Lumens
-
Posts
154 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
13
Content Type
Forums
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by Lumens
-
-
The problem is in the default settings of the software. Sharpening in LR is set to 40 by default. C1 uses a 0-1000 scale and is set to 140 - this would be a 14 equivalent in the LR 0-100 scale. X-trans sensors deliver a MUCH sharper image than the Bayer sensor from Canon/Nikon. Thus LR is defaulted for Canon/Nikon, while C1 is suited better for X-trans. Note: the C1 settings I am using come from Version 20 for Fuji.
Also the Luminance settings in C1 are set at 50 while LR is set to 0. Thus once again, the C1 for Fuji has defaults set for the Fuji sensor while LR is set for Canon/Nikon. I tried importing in LR with a C1 Fuji preset (14/50) and surprise LR & C1 appear pretty much equal for IQ! Also I find setting both software to "0" sharpening & "0" Luminance produces equal images.
I have started importing to LR with preset setting to "0" sharpening & "0" Luminance. Once I have processed my image I then look at the image and access sharpness. I will increase it as much as possible without creating noise or worms. If I see noise or worms before I have done any sharpening, then I set the Sharpening to "1" to enable masking. I then mask most of the sharpness out. Roughly masking ends up around 70 to 80.
If I still see noise or worms after masking, then I increase Luminance until the noise or worms are gone. Usually that ends up less than 50 even if the ISO was 6400 or above.
I find this system solves all the worm issues. Although the truth is, good capture and correct exposure during capture will reduce noise or worms the best.
-
Agreed, I use a Black Rapid attached to the Tripod Collar for my XT-3/100-400. Although I prefer the Peak Design - I do use it for all my other (Lighter) lenses.
-
I own the XT-2 & 3 and have also tested with my own files. I took 3 RAW images and converted them with IRXT, Enhanced DNG, CR DNG, and Tiff using CR. Then compared all the files in Lightroom. At normal viewing and even at 100% you will not see much difference. Most people had to zoom to 300 & 400% to see the difference. However I have been using Fuji and LR for a long time, the issue asserts itself with Clarity and sharpening.
So to view the issues at their worst I increased Clarity, Luminance, and Detail to 100%. The RAW and CR DNG files looked like a horror movie with alien worms about to jump out (at normal viewing on a small monitor. The IRXT & Enhanced DNG were very close to equal, with maybe an EXTREMELY small benefit going to the Enhanced. The CR Tiff showed the best appearance. These results were at all zoom levels - the worms were just not there on any of the three.
I started to export to Tiff just recently as I was experimenting with alternative software and not all are compatible with XT-3 files or even DNG. I found exporting to Tiff gave me the freedom to use any software I wish and the worm effect no longer occurred. The disadvantage is the larger file size of course. My new workflow is:
- Use Bridge "Review Mode" to sort out which images I want to process
- Open them in Camera Raw and Export to new location as Tiff (Full size, 16bit, Profoto RGB)
- Process "Global" adjustments using Luminar 3 (My preferred processing software)
- After global adjustments - export as Tiff to my "Gallery" folder
- Import the "Gallery" into Lightroom for the excellent DAM provided and round trip to Photoshop if any local adjustments may be needed.
- Export from Lightroom for final destination in format as required (Internet, Printing, Web, etc.)
-
Well. It's the end of the year and both On1 2019 and Luminar 3 have come out so I had to make my decision. All these software programs are excellent and each is best in one area or another. I have found that converting to Tiff or DNG outside of Adobe then opening in LR works quite well and Iridient Transformer does a great job of batch converting to DNG. So now I am converting to DNG and using "What Does What Best". LR has the best Libraries functionality so I keep a catalog of my completed images converted to Tiff in LR for a gallery and final touch up. But Luminar and C1 provide outstanding results so I develop in those two depending on what the image is. So far this is working quite nicely.in
-
I own both XT-2 & 3 as well. I have come to the same conclusion. I have set the two cameras aside for special purposes. The XT-3 is my go to camera being outstanding for Sports & Wildlife. That Auto-focus is insane and just does wonders on unpredictable subjects. I also prefer the XT-3 in good light for landscape and such, but when I know the light may be questionable out comes the XT-2. At ISO 3200 or less the XT-3 does fine, but the XT-2 can easily go to 6400 and I've even had success at 12800. So it's the XT-2 for low light and the XT-3 for everything else.
-
I picked it up a couple days ago @50% off. Interesting product, It does a good job, but a bit like shooting straight JPEG out of the camera. I prefer to do my own processing, but I suspect I will be using it when I'm feeling lazy or in a hurry. I may process then run Photolemur just to see how different the automated version appears from my own.
