Jump to content

Herco

Members
  • Posts

    328
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    39

Herco last won the day on May 31

Herco had the most liked content!

2 Followers

About Herco

  • Birthday 05/26/1962

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Switzerland
  • Interests
    Professionally: portrait, fashion, fine-art
    For personal work: street and (urban) landscape

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Herco's Achievements

  1. A few thoughts on the differences between LR and C1 as we've experienced it. We moved to C1 5 years ago, though we still have LR expertise and updates as well. Whether C1 gives you an 'adjusted file' to start with or not is a matter of configuration. You can start with the pure RAW file (standard or linear response) or with the jpeg settings (film simulations etc.) applied. By the way, in my field (fashion and beauty) I don't know anyone who uses the film simulations (either Fuji, Nikon or whatever brand) as a starting point for raw editing. Most of us use a predefined Style that is applied at import. What LR calls Presets, C1 refers to as Styles. C1 also provides you with the Fuji film simulations to choose from and these are configured in close cooperation with Fujifilm. They're much more similar to the 'official' in-camera film simulations than the LR 'Fuji film simulations', because they don't rely on the generic sliders only. By the way, the digital Fuji in-camera film simulations don't really resemble the analogue film look they're named after. In fact, there are C1 Styles available that have a closer resemblance to the different Fujifilm analogue film looks. So, when you prefer e.g. the Velvia or Astia film look, you might be better off with these specialized Styles. For tethering C1 is indeed the standard. Together with the Live feature I can tether my shooting sessions and have an art director viewing and rating the images in real time. Even when they're located at the other side of the world. Great feature. In terms of color management C1 is vastly superior to LR. The color editor is by far the best I know of. It is much more geared to professional use. For example, the sliders in C1 in general have less reach (less extremes) than LR, but are way more controllable. As for DAM (Digital Asset Management) LR's Catalogue has more options for tagging and searching. The C1 catalogue is a bit more basic, though for many users that's enough. However, most professional photographers that I know, don't use Catalogues, but the C1 Sessions feature. It fits the workflow way better. Unfortunately LR doesn't have that at all. For the best DAM, many professionals use Photo Mechanic as a specialized tool for keeping track of 100k's or even millions of images. In terms of costs, I think C1 is a bit more expensive if you want to stay up-to-date. Esp. if you also need Photoshop. When we moved to the Apple M1 platforms, we switched to Affinity Photo instead of Photoshop. Our two in-house editors prefer that now, though it is harder to find people with expertise on AP externally (though when you know PS, learning AP is a matter of a few days).
  2. Remember that the 'Fuji colors' only apply when you use the jpegs straight-out-of-camera. The Fuji film simulations can be compared to Nikon's picture profiles. You can even add Nikon Picture Profiles that are based on film stock, rather than the basic ones that Nikon delivers. When your workflow is raw-based the possibilities of color grading are defined by the raw processing software rather than the camera. I personally use Capture One with some predefined Styles and in my experience NEF-files are a bit easier to grade than the RAF-files (esp. in shadow tones). In 2014 I switched from Canon 5D to Fuji for the exact same reason as you're mentioning, even though I don't carry my cameras for a full wedding day 😉. In 2021 I switched back for professional work to full-frame (Nikon Z) for a number of reasons: I ran into a few reliability issues with Fuji cameras and lenses; the IQ of full-frame is still a bit better than APS-C (and in case of Nikon the Nikkor Z lenses are superb); the magazines I work for (I'm in fashion photography) nowadays demand larger files (often min. 7000 pixels on the long end). Comparing a D850 and an X-T4 is a bit tricky. When you look for straight-forward IQ it's a bit unfair. The D850 is one of the best full-frame cameras ever, so you will notice some drop in IQ. However, the D850 is also big and heavy compared to the X-T4 and so are the F-mount lenses. In all honesty however, you need to compare the cameras with the battery grip attached to the X-T4 as the D850 can easily last 1800 shots on one battery. Comparing the X-T4 to a full-frame mirrorless camera is perhaps a better comparison. The Z7II (that I use) is approx. the same size and weight as the X-T4. Full-frame lenses are obviously a bit bigger and heavier, although the Z-mount lenses are generally more compact and lighter than the F-mount equivalents. The Z7II has a similar IQ as the D850 (I think it's even the same or a very similar sensor). Whether the IQ of an X-T4 is sufficient for your wedding reportages is something only you can decide. You can make decent large prints from an APS-C camera, if