We hit the bump limit again (>>2839484), so here's a new one.
So I picked up my 56mm f/1.2 today. I'm using my bird as a test victim again, I tried some actual portraits of a friend but I can't post those.
Seems pretty damn nice so far. Bokeh with specular highlights is fucking insane. Normal bokeh is pretty good, but not quite as creamy as I thought it might be, at least when shooting 3/4 or full-length shots of people. AF hunts around a decent bit on small subjects like the bird here, but was no problem when shooting actual people. MF with the split image is pretty hard, even in EVF mode and zoomed in the DoF is so shallow that a few pixels each way on the split will throw an face completely out of focus. I think I'll have to try peaking instead.
I'm also really impressed by the DR of this X-Pro2. This shot was heavily backlit and I pulled the shadow slider in LR all the way to 100, and it's still plenty clean. I had another test shot where some leaves were completely blown out to white on first importing them, and I was able to recover detail with no problems in them. This thing blows my D610 away in terms of ability to recover shadows and highlights.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X-Pro2 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.4 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.2 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 84 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:05:23 15:45:55 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/1.2 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/1.2 Brightness 2.9 EV Exposure Bias 0.3 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 56.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>Fuji General Thread
What type of bullshit is this?
>>2846267
It's still better than sony shills fucking up every thread.
At least I have my xpro1 the optical view finder doest frame the crop factor of the 50mm and during daylight you cant see any frame anyway.
>>2846270
Dunno about them, i hide all gear threads. But whats this "fuji general" bullshit? Whats the need to create ghettos inside the board? Around a brand nonetheless? Fuck this board.
I also picked up a Canon TTL cable and tried some off-camera flash for the first time with the Fuji.
This one was with Fuji's EF-42 and a Gary Fong lightsphere, held up over my head. I found that overall exposure was kind of hot until I dialed in a stop of negative EV, at which point TTL flash exposures were as good as I've ever gotten from my Nikon. I did find that the flash RAWs needed a tiny bit more massaging than the natural light ones, but nothing compared to what I generally have to do to Nikon files.
Something odd that I noticed, by the way, is that auto WB exposures with the 56mm, both with and without flash, tend to be quite warm. It's no big deal with RAW, especially when your subject happens to be a creature the color of an 18% grey card, but it's something to keep in mind if I ever shoot important stuff in JPEG-only.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X-Pro2 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.4 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.2 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 84 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:05:23 16:45:32 Exposure Time 1/250 sec F-Number f/1.2 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/1.2 Brightness 2.3 EV Exposure Bias -1 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 56.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2846272
We've had Fuji threads going for a few weeks. It somewhat keeps the shitposters out and keeps our torrent of posts out of the gear and recent photo threads. (We've been hitting the post limit in like 3 days per thread.)
The first few were hijacked, and then somebody just outright made a "Fuji Thread" a few days ago. I made this one and figure I might as well just call it a general at this point.
>>2846271
This is actually the 56mm in the OP, and the frame isn't as tiny as it looks, it's just my phone camera seeing weirdly through the VF. In real life the frame ends right where the exposure scale on the left is.
How do you like that adapter, by the way? I've been meaning to get one so I can use my F-mount Rokinon 85 1.4. For less than $20 I'll order it right now, if it's any good.
>X100t
>50mm converter (optional)
>black tshirt
>sun sniper strap
>OVF only (with very little information)
>Aperture priority
>Manual focus for prefocusing (quicker with override via AEL button)
BE THERE
>>2846273
Yeah, canon flashes don't TTL with fuji, so you have to dial in the power on your own.
No experience with the 56 unfortunately, but it would be annoying if the white balance was consistently weird with it.
Though if that is the case, you can set up an import profile for the lens that will adjust it.
>>2846303
The flash was Fuji's own EF-42, not a Canon. Canon happens to use the same pin pattern as Fuji, so you can use their TTL cables and have everything work. TTL itself was working fine, and the flash knew what lens was on the camera, for example, it just wanted to overexpose until I turned the EV dial down. I think maybe it's that the camera expected the flash to be directly on top of it and not a few feet away.
I shot some more pics and it seems like the weird WB issues were just confined to that particular location. I think maybe the camera was balancing for the sunlit foliage in the background and not the warmer foreground light.
I went and dun did it
I'll miss my xpro1's flatchested grip, now on back-up duty
Talk about a big discount for a damaged box.
>>2846320
Oh I missed that part! I saw "canon TTL" and glazed over the rest. My mistake!
And you're sure you don't have any compensation dialed in? Including flash?
>>2846271
turning up the brightness of the EVF will make the framelines brighter when using a manual lens.
I just keep the xpro1's EVF to maximum brightness all the time and rarely use the EVF itself, except for a quick focus check. The back screen is far superior when I'm being autistic about composition, anyway.
>>2846277
its pretty solid, and work well with my 24-70 2.8 nikon.
>>2846321
Oh shit dude! Never thought I'd see it!
What motivated you to make the jump? Didn't think the particular benefits of the 2 would mean much to you for the way you shoot.
