Jump to content

flysurfer

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    716

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

 Content Type 

Everything posted by flysurfer

  1. flysurfer
    It's like the X-T1 situation. Fastest cards: 1. Lexar 2000x 300 MB/s is the fastest 2. Toshiba Exceria Pro 260 MB/s is the second-fastest 3. SanDisk Extreme Pro 280 MB/s is the third-fastest
  2. flysurfer
    Because there is no image without it.
  3. flysurfer
    Nikon is very good at image processing, and they also know how to use the ISOless camera concept. The thing with the D7200 and D5500 is that noise is just one of several parameters to judge ISOless performance (aka dynamic range). There's also color consistency in push situations, and this is where I found the weakness in the D7200. It's complicated, and you really have to approach it with an open mind. Being fixated on a single performance parameter doesn't help much, we need to look at the "big picture" and approach ISO performance from more than just one angle.
  4. flysurfer
    Exactly. Measuring noise doesn't tell us much. Fujifilm is indeed ADDING noise in its Acros simulation to produce a more pleasing (naturally grainy) result. Not to forget the new grain function to add "analog film grain" to color film simulations. So just measuring noise and saying "less is better" only shows that the test itself is quite incompetent. We have to look at the structure of the noise, how does it flow from dark to brighter areas, how fine is it, does it cluster, it is "pleasing" or not? For this, we have to look at different RAW converters, as they are responsible for the demosaicing and the "look" of the final image. IME, X-Processor Pro produces more pleasing noise than Lightroom. This wasn't the case with EXR II, where high-ISO noise in SOOC JPEGs would often look more clustered. Of course, much of this is also a matter of personal taste. Just like you can't say that a red car is always better than a blue one.
  5. flysurfer
    Just moved a few sliders. You should also clean your sensor. Basically, the shot was 4 stops underexposed in the shadows. 2 stops thanks to DR400%, another stop with the exposure settings, and a final stop to recover shadows. Luckily, the isoless sensor allows us to correct this with little penalty.
  6. flysurfer
    Such things can depend on the flash power setting.
  7. flysurfer
    I have synched the i40 at 1/250s for more than a year now.
  8. flysurfer
    Neither is Fuji. I'll take one of these time machines, though. To go.
  9. flysurfer
    My latest X-E2 revision is 4.00.
  10. flysurfer
    The majority of cameras at DPR is at 1/80s for f/5.6, including many SOS cameras. IIRC, Panasonic is also sometimes at 1/60s. So there's a deviation of -1/3 EV from the majority, which is within the ± 1/3 EV requirements of SOS. That a Nikon 610 is defining ISO about 1 EV higher than a Nikon 1 V3 is really Nikon's problem (or better: their users' problem). I like consistency, and luckily I get that within all Fuji APS-C cameras.
  11. flysurfer
    Tested it with X-E2 and X-E2S last week. No issue with the current LR version (6.4).
  12. flysurfer
    ISO 800 is perfectly normal for DR400%. Looks like the white balance isn't set correctly. You can redevelop the RAW in-camera with a different WB setting (even with Auto-WB) or process it externally in Lightroom or whatever converter you prefer.
  13. flysurfer
    But I'm sure that you made Patrick very happy, because now he got the kickback.
  14. flysurfer
    Adobe and Fuji demosaicing look almost identical. So this means that Fuji's internal JPEG engine must have a well-documented demosaicing problem, too. OTOH, many regard the built-in engine as the benchmark. Adobe's problem ist that applying too much sharpening quickly brings out ugly X-Trans artifacts, and that seems to be the issue that Adobe is willing to improve on in future ACR editions. As for changing the demosaicing: anything is possible, but that would mean a departure from Fuji's own demosaicing method.
  15. flysurfer
    I rarely use regular menus during shooting. It's counterproductive. Instead, I put everything I need on Fn buttons (ISO, DR, AF mode and frame selection, face detection, Natural Live View, sometimes white balance) als also use the Q menu to quickly change stuff like shutter mode, OIS mode or flash exposure compensation. In the X-Pro2, I am also using the new My Menu to change more frequently used settings. I use eye-detection most of the time, but may switch to LCD only when the camera is on a tripod.
  16. flysurfer
    Adobe Standard is just as valid as any of the film simulations (which aren't that good, except for the new versions Adobe made for X-Pro2, which are quite on the mark). See https://www.flickr.com/gp/ricopfirstinger/53VgT3
  17. flysurfer
    It's not unique at all. It's SOS ISO, which is more objectively defined than REI ISO and used by several companies, like Fuji and Olympus. The SOS standard allows a deviation of ± 1/3 EV from its definition, and Fuji tends to use this leeway to the downside. So in many cases, Fuji JPEGs would turn out 1/3 EV darker than JPEGs from other cameras. Of course, all of this is common knowledge (heck, it's on Wikipedia!), but it seems that many so-called "experts" from "review websites" don't have the slightest clue about any of it.
  18. flysurfer
    Of course not. And everybody with a minimum of competence knows that. However, Nikon is cheating with Nikon wrt ISO. For example, the Nikon 1 V3 needs 1/60s while the Nikon 610 needs 1/125s at the same aperture and ISO settings to output JPEGs with similar brightness. Click here, then click on the INFO buttons to see the awful truth nobody ever mentions anywhere on the web. Nikon cameras are all over the place wrt ISO. That's because they are using REI ISO, which allows them to calibrate each camera as they see fit. Sony and Canon are using REI, as well, with similar results. Fuji is using SOS ISO, and all Fujifilm APS-C cameras are pretty much identical when it comes to ISO calibration. The sensor doesn't matter, be it 12 MP Bayer, 16 MP Bayer, 16 MP X-Trans or 24 MP X-Trans. All models have the same calibration in order to not confuse their users who expect consistency. Consistency, of course, is something Nikon users can only dream of, as each new model is kind of a surprise package—even within the mirrorless Nikon 1 line.
  19. flysurfer
    I did as I was told: https://fujixsecrets.wordpress.com/2016/02/17/x-e2-vs-x-e2s-ending-the-confusion/
  20. flysurfer
    They sometimes do. I actually liked the video quality a lot. As for the contents, it seems like TCS and Fuji Canada may be a little bit at odds over something.
  21. flysurfer
    I'm surprised, I thought there were already plenty of articles about this? I have done a comparison and can write it up later this week.
  22. flysurfer
    There are several differences, but they won't affect many users.
  23. flysurfer
    I have no problems with Lightroom CC. No need to use another converter from my side, especially not for wedding stuff.
  24. flysurfer
    Provia is turning bright red into orange, anyway (think taillights of cars). Reprocessing with another film simulation usually changes that.
  25. flysurfer
    77 or 273. The same.
×
×
  • Create New...