Godfrey
somewhat colored
Ok, well rested now. My response is still, "Meh."
A Fuji X100S cannot be used with my lenses. It's sensor's raw files are a pain to work with. I don't like all the fiddly controls and menus.
I'll remain a curmudgeon. ;-)
G
A Fuji X100S cannot be used with my lenses. It's sensor's raw files are a pain to work with. I don't like all the fiddly controls and menus.
I'll remain a curmudgeon. ;-)
G
Actually, there is little need for raw, and there are good raw processors now (including the release of AccuRAW) if one really is insistent. The original X100 had some fiddly buttons (menu/ok) but that's been addressed. Nothing else fiddly left, it's a completely transformed camera in nearly every way. A true winner, IMHO.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I'm not changing my image processing workflow away from Lightroom and raw files. I don't want to have to think about image processing when I'm making my exposures. I worry only about exposure, focus, and what's in the frame.
The re-design may be great for many, but every time I pick up a Fuji digital it seems all the controls are cramped and in the wrong places. Same size camera: I pick up an Olympus Pen or Leica X2 and they're not. I've tried three Fujis, different models, and wont anymore.
G - Mr. C
jordanatkins
Established
I had an X100 for about a year... you don't need to shoot in RAW. Every other digital? Yes. X100(s), no. It nails exposure EVERY time. Wishing I never sold mine, but now I have a chance at an even better version...
rhl-oregon
Cameras Guitars Wonders
I think that's a lovely moniker for your moderator handle: Mister Curmudgeon. You could make pronoun cements (ha ha, spell-corrector goofs again) pronouncements in third person, and play DA (devils advocate) all day long. You're right, the Fuji controls are fiddly --compared to the GXR, truly a one-hand camera--but LR now supports it enough for me to keep working along at the deliberate pace I like with other digital and film cams. Except sometimes in LR 4.x when reviewing XE shots I can just say "Print 'im, Dan-o!" And accept that the XE/35 got it right wide open with aperture priority at autohigh 6400.
"Mister Curmudgeon's Camera Pans" could go viral with the right tone....
"Mister Curmudgeon's Camera Pans" could go viral with the right tone....
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Not a matter of 'need'. It's a matter of 'want'.
I use manual exposure about 80% of the time. I don't like cameras making my decisions for me.
G
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I like that ... "Mister Curmudgeon's Camera Pans". 'roast 'em up and serve with melted film topping.'
G
Going for my walk now. Olympus E-PL1 fitted with Skink zone plate, and Perkeo II are coming along...
Murchu
Well-known
Apologies, if veering off topic a little, but what is the story with Fuji raw files and lightroom. Would one day like one or two of these fuji's but if raw in lightroom is a no-go, would be a dealbreaker for me
rhl-oregon
Cameras Guitars Wonders
Not at the monitor now, but the latest (4.7?) handles my XE raw fine. All of my recent gallery pix were tweaked in LR, sometimes merely with presets, sometimes in more deliberate steps.
Murchu
Well-known
Cheers Robert. Just reading up on it a little, would seem that the quality of the conversions, at least at a pixel level, would seem to be the issue, as opposed to an inability to process the files in lightroom. Guess Adobe are still catching up..
Sunti
Established
The camera aside, I believe the article is very effective in its appeal to the target market for the x100s and the Fuji brand. I'll give it to him for the entertaining writing style and the great marketing.
willie_901
Veteran
The facts are these.
1. LR RC 4.4 is a bonifide game changer. Everything you read about Adobe and XTrans before the release of 4.4 RC is obsolete.
2. In my experience the deficiencies in LR RC 4.4 are no worse, but they are different, from other deficiencies I see with raw from my Nikons, the Lumix G1 or my X100.
3. Evaluating these deficiencies requires extreme pixel peeping and it is unlikely, but not impossible, for the remaining issues to cause distractions in prints. Obviously any rendering problems from any camera's raw are more problematic the more you crop.
4. Many of LR rendering parameter such as sharpening, clarity, defringing and, rarely, WB must be approached differently for XTrans images than they are for Bayer images. I apply some of these changes automatically upon import.
The claim that XTrans raw is technically problematic is obsolete. This doesn't matter because Fuji will suffer for a few more years from misjudging the impact of releasing the XTrans sensor without using DNG. Fuji grossly overestimated the suitability of SilkyPix to their user base. The more people who actually process XTrans images with ACR, the more the out-of-date claims will be ignored.
