Jump to content

qwertz7

Members
  • Content Count

    30
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. @Mervyn: that's very interesting, i'll check that. @drandyperry: the lens is already optically worse than the fuji and has has only manual focus. That sould be enough to make the prize difference. I expect a lens that is sold as 0,95 to perform at least close to that.
  2. Hi all, i recently bought the Mitakon 35mm f0.95 and was very excited about it. But unfortunately in comparison with the fuji 35mm 1.4 i found that the Mitakon doesn't gather more light than the Fuji. With the same settings (manual) both lenses wide open had about the same exposure. Both set at 1.4 the Mitakon was exposed about one stop darker. I also found that sharpness, microcontrast and colors were better with the Fuji Lens. So the only advantage for the Mitakon was the slightly better DoF. Anyone alse has the Mitakon and can verify my experience?
  3. Thank you all for your responses. I will try to use CO excusively and see if i can get a comparable workflow as in lightroom. Already made some good steps in customizing some shortcuts. otherwise i will consider tiff output. thanks, Tom
  4. Cause i want to do the RAW Conversion in CO as it does it better. But use Lightroom for the workflow.
  5. Hi all, i would like to use Capture One for converting my X-Raw Files but keep Lightroom as i prfer th eworkflow. So i would like to use Capture One to convert th eRAF files to DNG. But when i try to export my RAF files as DNG i get an Error Message. I can export them as JPg and also convert my Canon Raw files to DNG. Anyone knows this Problem? thanks, Tom
  6. anybody else noticed that AF is really snappy when focusing on vertical lines but hunts much more when focusing on horizontal lines?
  7. Most important for me would be to further improve AF, its really snappy when focusing on vertical lines but hunting much more when focusing on horizontal lines. Would be great if it worked as fast as the vertical ones. Second one would be to have a silent mode shortcut. For now you have to turn off several option to get silent.
  8. yes, pete i just saw the post. It solved the problem. Though i will report this to fuji as i think of this as a bug. They should fix it so you can see an accurate preview when you shoot in adobe rgb. It was fine on the X-T1 Thanks a lot Aherranz, you're my hero! I tried all settings but didn't think that this would have an influence.
  9. jwctp, i am not sure if you're talking of the same problem. i mean that the image changes when you actually take the picture. i also updated to the new firmware and it didn't solve the problem. So i will send in my X-T2 now
  10. i was at a fuji event today and as they lack of X-T2 the guy only had a pre-production model. And guess what, the problem was not there on the pre production model. I will wait for the upcoming update and if it will not fix the problem i will send in my x-t2
  11. and Pete, i agree with all what you say, and at least one does agree that there is a difference as all of the others seem to deny that. But the goal should be that the preview matches the final image as good as possible. And as they achieved that pretty well on the X-T1 i see no reason why they shouldn't on the X-T2. And as the final image (both in raw and jpg and every picture mode) is always slightly less contrasty and less saturated as the preview, it would be an easy task to make the preview also less saturated and contrasty so they match better.
  12. so Pete, how do you explain that on the X-T1 the preview matches pretty much exact the final image and on the X-T2 it doesn't? If Fuji managed to do it on the X-T1, why won't it be possible on the X-T2?
  13. @Neder, it has nothing to do with the brightness of the EVF. If the EVF is bright, its bright for the preview AND the final image. The problem is not there on X-T1, where the preview matches the final image exactly, but on the X-T2 it's not.
×
×
  • Create New...