Jump to content

BobJ

Members
  • Posts

    226
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from Paul Szilard in What is the histogram for?   
    I don't understand at all why your histogram is not changing with exposure - it does on my cameras. There is something  wrong. The little histogram that you can have in the corner of the viewfinder is of little value - it's too small. If, like on my x-t5, you can have a full histogram with all three colour channels showing, assign a button to it. The resulting histogram is accurate for the jpeg only. The right hand highlight end is fairly accurate for raw, although you may squeeze out another half stop. You cannot recover blown highlights, so make sure the  right hand side is not bunched up against the limit. Also remember, that if there are specular highlights in the picture, such as sun on water or mettalic surfaces the highlight end will show a narrow peak, which in this case, will be OK.  For raw you can pretty much ignore the shadow clipping as the shadows will be recoverable, unless they are really dark. The histogram is of great use when taking landscapes with a tripod. I use it frequently. It tells me when I need a separate exposure or grad filter for the sky. Of course, you wouldn't use it for street!
  2. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from Ruthless Rabbit in Very disappointed...   
    I have just looked at my X-T2. Yes, the peak highlights are hidden in the T2,  when the first pressure is taken, as opposed to the T5. The viewfinder information is partially cleared in both cameras and appears to be the same to me. I don't know of a way to alter the behavior.
  3. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from IanG in XF 23mm F2 - new lens but has a small bubble   
    A bubble in the glass will absolutely not affect the image quality in any  way. Whether it will affect the resale value is hard to say. If you are concerned can you not send it back?
  4. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from Staszek in Very disappointed...   
    I have just looked at my X-T2. Yes, the peak highlights are hidden in the T2,  when the first pressure is taken, as opposed to the T5. The viewfinder information is partially cleared in both cameras and appears to be the same to me. I don't know of a way to alter the behavior.
  5. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from john.skewes@gmail.com in Very disappointed...   
    I have just looked at my X-T2. Yes, the peak highlights are hidden in the T2,  when the first pressure is taken, as opposed to the T5. The viewfinder information is partially cleared in both cameras and appears to be the same to me. I don't know of a way to alter the behavior.
  6. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from YOUTA in Stick with LR or switch to Capture One?   
    I have tried both. Stilck with Lightroom and enjoy the much better file management and the new automatic masking, not to mention that you also get Photoshop. If you are worried about worms, buy the cheap X Transformer and run the files through that first. The reason why files look better in C1 before being tweaked is a difference in philosophy. Adobe give you a flat looking result that can be changed manually or with any of the Fujifilm presets, or indeed a preset of your own (which can be applied automaticallyon import). Whereas C1 give you something that they think you might like.
  7. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from bastibe in Stick with 18-55mm or trade in for 16-80mm?   
    Regarding sample variation. I have seen two very bad 18-55s and a bad 10-24, which my friend had to return to Fuji for repair twice before they would recognise there was a problem. I had a 10-24  that was fairly poor at the edges. I sold it. It seems that you can get the occasional bad apple with any lens. I have an 18-55 and the 16-80. My samples are about on a par optically and quite acceptable. I find the 16-80 to be a much more versatile lens. Additionally it has a much more capable ios. It is so good that you can forget about the loss of a stop at the wide end, except in the case of subject movement of course. Most of the reviews of the 16-80 seem to be expecting too much. Remember, it's a 5:1 zoom and is never going to be as sharp as a prime
  8. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from MARRIEDGUY9 in Thinking about the 16mm 1.4 for the X-T5...not on the "list"   
    Sharpness is not everything in a picture,  in fact beyond a certain point it is not important, and chasing after a small increase is pointless. Forget the stupid list and go out and enjoy what you have.
  9. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from biglouis in Thinking about the 16mm 1.4 for the X-T5...not on the "list"   
    Sharpness is not everything in a picture,  in fact beyond a certain point it is not important, and chasing after a small increase is pointless. Forget the stupid list and go out and enjoy what you have.
  10. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from jerryy in Thinking about the 16mm 1.4 for the X-T5...not on the "list"   
    Sharpness is not everything in a picture,  in fact beyond a certain point it is not important, and chasing after a small increase is pointless. Forget the stupid list and go out and enjoy what you have.
  11. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from Copur in 56mm 1.2 and Mcex 16 or 60mm For Macro Photography   
    The 60mm, although very sharp, only goes down to 1:2 and doesn't work well with  tubes. Look at the laowa 65mm. Totally manual, which doesn't matter much with macro, does 2:1 and is very  sharp. At least mine is anyway.
  12. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from Yannis in 16-80 or 10-24   
    If you want to travel with one lens, in my opinion, the 16-80 is preferred.
  13. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from jerryy in Why didn't my experiment let me see phase detection pixels?   
    Even with Rawdigger you are not seeing the output from the sensel. You are looking at the data after it has been converted into pixels. Each sensel has a photodiode which converts the amount of light it is exposed to to a voltage. It is an analogue device. This voltage is amplified and applied to an analogue to digital converter in order to get a digital value for that pixel. Two things come from this. Digital cameras are actually analogue at the start of the imaging chain and it is not possible to see the actual photodiode output. Rawdigger is looking at the output data - the only thing it can look at. It is showing you the digital output from the converter. If there is a loss of value associated with a phase detect sensel, this will most likely have been dealt with in the amplifier or during conversion. If that sensel is not being used for imaging at all, then yes, Rawdigger should see it as missing.Strangely, film is digital. Each grain of silver is either there or it is not. It is the number of grains that have been exposed that makes up the tonal value. Digital is analogue and film is digital!