Aesthetic or subjective dissatisfaction with XTrans raw rendering remains valid. After all, people disagree about which product renders their Bayer images best.
Item 4 above is the only practical disadvantage of the XTrans sensor. Some images do require different parameters than others. By contrast Bayer images seem to require less attention to these rendering parameters. So anyone who claims the XTrans sensor is unacceptable because it demands different processing techniques and can require more time and experience has a valid point. I don't find this difference to be significant, but I accept it could be important to others.
I will also say that overexposure in high contrast situations is not handled as well in XTrans images from the 18 and 14 mm Fujinon lenses compared to the X100. The 35 mm XF lens is similar to the X100 in this regard.
In my view people who claim Adobe is incapable of delivering excellent results from XTrans raw are either deceiving themselves or are incredibly fussy about issues that will rarely, if ever, detract from their works' impact.
This is what JPEG is for.
But if you want Lightroom for RAW, just do it.Yes, aperture ring, shutter dial, shutter button...hm, they all are in pretty much the same place as they've been for 70+ years.
Oh wait, yes, a real aperture ring, and a real shutter dial. Imagine that, no silly menus to set the basics...Vobluda
Well-known
He did got the camera from Fuji for free and Fuji did paid his photo trip to Istanbul. You can find it on his www.
Murchu
Well-known
Cheers for the thorough reply and thoughts. If I'd any cash right now, I've no doubt a chunk of it would have went to Fuji
ChrisLivsey
Veteran
I may have misread but i understood he had a loaner then bought one.
All the makers but Leica, Canon and Nikon especially have "paid" or "most favoured" status photographers who have pre-release or post release as "international ambassadors" "educating and inspiring photographers from across the globe"
I tend to the :
Those who can, do
Those who can't, teach
Those who can't teach post as experts on forums or are "bloggers"
There are many exceptions, alright some.
NaCl is a requisite condiment for most of the postings.
It now seems that by the time you have finished "testing" you new camera a new model comes around and you start again obviating the requirement to use it in real life.
Rant over.
NicoM
Well-known
He bought his original x100 and reviewed it. That us what caught fujis attention and that is why they pay him to test Thor new cameras. He had a photo story featured on CNN where he used the x100 and it was way before his relationship with fuji.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
This is what JPEG is for.
Wrong. In-camera JPEG production means you have to watch your white balance, contrast, sharpening, etc ... all image processing options with raw files.
Yes, aperture ring, shutter dial, shutter button...hm, they all are in pretty much the same place as they've been for 70+ years.
Just cramped together and made unappealing. To me.
You know, I thought I'd hate the E-PL1's push-button manual control setup. I bought the camera because it was cheap ($100 with a lens) and I had a couple of wacky lenses for the mount that I wanted to play with on it. Turns out that it works better than the Fuji X100 controls for me, by a long shot. And it has image stabilization and easy to work raw files.
I know LR4.4RC improves mightily upon Adobe's processing of Xtrans raw files. But now it's just "on par" with what I get out of GXR, E-PL1, M9, E-1, X2, and all the other digital camera raw files I work with. Now it's hit the baseline quality I expect, and I see no real world benefit to it.
G
Yes indeed, I'd say more than just a curmudgeon today. Didn't have your coffee this morning? Lol
Godfrey
somewhat colored
LOL ... likely too much, not too little. ;-)
I think was irritates me most about the Fuji-fandom is that Fuji's done a good job of making a decent little camera, albeit with a weird and hard to process correctly sensor data format, and everyone ogles the fact that they styled it to look like a classic camera and thinks it must be the best thing since sliced bread.
Well, for me, when I tried the X100, I immediately found it to be a cramped and irritating to use little POJ, and I couldn't get the image quality I wanted out of it with any ease at all, unlike working with the GXR, X2 or E-PL1. So no matter how pretty and classic it appears, it simply doesn't work for me at all. Same goes for the other Fuji X cameras.
The GXR, X2 and E-PL1, despite being un-classic in control design, simply work and work very well indeed. And it's that functionality, coupled with the fact of their very easy to work with raw files, that make them good cameras to me, and the Fuji not so great.
G