wojconner

This old chesnut AGAIN.
 
Just get Capture one and be done with it Works for me, few hints for people worried about tranisitioning to C1
 
1) This is for Mike Photo's - note you can import your old LR catelogue into C1 and it will do its best to recreate and translate the settings and processing you had performed in LR, its not 100% and its can't do all settings but it gets damn close and is a great place to start from if you are revisiting an old shoot.
 
2) Use Workspaces, you can customize your workspace to be as you want it, I use this a lot and have a workspace with all my most used tools in one place, hugely powerful.
 
3) If you are unsure where to start with workspaces, look in the menu and you will find that there are some legacy workspaces, including a Lightroom one, load this and it configures Capture One to be as much like LR as possible to help you transition your workflow.
 
4) Use the excellent series of C1 videos on their website, I watched them all and was up and running with about 90% of what I wanted to do in a couple of days.
 
G

I don't consider myself a pixel peeper at all... I am a professional photographer, working with Canon 5D camera's, and also using a Fuji X-T2 recently.
 
I have used Fuji camera's before, but only for my vacations and free work projects. For that purpose I was happy with the results I get out of LR. But now I want to use Fuji also for some professional work, and then I am going to look more critical at the raw processing and the results.
 
Now last week I have sent some images to a client of mine, taken with the T2 and edited in LR. Pictures from a building in a green park (so with a lot of foliage surrounding the building). And then my client complained about the strange way the foliage looked to him... And I can only say that his complaint was right!
 
The way LR renders the RAF files is just not good enough for professional use.
 
So this is not about pixel peeping but about making money with photography and keeping clients happy, take them seriously by providing them with pictures with the highest possible IQ!

Yes, if the lenses were as good then I would definitely switch-the lack of ibis and touch screen on the flagship xt2 is an issue. The lackluster face detect is also still an issue and that isFuj beyond comprehension. The naysayer fanboys suggest back button or manual focus to which I respond: that's not the purpose of face detection now is it? There's no perfect camera but there is market competition and Fuji cannot rest on its laurels. Instead, Fuji needs to keep pace with competition.

You hit the nail on the head for me. If Pentax/Ricoh made a camera that accepted Fuji lenses (or better yet, Pentax made rebranded versions with the Fuji optics, but Pentax build quality and weather sealing), I think it would be a no brainer to buy that instead of a Fuji body.
 
Poor ergonomics, flaky firmware, questionable build quality, premium price. But it's worth it for access to the Fujinon lenses (at this point).
 
However, Fuji needs to watch out because Sigma has also figured out how to make sharp (and faster!) lenses for APS-C. Samyang is making some killer stuff now too, and it's only a matter of time before that includes autofocus.

To put this in perspective, it's only a minority of owners who have had this dust issue (though they are understandably vocal about it).   For a truly pocketable fixed lens APS-C, IMO the GR is still the class leader.  Snap focus, one handed operation, and sharpest lens still give it an edge over the very nice X70.

I've tried several times to warm up to Capture 1, especially given that they give you a slightly limited version for free if you shoot Sony. But I can't stand the fact that it litters the file system with its own files and other several small annoying quirks (well, annoying from the perspective of a LR and PS user). But thanks for the suggestion!
 
That said, and even if I'm a self-confessed sharpness nut (in terms of lens performance) I'm not too obsessed with the sharpest possible print. Quite the opposite actually, I think sometime a print too sharp might look unnatural or, even worse, take away the attention from your subject to the technical quality of the print itself. So I get what you say when you write that you have to move the sharpness slider the other way with some lenses, otherwise the results will look "unflatteringly sharp".
 
A proper print, IMO, (and based on what you say I guess you agree) should be transparent, for lack of a better term, and every enhancement (and I post process my files quite a bit) should be in function of the subject.

Keep it and put a tag on like with "I survived hell" or something akin to that

https://500px.com/photo/119742739/isle-of-wight-under-the-stars-by-blake-sabin

Tokyo//Midtown Roppongi
 

Hi Everyone,
 
First post here.    I live in Japan, close to Tokyo.   I was walking around Shimbashi the other night and had the good fortune to look up in time to see this nice sunset happening right above me.    I pushed the process much harder then I normally would, but considering this is an abstract I hope it's not to garish..

I tested it with the kit 18-55 and there's some improvement in single shot mode. Obviously there's now tracking available in continuous mode and it works. It's faster than the Ricoh GR but not as fast as the a5100 with its kit lens but the sony lens is extremely poor in IQ no matter how you look at it. Also, as someone noted, it does appear to have a .5 ev improvement in low light focus point acquisition. Face detection has improved in movie mode as well.