|
Wengy posted:I have the new one, albeit for the M4/3 mount. From what I've read, they're optically identical, the only differences are an upgraded exterior (the new version is made of metal) and a new branding (the new version is part of the "art" line of lenses). ImagingResource reported some lower levels of CA and distortion in the newer model (both of which can be corrected fairly easily in software). There's the new mechanics, which does cost you the rubber grip ring. The Art lenses can also be put on the USB dock to adjust the micro-focus correction. I have the older one, it works just fine for me. It's not very fast and lacks image stabilization, but it's small, useably sharp from wide open, and $100.
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 14:48 |
|
|
I was gonna get the new one but when I heard the new one doesn't fix the banding on e-m5 and slow focus I went for a mk1 instead. I wonder if the e-m1 shows the same banding. e: oh wait I thought you guys were talking about the panny 20, nvm. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 19:29
|
|
|
Fuji people: what program are you using to process RAW files? I've been using ACR but it seems like I've really got to push sliders to get decent results. Poking around the internet, it seems this is a common complaint. SilkyPics is poo poo and DxO doesn't support Fuji RAW files (yet). Is there any other converter worth looking at for windows?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 19:40
|
|
|
ACR and LR5 ain't that bad to be honest. I doubt you'll notice much strange in the prints. SilkyPix - lol.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 19:44
|
|
|
I use LR5, its sharpening and noise reduction are better than Fuji's in camera, and its processing can be compensated for.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 19:53
|
|
|
Did LR get better support for Fuji's X Trans RAW files? Last I read it wasn't very good at dealing with non-Bayer sensors.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 20:02
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:Fuji people: what program are you using to process RAW files? I've been using ACR but it seems like I've really got to push sliders to get decent results. Poking around the internet, it seems this is a common complaint. SilkyPics is poo poo and DxO doesn't support Fuji RAW files (yet). Is there any other converter worth looking at for windows? If you search around on the net, you'll find that Capture one pro is unmatched in its raw processing for X-trans (among others). I tried it and I have to agree. Especially with foliage there's a huge improvement over Lightroom. Lightroom is great for catalogs and good enough for most images. But if you want to squeeze out every detail, use Capture One Pro.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 20:58
|
|
|
By all accounts, DxO never will support X-Trans files. This was one of my reasons for choosing the E-M1 over a Fuji camera.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 21:00
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:Fuji people: what program are you using to process RAW files? I've been using ACR but it seems like I've really got to push sliders to get decent results. Poking around the internet, it seems this is a common complaint. SilkyPics is poo poo and DxO doesn't support Fuji RAW files (yet). Is there any other converter worth looking at for windows?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 21:15
|
|
|
The only color "processing" I ever do is shoot it in film mode blanketing and pick one out of 3 pictures.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 21:16
|
|
|
This might help http://www.fujirumors.com/ultimate-raw-converter-shootout/ I do not know if any of the programs have improved significantly since it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2013 22:32
|
|
|
I pretty much exclusively shoot jpeg with the X-E1 since I got it because it looks absolutely amazing, and I do not really miss RAW. This is pretty much straight from the camera with slight saturation adjustment on the reds in lightroom. Love the fuji colors  
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 04:22
|
|
|
keyframe posted:I pretty much exclusively shoot jpeg with the X-E1 since I got it because it looks absolutely amazing, and I do not really miss RAW. That's a gorgeous shot. luchadornado fucked around with this message at 14:19 on Nov 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 14:17
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:Fuji people: what program are you using to process RAW files? I've been using ACR but it seems like I've really got to push sliders to get decent results. Poking around the internet, it seems this is a common complaint. SilkyPics is poo poo and DxO doesn't support Fuji RAW files (yet). Is there any other converter worth looking at for windows? LR5 if you feel you HAVE to shoot RAF. Most will spend the time to finetune the jpg then use that as their base file format instead of RAF file. LR5 does a great job but why not shoot jpg/raw combo yourself and figure it out. LR5 has a 30day trial. LOL Silkypix. Not the most interesting shot but it is SOOC JPG Fine, HTone-0, STone +1, color +1, Sharp+1, NR-1 shot on STD, Custom WB set at 2550K. This is one of my jgp settings that I move the WB and film sim modes on. I use the wb to warm or cooldown the Film preset that comes built into the camera.  As for the complaints with LR5 and cistrans-Sensors behaving dumb, I have yet to see it. Sure, I get to push some slides to 30/50/80 sometimes, but they go that high for a reason so might as well use them. The only thing I dislike about shooting RAF is that the JPG in Provia/STD and ProNegHi already give color that I really like that takes work to get in LR5 from the RAF file. The RAF file is great but they can be a lot of work, especially if you find yourself liking the color output of the jpgs. TLDR: you can shoot jpg if you own a Fuji-Cisgender sensor, for 99% of everything. Musket fucked around with this message at 21:28 on Nov 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 16:48
|
|
|
I have an X pro1 and I'll never stop shooting RAW because I really like to playing with my images in post. I've been using LR4 and I have to admit it is not perfect for the X-trans sensor but I put up with it since I still shoot Nikon so frequently. For all you fuji JPG shooters, could you do this straight out of camera:
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 19:10
|
|
|
842 posted:I have an X pro1 and I'll never stop shooting RAW because I really like to playing with my images in post. I've been using LR4 and I have to admit it is not perfect for the X-trans sensor but I put up with it since I still shoot Nikon so frequently. For all you fuji JPG shooters, could you do this straight out of camera: Yes. And have, YMMV. You are frontlight, not hard at all with spot metering EV pushed a bit. Would i drop the file into LR5, probably to add a bit of noise or pull my blacks down a bit further. Anyone with a working knowhow of photography could do that sooc with a canon sx50. The reason to shoot jpg is because you start off with a base file thats pretty drat near complete vs what you get from the RAF file. Musket fucked around with this message at 21:25 on Nov 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 21:21
|
|
|
Musket posted:LR5 does a great job but why not shoot jpg/raw combo yourself and figure it out. This is probably what I'm gonna end up doing, especially considering what I'd be using this camera for, ie street, impromptu portraits, etc. I tried the Capture One Pro demo but I doubt I'll go through the process of learning yet another RAW converter just for RAF. I'll keep the RAWs for the few shots that I really want to do post work on and just deal with em in LR/PS. I really wish DxO would support Fuji though, cause their presets are pretty loving steller.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 21:54
|
|
|
I just dropped my GF5 out of my coat pocket. The metal case is a little buckled in the corner. It all works perfectly and it's not really noticable...EXCEPT TO ME!