>>2846321
why not sony a7?
>>2846322
Yeah, I double checked after chimping the first frame.
There may be something else I'm missing, though. The EF-42 interface is pretty crude and I haven't learned to speak Fuji flash yet, so maybe it was in the wrong mode or something.
Come to think of it, my Nikon flashes had a "TTL BL" mode, which really meant fill flash mode. I don't see anything like that on the EF-42, but maybe it's hidden somewhere. I suppose I ought to read the manuals.
>>2846327
I've got a wedding shoot coming up in September that I'd like to have a second body for, came into just enough spare cash to make it an easy purchase and couldn't pass up that damaged box price.
It's not so much a "that's it, I've gotta upgrade" moment as "Well, now's a really opportune time"
I've been shooting a lot of jpeg lately as well, and often with custom WB, so I've found myself swapping yearning for another fn button lately, swapping down back and forth between film sims and custom WB (to get access to the WB shift grid)
With the 2, I won't be changing binds all the time lol
Looking forward to beating the hell out of another generation of xpro :^)
>>2846329
Because I'm already an Xpro1 user, and because that's a piece of shit by comparison. :^)
>>2846346
I've been using a 5D for years now, considering a smaller, lighter setup for personal work and since you just bought the x-pro2 I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts comparing it to its predecessor when it arrives
>>2846351
It's better in quite literally every single way.
Better image quality, better build quality, better viewfinder, better focus (both manual and auto) better menu system, two card slots, better sync speed, more film sims, better video, more buttons. every single thing.
>>2846356
I gave up my 5dmk2 for an X-T1, and that was better. Then I got the XPro2, and it's better than the X-T1, so by the transitive property...
>>2846356
Worse ability to remove the grip and replace the leatherette with a QT large-grain Leica-like leatherette. :(
Being in the minority that doesn't like a substantial grip on a camera, I don't look forward to the new grip, but it's worth it for a second card slot and wifi without buying a new eyefi card (mine died recently)
Also, instant communication with my instant printer instead of using the phone as a third wheel is nice.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SAMSUNG Camera Model SAMSUNG-SM-N900A Camera Software N900AUCUEOC2 Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.2 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 31 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 3264 Image Height 2448 Image Orientation Right-Hand, Top Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:04:22 17:20:07 Exposure Time 1/427 sec F-Number f/2.2 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 50 Lens Aperture f/2.2 Brightness 7.0 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Average Light Source Unknown Flash Flash Focal Length 4.13 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3264 Image Height 2448 Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Unique Image ID C13QSGJ02SB
>>2846364
>Worse ability to remove the grip and replace the leatherette with a QT large-grain Leica-like leatherette. :(
Haha I've seen photos of your xpro1. Trust me, preventing that crime from happening a second time is a major improvement!
>>2846367
I second this.
>>2846265
>>2846273
>Fuji 56mm/X Pro 2 Parrot Photos General
>>2846364
I hope the paint on the XP2 wears the same way. I don't care how faggy it is. I love it.
>>2846367
>Haha I've seen photos of your xpro1.
I'd imagine so considering there's a photo of it in literally the post you're responding to
Flatchested cameras are patrician. Sorry about your less than privileged upbringing.
>>2846391
Okay I meant I've seen OTHER photos, from different angles, in brighter light from the front. And it does look cool, I was just joking.
>>2846396
You should see the bottom of it. I got access to an engraving tool recently.
My Xpro1 now has my contact info on the bottom of it. In case it ever gets stolen or lost. :^)
>>2846381
I WANT PICTURES
PICTURES OF PARROTS
>>2846397
my first instinctual reaction is "man, that's gonna hurt your resale value" hahaha
>>2846364
I'm actually a bit sad about that with my X-Pro2. I was going to get a leather kit for my X100 if I'd kept it, but had to let it go to fund the XP2.
I think the brown cow hide whatever it's called from Aki-Asahi would be gorgeous on an X-Pro.
Also, hey, our new cameras aren't DFC anymore, but they're still pretty petite compared to the FF DSLRs I'm used to. I'm happy going to this A-cup of a grip after my Nikon's DDs.
>>2846400
on the plus side I probably will polish the lens release and evf lever in exactly the same way again, because I just really like the silver-on-black look.
>b-but resale value
I went outside and took some worthless snapshits while there was some nice light. Might as well dump a few, if nothing else they show off the XP2 and 56mm decently well.
These first few are SOOC JPEGs. The B&Ws are Astia and the color is Velvia.