needed, but dynamic range and how the camera handles complex textures of e.g. fabrics is a bit 'less'. I would rent/loan a camera before switching in order to decide whether its good enough for you. I wouldn't recommend adapting lenses. Esp. in wedding photography you can't run the risk of reliability issues with adapters. Next to that you actually forfeit on the advantages of the smaller APS-C lenses when you opt for adapted full-frame lenses. Moving to medium format is another option mentioned above. We use Hasselblad H6Ds in our studio, but I wouldn't recommend those for wedding photography. The Fuji GFX cameras have approx. the size of a full-frame DSLR (like the 5D or D850), but the lenses are considerably larger and heavier due to the larger image circle. It would actually move you away from your goal of a lighter, more portable kit. Although the GFX50SII and the GFX100S are quite 'snappy' for medium format cameras, compared to a D850 or an X-T4 they're slow to respond. It will certainly force you to slow down your workflow when shooting weddings. All of the above may change when you also do video work with the same camera. In that case the X-T4 or the Z6II are great choices and well-above a DSLR like the D850 or any GFX camera. Today I'm using my remaining X-Pro2 for personal work. For that the IQ is sufficient and portability is key. Besides that, I love the form factor and the jpegs are of great quality for Instagram.
  3. Usually X-Pro users are quite meticulous about their camera, so you should be able to find well-preserved pre-owned X-Pro2's at a decent price (around €650 in Europe and $600-700 in the US). These cameras are well-built and should be able to serve you for many more years, Pre-owned X-Pro3's are harder to find (by lack of an X-Pro4) and come at a much higher cost (€1450-1500) which is close to new price. Of all the Fuji cameras I had over the past ten years, I only kept the X-Pro2. It still has some advantages over the X-Pro3 and with its fixed LCD, it is less prone to defects. I've heard that most X-Pro3 defects are back panel issues. The X-Pro4 is expected mid-2023 earliest, so X-Pro3 prices will remain high for a while...
  4. You really made an effort going to 4 stores 😉 First be aware of the sales techniques: a) a store will rather sell you a camera they have in stock as opposed to ordering one for you (a camera today is more valuable than one in 5 weeks time with you having time to change your mind); b) they are more likely to sell you brands or models with a higher margin for them; c) when they notice you're looking for a good deal, they revert to end-of-life-cycle models (like the EOS R and RP) or cameras with successors in the market (like the A7III or XT3). It's a way of clearing their stock. Some tips based on my experience (which is definitely different from yours): - when wearing glasses, be extra careful to check the EVF: the X-S10 is not great when you wear glasses. The X-T4 has a much better EVF. Just try it and check how much effort it is to see the corners; - don't get overly focused on weather resistance. There's some benefit to it, but basic care goes a long way too. When you find the X-S10 better handling, that's an important factor; - for landscape the Fuji 23/f2 is not a great option. The 35/f2 is much sharper. Whether you want the 18-55 or the 16-80 is a matter of personal preference. The 18-55 has slightly better image quality, but the 16-80 is more versatile and WR; - the EOS R and RP lack IBIS which is one of Canon's big mistakes with these cameras. That's why they're not very popular. Otherwise they're fine but make sure you use the 24-105/f4 rather than the mediocre f4-f7.1; - the A7III is a very mature camera with good features. For stills it's definitely 'better' in terms of image quality than e.g. the X-T4, but for video the Fuji has some better options. USD2000 is rather a steep price for an A7III. Once the A7IV becomes more widely available the price of the III will drop. I've seen the A7III for as low as USD1800 a few weeks ago. In terms of lenses there are a lot of options for E-mount. Don't be afraid to look at Sigma or Tamron as well; - I'm not sure whether you've ran into the Z5 or Z6. They would be my pick esp. also for the great Nikkor Z lenses; - Olympus is a Micro43 sensor (quarter of the size of full-frame and 2/3rds of the size of APS-C). Great build quality and very good PRO-lenses, but rather expensive for its sensor size and less suited for high-ISO photography; - Panasonic is very underrated imo. Both the S5 and the S1 are great cameras at a decent price. The new Sigma primes for L-mount are very good value for money, but the Lumix 24-105/f4 is a very good lens too; Whenever you have two/three models left, try to get some hands-on time. Some stores allow you to take a camera out for a walk or have the option to rent one (with refund after purchase). Good handling of a camera is a very personal matter. Good luck and have fun.
  5. In general: make sure you run the latest firmware (v1.31) and use Fuji recommended SD cards. It's a drag, but Fuji is incredibly sensitive to 'the right' SD cards. I've had the same issue when I had a GFX100S on trial for a few days. I wasn't able to 'solve it definitively' because I didn't keep the camera long enough.
