Jump to content

Lumens

Members
  • Posts

    151
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Everything posted by Lumens

  1. Downloaded it last night. Quick open shows it DOES handle my .RAF files quite well. Now for the "Learning Curve". :)
  2. Originally the XT line was made for Sport. The XT-3 was one of the more sophisticated Sport/Wildlife camera on the market at the time. The XH-1 came out and that was supposed to be the "Hybrid" line. But then Fuji went video centric and have not built a camera since the XT-3 - all Fuji has output have been camcorders. So far all the marketing I've seen for the XH-2 is about 8k Video. Another camcorder coming out, so I don't expect a camera any time soon. I love my XT-3 and will stick with it, until Fuji starts making cameras again!
  3. Impressive! Mine is in the mail to be delivered Thursday. I'm looking forward to the great pics I am hearing about and how with just my 16-80 & 70-300 I should be able to throw both lenses into a small shoulder bag and shoot anything I see on my hikes,
  4. It's not that I don't like them. It's more that I HATE THEM!!! I use my LCD on my XT-3 and XT-2 at different angles every time I go out. It's how I get into close spots and get the shots I like to get. Using a selfie screen makes the camera twice as wide and impossible to reach the angles I normally shoot.
  5. If it has that stupid selfie screen like the XT-4, I'll keep shooting my XT-3.
  6. I mean all sharpening. The X-Trans sensor files are already much sharper than the standard bayer sensor file. Some can be added after the fact but usually is not necessary.
  7. I use Lightroom (Subscription) all the time without any issue. I find RAF or Xtrans Sensor files are initially sharper then Bayer sensor files from other cameras causing the issues generally identified as "worms". Lightroom adds sharpening (40) to all imported files, so higher ISO RAF files may tend to show very high noise. I created a preset to import with, that reduces sharpening to "0" and adds Luminance (50) (same as Capture One does). With this preset working with RAF files in Lightroom works every bit as well as Capture One with equal quality results. With these changes, it then comes down to personal preference. Both are outstanding software and do an excellent job. For me I prefer the sliders of Lightroom over the Levels and Tone Curves of Capture One, so I stay with Lightroom. I own both (subscription) and like to play with each at different times, but as for final results I find both the be pretty close to equal, although at HUGH magnification a pixel peeper may disagree - depending on which software he prefers. As far as import issues with Capture One I can only think you have an older version. Capture One works closely with Fuji and should accept any Fuji RAF file you have unless it has not been updated properly. This is the difference between purchase and subscription. A lot of people don't like subscription, but then cuss when they can't open files from a newer camera without re-purchasing a newer version. The newest version of Capture One should handle your RAF files. Pro 12 should handle most except from any of the newest cameras (XS-10, XT-4, ? are questionable) - you'd need to check on their website for compatibility.
  8. WOW! Obviously spoken from one who has never used both types of screens. The flippy thing makes it impossible to shoot "tilted and rotated in any direction". Yes you can flip it that way, but viewing is distorted and impaired. I tried the XT-4 and sent it back. All the improvements and upgrades in the world would not overcome the detriment of the flippy thing! I'll shoot my XT-2 & XT-3 forever if Fuji doesn't return to the LCD that works.
  9. I've been meaning to try ON1 again, but my 3 to 6 emails a day from them turn me off BIG TIME!! It's been a couple years since I tried the software and at that time I judged them good, but mediocre. Since then I have seen some aggressive changes and improvements from them in the media and been thinking about trying it out again, I just don't want the spam to jump to 12+ emails a day!!!!!