>>2846406
Resale value is bullshit on digital bodies anyway, they're worthless by the time you'd usually upgrade.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X-Pro2 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.4 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.2 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 84 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:05:23 19:33:26 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/11.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 1600 Lens Aperture f/11.0 Brightness 4.8 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 56.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Custom Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2846412
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X-Pro2 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.4 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.2 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 84 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:05:23 19:25:33 Exposure Time 1/2000 sec F-Number f/1.2 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 800 Lens Aperture f/1.2 Brightness 3.7 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 56.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2846413
Also I don't get what 4chan is doing to these, it's fucking some of the detail that's there when I check the jpegs in my export folder. I'm exporting in SRGB and everything so that's not the problem. I guess it's just shitty compression.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X-Pro2 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.4 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.2 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 84 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:05:23 19:25:45 Exposure Time 1/8000 sec F-Number f/1.2 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 800 Lens Aperture f/1.2 Brightness 5.6 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 56.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Custom Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2846414
And then I figured I might as well try out the 50-230 and see if it's as shit as people say. I shot these in raw because I knew I'd need to do some pretty heavy tweaking.
It's actually pretty damn sharp. AF isn't the worst I've ever seen, but not great. The IS is pretty good too.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X-Pro2 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.4 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/4.4 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 345 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:05:23 19:32:11 Exposure Time 1/680 sec F-Number f/6.7 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 1600 Lens Aperture f/6.7 Brightness 6.5 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 230.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
I'll post my snapshits of the day I suppose, just because they're likely to be the last thing I shoot with the 1 for a while.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties:
>>2846418 (You)
And the last one.
I can't stop being impressed by this camera's DR, especially considering that these are at a relatively high ISO for a high-res crop sensor. This one was almost a silhouette against a blown out sky when I imported it into LR, and the mountains had no visible detail except the outline of the peaks in the previous pic.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X-Pro2 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.4 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/4.4 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 216 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:05:23 19:32:31 Exposure Time 1/950 sec F-Number f/6.4 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 1600 Lens Aperture f/6.4 Brightness 7.8 EV Exposure Bias 1 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 143.90 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2846421
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties:
>>2846424
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties:
>>2846425
Looking forward to Acros and Classic Chrome a lot, since they're something I've not gotten to play with a lot yet.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties:
>>2846427
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties:
>>2846428
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties:
>>2846427
I like Acros a lot so far. It's about as good as any "easy" digital B&W I've seen, including conversion in LR and using Nik's filters without a ton of tweaking.
I haven't found the right subject for Classic Chrome yet, but I think it'll be pretty great for certain stuff. I can imagine it being really nice for classic car photos, for example. It seems like a decent portrait option too, but with my quick test shots I'm liking Pro Neg Hi better.
>>2846430
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties:
So it's now an isi general thread. I'm out.
These were fun while they lasted
b&w=instant art
Super fucking boring, but quite informative, with good comparisons and explanations.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHvCkRTK4_g
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Greenshot Image-Specific Properties:
>>2846443
Yeah that's a good video that - was going to post it but fell asleep
nice thread! I just bought an xpro 2 as my first dsrl
>>2846443
Interesting video, and it's definitely got me convinced to shoot raw + jpeg.
I did notice, though, that he's comparing everything to Adobe Standard, which has been shit on every camera system I've ever shot. I really wonder how much closer you can get by selecting Velvia, Astia, etc in Lightroom instead of trying to process horrible Adobe Standard files.
>>2846476
Those are still just Adobe simulations of the real thing. Theoretically Adobe Standard gives you the widest palette from which to start.
His own experience matches mine. I shoot raw+jpeg, and while 9 times out of 10 I prefer the raw edit, that 1 time I get much better color and tonality out of the jpeg
So I'm looking to get started down the /p/ rabbit hole. I primarily want to be doing street photography and events (usually the events have shitty-ish lighting, hoping for results in the ball park of pic related). Mirrorless is very attractive to me and people seem to recommend the x100t, but the lens isn't interchangeable and I feel like that limits a lot of options, especially when spending 1k. Should I go for the XT-1, or a Canon DSLR like the EOS Rebel T6? Or perhaps something else entirely?
>>2846486
Get an XT10 unless you really need weather sealing (most people do not) instead of an XT1
It's smaller, it has arguably better controls, and its cheaper.
I highly recommend getting a kit lens with a Fuji as well, because they're very good lenses on their own. I personally prefer the 16-50.
>>2846486
I would not make the X100t your first and only camera. I use mine for probably 75% of my photography, but I would be super pissed if I didn't have an interchangeable lens camera as a back-up for telephoto and going wider for that other 25%.
>56mm
I am really undecided on whether to go for the standard 56mm OR the APD version..
On one hand, I feel like these lenses are made to be shot wide open and the APD version does really have the better bokeh.. BUT its major flaw is the AF performance.
On the other hand the regular 56mm still produces a great image and still has decent bokeh as well as having far superior AF performance AND is cheaper.. BUT the APD produces the slightly better image.
How did everyone else approach this? The APD would be a no brainer for me if the AF wasn't so compromised, it's a decision between having the superior image quality or having more reliable AF to actually get the shots..
I would be shooting portraits on the street in natural light (including low light) and some general travel stuff.
>>2846534
For me the deciding factor was that the APD version loses about a stop in light gathering.
>>2846534
I went with the non-APD. The deciding factor for me was price, I simply don't need the benefits of the APD lens enough to justify the extra cost.
I think for 99% of people, the APD is irrelevant. It's a specialty lens that really caters to pro senior/family portrait types, and for the rest of us the difference is marginal.
