Jump to content

Herco

Members
  • Posts

    335
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    43

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Herco got a reaction from zac Su in Dilemma Entry into Fuji - X-Pro2 used vs new vs X-Pro3   
    I've owned all three versions of the X-Pro series. Overall, I found the XP2 the best. It's much more a professional grade camera than the XP1 is. I personally returned the XP3 after a few weeks. Though the EVF is better than that of the XP2, the OVF (that's why you use an XP) is actually not as good since it has only one magnification level (XP2: 2). So, it struggles with lenses wider than 23mm or longer than 50mm. You just don't get the frame lines wider than 23 or the magnification longer than 50 to work well with the OVF.
    Don't bother about titanium top plates and sub screens with film box logos on the XP3. These are just gimmicks. In terms of IQ there's hardly any difference between the XP2 and the XP3. In terms of durability the XP2 turns out more reliable since it lacks the strange (for me: useless) downward folding screen. As it turns out, that is an Achilles heel of the XP3. There's even a class-action lawsuit in the US against Fuji for that.
    The weak spot of the XP2 is weather resistance. The front- and back dial as well as the on/off collar around the shutter release button are not too well-sealed. So be a bit careful with heavy rain or snow. The XP3 is not better on that subject. It's just that its dial click function feels less mushy. 
    $600 for a good XP2 is a very fair price. Don't worry about the 13k actuations. That's less than 10% of what Fuji claims as a life expectancy and generally cameras go well-beyond that.
    As you mention using MF vintage lenses on the XP2/3 you might also want to consider a XT2 or XT3. Though no 'rangefinder-style', these are great little cameras with a similar IQ. The advantage of the X-T line is that they have a better EVF with higher magnification. That will make manual focusing easier than on an X-Pro camera. Generally, they're also a bit cheaper pre-owned than the X-Pro range.
  2. Thanks
    Herco got a reaction from Cmphotonh in Leica Monochom envy   
    Compared to the separate lenses, the Q2 is certainly a good deal in Leica's world. Without turning this into a Leica forum, I can confirm that the current digital Leica's still have amazing colors. I was a bit disappointed with the M8, but since the Q, the SL and the M10 they've found their consistency back. What's particularly striking is how easy the raw files are in post. As for the Q2 Monochrome, I've never seen such beautiful and high quality B&W images from a consumer camera.
  3. Thanks
    Herco got a reaction from Cmphotonh in Leica Monochom envy   
    It's quite a difference. As a basis the Leica Q2 already has a very good 47Mp full-frame sensor paired with one of the best lenses ever made (a 28mm Summilux). By leaving out the color array filter on the sensor and optimizing the sensor lenses for monochrome images, you get an incredibly sharp and contrast rich monochrome image. Without the color array filter you also boost the low light performance and expand the dynamic range of the sensor by approx. 2 stops.
    In the meanwhile, I couldn't resist and purchased a Q2 Monochrome. I'm not disappointed. Though my X-Pro produces very nice Acros files, the Q2 Monochrome is a different league (also in price to be fair). I usually shoot monochrome for my personal work, but to be able to shoot at ISO25000 and have files as clean as an X-Pro at ISO1600 is amazing. At normal ISO levels, the level of detail and the tonality of the Q2 files is stunning. Both for the jpegs out-of-camera and the DNG raw files via Capture One.
  4. Like
    Herco got a reaction from zaax in Leica Monochom envy   
    maxmax.com converts many Fujifilm cameras to monochrome. It's quite expensive, but probably not more than when Fujifilm would launch a monochrome themselves. Previously, Fujifilm managers stated that a monochrome is not to be expected any time.
    As a regular Leica owner (those film days) every time I pick up a Leica I'm tempted again. The Q2 monochrome will probably not be an exception. It's not made for people looking for features or value-for-money (though it holds fantastic value in the second-hand market) and in that respect its hard to compare with other brands. It's just like cars: you don't need a BMW to be happy, but it sure helps 😉 (for those who like cars)
  5. Like
    Herco reacted to Meeeeeeeee in Has the X-Pro3 been a success?   