-
I made the attachment using the metal clips supplied with the camera body, on my XT-1, XT-2, and now my XT-3. Have to agree straight through the eyelet would be nice, but the clips work fine for me.
-
Yes, I don't use Sports mode so have not had any issues with purple images in C1. I am assuming an update will be sent out in short order, but in the mean time stay out of Sports Mode and all is good..
-
Capture One works for me and does a better job than LR. My files will open in LR Classic without issue - maybe it's the LR CC that still has a problem.
-
"There is no Fuji Worms effect. There is an Adobe Worms effect."
I like that statement as it is MUCH more accurate. My problem is I am too familiar with Lightroom - it is much easier to use because I know it so well. But I've not been happy with Adobe for a while now and keep looking for a suitable software to switch to permanently. Like mostlyphotos above the new Fuji version of Capture One was the only software to bring about a prompt upgrade to the XT-3 so I started using it. There's a very strong chance this will be my answer to where I will be moving to. It is a fantastic Software.
I have also tried several other software including On1, Luminar, Raw Therapy, Irridient, ACDSee, etc. Not one of them produced worms unless I really get ridiculous with the sliders. Then all of them will to a degree, but nothing like what Lightroom does with just a slight adjustment.
At this point I am waiting to see the new On1 2019 and the new version of Luminar when they come. Between Capture One, OnOne Photo, & Luminar there are features I like and dislike about each. Capture One being the most powerful, I love the way the Libraries work in OnOne, and I get the best results with Luminar. On the other hand, Capture One is going to require a bit of a learning curve and require me to get accustomed to the different User Interface, OnOne has great result, but not nearly as good as the other two (Could be me not the software), and Luminar at this point is just a plug-in.
I will be moving to one of them permanently after the first of the year, when I can give each another try. Mostly because they all render Fuji files a GREAT deal better than Adobe.
-
19 hours ago, MPoK said:
Anybody understand why Fuji would introduce a new sensor that seems more noisy at hi ISO, rather than incorporate the other improvements into an updated XT2 / 20 etc??
I own the XT-2 & the XT-3, as I kept the XT-2 as a backup. The BSI sensor on the XT-3 in my opinion seems focused on speed. The AF on this thing is incredible! Has me tracking Butterflies & Dragon flies In-Flight! I suspect Fuji wanted to step ahead of the mirrorless phobia about poor AF. Definitely not true any more, this thing can keep up with any of the best DSLRs. But that came at the price of a little bit more noise. Note: the XT-3 is still way ahead of the noise game, just not quite as much ahead as the XT-2. I am finding what I could shoot with my XT-2 @ 12800 is about equal the the XT-3 @ 6400. I still try to stay below 3200 so really it is not an issue - I am very happy with the performance of the XT-3
I don't shoot video so the XT-2 is identical to the XT-3 except for slightly slower AF speed and slightly better ISO handling. Both cameras are almost identical except in a very slim measure of performance. If I am going to shoot in low light the XT-2 is coming out, when shooting wildlife, you can't beat the XT-3. I now have the best of both worlds!
-
Yes, WAY BEHIND, I've been wondering if this forum is actually still active.
-
I purchased the subscription Capture One Pro for Fuji (v11.3) and may purchase the permanent license at the end of the year. The subscription isn't bad but as always any subscription plane is just a leach attached to the wallet. The permanent version $299 does include all the Fuji and Sony features with it. It is designed for all cameras. For a lower price On1 is a good option as well.
-
I just received my "It's on the Truck" email from B&H, to be delivered Tuesday by FedEx. XT-3 Black + Vertical Grip!
-
On 7/7/2015 at 5:24 AM, MintMark said:
When I saw the subject I thought of the Canon EF-S 15-85... a great walk about lens.
-
14 hours ago, jabell said:
Am I the only one who thinks the silver model looks like the silver part would just scrape off, showing black underneath?
I just pre-ordered the silver, this being my only reservation, but it just looks so cool!
Hopefully it stands up with the normal Fuji quality - time will tell.
-
On 7/7/2015 at 5:24 AM, MintMark said:
When I saw the subject I thought of the Canon EF-S 15-85... a great walk about lens.
I must agree, I kept my Canon 7D because of that lens. Sold all the other lenses, but every once in a while I'll take a stroll with my 7D/15-85 combo just because it is so good. I was more thinking the Fuji 16-80 f4 now in the works would be more to challenge the Canon EF 24-105 f4 - another good lens. Either way it sounds like a good idea. I just don't know that it would replace my 18-55/55-200 combo I love so much.
