Jump to content

Wuthoqquan

Members
  • Posts

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    Wuthoqquan got a reaction from Les_Hall in Creating Lossless ACROS Files   
    It would be great if there was an option to have a sidecar file saved together with the RAW image, which would make it easy to replicate exactly the film simulation used in the .jpg output. But I wonder if that would be at all possible, without mentioning the reluctance of Fuji in giving out so easily the recipe to their successful film simulations.
  2. Like
    Wuthoqquan reacted to Tomvani in X-Pro2 "turn camera off and back on" error with FM 1.01   
    I experienced this error today with version 1.0. Tonight I did the update.
     
    Background: had a studio shoot today with two models that totaled approximately 45 minutes. Lens was 35mm f2. Fast cards. Saved RAW and jpeg to same card (changed that tonight to save to separate cards). The total image count was 1080, so that should have been 540 shutter activations. It was set for single shots. Pre focus off. Face detection on
     
    The error message first appeared after about 30 minutes, then happened twice more before the end of the session. Used a Paul C. Buff trigger for an Alienbee (worked great). Noticed that when the first error message appeared the camera was definitely warm on the bottom plate. Camera remained warm for the remainder of the time.
     
    The was no problem restarting the camera, but the shooting flow was certainly interrupted.
     
    Camera s/n 61A0xxx It was delivered the day of release in the USA.
     
    This shoot was an unexpected opportunity. I'm in the process of moving and my Nikon gear is in storage. Had it been a pre-planned session, I would have used the D750. The Fuji was intended for the trip and in that setting it performed as expected.
  3. Like
    Wuthoqquan reacted to khollister in X-Pro2 initial bug report   
    Lloyd always manages to find the end of the world with almost anything he writes about. This effect was mentioned on another forum and the example images there, like the one Lloyd posted, are frankly nothing I would ever expect to use to begin with. This problem (which I'm pretty certain is internal reflections) appears to only be seen in circumstances with horrible veiling flare that would itself render the images useless IMHO. 
     
    Lloyd hates the X-TRANS sensors anyway and is using this as another reason to pile on. Using diglloyd as proof that a camera/lens is bad strikes me as just about as crazy as using Ken Rockwell as proof that something is wonderful.
  4. Like
    Wuthoqquan got a reaction from thierrynguyn in X-Pro2 "turn camera off and back on" error with FM 1.01   
    I'd like to thoroughly test my X-Pro2. Does this error occurs under particular conditions/settings?
     
    So far, I've been shooting at a slow pace and never got the "Turn Off/On" message. Anyway, I didn't test the camera at the low/high continuous drive settings. The 23mm 1.4 is the lens I've been using all the time in the last 30 days.
     
    Should I try anything in particular to be sure that my camera is not affected by this issue?
     
    The serial number of my X-Pro2 is 61M07xxx.
  5. Like
    Wuthoqquan reacted to adzman808 in Dramatic Under-Exposure Randomly with XPro2   
    Unless you're shooting from a tripod in fixed light, then there's always scope for multi metering to make expsoure changes that have a impact on the overall brightness of the picture.
     
    It's a LITTLE like auto WB, 99% of the time it works great, but every now and then there's something in the scene that that camera rates as middle grey that actually screws up the colour
     
    Same with multi metering.. Maybe the sun was bit brighter for one shot (ie came out from behind a cloud) or perhaps the camera metered off reflected light from a wing mirror or the shiny wheels.
     
    Automation in cameras is generally very, very good these days, but ultimately it's 'only' an algorithm, it's not a human eye looking at a scene...
     
    As posted above... 7000 shots, 5 off exspoures, that's good odds of a correctly metered scene IMO! YMMV
  6. Like
    Wuthoqquan reacted in Creating Lossless ACROS Files   
    Anyway, leaving aside that you can shoot acros plus raw, can't you do an in-camera conversion of a raw after the shoot? I had the impression you could. If so, can customize settings at conversion time?
  7. Like
    Wuthoqquan got a reaction from Phil in Creating Lossless ACROS Files   
    It would be great if there was an option to have a sidecar file saved together with the RAW image, which would make it easy to replicate exactly the film simulation used in the .jpg output. But I wonder if that would be at all possible, without mentioning the reluctance of Fuji in giving out so easily the recipe to their successful film simulations.
  8. Like
    Wuthoqquan reacted to Mr. Vinyl in Creating Lossless ACROS Files   
    Just an update.  Like DIS Ottawa, I also typically use Sliver Efex Pro 2 for mono conversions, so I've run a number of comparisons between the in-camera ACROS setting on the X Pro2 (no other mods) against an identical RAW image, opened in SEP2, and then applying the Fuji Neopan ACROS simulation included with that software package.  Sorry to say that tonal gradations in that comparison aren't even close, with the in-camera sim significantly superior.
     
