Jump to content

Lumens

Members
  • Posts

    154
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from le boecere in What are the still shooters thinking about the new video features?   
    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!! 
  2. Thanks
    Lumens got a reaction from Michael_in_Victoria in News Fujifilm X-H2   
    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.  
  3. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from Greybeard in Full articulated screen on X-H2 | YES!   
    Actually I believe with the 3-way tillt you could get the Sensor/Camera CLOSER to the ground - allowing a more level staight-on shot.  Not possible with the Articulating screen as it gets in the way of the ground flipped out all the way.  
  4. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from jerryy in Full articulated screen on X-H2 | YES!   
    Actually I believe with the 3-way tillt you could get the Sensor/Camera CLOSER to the ground - allowing a more level staight-on shot.  Not possible with the Articulating screen as it gets in the way of the ground flipped out all the way.  
  5. Haha
    Lumens got a reaction from Jazz1 in News Fujifilm X-H2   
    If it has that stupid selfie screen like the XT-4, I'll keep shooting my XT-3.
  6. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from Ketsada UNs in News Fujifilm X-H2   
    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.  
  7. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from dward in News Fujifilm X-H2   
    If it has that stupid selfie screen like the XT-4, I'll keep shooting my XT-3.
  8. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from BruceBanner in Is Lightroom good for RAF FILES NOW?   
    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. 
  9. Thanks
    Lumens got a reaction from YOUTA in Is Lightroom good for RAF FILES NOW?   
    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. 
  10. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from LowTEC in Is Lightroom good for RAF FILES NOW?   
    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. 
  11. Thanks
    Lumens got a reaction from teaandcake in Fuji XT-2 Raw : worm effect when photographing small leaves and flowers   
    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.
     
  12. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from oxjox in What are the still shooters thinking about the new video features?   
    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!! 
  13. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from Highlander123 in Fujifilm X-T camera type only for stills   
    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.
  14. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from highfive44 in 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. 
  15. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from le boecere in Fujifilm X-T camera type only for stills   
    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.
  16. Thanks
    Lumens got a reaction from Distope in Fujifilm X-T camera type only for stills   
    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.
  17. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from merlin in Fujifilm X-T camera type only for stills   
    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.
  18. Thanks
    Lumens got a reaction from skipcooney in Noise at 800 ISO and above   
    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.
  19. Thanks
    Lumens got a reaction from James Thurley in Comparison of X-Transformer and Lightroom Enhance Details   
    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.)  
  20. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from umijin in Desperate for the 80mm macro   
    Anymore I get the impression Fuji isn't interested in the X system any more.  The trend is the GFX.  If it isn't GFX they don't want to bother.  The GFX is impressive but out of my league and something I really don't need.  I do love my XT-2 and have the lenses I need for it.  I believe it is time to spend elsewhere.  Education or travel maybe?
  21. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from mcdesign in Longer than 30s ?   
    It appears Fuji is aware of this issue.  I own both the XT-1 and the XT-2 and just learned the new Firmware update to be out shortly will allow the XT-2 to go 15 minutes in "T" mode rather than just the 30 seconds allowed now.  I am overjoyed with this one!  Maybe a new firmware for the XT-1 will be out at sometime but I believe the XT-1 is considered a discontinued item so hard to say.
  22. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from fugu82 in Which Slingstrap for X-T2?   
    Another fan of Peak Design here. 
     
    I'm afraid my XT-2 looks a little strange with three dongles hanging from it, but truth is the Peak Design just works.  Two dongles hanging from the top for when I am carrying a heavy lens like my 100-400 and then one more hanging from the bottom of the Vertical grip for when I just want to handhold.  The straps just attach and unattach so easily it makes shooting so much easier.
  23. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from olibe in Video really needs to be top priority for Fuji   
    "Video really needs to be top priority for Fuji"  Very true -> For their next VIDEO camera.
  24. Like
    Lumens reacted to jlmphotos in Which Slingstrap for X-T2?   
    I only use TWO dongles, both hanging off the left side of the camera.  This way the camera dangles off my right hip very comfortably.
  25. Like
    Lumens got a reaction from Sella174 in Video really needs to be top priority for Fuji   
    "Video really needs to be top priority for Fuji"  Very true -> For their next VIDEO camera.
×
×
  • Create New...