  10. That we definitely agree on. When the XH-1 came out it was a camcorder version of the XT-2 and word was the "H" stood for Hybrid so the XH series would lean toward a camcorder for videographers. I was quite happy when I heard that because it meant the XT series would remain a camera. But then Fuji betrayed us and came out with the XT-4 camcorder version of the XT-3 - It is in fact the expected XH-2 only Fuji screwed up in MAJOR fashion by calling it an XT. You are 500% correct "Fuji's dual-tilt screen is the best implementation of a screen for stills work and should be maintained on the X-Tx line". I use the dual-tilt screen on my XT-2 & 3 every time I go out. It is essential in the way I shoot. That flippy thing is only good for turning it around and adoring yourself! Currently it does look like my XT-2 & 3 are simply going to have to last me a long time as I will NOT be purchasing anything that has a flippy thing hanging off the side and in the way. I would like to upgrade to IBIS, but will not do so unless the XH-2 has the dual-tilt screen.
  11. Hmmmm...... Good Point. I think what we are all waiting for was a promised (rumored) upgrade of the XT-3 firmware definitely due to arrive on or about sometime last May/June or so. All the others upgrades were earlier. I likely just need to get over my disappointment with the XT-4. Hopefully the XH-2 will have a real useful LCD instead of a flippy toy. I really would like to move up to IBIS.
  12. At one time there was something called "Kai-zen" I believe. Where Fuji would update some of the older cameras with characteristics of the new. But unfortunately for XT-3, Fuji has given up on photography and gone into the videography world. You see their developers are too busy writing new firmware for video and webcam operation. The rumored "Kai-zen" for the XT-3 has gone by the wayside. It's the videography that counts, Photographers are now second class and no longer count. At least that is what I have been seeing lately (IMHO).
  13. I own the 18-55, the 16-80, and the 16-55 "Red Badge". The 18-55 is a fantastic lens as you know. If I'm going to be in low light (handheld) I grab it for the f2.8 aperture over the f4 of the 16-80. The 16-80 is my favorite lens. The OIS on this lens is INCREDIBLE. I can hand hold down to 1/10 of a second and still get tack sharp images. This lens is on my camera 95% of the time. I love it! The 16-55 is the sharpest of the 3 lenses, but has no OIS - making it lacking at the longer length hand held. But for Landscapes or low light on a tripod it is the sharpest and best of the three. When on a tripod it is the lens of choice.
  14. Actually when the XH line came out Fuji stated the "H" stood for Hybrid and the XT line would remain separate as a camera. At least that was my understanding. Since then I have heard others say the "H" stands for High Quality. In reality the XT-4 came out as an XH hybrid camcorder so now XH and XT are one in the same. What Fuji is going to do with the next XH-2 is anybody's guess since the XT is now an XH. REALLY CONFUSING!!. I'm hoping the XH-2 will actually come out as a camera and NOT a camcorder like it's recent predecessors. If not I will stick with my XT-2 & XT-3.
  15. I already purchased too many lenses to switch!! I did start to look and find great things in Sony and Olympus. I came EXTREMELY close to purchasing the last sale from Olympus. The problem is they use that ugly flippy thing hanging off the side as well. I absolutely hate that useless camcorder feature. Bottom line it is not just Fuji making nothing but camcorders anymore - it's the industry! I have settled on my XT-2 and XT-3 until such time as the industry starts making cameras again. The only thing the XT-4 is good for is a complete cure for GAS. My bank account is loving it!!
  16. Bottom line learn what it is you are working with - that is an Xtrans sensor vs a Bayer sensor. Fuji files are created with an Xtrans sensor which is quite sharper than a file created with a Bayer sensor. Therefore default settings in Lightroom tend to over-sharpen when translating from the RAW format; thus creating worms. This can be proven by simply over-sharpening any image - you will get the same effect. I use a preset while importing to my Lightroom Catalog that sets all sharpening to 0, then as Capture One does, I increase the Noise Reduction to 50. This provides an imported image to work with no different than if it came from a Bayer sensor or if I was in Capture One. Lately the "Go To" solution has been to use Capture One, but if you look at the default import settings it simply decreases sharpening and adds Noise Reduction to remove the worms. Truth is both Lightroom and Capture One are both great software solutions, they simply handle Bayer & Xtrans sensors files a bit differently so you need to adjust accordingly.
  17. Lumens