  14. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from jerryy in Why didn't my experiment let me see phase detection pixels?   
    That is not really raw data. It is the raw after it has been processed, by the camera  into pixels. The data coming out of the d to a convertor is just binary and can only be decoded into an image by the camera or raw converter software. That is why you can't see a difference.
  15. Thanks
    BobJ got a reaction from XFGPhotography in 16-80 or 10-24   
    If you want to travel with one lens, in my opinion, the 16-80 is preferred.
  16. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from implicit-solarium in Discoloration inside 50mm f2   
    It looks like something has penetrated the lens elements. It could be separation between cemented elements. By the way, never squirt lens solution directly onto the front element. Apologies, as I am sure you know that. Either way I should send it in for examination.
  17. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from teaandcake in Stick with 18-55mm or trade in for 16-80mm?   
    Regarding sample variation. I have seen two very bad 18-55s and a bad 10-24, which my friend had to return to Fuji for repair twice before they would recognise there was a problem. I had a 10-24  that was fairly poor at the edges. I sold it. It seems that you can get the occasional bad apple with any lens. I have an 18-55 and the 16-80. My samples are about on a par optically and quite acceptable. I find the 16-80 to be a much more versatile lens. Additionally it has a much more capable ios. It is so good that you can forget about the loss of a stop at the wide end, except in the case of subject movement of course. Most of the reviews of the 16-80 seem to be expecting too much. Remember, it's a 5:1 zoom and is never going to be as sharp as a prime
  18. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from jerryy in Lenses optimized for 40mpx?   
    From my experience with both of those lenses I would say no. Remember though that you will get an improvement using them with 40mp, just not as much as with the sharper lenses. How much of an improvement I don't  know. Resolution is determined by the product of all the system components.
  19. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from jerryy in White Display   
    That's a very unfair comment cpX. I have an X-T2 which I bought in 2016 and is still going strong (now converted to infra-red), an X-T3 and an XE -3. All still  working. I know photographers that have had  Nikons and Canons that have failed. You can be unlucky with any make. Remember the Canon eos 5d mirror problem? They used to fall out. And the Nikon oil on sensor problem? Not to mention the Leica M8 with the peeling sensor cover glass coating.
  20. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from Astigmatism in "PREVIEW DEPTH OF FIELD" function - what's the point? It's ALWAYS previewing.   
    Surely there isn't any point, as when you put a half pressure on the shutter release the lens stops down to is working aperture and so you get the same function.
  21. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from jerryy in Locking Focus Area X-T3   
    Probably you have the touch screen on. I have mine disabled for this reason. Frankly touch screens are of limited use anyway.
  22. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from jerryy in Advice for Mirrorless   
    To give a definitive answer is impossible, even if I had experience with all those cameras - who would? I know that real camera stores are thin on the ground these days, but the most important consideration is how the camera feels in your hand. You should try them out. For instance, the X-S10 is small and light and is a great camera but may be too small if you have big hands. The X-T4 has very different ergonomics, with dials and buttons. IBIS is nice to have for some photography but not nearly so important as some think. For instance, when in the city, subject movement is more likely to be a problem than camera movement. Also, as you say, many lenses have stabilisation. Another consideration is are the lenses you think you might need available within your budget and are there plenty of secondhand lenses available for the mount. There are no really bad cameras out there, just different ones.
  23. Thanks
    BobJ got a reaction from Astigmatism in What is on the front of the sensor? Glass? How durable is it?   
    The sensor is behind several layers of glass. There is an anti static cover glass, an infra red reject filter and the micro lenses for the sensels. Then there are the colour filters for the photodiodes. So you are not actually cleaning the sensor, only the cover glass. It is coated though, so you definitely can't use your shirt sleeve It does have an anti reflection coating but is actually quite tough. The main thing is to make sure that you blow off any loose dust before you use the swab, only use the fluid supplied with the kit and don't press hard. I have been cleaning sensors for years with no problems. Don't use those sticky pad things, they are dodgy. Most dust can be blown off with a rubber "rocket" blower. Never, never, use canned air. If the propellant gets on the glass you will never get it off, plus they are too powerful and can damage the shutter.
  24. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from jerryy in Depth of field preview in manual focus mode.   
    Why is this an issue? It is the same for all cameras as far as I know including all film and digital slrs. You can only focus accurately with the lens at its widest aperture simply because that has the shallowest dof. Then if you want to get some indication of the dof you half press the shutter button, which is way more convenient than pressing the dof button on an slr and getting a view so dim you can't really see anything. For dof do not rely on focus peaking. It wil only give you a rough idea. Use the magnified view for that. You have to have some understanding of dof, (which varies according to how big the final image is displayed), where to focus and what aperture to use. I assume you are talking about landscape. It's not easy but It will come with experience. Take lots of photos and analyse the failures.
    .
  25. Like
    BobJ got a reaction from jerryy in Does back button focusing work with the Fuji 14mm f2.8?   
    No, it doesn't work if you have pulled the ring to manual. The 14mm is a sharp lens by the way. You won't be disappointed.
×
×
  • Create New...