    I wanted to love the x-pro3 but didn’t. In fact it was IMO an opportunity missed.
    the rear screen or lack of was a bold move but didn’t work. It did not improve my ‘analogish’ experience , rather it annoyed  me, a lot. It’s a street camera and rapid chimping is essential to me (especially the histo)
    going back to the ethos of pre-digital  fails. I remember in analog days wishing and wanting a camera that had an integral Polaroid function.
    the camera I’d really hoped for had less buttons, but not less screen. I don’t need or want to have buttons everywhere.
    IBIS would be nice but my main criteria for what I still hope will be an X-pro4 are: a beautiful big rear screen. VF, big, open and bright. Doesn’t have to articulate or to be touch sensitive, in fact I’d prefer without either. Sensor 40+ MP. No moiré filter. Less buttons
    xPro started out trying to be a Leica rangefinder but the xpro3 iteration wandered off into idealistic but unusable nostalgia. for me, my above wish list would bring it back to its original goals.
     
     
     
  6. Like
    Herco got a reaction from Iancass in Has the X-Pro3 been a success?   
    I'm in exactly the same position. For professional work I've moved away from Fujifilm, but for personal work I still love the X-Pro2 form factor. The X-Pro3 indeed misses the point for me. Next to a number of improvements (faster AF, better EVF, placement of the diopter adjustment and exposure comp dial) there are some crucial misses for me: the sub screen is nothing but a gimmick and looks cheap on this camera. The tilting screen is exactly the wrong implementation, whereas the X100V is exactly right if you want a tilting screen at all. Same for the ISO dial. But the main issue for me was dropping the X-Pro2 dual magnification in the OVF rendering the X-Pro3 OVF useless for anything wider than 23mm or longer than 50mm. So I returned the X-Pro3 I had on trial and kept using my X-Pro2 (although I mostly use my M10-R and Q2 nowadays).
    Now, the X-Pro models have always been niche cameras for Fujifilm. Therefore the launch of newer models followed roughly a 4 year cycle. So, logic dictates that we should expect a new model around Oct 2023. If at all, because a friendly retailer (one of the larger online ones in Europe) told me that X-Pro3 sales were initially good due to X-Pro2 owners replacing their camera, but dropped sharply thereafter and is now way under previous X-Pro2 levels.
    As said before, this is a niche camera in a rapidly shrinking market (digital camera sales dropped between 2011 and 2021 by over 90%) and it's a rather expensive one too. Priced in 'full-frame territory'. Potential buyers love the looks, but buy an X-T3/T4 (of a full-frame compact like the Z5, A7C or S5) because it's more convenient with better options. What doesn't help is that the newer f1.4 lenses (the 18, 23 and 33) are all substantially bigger and render the OVF on the X-Pro's useless, while at the same time some of the crucial compact lenses (the 16/f2.8 and the 23/f2) in terms of pure image quality are not Fuji's best.
    Long story short, the X-Pro3 is a rather expensive niche camera with the relative low sales numbers to match that. If at all, the successor isn't likely to be expected before end 2023.
  7. Like
    Herco got a reaction from eagle_eya in Dilemma Entry into Fuji - X-Pro2 used vs new vs X-Pro3   
    Hi, my advice would be to start with one and take it from there whether you need something wider or more tele. The two most likely lenses for the XP2 are the 23/f2 or the 35/f2. Both are almost designed for the XP-line as they don't block the OVF. They're also weather resistant if that is important to you. The only issue is that the 23/f2 is a bit soft wide open at the shortest focus distance. For general photography its not an issue. The older 23/f1.4 is a great lens, but a bit bulky (compared to the 23/f2) and slow and noisy to autofocus. An often overlooked combo for travel photography can be the 18-55/f2.8-4 and the 14/f2.8. Both are quite good, relative compact and have the same filter size/hood. They're also relative cheap to buy pre-owned.