    XT3 to XT4

    The XT-4 is designed for video, so if you do video it would be worth it. I consider it a camcorder, not a camera.
  18. I am afraid this was my understanding when the XH-1 came out. The "H" stood for hybrid. I know I read a couple of articles that mentioned this, but doubt I could find them now. Actually I was quite pleased because this meant the XT line would continue to improve while the XH line would satisfy the needs of the videographers. Now the XT-4 has come out as a camcorder I am VERY disappointed and disgruntled with Fuji. I will not be purchasing any more Fuji products until they go back to photography rather then videography. And I will never under any circumstances own any camera with one of those cheap useless flippy things hanging off the side.
  19. I think I do that when I shut down the the Sharpening & Noise Reduction I'll have to check when I get home. If I remember correctly I move all the sliders in those categories to 0. Thanks.
  20. I first tested by importing an image (actually tested several) into C1 and Lightroom, then looked at the defaults. I did need to make corrections for the different scales, but I found two items making the big difference - sharpening & Noise Reduction. 1. Sharpening was set to roughly 18 by C1 compared to 40 in Lightroom. Although I've learned since C1 will adjust sharpening based on image ISO. It is still roughly 18-25 compared to 40 in Lightroom. As I understand it X trans sensor files will be sharper than Bayer sensor files so Lightroom defaults add too much sharpening (causing the artifacts & worms). Lightroom is geared for Bayer sensor files - not X Trans. 2. Luminance/Color (Noise Reduction) in C1 is set to 50 every time, while Lightroom is set to 0. C1 for Fuji adjusts Noise Reduction to compensate for the extra sharpness of the X Trans file. I found if I import to Lightroom with the C1 defaults - that is a preset setting Sharpening to 20 and Noise Reduction to 50 I can work with my image in Lightroom much the same as with C1 and the results are the same. I am much more comfortable in Lightroom so this is works very well for me. C1 for Fuji is geared for X Trans files - you simply need to adjust Lightroom away from the Bayer sensor and more towards the X Trans sensor. Actually what's best though, is to import into Lightroom with a preset Sharpening & Noise Reduction both set to 0. I make all the global adjustments I want being cautious with contrast, texture, & clarity as those tools do increase sharpening. Then I adjust sharpening and add masking as necessary (use ALT key). If necessary (High ISO images) then I'll add Noise Reduction feeling free to go all the way up to 50 if necessary.
  21. There is a lot of discussion on this. Bottom line XT-3 files are handled fine by Adobe if you have a current version. I have heard a large number of complaints about the subscription model, but it does work and it is what I use. I also see a large number of Fuji users moving to Capture One as it does do a nice job with Fuji RAW files. Adobe treats X Trans files as if they were Bayer sensor files causing noise and artifacts. I have found if I use C1 import defaults as a preset to import into Adobe then Lightroom works just fine. Most is a matter of personal preference. I have tried and learned how to use most software options out there, but I started in Lightroom and I am comfortable in it. So I figured out how to make it work.
  22. I prefer the existing articulating screen on the XT-3 as when I need (and I do often) all I need to do is pull it out and adjust the angle. With this flippy thingy I have to flip it over turn it around, find space for it to flip to in a tight space, figure out which way the camera is pointing to so I can move things around to see what I am doing, try to hold what has become a long horizontal monstrosity so I can still get to the shutter, etc. etc. etc. etc. The screen is likely great for video, that is fine - when I want to shoot video I'll purchase a camcorder.
  23. This I must agree. I just hope it stays that way. I have my concerns competition is going to lead Fuji in the direction of becoming one of them rather than the company they have been in the past.
  24. You take a short sentence outside of what I said to completely distort what it is I actually said. The XT-3 does have some advantages over the XT-2 and when it comes to going out to shoot moving subjects, the XT-3 is what is in my bag. But when it comes to ISO performance and a cleaner RAW file I find my XT-2 files to be a much higher quality than my XT-3 files. Granted this is just my opinion, but I know quite a few others who feel the same.
  25. Wrong, The flippy screen destroys the ease of use enjoyed with the articulating screen of the XT-3 - just for starts. I'm afraid my next upgrade won't happen until Fuji starts making cameras again instead of camcorders. Just my opinion, but I believe there are plenty others out there that agree with me.
×
×
  • Create New...