Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Comparing On1 and Capture One.

There seems to be much concern about which software does a good job of Fuji files.
Having decided to use On1 2021 I decided to compare a raf file (Fuji X-S10) with minor editing between these two editors. The photo in question is quite dull in keeping with the weather.

I only did the following to the file in both editors:
 
Pushed out the whites and blacks for max dynamic range
Boosted Structure (to 40)
Sharpened.

Having edited the file in each editor I exported the raf file as a full size jpeg and then compared them side by side in ACDSee Ultimate at 100%. 

The attached comparison image was captured using ACDSee Ultimate at 100%.

The Capture One image is on the left and On1 is on the right.

I concentrated on the rocks as this is where I thought there may have been a problem.
I see no noticeable difference.

I hope this is of some interest, 

Dave.

Comp ACDSee Cap1 left On1 right 100per.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Dave,

It is interesting to see although doing these comparisons can be quite a tricky science as different software engines will have differing incremental scales on any adjustment. I have seen this comparing Fuji rafs in C1 Pro and LR which is why I think its important to make use of the trials to help decide. How are you getting on with the X-S10? Wondering if you have tried it with primes and also if you have found the IBIS an advantage?

Will be down your neck of the woods over Xmas waving a 100v about!

 

John 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, best approach is to download a trial and try it out. 

I have found the ibis lets me hand hold down to about half a second, below that and it is no longer sharp. Of course the lens also has IS so I may have managed with that alone but there is so much more to this camera than IBIS. 

I only have the one lens, the 16-80mm f4, and I am very pleased with it. It balances nicely with the camera.

The weather here has been quite dreary since I got the camera so you can imagine the kind of photos but I am impressed by how accurately the jpegs reflect what I actually saw. The only time it got it wrong was a seascape where the white balance was very blue. I put this down to being in Auto WB but changing to Daylight WB did not improve things.

The Acros film sim is as good as I have heard on the forums.

Enjoy your Christmas trip.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Posts

    • The 8-16 is the 'natural' companion for the 16-55 (as is the 50-140). However, since the 'long end' of the 10-24 is definitely the 'weakest' part, the actual overlap with the 16-55 is smaller than you might think. From 20mm onwards the 10-24 becomes rather soft with low contrast. An alternative could be the 14/2.8 or if you need wider, the Zeiss Touit 12/2.8. That is actually a great lens. I've had the 50-140, but I wasn't really impressed esp. considering the price. It's a good lens though, but if I now compare to my new Nikkor Z 70-200, the difference is stunning, which is of course also part due to the camera. The 55-200 is IMO very close to the 50-140 in terms of sharpness and IQ, but of course much slower in terms of aperture and it has noisier AF (and lacks WR). Considering the price though, I regard the 55-200 as a very good lens and better suited for incidental tele work than the more expensive 50-140.
    • The X-mount on most Fuji camera models is not particularly robust in my experience. Only the ones on the X-H1 and the GFX are better. Part of the issue is the quite shallow electronic contacts. Esp. with heavier lenses. The 50-140 on an X-Pro2 gave me constant issues until I got the X-H1 (according to Fuji 25% enforced mount) and never experienced problems with the same 50-140 again. Just a little bump may throw-off the contact between lens and camera, resulting in the "turn off-on" message or the infamous "f0" message. You also may want to check whether there is some lateral or rotational tolerance between the 10-24 and the X-T4. I had to swap two times a Fuji lens: one 16-55 with a misaligned mount and one 16/1.4 with too much tolerance when mounted. Something you wouldn't expect with a premium brand...
    • I purchased the fujifilm leather case for my x100v and just leave the bottom portion off. I find that the top portion fits my adapter/filter and protects the screen. A possible option unless you only want a lens cap. Did you end up finding something that works? 
    • There are rumors about a new Fuji 18mm (=27mm FF equiv.). It is supposed to be f1.4 according these rumors, but I would love an update of the 18/f2. At f1.4 will be between the 23/f1.4 and 16/f1.4 in size and that's too big to my liking for my X-Pro2. Either way, I hope it will be significantly better than the 23/f2 or the 16/f2.8. More at the level of the 35/f2...
    • Hello everyone! I am looking for the best solution for my specific scenario/ needs. Currently I shoot with a Canon EOS M50 and have the FF-equivalent lenses for 18-35mm, 35mm, 50mm. Everything is fine and dandy with the kit, but I wish I could get just nice Jpegs out of this thing. Before I switched carreers I was a professional photographer, doing portraiture and documentary style weddings etc. Always been a FF Canon shooter. But, I was also an X-Pro1 early adopter! What pulled me in was the look and feeld of the camera (so nostalgic, "retro") but also the SOOC Jpegs. I wanted this camera to be the hassle free, pure photography camera to take everywhere and have a finished "product" after pressing th shutter button. Well, the camera was nice but lacking in many aspects, especially in speed and AF. I purchased the M50 with the 22mm F2 lens as a pocket snapshooter, added the 11-22 for wideangle work and sold my FF kit. Bought the 32mm F1.4 when it came out and like the kit a lot. It is small, lightweight and the picture quality and AF is absolutely enough for my use today. I'm a casual shooter, mainly photographing the family and outings with friends and whatever els snapshots I take. Now the thing is, the M50 takes just OK SOOC Jpegs, but nothing really worthwhile. I've tested custom picture stiles and the likes but was never satisfied with the outcome. And honestly, I don't want to work on RAWs anymore. I'm just tired of it. I want the same approach that I have when shooting film... finished product. I accept that I cannot change a whole lot with my scanned negative, but I am happy with it, because I like the tonality, the color and the imperfections. They fit together nicely and feel "real" in a sense. In the digital world I think that Fuji Jpegs come closes to what I need, so the picture quality is already there. Now I see Fuji has brought a whole bunch of new and improved cameras to the market and I am looking for something that will be the end-all be-all camera. My Requirements: Newest Sensor and Processor with Color Chrome effect Classic Neg and Acros film sim Fixed or exchangeable lens, preferably 28mm FF equiv. or around 28-45mm Bonus: Set specific Shutter Speed for Auto-ISO (Canon has a fixed threshold of 2x focal length for shutter speed, so with my 32mm lens will keep the shutter speed at or above 1/60th second which may be too slow sometimes) That's it. I don't care about APS-C, FF or MF - as long as it delivers great photos and is easy to setup and use. I was looking at the X100V as it is the easiest to grasp as a concept. The other series are so convoluted that I am honestly having a difficult time finding out which one is still a current camera or already discontinued etc.  
×
×
  • Create New...