFX vs XT-2
in Fuji GFX 50R / GFX 50S / GFX 50SII
Posted
There is big difference between 50MP and 50MP