>>2846321
Omg, can't wait to see the first results!
Hopefully the rumor of the newest generation of X-Trans sensors having lost some of its magic isn't true.
>>2846272
fuji threads are pretty successful. get over it.
>>2846543
what kind of magic are you referring to exactly?
>>2846543
What rumours? Overwhelmingly, the feedback, both in the actual internet and here has been very positive.
QUESTION
Fujibros, I am curious.. If I shoot RAW with a Fuji camera AND I change my picture profile/film simulation will it apply the film simulation to the RAW file (without turning it into a jpg)???
For example, I remember with my 5D2 I could shoot RAW and change the picture profile to monochrome and if I imported the files into the Canon supplied software the RAW file would be monochrome on import with the ability to change afterwards and still be a standard RAW file.
I like the film simulations and their aesthetic but I hate the jpg file format, I want to be able to shoot RAW and apply a film simulation that will be kept on the RAW file even when imported but keep the flexibility of a RAW file.
Hope this makes some fucking sense, plz respond.
>>2846605
it does not apply film sim to raw files. You have to shoot jpeg or raw+jpeg to get the simulation on your files.
>>2846605
also, fujis simulations are available for both silkypix, lightroom (these two being official), and capture one pro (unnoficial via 3rd party)
>>2846608
I remember reading that LR sucks for editing Fuji RAW files, is this still the case? What software is preferred by Fuji shooters??
Do the software film simulations prduce the exact same result as the in camera ones?
>>2846609
Yes and use anything but LR unless you absolutely have to.
>C1
>Rawthearapee
>Dark table
>>2846609
Lightroom has worst details but is fastest of the bunch. Also has all those sweet profiles/plugins etc.
Capture one has much better details, is fast enough.
Photoninja has best detail recovery but is not so nice to work colour wise + a bit slow
Silkypix is kinda in the middle
Rawtherapee is shit. dont listen to what others are saying
Also the dude that makes the best x-trans raw converter aka iridient developer is apparently working on a windows version but hes fucking slow cause he cant into windows coding.
>>2846619
I use a mac, how much better is irident compared to C1?
How are the fuji cameras with manual lenses?
>>2846622
ID slightly better. One might not even notice but when it comes to pixel peeping for example distant foliage I can see the ID has slightly less "waxy" details.
>>2846624
Way better the your dslr
>>2846619
>iridient developer is apparently working on a windows version but hes fucking slow cause he cant into windows coding.
He's also just one guy.
>>2846431
>I haven't found the right subject for Classic Chrome yet
I've found classic chrome best fits my uses when the world itself is a little classic chrome, like just after it rains on a cloudy day.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X-Pro2 Camera Software Digital Camera X-Pro2 Ver1.01 Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 147 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016-05-24T23:19:28+10:00 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/4.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/4.0 Brightness -3.2 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 98.20 mm Image Width 1000 Image Height 667 Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2846570
>>2846595
Well, Fuji seems to have modded the areangement of their X-Trans color filter and a few people complained about the newest generation of X-Trans sensors 'losing some of its magic'. What magic? I guess they mean the whole package - as if the new sensor is 'less complete' than the first generation - due to having an 'inferior' color filter pattern.
>>2846431
>I haven't found the right subject for Classic Chrome yet
Works amazingly for portraits, both direct golden hour light, and diffused soft light.
It work REALLY well if you push the white balance a touch yellow and a touch magenta, and then go to HSL and move your reds about five points towards orange.
>>2846534
The APD is a little nicer in terms of background blur, SOMETIMES. Even in their comparison shots though, a lot of the time, it's nearly identical. It seems like a dentist lens to me. If they were the same price, and I never shot in low light, I'd go for it, but for the added expense, and my personal need for the light gathering, it's an easy choice of the non APD for me. Plus, the AF on the normal 56 is already a little unreliable. Knowing that the APD is worse yet, I don't think I'd be happy with it.
>>2846669
>>2846543
I've used all of the sensors, from the X100, to the X-T1, to now the XPro2. I haven't noticed any loss in "magic" at all. Slight differences in the rendering of the profiles, certainly, but no real better or worse, and merely slightly different, in ways that even I can't tell unless I'm doing a direct a/b comparison.
Contrast is still rendered very well, colors are still excellent, and of course the main contributing factor to "magic" in an image, the lenses haven't changed at all, and are all fantastic, image quality wise. Have no fear.
>>2846669
Where are these complaints? Perhaps posting a couple would add to the discussion?
>>2846321
fuck yeah bro! Are we going to get our engraved metal plates together like we talked about? Haha
>>2846609
I know that everybody fusses over comparison pics and bashes LR's loss of detail, but personally I think it's totally adequate and LR's color profiles more than make up for it. I shoot Fuji for the colors and publish at sizes where the detail differences aren't really that noticeable.
>>2846795
imo if i'm putting a grain filter on the image (aesthetic t b h) then lightroom's results are subpar and make the lack of detail even more apparent, haven't tried enough programs to figure out which is the best though
Any thought on the Fujinon XF 35mm ?