     
  8. Like
    Herco reacted to eagle_eya in Dilemma Entry into Fuji - X-Pro2 used vs new vs X-Pro3   
    @Herco Thank you and very much and highly appreciate your advice. Definitely going for that (used) XP2, mainly because it is a great camera (plus all the facts mentioned by you), but also as I like the rangefinder style of camera and that will inspire me to shoot more! Funny that you mention this XT3, I was searching for an XT3 before I discovered the XP series :), but I guess going for the coolness factor, I admit (almost happy the Leicas are out of my budget, at least I keep telling myself so). Greetings form the Baden area   
  9. Like
    Herco got a reaction from eagle_eya in Dilemma Entry into Fuji - X-Pro2 used vs new vs X-Pro3   
    I've owned all three versions of the X-Pro series. Overall, I found the XP2 the best. It's much more a professional grade camera than the XP1 is. I personally returned the XP3 after a few weeks. Though the EVF is better than that of the XP2, the OVF (that's why you use an XP) is actually not as good since it has only one magnification level (XP2: 2). So, it struggles with lenses wider than 23mm or longer than 50mm. You just don't get the frame lines wider than 23 or the magnification longer than 50 to work well with the OVF.
    Don't bother about titanium top plates and sub screens with film box logos on the XP3. These are just gimmicks. In terms of IQ there's hardly any difference between the XP2 and the XP3. In terms of durability the XP2 turns out more reliable since it lacks the strange (for me: useless) downward folding screen. As it turns out, that is an Achilles heel of the XP3. There's even a class-action lawsuit in the US against Fuji for that.
    The weak spot of the XP2 is weather resistance. The front- and back dial as well as the on/off collar around the shutter release button are not too well-sealed. So be a bit careful with heavy rain or snow. The XP3 is not better on that subject. It's just that its dial click function feels less mushy. 
    $600 for a good XP2 is a very fair price. Don't worry about the 13k actuations. That's less than 10% of what Fuji claims as a life expectancy and generally cameras go well-beyond that.
    As you mention using MF vintage lenses on the XP2/3 you might also want to consider a XT2 or XT3. Though no 'rangefinder-style', these are great little cameras with a similar IQ. The advantage of the X-T line is that they have a better EVF with higher magnification. That will make manual focusing easier than on an X-Pro camera. Generally, they're also a bit cheaper pre-owned than the X-Pro range.
  10. Like
    Herco got a reaction from maidenfan84 in Has the X-Pro3 been a success?   
    The reason that they're often sold out, is because production numbers were very low and retailers ordered very few stock. According a friend who runs a large camera store in Europe, around mid 2020 -after the X-Pro2 replacement wave and after the X-T4 was introduced- sales of the X-Pro3 dropped to only a handful each year. Since end 2022, Fuji stopped producing the X-Pro3 altogether, even though a successor (X-Pro4?) is still at least a few months away. Knowing that Fuji normally keeps the predecessor in production for a year or two after the successor becomes available, that says enough to me...
  11. Like
    Herco reacted to mecsw500 in Moving to Fujifilm from Nikon   
    In the end I bought a second X-T30-II body. I like the way they operate, I'm not so keen on the PASM dial style operation. I tried the X-T3 and X-T4 but I still preferred the size of the X-T30-II. I don't miss the IBIS with the primes up to 50mm. I don't shoot video anyways.
    I also bought a few Olympus OM Zuiko to X-Mount manual adapters and I've been playing with a variety of Zuiko lenses in manual mode from my old OM-2 cameras. The Zuiko lenses are all later multi-coated versions and produce decent results, especially the 50mm f/1.8.
    So, I'm happy with my choice and the Fujifilm gear as a whole so far.
  12. Like
    Herco got a reaction from jerryy in XT-4 loses detail in bright light situations   
    You could opt for a variable ND filter that allows you to determine the amount of reduction of light by rotating the filter. It saves on the number of ND filters you have to buy. However, the cheaper variable ND filters tend to suffer a bit more from purple color cast, so make sure you buy a really good one. In my experience the ones from B+W, Hoya and Cokin are very good.
  13. Like
    Herco got a reaction from Jon Erdmann in Sharpness of Fuji lenses vs. Canon lenses   
    With Fuji raw files the raw converter matters but no so much for sharpness and contrast. Mostly for artefacts and noise reduction. Lightroom or Capture One shouldn’t be really different when it comes to sharpness. In all honesty you’re comparing a pro-grade full-frame camera like the 5DMkIII (had one for many years) with a consumer grade aps-c camera which most Fuji cameras are. On top of that you mention L-glass which is Canon’s most discerning line of lenses. Without exactly knowing which hardware you’re comparing, my guess is that your expectations are a bit too high. I use Fuji for personal work and have used it for a few years professionally as well (X-H1 a/o with red badge zooms and fast primes). I’m very happy with the results but they’re not in the same league as my current full frame Nikon Z’s. Let alone the Hasselblad H6D... 