  6. Set the lens to f2, insert a fully charged battery and restore to factory settings. Make sure that you have the latest camera firmware installed (v1.11). If that doesn't help, your camera needs to be brought in for repair.
  7. Is the camera indicating that the aperture is 0 (zero) when the lens is mounted?
  8. When you refer to the LCD panel on the back, you can just toggle the DSP/BACK key to switch to a 'clean' screen. For the EVF there's no easy way on the X-H1 to get rid of all information, other than disable it in the screen setup menu.
  9. As you didn't mention it, I assume you don't shoot a lot of video. When portraits and low light stills matter to you, I can recommend full-frame when you can afford it. My personal advise would be a Nikon Z5 (you can get some good deals and the first pre-owned ones now hit the market) combined with a Nikkor Z 28-75/2.8 and if you have some money left the superb Z 50/1.8 or 35/1.8 (whenever you need the f1.8). An option would be the 24-120/4.0. The Z5 has excellent IBIS (sorry to say, but far better than any Fuji) and excellent high-ISO performance. The Z50 and Zfc are good cameras too, but when you opt for APS-C you have limited choice in lenses with Nikon or you spend too much on full-frame lenses. It might however be a good option when you move to full-frame Z-mount in the future and buy the lenses now. When you stay with APS-C, Fuji might be a better choice. Whenever video matters, the X-S10, X-T4, a Z6 or a pre-owned Z6II are great options. Alternatively in full-frame have a look at the Lumix S5 or a pre-owned S1. Their video capabilities and IBIS are superior to almost all competitors. Another consideration could be your workflow. When you're not planning to edit your images in post, the film simulations of Fuji are a nice feature to get good jpegs out of camera. You can get similar out-of-camera output from a Nikon, but it requires some more tweaking. Nikon calls this Picture Control and on nikonpc.com you can download film profiles straight to your camera. Whenever you edit in post, all of this hardly matters as to which camera brand you pick.
  10. Now, some bad luck can happen with every brand, but in 35+ years of photography I've never had as many issues as I had with Fujifilm. Some camera, but mainly lens issues and except for one, all of them manufactured in their Philippines factory and all pretty soon after purchase.
  11. The overview on the Fujifilm sites states it is not compatible. Now that could mean a physical limitation (e.g. with retractable lenses) but often it is just because the lens is not recognized and you're not able to set the focal length or image corrections. It doesn't always mean it will not work. Besides that, the list is dated May 2012: https://fujifilm-x.com/global/support/compatibility/accessories/list-of-compatible-m-mount-lenses/ I've used multiple lenses not on the list and they worked fine. Even on an X-Pro2 with the optical viewfinder, I was able to select the right frame lines. My suggestion is to try it out before you buy or make use of a return right or so.
  12. It's not uncommon to hear some noise from the AF motors (esp. with Fuji 😉) but when the pitch changes based on how you hold the lens/camera, that would be strange. When you say overhead work, I'm assuming the lens was pointing downward vertically? As the 33mm moves 5 or 6 elements to focus, weight/gravity can be a factor and put a bit of strain on the single linear motor. My suggestion is (as you apparently live in London) to go to the Fuji House of Photography (near St. Martin in the Fields church) and ask them to try one or two other copies of the lens on your camera. You will soon be able to tell whether they sound the same or different.
  13. You don't mention which tripod + head you have. Esp. with 102MP medium format any vibration from shutter or ground can create a resonance in esp. lighter or less dampened tripods with a camera/lens combo of around 2.5kg. It doesn't affect you at 1/650th, but could certainly at 1/30th or slower.
  14. If you talk image quality (sharpness across the frame, chr. aberrations, contrast...) the 23/f2 has most room for improvement. It's not a bad lens, but nothing special either. Wide open it has quite soft edges and corners. Both in sharpness (line pairs) as well as in contrast. The lens also suffers a bit from longitudinal chr. aberration (color fringing). The 23/1.4 MkII is much better in terms of IQ, but bear in mind it is also larger and heavier and if you use it with an X-Pro body, it blocks a fair part of the optical viewfinder. The 35/f2 and 33/f.14 are much closer in terms of IQ. It's just that the f1.4 is a stop faster. One difference though (apart again from size and weight and OVF impact): the 35/f2 has significant focus breathing whereas the 33/f1.4 doesn't. That could be important when you do video work. The great thing about both the 23/f2 and the 35/f2 (and the 50/f2 as well) is their compactness and usability for street photography. Robust little pocketable lenses, weather resistant, decent performance at a reasonable price. Though the f1.4 are still not large lenses, you don't put them in your jeans pocket that easily... Next to that, they're pricy.
×
×
  • Create New...