-
23 hours ago, Patrick FR said:
X-T3 seems to be quite affordable
https://www.fujirumors.com/breaking-fujifilm-x-t3-will-cost-less-than-fujifilm-x-t2-trusted-source/Sounds like they may get my dollars after all. The difference from XT-2 to XT-3 is nothing compared to the XT-1 to XT-2 jump, at least from what I have seen so far. Actually, I've been thinking on passing this time, but at the right price....
I'm thinking Fuji is working on a smart strategy - sell the camera well below competition, make the profit on consumer GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome). You know anyone moving from Canon/Nikon to Fuji is going to need more than just one lens
-
20 fps really seems like overkill to me. The 11 fps of the Xt-2 is MORE than enough, if not too much for me. However, if the XT-3 can shoot that many frames that quick, then the improvement in Auto-focus speed must be quite significant. THAT would make a big difference for me.
-
Many have complained about lock ups and Fuji has answered with Firmware upgrades. Are you using the latest version of firmware? If not you are MISSING OUT on a lot of good stuff. Personally I have never had a lockup happen to me. I have always suspected third party batteries and mix of cards in the card slots. I always use Fuji batteries and matching sd cards in both slots.
-
Hmmmm, now made in china - I may just pick up that second XT-2 and pass on the XT-3. So far only 2 extra megapixel, maybe faster processor, and a smudge screen - I keep getting less and less impressed with the rumors.
-
Hmm I just can't see how the XT3 could be released without IBIS! I know technically it's apparently not possible, but I just don't see how Fuji can expect this to compete for 2-3yrs without IBIS at a £1200+ price point. Short of the current canon MILC i can't think of any other camera released (non-Fuji) without IBIS at. The price point Fuji are aiming for.
Sure they'll sell upgrades to those heavily invested in the system (although with those specs I suspect that won't be as easy as it was with XT2) with glass but expanding their user base will be very hard with a non-IBIS body at the time Canon & Nikon are rumoured to be entering the market in a big way and Sony are moving the price of FF down.
Fuji has two strategies - If you want IBIS look at the XH series. There's not a lot of difference between the XT-2 and XH-1 except IBIS. I want to say, If you don't shoot video there really is no difference, but I do hear users of the XH-1 say IBIS really helps with the prime (non-OIS) lenses.
I have not shot an XH-1, but with my XT-2 I really haven't experienced a need for IBIS and I do shoot primes. So far I am extremely happy with my XT-2 and figure it's going to take something really impressive to get me to upgrade. So far in the XT-3 rumors I have not seen that, but not that much is out yet either, so my upgrade while doubtful is still up in the air.
-
You're talking covering everything from wide-angle to telephoto. In my opinion the easiest way to do that is with zooms.
Ultimate setup -> 8-16 f2.8, 16-55 f2.8, 55-140 f.28, & 100-400 (My setup will look like this when I hit the Lottery
)Most affordable/efficient -> 10-24, 18-55, 55-200, & 100-400 (My current setup)
Prime system -> 16 f1.4 (maybe 14 & 23 here), 35 f1.4, 56 f1.2, 80 Macro or 90 f.2, & 100-400
Alternate Prime -> 23, 35, 50, 90 all f.2 with 100-400
Bottom line covering that wide a range is expensive, best option is make a plan and stick with it. So much in the bank a month until the finances (and sale price) is there.
-
I must admit I really love the idea, but as you say it's all guess work. I tried using for landscape and ended up with spots out of focus as the steps moved too far in between. I tried some Macro and didn't set enough shots so didn't get the detail/shot I wanted. I did get one good shot, but it is truly nothing but guessing at this point. I am better off to wait until they improve the process so you know what your settings are actually going to do.
Hopefully it stands up with the normal Fuji quality - time will tell.
Fujifilm X-T camera type only for stills
in General Discussion
Posted
YES, YES, YES!! The direction Fuji has taken lately has been all for video and AF at the expense of ISO performance. Forget about producing good stills, I'm not so sure they care. The XT-2 was much better than the XT-3 and so far all I see is Fuji stepping back from image quality for the sake of AF and video.
The "XH" series was supposed to mean "Hybrid" for both video and stills while the "XT" line was supposed to continue to be a camera, not a camcorder. Now the XT-4 is simply the XH-2 in disguise.
I will be using my XT-2 & XT-3 much longer than I expected from what I am seeing lately and that's a good thing because I love those two cameras.