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 22:48
|
|
|
spog posted:I just dropped my GF5 out of my coat pocket. Welp, time to buy another, since you can never have too many cameras.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2013 23:47
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:Welp, time to buy another, since you can never have too many cameras. Tell that to my wife 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 00:53
|
|
|
Helicity posted:That's a gorgeous shot. Thank you! Musket posted:
Agreed. I do like messing with the RAW files and at first I was shooting in the jpeg + raw but realized I was using the RAW files less and less. It all comes down to preference really. You can always shoot jpeg + raw and have the best of both worlds. keyframe fucked around with this message at 03:56 on Nov 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 03:53
|
|
|
keyframe posted:Thank you! One of the things I really like about the Fuji's are the lovely JPG's. With my old Canon gear I used to spend far too much time shooting RAW then adjusting in LR. Now it feels much more natural to adjust photos on the fly with traditional controls. Shooting pretty much exclusively jpg does make my 32 gig cards pretty useless tho.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 05:04
|
|
|
Posted a while back for advice on my first mirrorless camera, which was helpful, thanks. I've narrowed it down to either: Sony NEX-6 $798 (with lens kit) Fuji X-E2 $1,399 (with lens kit) NEX 6 is my budget option, X-E2 is my stretch option. The NEX 6 is there purely because of price, but it does seem like an awesome camera for the money. The X-E2; I love the style, I like that it's a brand new model, I love Fuji's colors and awesome jpegs straight out of the camera. I'm leaning toward to the X-E2, but is it worth almost double the NEX 6?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 16:16
|
|
|
Bird Law posted:Posted a while back for advice on my first mirrorless camera, which was helpful, thanks. I've narrowed it down to either: My cousin-in-law sold his Canon setup and got an used XE1+zoom, for less than 800. XE2 is a worthy successor but you are paying a few hundred dollars extra for faster AF and shorter shutter lag. That money you can use to buy another lens or two.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 16:26
|
|
|
I don't think the kit lens on the NEX is outstanding and would suggest just buying the body and something like the Sigma 30mm EX 2.8 off ebay instead for a walk around lens. Fuji lenses are really good but I bought the NEX to have fun with legacy glass.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 16:32
|
|
|
Bird Law posted:Posted a while back for advice on my first mirrorless camera, which was helpful, thanks. I've narrowed it down to either: I played with an XE2 and im tempted to sell my XE1 body for the faster AF. Side by side, theres a noticable difference with the 18-55, 14mm and the split focus MF is omg. I do happen to use a lot of manual focus glass, so for me, the XE2 does make sense as a upgrade more than a sidegrade. I would personally put the XE2 value over the NEX6 as worthwhile. Also just to note that part of the cost of the XE2 kit is that "kitlens" thats not a kitlens. The Xe2 comes with the 18-55 OIS which is actually not a kit lens at all. The IQ alone stands toe to toe with my 24-70 Nikkor 2.8 glass. The nex6 babbyfirst kitlens, cannot do that. Factor that quality of glass when debating cost of the systems.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 16:35
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:My cousin-in-law sold his Canon setup and got an used XE1+zoom, for less than 800. XE2 is a worthy successor but you are paying a few hundred dollars extra for faster AF and shorter shutter lag. That money you can use to buy another lens or two. As I'll be primarily using this for my kids, the faster AF is what got me looking at the XE2 to begin with. I know its probably not the "worlds fastest AF" like Fuji claims, but everything I've read says its a huge improvement over the XE1. quote:I played with an XE2 and im tempted to sell my XE1 body for the faster AF. Side by side, theres a noticable difference with the 18-55, 14mm and the split focus MF is omg. I do happen to use a lot of manual focus glass, so for me, the XE2 does make sense as a upgrade more than a sidegrade. I would personally put the XE2 value over the NEX6 as worthwhile. Also just to note that part of the cost of the XE2 kit is that "kitlens" thats not a kitlens. The Xe2 comes with the 18-55 OIS which is actually not a kit lens at all. The IQ alone stands toe to toe with my 24-70 Nikkor 2.8 glass. The nex6 babbyfirst kitlens, cannot do that. Factor that quality of glass when debating cost of the systems. I did not know this about the XE2's 18-55 it comes with, that may just push me to getting it, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 16:37
|
|
|
