flysurfer

http://www.amazon.de/gp/product/B00ID4KWN0/ref=s9_simh_gw_g421_i3_r?pf_rd_m=A3JWKAKR8XB7XF&pf_rd_s=desktop-1&pf_rd_r=1MDW34QSAF7XS4NDWZDT&pf_rd_t=36701&pf_rd_p=862808927&pf_rd_i=desktop

The DR-Auto issue was discovered a few weeks ago by a different user. It was easy to track it down to a metadata item that Adobe is ignoring. Fuji knows it, they will probably forward it to Adobe who will probably do nothing. Just like they never did anything for the X100 and DR. Just like they never resolved miscalibrations with the X-E1, X-Pro1, X-E2(S), X-M1, X-T10, X100S, X100T, X70, etc. (they actually did something for the X-T1 eventually, so there's a glimmer of hope). It's also likely that the miscalibration of ISO 51200 in the X-Pro2 will remain. They will probably even carry it over to the X-T2, because Adobe obviously couldn't care less about their Fuji customers. Then again, it's no big deal, I know all the issues (it's not rocket science) and can easily correct them in less than a second by moving a single slider. If there's another issue, I don't have it. AFAIK, everything is exposing just fine in the camera, and I have plenty of SOOC JPEGs that show just that.

Of course. I have just explained the nature of the problem. DR-AUTO. Adobe may or may not fix it. If I had to bet, my money was on "not fix it". But hey, miracles do happen. Sometimes. Rarely. Then again, DR-AUTO is not recommended, anyway. So maybe the whole thing has some hidden educational purpose? Who knows...

Don't use Canon TTL flash gear on a Fuji TTL flash mount. Not compatible (obviously). Use different gear or buy a contact separation adapter to reduce the contacts to simple triggering.

It's a known issue that Lightroom doesn't process the metadata of X-Pro2 DR-Auto RAWs, so shots taken with DR200% need to be manually pushed by 1 EV. No big deal, and it's also pretty obvious when one compares the initial Lightroom import with the corresponding SOOC JPEG. This is one of several issues LR has with the X-Pro2 and other X cameras. Given that Adobe hasn't fixed most of them in the past 5 years, I don't really expect an update that fixes it. Instead, it's best to know the import errors and correct them manually.

Is this a flash for Fujifilm TTL cameras? According to Google it looks more like a Canon flash.

They could have read one of my books to avoid incompetent camera settings (or to try and compare different/counterintuitive setting and be surprised by their superior performance), but I understand that the $10.00 for an eBook may have overextended DPR's budget. Then again, DPR receives free review copies. There are several other mistakes that illustrate a lack of professionalism, but to be fair, most (all?) other review sites and magazines are even worse, so DPR may be considered the lesser of many evils. They also offer decent studio tests and allow us to download the original RAW files, so it's not all bad.

& X30, X70, X100T...

Of course, 100% viewing is becoming the norm with 5K and soon 8K displays becoming the norm. You don't even have to zoom in for it. In a few years, 24 MP resolution will be required to fill all pixels of a normal desktop screen.

My First Look provides DR examples and mentions differences to previous models: https://fujixsecrets.wordpress.com/2016/01/16/first-look-fujifilm-x-pro2/ I particularly like the new DR50% option for RAW shooters (by selecting ISO 100).

If that's possible, sure.

The i40 has always supported manual HSS. So this is old news from 2014.

Pixel based is our usual DOF scale as we know it from previous X cameras. Of course, it's now adapted to the new sensor and its smaller pixel pitch. Film format based corresponds to the DOF markings on Fuji's MF clutch lenses. This DOF scale about 4.5 stops less conservative and only recommended if you do not look too closely and don't print or display large. Also see my article for images showing both scales while setting a hyperfocal distance: https://fujixsecrets.wordpress.com/2016/01/16/first-look-fujifilm-x-pro2/

It's Adobe's fault, so you should open a support ticket with them. Fixed DR settings are treated correctly, btw. So only DR Auto (with DR200% in the actual shot) is affected. Fuji can't do much here, as the RAW metadata appears to be fine.

No problem with my DR200% and DR400% files here. Please make a few of your affected RAWs available for download (along with the respected SOOC JPEGs), so I can check them out.

That would be a strange error in Lightroom, because this was fixed after the X100 Classic came out. You are using RAF files with the latest LR version, right?

The only LR miscalibration I'm aware of is at ISO 51200. Sadly, you didn't provide specifics about the ISO and DR settings of the affected RAW files (and also didn't post examples), so it's impossible for me to of actual help here.

I can relate, as I'm also sentimental about my X100 Classic, my very first X-series camera. We went through difficult times together, and it may even be possible that it would still be my only X camera if my main duty wasn't to evaluate new gear that isn't on the market, yet. So I'm split. The majority of my images is made using (usually faulty) pre-production gear with unfinished firmware, so there's always a craving to use mature and well-aged gear that has reached its end of life and will not change/improve anymore, like my X100 Classic. Maybe that's also why I bought myself three old Sigma Merrills.

A real freeze can only be remedied by removing the battery for a few seconds.

I think it's perfectly normal to be attached to gear that you know well and are familiar with. There are memories of common history. However, it's also perfectly possible to get familiar with new gear and create new history together.

Yep, it depends on available resources. So maybe later.

Still no.

No.

- Depends on your speed/accuracy requirements. - Hybrid-AF is faster and shouldn't be less accurate. - Again, speed vs. accuracy. Good luck!

I do this with the autofocus trick. AF-C only for faster moving subjects.