Does it worth putting extra money to get the f/1.4 instead of the f/2
>>2846819
The consensus seems to be that the f/2 is the lens to have. I tried them both in the store and the f/2 definitely blows the 1.4 away in terms of focus speed, and from what I could see on the rear LCD the difference in DoF was surprisingly marginal.
>>2846825
Do you own this lens ?
What's your thoughts about it ?
I know I could just read a random test, but I'd rather have "human" feedback.
>>2846919
No, I just played around with them. I'm not really a fan of the focal length. I bought the 23mm instead.
I'd say from my little bit of experience, though, that the f/2 seemed like the lens to have. It's better in every way except maximum aperture, and it's cheaper too.
>>2846825
Focus speed is not everything. The f/1.4 produces a slightly better image quality (according to most benchmark sites), and it coughts more light.
>>2846945
>coughts
>catches
fixed, sry.
>>2846945
>The f/1.4 produces a slightly better image quality (according to most benchmark sites)
no it doesnt, youre just defending what you personally own lol
I couldn't resist my gearfag impulses and took a family portrait of the new setup.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon PowerShot S90 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.4 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:05:24 14:53:29 Exposure Time 1/60 sec F-Number f/2.8 ISO Speed Rating 400 Lens Aperture f/2.8 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Flash Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 9.64 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2846919
I have owned both. The 35 f/2 makes me happier. The loss of the f/1.4 isn't really missed on my personal kit, and the benefit of the size, speed, lack of noise, weather sealing, and improved image quality all make it much better in my mind. I also have longer lenses for portraits, and don't bokeh whore so much at the wider lengths (like anything below 85mm)
>>2846980
thoughts on the 50-230?
>>2847024
f/4.5-6.7....
what types of pictures can you possibly take with this thing other than birds
>>2847044
? Are you suggesting that no photos are ever taken with an aperture smaller than f/4.5? Are you in your first year of owning a camera?
Most photos you see anywhere besides instagram are shot below f/4, because people working to put things into their frame generally want people to be able to see them.
Also, at at 230mm, at f/6.7, with a subject 25 feet away, your focal plane is literally one foot front to back.
At 35 feet, it's only two feet, front to back.
So if you're bokeh whoring, you aren't very good at it.
If you're LIGHT whoring, you're also showing your newness, because most people tend to shoot things that you'd need 345mm for outside, in the daylight.
>>2847044
All kinds of things. Architectural details, long-lens scenic stuff (I've heard this lens is popular with backpackers), in theory even certain motorsports stuff. (It should do fine for panning shots, where the struggle is often getting the shutter speed low enough in bright light, rather than trying to keep it high.)
And yeah, the DoF is surprisingly shallow at 6.7. You might actually be able to use this thing for portraits if you tried hard enough, the bokeh is surprisingly decent.
(This is just a test shot BTW, you don't need to tell me that it's a snapshit/not a good photo/whatever.)
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X-Pro2 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.4 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/4.4 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 345 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:05:24 17:12:53 Exposure Time 1/90 sec F-Number f/6.7 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 1600 Lens Aperture f/6.7 Brightness 4.4 EV Exposure Bias 1.3 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 230.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2847135
>that there, friend, is a snapshit
It's obviously a photo of a flower. What could have been done to make it better?
So because I got stood up on my plans for tonight and I'm bored as hell, I took some DoF test shots with the 50-230 in question, along with the 23 and 56 for good measure.
I'm actually quite surprised at how much subject isolation you can actually get at the long end of this little zoom. This framing is about the size of a head & shoulders portrait, and I wasn't obscenely far away, so you might actually be able to do a passable portrait with this thing.
>>2847164
I realize your head and heart are in the right place, but you can also do fantastic portraits without any background blur at all, by correctly choosing a scene and environment that matches your model, rather than just putting them wherever and blowing the environment away.
>>2847171
Oh absolutely, and I shoot many like that.
I can't do backyard tests for that kind of stuff, though, but bokeh circlejerking is more than possible without a real subject, and I'm honestly itching to play with my new gear.
I'll be at FanimeCon this weekend, and I'm super amped up to do some cosplay shoots there. Convention centers being what they are, though, I'll probably be crutching on bokeh pretty heavily.
>>2847175
All totally understandable! Wish you luck.
>>2847164
Why wouldn't you be able to get good subject isolation with a 50-230mm lens?
>>2847189
Many inexperienced people don't realize that even a small aperture like f/6.7 creates a very narrow depth of field with really long focal lengths.
Really want to get a X100T but torn between black or silver.
I like black since its so discrete but silver also looks like a nice change of pace given all my other cameras are black.
help a brother out, which color should I get
XT1 bros,
How do I set my XT1 to only focus with the AFL button and NOT the shutter button??
>>2847273
It only works in manual focus mode. Set the dial to M, and you can "instant AF," which is essentially back button focus. The shutter isn't tied to focus either, since it's in manual. Unfortunately I don't know of any way to get continuous AF this way, perhaps by setting it to the tracking mode AF before switch to manual.