    I am traveling with my new camera, but will perform a print comparison when I return home, and will post the result.
     
    Regarding the post about using jpg files, the flexibilities and advantages afforded by lossless file formats over compressed lossy files are well-known and too numerous to argue.  Certainly, JPGs are adequate for many, but I prefer the flexibility afforded by maintaining every bit of the original capture.
  9. Like
    Wuthoqquan reacted to bryanminear in X-Pro 2/10-24 + Haida 10-stop ND + Acros   
    I'm not usually a black & white kind of guy. And when I am i prefer to use Nik Silver Efex because it gives the best control. But I was out shooting some long exposures last night thanks to the sun returning to Michigan and realized that Acros + R is extremely fitting for long exposure cloud work.
     
     

  10. Like
    Wuthoqquan reacted to danwells in L-Bracket for X-Pro 2   
    The Fuji one isn't an L-bracket if I remember correctly... It's just a baseplate and grip set without vertical capability, no? If it IS an L-bracket, it's actually cheaper than the RRS equivalent, once you add a grip to the RRS version.  RRS hasn't announced any plans for a grip for the X-Pro 2, but their grip sets for other Fujis are around $190. The L-bracket (no grip) will be $130. Fuji wants $130 for a baseplate and grip, with no L component, and I haven't seen anything suggesting there will be an L component for it (I don't think Fuji has offered L components for other cameras). If RRS doesn't add a grip to their offerings, which they do for some Fujis, but not others, there will be an interesting dilemma for any photographer who wants both a grip and an L bracket... They had a grip for the X-Pro 1 and still offer them for the X100 and X-E lines, but they don't do grips for the X-T line (and the X-Pro 2 has a more pronounced built-in grip than the X-Pro 1 or X-E lines, but not nearly as much as the X-T line).
     
    Also, an X-Pro 1 baseplate won't fit. Even if the dimensions were identical (as I recall, the X-Pro 2 is a couple of mm thicker), the X-Pro 2 tripod mount is on-axis, while the X-Pro 1 mount was off-axis..
  11. Like
    Wuthoqquan got a reaction from m_lance in X-Pro2 or X-T2? Why pick one or the other?   
    The most noticeable difference between the X-Pro2 and the forthcoming X-T2 will be the type of viewfinder available on the two cameras. Like the X100T you already have, the X-Pro2 sports both an optical and digital viewfinder, whilst the X-T2 - as the current X-T1 - only has an electronic but larger viewfinder.
    We can all assume that the X-T2 will replicate all the technical features of the X-Pro2, in a different body with necessarily different ergonomics. It's definitely up to your preference to choose which one to pick, with the availability of the OVF being one of the main discriminating factors - other than the obvious rangefinder or SLR appearance.
    You should also consider that the X-T2 will likely hit the market at a lower retail price, since the OVF in the X-Pro2 seems to be one of the element contributing to the higher overall cost. The price difference shoukd not be considerable though, probably in the range of a couple hundred dollars.
  12. Like
    Wuthoqquan reacted to Wing0949 in Corrected AF Frame   
    I suppose you never used an x-pro1 or x100 before?
     
    I hope I can explain well and don't confuse you more.. but, here goes...
     
    It just gives you 2 points of reference to guesstimate where you think the actual AF focus point will be when using the OVF. It does not apply to using the EVF.
     
    2 focus squares/boxes are shown in the OVF when corrected AF frame is on.
     
    The center most square represents infinity focus and the off center square, usually a bit more towards the lower right corner, represents closest focusing distance.  Your actual AF focus point can be anywhere inbetween.  When you half press shutter to get an AF lock, a green square/box will appear to confirm the AF focus point.  The closer your subject is, the closer that green confirmation square/box will be to the lower right corner. Conversely, the further away your subject is, the closer the green confirmation box will be towards the center square/box which represents infinity.  As soon as you get the af confirmation, the frame lines will automatically adjust for parallax correction.
     
