Jump to content

hifimacianer

Members
  • Content Count

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I think many of the smaller shops around the country also have an online shop!? There is more than Amazon, B&H or Adorama where you can shop online. I ordered mine 2 days prior to the official release date. The small retailer is aprox 200km away from me, but he has an online shop too. It arrived on saturday.
  2. I know that the world is full of compromises. Everyone has to decide what is more important for himself. You where not directly saying "bad" regarding the SOOC JPEGS, but as you said, there is a "tone thing" in your comment, that let me think your are making indirect claims about "better". I had no Intention to disrespect the work that is done for the Fuji profiles. Maybe it's because english is not my native language, and there are certain things that I am not able to spell in a more subtile way, as I am able in my native language. I fully respect the work that is done here. But what is wrong to give some examples where the profiles could be still improved? I mean the work was released to emulate the Fuji Film Simulations, so I think they had in mind to get a close to 100% result.
  3. There IS a "one click solution" where you get the full latitude from the RAW, while having the OOC look of the film simulations: Lightroom! But everyone knows that LR has other downsides, that's why I use C1. And why is it bad that people like the OOC look of the Fuji files? Fuji is famous for that, so it seems to be good for many situations. I like RAW because it gives me more room for improvements in difficult situations. But I don't want to adjust every single picture to my needs! A perfectly matching style for C1 would still be a great starting point for everyone, but it could also be the "one click solution" for the ones who like the OOC look for certain pictures. It would be the best of both worlds. Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk
  4. I just ordered the 23/2 today, expected delivery is on friday There are many reasons why I choosed it over the 23/1.4 First of all it was the size, the 1.4 is too big for my taste - expecially as a "always on" lens. Price/value also matters - I don't think that the 1.4 gives so much better results in comparison - and in combination with the size/weight it is just not worth to me. AF Speed: I heard that the new 23/2 is blazing fast in af, and since the 23 will probably be my "always on" lens, I appreciate the speed for my playing daughter. I had a X100s a few years ago, so I know that f2 will give me enough room for low light and subject separation. And I also have a 35/1.4 for certain situations where the aperture is needed. And last but not least - 23mm is not always 23mm! According to different previews, the new 23/2 seems to be a little bit wider than 23mm. This is something I really appreciate, because it gives a little more room in certain situations and the step to my 35mm is not so close.
  5. Thanks for your suggestions. I thought that the C1 Simulations also adjust the interpretation of shadows and highlights by themselves? By the way: I already tried to match the colors and shadows/highlights by myself, but while the harsh overexposure in the face can be adjusted, the colors of the skin, the grass and the hedge still don't match the original OOC JPEG of the simulation. I also have other examples where I compared the Velvia Simulation, on a summer scene with the blue water of a swimming pool, colorful sunshades etc. and there the colors and the shadow/highlight handling are off too. Don't get me wrong - if you don't have a direct comparison the profiles are OK, and a welcome addition to the workflow. At least they are similar to the original OOC simulations. But what really bugs me is the fact, that the included simulations in Lightroom are almost 100% perfect in comparison - in colors AND shadow/highlight handling. They just look exactly the same like the JPEG.
  6. That's not correct! The Photos App has all the adjustment sliders that are available in iPhoto, plus some more. Initially they are only hidden behind simple "auto-sliders", but you can expand all if them to have full access to all detailed sliders like in iPhoto (also by Default). Photos is great for Basic Image adjustments, just like iPhoto was. The big rant about Photos came, because it was also supposed to replace Aperture - but that's not the case for sure.
  7. Here are 2 examples where you can see the differences in the Astia simulation. Look at the differences at the face and the different green tones and shadow/highlight handling.
  8. I just tested the new profiles last Weekend. They are indeed better than the older versions. Thanks for that, this is a big step forward for C1 users using Fuji. Unfortunately I have to say, that they still can't compete with the original jpeg simulations out of camera. I did a 1:1 comparison with each jpeg simulation, and I observed shadow/highlight handling and also the colors are off in direct comparison. Especially in a tested Astia simulation, the highlights in the face were blown in comparison, and also the greens of the grass and bushes in the Background have another tonality. I also tested the included film simulations in the LR trial, and the results were much more consistent there. I often couldn't tell the difference between the jpeg and the raw simulation in LR.
  9. @fleckintosh Thank you, such a great News! I will try them when I am back home from work today!
  10. Do you have any news, if/when the updated profiles will be public?
  11. I would suggest to take the 12, 18-55 and 35 with you. Maybe the tiny 27mm if you want to have a small walkaround package for crowded citys. I also own the 50-230 - but it's the least used of my lenses. We did a 3 week US west-coast roundtrip last year, and I only used the 50-230 for a few shots. But that may be a personal preference. The 18-55 is the lens I use most of the time, because it's versatile and has a great IQ. I use my 14mm and the 35mm for special scenes or in low light conditions.
  12. But I guess that wasn't possible in that scene because of the people around the dancer. You would have to go back some meters to have the same framing @140mm, and then other people would hide the scene. On the same spot you would have an other framing @140mm, so the comparison doesn't make a lot of sense.
×
×
  • Create New...