>>2847273
Change from S or C mode to M on the front dial.
>>2847272
I had silver and wanted black.
In my X-T1, I have black, and want silver.
Flip a coin. they're both gorgeous
>>2847285
In the menus, you can go to "instant AF" setting and change from S to C. In my experience, M mode and AF-L isn't as snappy or accurate as doing it normally though. It could be totally my imagination, but as much as I would love to, I don't use it.
>>2847272
>Buy silver
>Paint it black
>Scratch paint
Best of both worlds.
>>2847315
That's redundant, anon. The camera is metal. A black one shows silver anyway.
>>2847322
It does, I just tried it out. You just set it a different way.
>>2847322
Yuuup. It has AF-L which can be used to activate focus, but there's no way to de-couple focus from the shutter button. There is a workaround by putting the camera in manual focus mode, and then using the AF-L button, and it works to get the job done. Pure "feel" though, is that it doesn't work as well. Also, you can only use single point AF mode, and no zones or wide mode.
I've tried reaching out to them about that, and also camera-orientation specific focus points, but haven't heard back.
>>2847324
If it means not having AF-C or selectable focus points, it really means it doesn't.
>ricoh gr does
>ricoh gr also has AE ON in manual mode, btw, so you don't have to spin dials like a monkey chasing the meter
>>2847334
You can have both AF-C and selectable focus points, just not zone focus or wide focus mode.
>>2847318
Is that just metallic?
Can you polish the metal?
Fuji Bros, are there leather skin kits for the xt1?
>>2847336
Most Fujis are a magnesium alloy upper body (at the least, some are full body), painted in either silver or black on top (the bare magnesium alloy frame oxidizes to a dull blue-grey color if its uncovered)
Fresh wear will be shiny, and it'll dull to grey with age.
You can't polish a silver Fuji's silver color, because that's paint, but underneath it is bare metal which *can* be shiny
>>2847190
I'm far from inexperienced, but I haven't touched a zoom slower than 2.8 in almost ten years, and haven't shot crop in almost as long.
>>2847343
>I'm far from inexperienced, but I haven't touched a zoom slower than 2.8 in almost ten years, and haven't shot crop in almost as long.
that doesnt make you experienced, that makes you a long-term gearfag
>>2847343
>I haven't touched a zoom slower than 2.8 in almost ten years
confirmed for not shooting medium format.
>>2846256
hi guys
i got an xt10
how the crap do i work with raw/.RAF files on the linux?
im running debian stable. really don't want to have to load up the windows VM every time it's time to edit photos
>>2847439
>Dark table
>Rawthearapee
An anon in the previous thread was using rawthearapee, he seemed pretty happy with the results.
Dark table feels a lot like LR.
>>2847272
i'd personally go black. it's never a bad choice
>>2846950
I do not even own a Fuji camera. But i studied the charts when i planned to buy one some time ago,
>>2846950
Most direct comparisons show that, wide open, the f/2 is sharper across the frame. Both matched at f/2, the f/1.4 is pretty much the same in the center, and softer on the edges. By f/4, the 1.4 is caught up, and beyond f/4, the 1.4 is better across the entire frame.
That being said, the image quality on both is fantastic, and an extra .7% sharpness out of the f/1.4 doesn't come close to erasing the build quality, size, silence, weather sealing, or AF improvements of the f/2 for many people.
Objectively, the f/2 is a better lens for most things. The f/1.4 is a great lens, also.
>>2846819
The 35mm f1.4 is slow to focus compared to newer lenses and quite noisy. I'm about to sell mine as it's my only lens and not my favorite focal length (although I used to think so).
It does have some magic in it though which is why I've procrastinated so much on selling mine. I always am set on selling it and then I get a shot I really like with it. I hope the 35mm f2 has the same traits.
Really I would just go with the f2 version personally. I don't shoot the f1.4 wide open much anyway and I care less about sharpness than fast, quiet AF.
>>2847620
I owned the 1.4 for about two years, and switched to the f/2 when it first became available. I have not found it to have any less "magic" in terms of contrast, color, or detail. Only in depth of field (obviously) but what out of focus areas the f/2 does have look very pretty still.
>>2847608
>beyond f/4, the 1.4 is better across the entire frame.
>he thinks he can tell the difference at small apertures
retard alert
>>2847634
They're both excellent lenses, and it doesn't matter at all in the real world, but that doesn't mean tests haven't been done, and that what I said isn't true. Feel free to see for yourself, if you're incredulous.
http://www.fujivsfuji.com/35mm-f1pt4-vs-35mm-f2-wr/
http://admiringlight.com/blog/fuji-35mm-f1-4-vs-fuji-35mm-f2/
>>2846681
The complaint was that, between X-Trans I and II, there was a loss of dynamic range across all the film sims, and boosted saturation. Some argued that there was some kind of Magic to the first one that was lost in the second, and speculations were that plebby McPlebberson (according to Fuji interviews) preferred the more colourful, saturated look.