  14. Like
    Herco got a reaction from George_P in Stick with LR or switch to Capture One?   
    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). 
     
  15. Like
    Herco got a reaction from dward in Stick with LR or switch to Capture One?   
    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). 
     
  16. Thanks
    Herco got a reaction from Klaus Schleicher in 10-24mm (15-35mm equivalent ??)   
    Focal length equivalency depends on the size of the sensor. You've posted this message in the GFX-lenses section (which is for Fuji's medium format sensor cameras) but I guess you use an X-system camera from Fuji with the smaller APS-C sensor. Right between APS-C and medium format are the so-called Full Frame (FF) sensor cameras. This was in the days of film the most used size of film for amateur photographers. That is why focal lengths of lenses are often recalculated to the FF equivalency. From APS-C to FF the 'crop-factor' is 1.5x
    The 10-24 f4 Fuji lens therefore has a full frame equivalency of approx. 15-35mm meaning it gives you that same angle of view. It ranges from an super wide-angle to a standard wide-angle view. That makes it perfect for architecture, indoor architecture and landscape.
    The 10-24 has two main advantages for your intended use: first it doesn't have a lot of distortion in the super wide-angle mode, so you don't need software to correct the image all the time (keystone correction). Precondition is that you keep the camera and lens level at shooting (and not tilted backwards). Secondly, it has an optical image stabilizer. So, shooting indoor with longer shutter speeds isn't too much of a problem, since the lens corrects motion blur in some degree. That compensates for the fact it has not a really fast aperture (f4) so your low-light/indoor shutter speeds can be a bit longer (I would say up to 1/8s).
  17. Like
    Herco got a reaction from bastibe in X-Pro 2 or X-Pro 3   
    There's a lot of misconception re. the sensor generations Fuji uses. In essence there's no visible image quality difference between the 24Mp X-TransIII/Processor and the 26Mp X-TransIV/Processor. The 2Mp are negligible. There's virtually no visible difference in low-light performance as well. The BSI (back-side illuminated) technology of the 26Mp sensor has a theoretical advantage here because the metal wiring layer is not on top of the photocells, but beneath them. However, the photocells of the 24Mp are larger and therefor the yield of the 26Mp BSI-sensor is lower than the 24Mp FSI sensor (front-side illuminated). That glitches out almost all advantages here.
    What does make a difference is the number of AF pixels on the 26Mp sensor (much higher) and the shorter circuits due to the BSI technology of the 26Mp sensor. That allows for greater throughput capacity and quicker AF. Top that with a more powerful processor in the 26Mp camera's and you have snappier AF and higher video bit rates (up to 400 Mbps).
    The main differences between the x-pro2 (I'm a long-time owner) and the x-pro3 (tried it extensively) are the LCD screen and the viewfinder. The hidden LCD screen could be very beneficial to a street shooter (from the hip). However, imo it sucks to have to open it for menu access and menu access through the EVF is cumbersome when you wear glasses (and have thumbprints all over them). I prefer a screen like the X100V were the user has options to choose how to use it and which is nicely integrated in the body. The sub monitor is imo a useless gadget as there's not backlighting button like on the X-H1/GFX50S. 
    The viewfinder for me is the real dealbreaker on the X-Pro3. Though it is larger and brighter, in OVF mode (which is why I bought the X-Pro) there's only one magnification left (x0.50) rather than the 2 magnification levels of the X-Pro2. That renders the X-Pro3 in OVF mode useless for lenses shorter than 23mm and longer than 35mm. I can't use my 16/18mm and my beloved 50mm anymore on the X-Pro3 in OVF unless I settle with a very tiny frame or frame lines outside my OVF. For now I'm sticking to the X-Pro2.
  18. Like
    Herco got a reaction from Gaman in My brand new X-T4 freeze now and then - anyone else same problem?   