Equilibrium posted:I don't think the kit lens on the NEX is outstanding and would suggest just buying the body and something like the Sigma 30mm EX 2.8 off ebay instead for a walk around lens. Fuji lenses are really good but I bought the NEX to have fun with legacy glass. The kit is OK, but it is very much a kit. I'm keeping mine for 2 reasons. It's good enough at 20mm that I don't feel the need to replace it with the Sigma 19, and when I take my 3N out to situations where I might want to hand it to someone else, it behaves just like a point-and-shoot with the zoom lever on the body that people "get" it. So when we're at some kind of family thing and my mom asks, "Hey, want me to take a picture of you guys?" I don't have to explain to her why the "zoom is broken." But on the 6 for same money, you will probably get more out of the 30, since you're going to want it pretty quickly anyway. On the other hand, the SELP1650 goes for around $150-175 on eBay, so if you get it and decide you hate it, you can turn it into the 30mm without a lot of loss (assuming you didn't pay more than that for it when you got your body).
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 16:56
|
|
|
I've actually been wondering, is the 19mm Sigma good as a wide angle lens? I've got some lens money saved up and I know I've heard that the Sony 16mm is bad, and the 20mm is a lot more expansive than either one. I kinda want a wide angle lens to go with my older MD lenses, but I also don't know how well a wide angle would adapt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 17:16
|
|
|
Bird Law posted:I did not know this about the XE2's 18-55 it comes with, that may just push me to getting it, thanks! I keep wanting to buy other primes in the 18-55 range for use with my XE1, but the quality of the "kit" stops me every time. It's really that good of a lens.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 17:55
|
|
|
The nice thing about the NEX kit lens is that it is stabilized so if you're shooting street, old-school style with the aperture at f/8 and the focus set to hyperfocal or whatever, you'll get clearer photos than the Sigma if the light isn't so bright.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 18:19
|
|
|
Bird Law posted:Posted a while back for advice on my first mirrorless camera, which was helpful, thanks. I've narrowed it down to either:
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 20:09
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:Are you likely to still be using the same body-lens combo in four years time or is it likely to be the start of a wider investment in a system? it's one thing to buy the more affordable camera, but it makes rather less sense if it starts to tie you in to a second-choice ecosystem. Is E-mount a second rate system at this point though? It has a lot more of the common lenses now, and it's growing faster since the announcement of the a7. Edit: Oops, I misread that, sorry. Karasu Tengu fucked around with this message at 21:24 on Nov 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 21:12
|
|
|
I didn't say second-rate, I said second-choice. The former might be said to condemn something, but the latter is merely a reflection of personal preference.
Pablo Bluth fucked around with this message at 21:19 on Nov 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 21:15
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:Is E-mount a second rate system at this point though? It has a lot more of the common lenses now, and it's growing faster since the announcement of the a7. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 21:21
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Even Samsung has a better first party lineup I like how Samsung has more DX primes than Nikon, Sony and Canon.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 22:11
|
|
|
Mightaswell posted:I like how Samsung has more DX primes than Nikon, Sony and Canon. Well, they also don't have the history/baggage of designing lenses for 35 mm cameras first, and they don't have any full-frame digital cameras either.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 22:34
|
|
|
Mightaswell posted:I like how Samsung has more DX primes than Nikon, Sony and Canon. Gotta have something in addition to a camera body that plays angry birds.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 23:12
|
|
|
Helicity posted:I keep wanting to buy other primes in the 18-55 range for use with my XE1, but the quality of the "kit" stops me every time. It's really that good of a lens. Yea the lens alone sells for $800. It is not even fair to compare it to the poo poo kit lenses other cameras come with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 03:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 14:48 |
|
|
ChirreD posted:I picked up the 27mm for cheap to see if it could replace the x100. Size wise it's fantastic, makes your camera very small. Just like the x100, it makes it a pocketable camera. But the colors didn't have that "fuji magic feel" to me. I can't explain it. So I sold it. Huh, I haven't heard that, I will have to look at some examples to see what's what. Thanks for sharing your experience. whatever7 posted:My cousin-in-law sold his Canon setup and got an used XE1+zoom, for less than 800. XE2 is a worthy successor but you are paying a few hundred dollars extra for faster AF and shorter shutter lag. That money you can use to buy another lens or two. Has anyone stated or shown that the LMO of the X-E2 makes any difference?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 06:29
|
|