All that being said, it's super irrelevant if you're going to set your JPG presets and/or work with the RAWs. Both of which are inevitable. Probably
>>2846381
That bird is so fucking green.
>>2847674
Should see under its wings!
>>2847347
haha, isn't that true of everybody here to one degree or another?
Nah, actually I just bought a 70-200 in 2007 and never had much reason to use anything else.
Come to think of it I was wrong though, I shot a few events with the 200-400 f/4 back in 2011.
>>2847433
heh, only Hasselblad, and I can't afford a zoom for that shit.
It came.
Me too.
Anyone remember that really extreme set of settings I came up with for the old jpegs? Infrared, B&W red filter, incandescent WB, all of that? Really cool looking in a thumbnail, but the old engine would riddle it with artifacts?
Yeah, well the artifacts are gone. Now it's just really dank.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties:
>>2847902
That doesn't sound familiar to me. Comparison photos between the new camera and the old?
Also, congrats! How's it feel?
>>2847906
I'll make a direct comparison later at some point. It was basically an almost-infrared look (probably enabled by the fact that the cameras receive a little more IR light than they "should"), but it has heavy artifacting in the jpegs (as its applying a custom WB and a filtered B&W jpeg at the same time), its a way to create a very deep red filter effect
Any raw converter can take the same info and handle it appropriately, and those are the settings I generally start from with my higher contrast B&W stuff like pic related, but the jpegs are usually quite artifacted and only good for instagram.
Not so on the Xpro2. It handles it like a champ.
>>2847915
I forgot pic related
Just got the X100t and love it. Got it from e-infinity out of Hong Kong with no problem.
Any tutorial suggestions for tweaking the menu? I've figured out plenty but still can't figure out how to do things like automatic display of picture after taking it.
>>2847917
Setup menu page 2 --> Image Disp
• Continuous
• 3 sec
• 1.5 sec
• Off
>>2847902
>Me too.
Say hi to your brother for me.
>>2847921
I only have sisters.
Classic chrome actually tames 'Bama greens.
This is a gamechanger.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties:
>>2847975
>Those Earth-like greens
It's the end of an era!
Seriously though Chrome is so great. You don't shoot a lot of standard beauty portraits, but if you do, try out Chrome with a slightly warm white balance. It's a dream.
Ever since I got my X70, the X100S has been gathering dust. I got it mainly as a more portable alternative for my then-Nikon (since replaced with another Fuji camera), but everything I didn't like about the X100S - slow autofocus, soft-ish lens, slightly tight FOV, not as portable as I thought it would be - has been remedied by the X70. Seriously underrated camera.
Also have the 35/2 on the way. Those Fuji rebates got me good.
>>2848083
I looked at an X70 right after it came out, but wasn't down for the lack of a viewfinder and the touch-based interface at the time, so I got an X100 instead.
Now that I've replaced the X100 and all of my Nikon gear with the X-Pro2, I think I might pick an X70 up as an EDC camera and mini backup.
>>2848095
what the fuck, wasn't an X70 just released like three months ago? how fast do you go through cameras?
>>2848095
You can disable the touch screen, and the menu/interface handles just like any other Fuji camera. The touchscreen is only for selecting a focus point and swiping/zooming when viewing pictures - I disabled it for focusing, but kept it on for picture playback.
The X70 + EF-20 flash + Instax printer is an awesome combo for shooting on the go.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X70 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 4896 Image Height 3264 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:05:25 19:44:05 Exposure Time 1/30 sec F-Number f/4.0 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 1600 Lens Aperture f/4.0 Brightness -5.2 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 18.50 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1000 Image Height 667 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Hard Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2848098
That's how most people "accidentally" swap to Fuji. They buy a X100 or other small X camera as a "side camera" and fall in love with the UI
6 months later they're in the X system getting Classic Chrome bukkake
>>2848095
Yeah the fixed lens Xs are pretty much a gateway drug
>>2848098
Normally not that often, maybe one every 4 years. This was a weird case, I scored the X100 used for a good deal, and liked it so much that it convinced me to switch my whole rig to Fuji. I was just short of funding the XP2 setup I wanted with my Nikon gear alone, so I sold the X100 for the same price I paid for it, since it was kind of redundant anyway.
>>2848105
Forgot to add:
The flippy screen on a camera this small and with this purpose (i.e., EDC) is incredibly useful too.
I was worried about the lack of a viewfinder, but with a camera this small it really doesn't matter.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X70 Camera Software Camera Remote Ver.2.0.1.1 Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Maker Note Version 0130 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:05:25 18:58:58 Exposure Time 1/420 sec F-Number f/2.8 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/2.8 Brightness 5.9 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 18.50 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1000 Image Height 667 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Hard Subject Distance Range Unknown Sharpness Unknown White Balance Auto Chroma Saturation Unknown Flash Mode Off Focus Mode Auto Slow Synchro Mode Off Picture Mode Aperture Prior AE Continuous/Bracketing Mode Off Blur Status OK Focus Status OK Auto Exposure Status OK
>>2848106
>>2848109
Yup, that's pretty much exactly what happened.