    All X-T4 cameras we buy in Europe are made in China. Fuji only delivers 'made in Japan' X-T4s to the USA to bypass the high trade tariffs imposed on Chinese products. In fact, I've been told (but I'm not certain about it) that these cameras are also mostly made in China, but then shipped to Japan for some final assembly and packaging. Just enough to qualify for the 'made in Japan' stamp. Today, only the X-Pro, X-H1 (until a few months ago) and the GFX are actually build in Japan.
    As for the SD card issues, that is a recurrent issue with Fuji cameras. The X-H1 had real issues (incl. lost images) and we've seen multiple reports of X-T2s, X-T3s and X-Pro3s having issues. Most of them are solved in firmware updates (the notorious 'various other bugs') but for the X-H1 I've experienced continuous problems up to date (albeit less than when the camera was first released).
    Best advise is to stick to the brand and type of SD cards that Fuji recommends and hope for firmware updates. In case the camera frequently freezes, I would always ask for a replacement.
  19. Like
    Herco got a reaction from Adam Woodhouse in Lens hood for XF 16-80mm F4 R OIS WR easily deattached while walking.   
    Should the new hood still be too loose, there's one other DIY solution. The issue is that the clamp mechanism is not stiff enough. You can solve that by inserting a splinter of soft wood (like from a [safety] match) and insert it in the small notch underneath the clamp mechanism. Like in the attached image. That stiffens the clamp mechanism and provides a more snug fit. 

  20. Like
    Herco got a reaction from Adam Woodhouse in X Pro 1 Focusing...I need help. Desperately.   
    You may want to check out fujifilm_xpro1_manual_en.pdf (fujifilm-x.com) and esp. page 86 or CORRECTED AF FRAME (fujifilm-dsc.com) for the X-Pro2. The latter is the same, but better described.
    Though technically the X-Pro cameras are not rangefinders, the OVF has the same parallax issue as rangefinders have. That means that for shorter focus distances the frame (and therefor also the focus point) is different than for infinity, simply because you're not looking through the lens, but through the OVF which is slightly right and up from the lens. The deviation is larger for short focus distances and becomes insignificant for focus on infinity.
    When you switch on the Corrected AF Frame setting you get a dotted white focus box to the right and below the original focus box. The solid white focus frame is for infinity. The dotted white box is for 80cm focus distance (50cm in the X-Pro2). As soon as you half-press the shutter release (or press the AF-L button) while trying to focus on subjects closer than infinity two things happen:
    - the outer white frame line indicating the outlines of your image shifts to the parallax-corrected position: that will be the new outline of the final image;
    - a green focus box appears indicating the corrected focus area based on the parallax shift. It will be anywhere between the solid white and dotted white focus box depending how far your focus actually is.
    The camera focuses on the green focus box area. If that is not the area you intended, you need to slightly move the camera and re-focus. This requires some practice. Sometimes its best to switch to AF-C mode because the camera will re-focus wherever you point it. 
    However, whenever focus is critical and distance is short (e.g. macro or portrait), you're better of using the EVF-mode of the viewfinder. An alternative is manual focus with focus peaking assistance. When you focus, the OVF switches to EVF to show the focus peaking and then goes back to OVF for composition. 
  21. Like
    Herco got a reaction from justingould in Question about lack of weather sealing   
    There's always a lot of debate about the value of weather sealing. First of all, weather-resistance is not absolute. In fact, Fujifilm doesn't provide any information as to the quality or WR or the tests that cameras and lenses need to pass. That means that we have no clue to what extend the WR-badge 'protects'. To my knowledge only Leica provides you with an IP-rating which indicates what standardized tests the camera and/or lens is able to pass. Fuji's -10 C claim is a quite generic one. The past 35 years I haven't had cameras unable to operate at -10 C. Regardless of brand or the WR-status.
    The weakest point of an ILC is obviously the lens mount. You should avoid changing lenses under challenging conditions unless you can provide protection against direct impact. That means that lenses with rubber gaskets also protect the weakest point of a non-WR camera.
    In my experience (I meet a lot of enthusiasts in workshops) most amateurs are quite meticulous about their camera and lenses. Just some generic TLC will go a long way, also for non-WR cameras. Submerging your camera or leaving it unprotected in a downpour or snowstorm, can lead to immediate failure. If not, then you were lucky. WR only protects a little against that but not entirely (not at all to submerging by the way).
