DIS Ottawa

... in Canada. Famous for its red soil. In the background you can see part of the 13km long Confederation Bridge connecting Prince Edward Island to New Brunswick, the mainland of Canada.

Vidalgo, A valid criticism. However, at least part of the problem is that the blacks are crushed on this site by the compression used. It does look better on Smugmug, where this is linked from and still better on my computer. https://disottawa.smugmug.com/Photo-Club-Expe/Les-Chutes-de-Plaisance-August-2/i-k53VDbK/A I could probably lift the shadows more but this is actually the light I was dealing with. The location of this waterfall is operated and the trail and lookoffs maintained by a volunteer organization, which doesn't open until 10:00 am and this shot wasn't taken until 11:00 am, so the light was quite harsh. All that being said, I'll take another look at it in Lightroom and see if I can lift the shadows a bit more than I already have. Thanks for your thoughts!

Another view of the same waterfall.

X-Pro2, 16-55mm 6 shot panorama of the waterfall near Plaisance on the Petite Nation River in Quebec.

Beautiful shots! I particularly like # 1 & 5. You make me want to go on a photo trip to Scotland.

X-Pro2 with 16-55mm.

Swallow with X-T1 and 100-400mm.

From now on, when I see the word bucolic, this is what I'll think of. Lovely.

Bedford Mills near Kingston, ON

Ahh, didn't realize you can link to Flickr like that. It certainly does look better there. Consider my comment withdrawn. I use Smugmug and don't think you can "click through", as you put it. At least it didn't work just now when I tried one of mine. Glad to hear the 16mm is as good as the 23mm, one of my favourite lenses. I've been considering the 16 but find the 16-55 to be very good when stopped down. Even when not stopped down. Probably not quite prime good, but I'd be hard pressed to spot any differences in a print.

Nice compositions on both; you might try opening up the shadows on the far bank on the first one. A bit contrasty for me. Do you find the 16mm to be as sharp as the 23mm?

I had a look at your trip to Morocco; some really beautiful images. Makes me want to visit. Thanks for sharing.

The St Laurence River at Prescott, Ontario X-Pro2 with 16-55mm at f11 for 160 seconds

Ontario, Canada on the left, New York, USA on the right. X-Pro2 with 16-55mm at f6.4 for 107 seconds, converted to black and white in Nik Silver Efex

Yeah, I tend to agree that Lightroom, which is built on Adobe Camera Raw which has been around for many a year, needs its basic code brought up to date. However, that would cost money and since it seems to have been optimised for Canon/Nikon files and works pretty well for those files, I don't see them doing it anytime soon. I'm starting a search for something to replace Lr. OnOne will have a new raw processor in the fall and Corel has just released a new version of After Shot Pro which may be worth a trial download. The trouble is I'm used to Lr, I know it and it does certain things very well, like the print module and soft proofing, adjustment brushes, etc. Photography is a hobby for me and I want things to be fun and easy. Learning a new program, well...it may not be so easy.

I seem to have found a solution of sorts. I have been building standard previews upon import and this never caused an issue with Canon, Olympus or 16 mp Fuji raw files. However, it seems Adobe can't manage the 24 mp Fuji files with standard previews. I just imported about 70 uncompressed raf files, converted to DNG and built 1:1 previews and now I can scroll through mostly without issue. I did see the "Loading" dialog box briefly a couple of times but overall, a huge improvement. I also tried the same files in my late 2013 Macbook Pro with a 500gb SSD and standard previews and it was much better, but I did still sometimes see the "Loading" dialog box. So from now on I will have to use 1:1 previews and my next iMac with have SSD only, no more spinning drives. Or Adobe could fix their software.

Yes, I'm staying in the Library module; strangely the Develop module is more responsive. The system isn't regenerating previews as this happens with all files, ones I've just imported as well as older ones. My catalog is quite large but I tried creating a new catalog with only 50 or so images and still, it takes 5 seconds to fully open a file and/or to move between files. It's possible, even likely, that the catalog and previews have been transferred off the flash drive to the HDD, however, one doesn't hear of this sort of slowdown with 24 mp files from Bayer sensor cameras. I have a Macbook Pro with a 512 gb SSD and will try some Pro2 files on that and see what happens. Thanks for the thoughts.

Since I got my X-Pro 2, I've noticed that even after import is over, raf files are converted to DNG and previews have been generated, the Library module is very slow. Each file I click on takes 5 seconds to load (I get a small black dialog box which says "Loading"). I never had this problem with the T1, E1 or 100T files. While I still get the dialog box in the Develop module, it's only there for a second or so at most and often not at all. Whether or not "Use graphics processor" in Preferences is on or not, doesn't seem to make a difference. My computer is a late 2012 27" iMac with 3.4 GHz Core i7, 32 GB of 1600 MHz DDR3 memory and a three TB Fusion Drive. Three years old but still good specs. I know the Pro 2 produces larger files, but this slow? Any ideas if this is a Lightroom problem or a computer problem and how to fix it?

Common Nuthatch, 100-400mm.

Drake Mallard with 100-400mm.

One more from the Mississippi River (no, not that Mississippi River) at the gorge at Blakeney, ON.

I like long exposures too. Here's one from Les Chutes de Coulonge, about 90 minutes from Ottawa.

I don't like the subscription model either, but I'm also pretty tired of Adobe's lack of interest in supporting X-Trans files. The Fuji files are much slower to import, slow to generate previews, when moving from one file to the next I get the loading message all the time. And the demosaicing, although much improved, is still subpar compared to Iridient Developer. I never had these issues with Canon or Olympus raw files.

I think this looks quite interesting. I'll be wanting to give it a try as I'm tired of Adobe's poor efforts at supporting X-Trans files. https://www.on1.com/news/announcing-the-first-new-raw-processor-in-years-on1-photo-raw/

I'm sure that's true, but if I ever need lens repair, I suspect I'll send it to Fuji. I've never been very handy; I worked in international relations where I didn't need superior hand coordination. Just the ability to speak for a long time without saying much of importance.