I kind of knew what I was getting into, actually. I'd been drooling over the Fujis for ages, and bought the X100 as a "sampler" as much as anything else. After that, it was just figuring out that the X-Pro2 was the only Fuji body that I felt could seriously replace my Nikon stuff and then waiting for a good deal to show up.
>>2848105
>>2848119
It's not so much that the interface is bad, more that I wanted the full Fuji experience with the hybrid finder and all of that stuff. Also, I really like 35mm (equiv.) lenses, that was a major factor in me choosing the X100 over the X70 and other options like the GR.
Now that I have one Fuji body with a 23mm, though, the thought of a pocket-sized camera with a slightly wider FL appeals to me. I also found 23mm to be a bit restrictive on a fixed-lens camera anyway, I'd loved my 35mm on FF but always had a 20mm to back it up when I needed something wider.
Own an M4 and a7ii, handful of M-mount lenses. Considering selling my a7ii soon. Thinking about geting an X-Pro2 as the replacement. It's much more what I'm looking for in terms of handling and aesthetic.
1. How reasonable is it to use MF in the OVF? I know down the road I'd pick-up native lenses, but it'd be great if I don't need to right away.
2. How large is the OVF? I know it'll be smaller than the M4, but it's not to cramped is it? X-Pro1 seemed surprising small.
>>2848123
I think it's about the same size as the XP1. I know a few people in the thread own both so they can say for sure.
MF is quite usable. I'd say it's about on par with a Leica, actually, but with the tradeoff of gaining a bigger, brighter, and clearer finder patch but having it in the corner instead of the center, which I find makes it a bit hard to compose and focus at the same time. Of course you also have the option of switching to EVF mode and getting a full-screen split image or peaking if you need it. (For what it's worth, I'm finding that the corner screen in OVF mode is fine with the 23mm, but I need to switch to the EVF with the 56mm.
>>2848127
Nice to hear about the focusing, I'm sure it'll be fine. The listed magnification seems to be higher (0.37 v 0.6), but I'd love to hear if anyone has any experience with both. The X-Pro1's felt a bit small, and that's my only concern.
>>2848171
It's definitely kind of small, whether it's the same as the XP1 or not.
That said, I only really notice it when I'm actually sitting there trying to decide if the VF is too small or not. I don't find it obstructive when I'm actually taking pictures, and I wear glasses so I'm the worst case scenario.
>>2848106
>That's how most people "accidentally" swap to Fuji. They buy a X100 or other small X camera as a "side camera" and fall in love with the UI
>6 months later they're in the X system getting Classic Chrome bukkake
Literally exactly what happened to me. I had a 5Dmk2 I very much liked, but fell for the X100 style and simplicity. Got one for Christmas as a fun side camera for when I'm traveling for work. Ended up completely loving it, and wishing I could use it for portraits and stuff, so I sold it and got an X-T1. Spent about 2 years ONLY using it while my 5D sat and collected dust and eventually sold it all off to get an XPro2.
>Throwback photo to my X100s
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi
Does anyone use C1? I want to know if it's worth the pricetag for Fuji, how fast the program operates and how powerful it is?
>>2848938
I did for a little while. It's not bad. Feels better than lightroom, speed and efficiency wise. I found the fine detail to be better than Lightroom, but worse than every other option. Having layers and masking was great, but overall, I had a harder time getting my colors where I wanted them to be. I believe that was my failing though, as the color adjustment controls are really nuanced and powerful.
When you have a little wiener
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make samsung Camera Model SM-N910R4 Camera Software N910R4TYU1BOG2 Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.2 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 31 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 2048 Image Height 1152 Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:05:26 23:16:03 Exposure Time 1/10 sec F-Number f/2.2 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 400 Lens Aperture f/2.2 Brightness -1.3 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Focal Length 4.60 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2048 Image Height 1152 Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Unique Image ID H16ULHK02SA
>>2849031
I was hoping to get a really shitty pic of saturn with the 1.4x TC and the fuji 1.5 crop factor, but alas it was just a spec
Hey everyone,
I've been shooting a couple years on Nikon and recently a friend introduced me to his Fuji (can't remember model, but recent) and I wondered if mirrorless cameras are competitive with DSLRs yet. I like street/candid photography, so something light(er) and without the signature "click-clack" of a mirror appeals to me, but I don't want to jump ship if mirrorless has a lot of drawbacks for its benefits. I know I can look up a comparison online, but I'm curious in /p/'s opinion
>>2849919
>if mirrorless has a lot of drawbacks for its benefits
Benefits > drawbacks
the AF is not the fastest thing in the world but the current speed of xt1,2 and xpro 2 is very useable and you only notice the it if you where a sportstog. as a note the evf of the xt1 is FUCKEN HUGE this make it hard for me to switch back.
>>2846364
how did you get that metal look ? fucking love kit
>>2849972
The camera is metal. Just take some sandpaper to it.
>>2849930
Is the X-T10 worth looking at then?