    The real issue is the long-term threat. Dust and moisture gradually builds-up inside the camera and starts corroding the contacts and print boards, resulting in strange and erratic failures until complete shutdown. WR helps a little bit in this area. But when your camera survives the rain, it doesn't mean that you're in the clear. Always wipe dry your camera. Esp. around the dials and buttons. Also when your camera is WR. If the elements are really severe (monsoon season or arctic winters) I would always use a rain cover. Regardless of WR or not.
    Sometimes people claim that WR doesn't make a difference at all and that most cameras in repair are actually WR. That's a bit misleading imo. Cameras in repair are usually the more expensive cameras, where repair is worthwhile. These more expensive cameras are mostly WR, so that messes-up the statistics. Next to that, these are also the cameras mostly used under severe conditions, so eligible to more potential damage. Esp. when their owners have complete faith in the WR-badge.
    So, in short, if you like the X-S10 and you apply a little TLC it shouldn't be a problem. Just avoid the severest of conditions and if not possible, use one of these cheap plastic rain covers.
  22. Like
    Herco got a reaction from Jim White in Fujifilm x pro 2 sometimes not turning on   
    Be aware that (unlike the X-Pro2) the X-E2s is not weather resistant. It's more susceptible to moisture building up in the camera.
  23. Like
    Herco got a reaction from jlmphotos in Why do I prefer my x-pro1's images over my x-pro2's?   
    The 16MP sensor in the X-Pro1 and X-T1 is still widely appreciated for its character. Compared to the later 24 and 26MP sensors, the pixel pitch is quite a bit larger. This impacts the levels of noise reduction and sharpening needed for the images.
    When moving to the 24/26MP sensors Fuji adopted a slightly different approach. They moved to a more aggressive NR and Sharpening. Advantage is that the images look cleaner and sharper, but the side-effect is that esp. skin (but also other textures) can look 'plasticky' or less organic. To counter this, I set the NR on the 24/26MP X-cameras to -2 or even -3. The sharpening goes to -1 or -2. That solves the jpegs and preview images somewhat.
    For raw files in Capture One you have far greater control. My recommendation is to set Sharpening to 140-180, Radius to 0.8 (1.0 for 16MP files) and the Threshold to 0 or 0.3 max. Halo Suppression can be around 5-10. For Noise Reduction you can set Lumi NR to 0 for low ISO and up to 50-75 for high ISO images. Set Details and Color to around 50 and use Single Pixel only for long exposures. I don't use LR anymore, so I have no idea of the values there. Since they have a different scale, you can't just copy the numbers between C1 and LR.
    That way the 24/26MP files come out with a bit more 'organic look' just like the 16MP had from the start. It's usually better to have some 'grain' rather than over-sharpening your images. The higher megapixel cameras, the more critical this gets...
  24. Like
    Herco reacted to jlmphotos in Why do I prefer my x-pro1's images over my x-pro2's?   
    Even though I own the XT2, XH1 and GFX gear I STILL use and LOVE my XT1.  As a matter of fact, I have an exhibition at the newly built Hale Wing at the Boston University Children's Hospital of images taken with the XT1.  IT's that good.  The prints are 30" x 20".  The XT1, using proper shot discipline, is an amazing camera even with only 16 megapixels.  Actually, as test images several years ago I printed the sister image that's to be exhibited at 40" x 30" and they still looked amazing.
    I also believe the XT1 has a more organic quality to the images and hat I believe to be finer grain at higher ISO's. 
  25. Like
    Herco got a reaction from Jim White in Fujifilm x pro 2 sometimes not turning on   
    This is most likely one of the known issues with the X-Pro2. I've had this on one of my two X-Pro2 copies and I've also heard this from others.
    The issue is the on/off switch. Though Fuji claims the camera is weather resistant, the sealing of the shutter button and it's collar isn't great and moisture can affect the contacts of the on/off button. Another similar weak point is the WR sealing of the back rear dial that can affect the push function of that rear dial. If it gets worse, you can have it serviced.  
×
×
  • Create New...