    The best way to picture using corrected AF frame is to think of the 2 boxes floating in 3D space. An invisible line of focus runs between the lens to infinity.. the infinity box in the center and closest focusing box to the bottom right which if you think about parallax error, is actually somewhere in front of the lens.. and you just imagine where your subject is in 3d space between closest and infinity focus points and try to place your aim in that area.
     
    With practice, you can do a pretty good job of guessing where that AF point should be floating between the infinity and close focus squares/boxes.
     
    Note, the Corrected AF Frame is not represented the same on all lenses.. it will vary depending on the lens and focal length you are using.  Some will have the 2 squares/boxes a lot closer to each other, others will be further apart.
     
    Note, using the Corrected AF Frame was the best way to get some reference to AF focus using the OVF in the X-Pro1 & X100 & X100S.  It was not until the X100T that electronic rangefinder (ERF) mode was implemented and you could get that small EVF overlay in the bottom right corner in OVF mode to show you exactly what your sensor is seeing 100% and where the focus point actually is. The X-Pro2 has this now, as well.
     
    I find the Corrected AF Frame less useful now since you can have the little EVF overlay in the bottom right corner to show you exactly where the focus point is.. no need to guesstimate anymore.
     
    Now, some people find that little EVF distracting and not useful.. I don't personally think so and love it.  No more guess work and you can use that little EVF overlay to fine tune focus manually after AF lock (if you just want to be extra sure).
     
    I will add the beauty of the electronic rangefinder mode is that in manual focusing, that small EVF overlay can be used to focus and the frame lines will adjust in real time and hold position accordingly which really makes it feel as close to a real rangefinder (in digital format) as much as possible.  Where as if you used AF, the corrected frame lines in the OVF only show up after you've half pressed the shutter button.  it works great still, but at least you have more options now on how to focus and compose your images.
     
    BTW, if it doesn't make sense, take a look at this video by Rediscover Film. Don't worry about the problem with the 35mm OVF.. it's something we both found on the x-pro1.. not going to talk about it as the video goes into it more.. but, the basics on how Corrected AF Frame works will be more apparent with this video and some visuals to explain.. probably better than just words here on this forum.
    https://youtu.be/vn2BY1jpHWY
     
    Bottom line.. on the new x-pro2, I would say the corrected af frame is not as useful anymore if you plan to use the electronic rangefinder (ERF) mode with the OVF as it is more accurate and show you exactly your focus point. But, if you don't like ERF, then I would suggest you turn on Corrected AF Frame so at least you have an idea where to guesstimate AF focusing using the OVF.
     
    Tips with Corrected AF Frame:
    1) If your green confirmation square/box is not over the spot you were guesstimating it would be.. you at least know where the af point is now and can adjust your aim to compensate and retry.. you will find if you adjusted correctly, the green confirmation square/box will be exactly over your intended target
     
    2) The other way to help visually confirm if you've hit your mark with the AF using the OVF is to check the distance scale at the bottom.  If it's showing you a distance that is where the subject is from you, then it's a good chance you got the af point where you wanted.. otherwise, if you know the subject is close within a certain distance and the distance scale shows out beyond 10 meters, then you should know it probably missed the mark being it's showing focus so far away.
     
    ** Manual Focusing with OVF does not show Corrected AF Frame, meaning you will only get the 1 box in the center which does not represent your true AF focus point, only your infinity point.. you will still have to guesstimate, but you have 1 less box (the close focus box) to reference where to aim and place your focus over.  If you get good at guesstimating and confirming focus by taking note of distance scale & seeing how the frame lines adjust, it may not be so bad.
     
    One more note about using manual focus with OVF, the green confirmation box only shows up when using AF-S mode with the OVF.. So, if you're in manual focusing and use your AF-L button to try to more quickly acquire focus first before manually dialing in your focus, there will not be a green box that shows up to confirm AF point lock.  you will see the frame lines adjust and distance scale update, but that's the only visual clue you will have to confirm focus point.. you'd probably need to zoom with EVF to be 100% certain.  It's stupid.. I don't know why they don't just show the green confirmation box when you've locked focus?..  it's bad enough they took away the 2nd box that shows your close focus reference point.
×
×
  • Create New...