Pro-2 with 35f2
- Thread starter FrankS
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 119
- Views 16K
shawn
Veteran
“At ISO 400 the meter recommends one decrease exposure. Then, after the shutter closes, the DC signals are amplified to increase the global brightness. The analog DR is essentially unchanged. However the ADC can clip due to over amplification of the highlights' signal levels. This is not overexposure. So shifting the EV range is not relevant. “
When you are at ISO400 and DR200 (either by autoDR or setting it directly) the signals are not amplified. The chain to the RAW file is the same as if you were at ISO200. The camera simply metered at ISO400 but internally ran at ISO200. That is how it shifts the exposure range.
You can easily verify this.
Set your Fuji to ISO200 and set shutter and aperture where ever you want. Now set ISO to 400 and DR200 without changing the shutter/aperture. The resulting RAW file will be identical. If the DC amplification were occurring you would see that in the RAW data, but you won’t.
Shawn
When you are at ISO400 and DR200 (either by autoDR or setting it directly) the signals are not amplified. The chain to the RAW file is the same as if you were at ISO200. The camera simply metered at ISO400 but internally ran at ISO200. That is how it shifts the exposure range.
You can easily verify this.
Set your Fuji to ISO200 and set shutter and aperture where ever you want. Now set ISO to 400 and DR200 without changing the shutter/aperture. The resulting RAW file will be identical. If the DC amplification were occurring you would see that in the RAW data, but you won’t.
Shawn
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
I am seriously thinking about selling off my NEX7 and all the lenses, the N1V1 kit and/or the 'Blad to finance a X-Pro2 and a 35/2...
willie_901
Veteran
The camera meters at ISO 400 because DR =200. In this case, if the camera decides the exposure (shutter or aperture), or if you set the shutter or aperture manually to zero the meter, the sensor is underexposed by one stop compared to ISO 200 and obeying the meter.
If you ignore the meter, then the exposures could be identical.
If you are using raw files only and set the exposure without regard to the meter, what is the point of using DR > 100?
What percentage of people who use DR > 100 and use in-camera- JPEGS don't set exposure (one way or another) based on the light meter reading?
shawn
Veteran
That was simply to point out that your earlier statement (analog amplification) does not happen with you are at ISO400 with DR200.
"If you are using raw files only and set the exposure without regard to the meter, what is the point of using DR > 100?"
Not much of a point unless you are wanting more safeguard for blow highlights and use AutoDR.
"What percentage of people who use DR > 100 and use in-camera- JPEGS don't set exposure (one way or another) based on the light meter reading?"
No idea for a percentage. I do it occasionally. It can be useful with flash photography when using an A mode on a flash. It can also be handy to practice Sunny 16.
But the original response was to a person having blown highlights. I suggested using AutoDR to help with that. You suggest that that would not help with RAW files. That isn't the case, if are blowing highlights while shooting RAW AutoDR will in fact help save your highlights.
There are of course other ways to save the highlights too.
Shawn
"If you are using raw files only and set the exposure without regard to the meter, what is the point of using DR > 100?"
Not much of a point unless you are wanting more safeguard for blow highlights and use AutoDR.
"What percentage of people who use DR > 100 and use in-camera- JPEGS don't set exposure (one way or another) based on the light meter reading?"
No idea for a percentage. I do it occasionally. It can be useful with flash photography when using an A mode on a flash. It can also be handy to practice Sunny 16.
But the original response was to a person having blown highlights. I suggested using AutoDR to help with that. You suggest that that would not help with RAW files. That isn't the case, if are blowing highlights while shooting RAW AutoDR will in fact help save your highlights.
There are of course other ways to save the highlights too.
Shawn
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
Has anyone tried the 60/2.4 on their X-Pro2? How is the focus speed, especially compared to the 35/2?
I and very close to picking up an XP2 with 35/2 as soon as I see a decent price, and I'm thinking I'd actually prefer the 60 over the 56 - just like I prefer my 90/4 Elmar-C over the 90 Cron that I had back in the day. Add a future 23/2 WR, and I'd be soup.
I and very close to picking up an XP2 with 35/2 as soon as I see a decent price, and I'm thinking I'd actually prefer the 60 over the 56 - just like I prefer my 90/4 Elmar-C over the 90 Cron that I had back in the day. Add a future 23/2 WR, and I'd be soup.
krötenblender
Well-known
Well, I guess it depends, on what you are used to. I just started using the X-Pro2 two weeks ago and my first lens was the 35/2. A really nice combination, but since, every orher lens I put on that camera feels pretty slow.
I have the 60 Macro since two days and I'm already thinking of getting rid of it and use a manual macro lens instead (the Laowa 2:1 macro), because it is so slow and does not handle very nice. IQ-wise it is okay, but not phantastic, I liked my Olympus 60mm macro much more. I just changed from Olympus E-M1 to the Fuji and I'm really used to snappy focus. Fuji does not have it...
The Fuji system has other strengths, that I currently like to use. Fast focus with the macro is really not its strength and the lens is really not a top lens.
On the other hand, I would say, the combination with the 35/2 alone is worth buying into the system. I really hope, the rumored roadmap is correct and we see a 23mm/2 like the 35/2, because I'm more tied to fullframe 35mm angle of view.
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
Thank you!
willie_901
Veteran
As far as I know the 60/2.4 will always be slow.
It is a close-up lens (not really a macro based on it's reproduction ratio). Fujifilm designed the lens AF system to be slow to enhance critical focusing performance.
It nay be a bit faster on newer bodies because their CPUs are faster.
There is a 120mm 1:1 macro lens on Fujifilm's lens roadmap. There are rumors the focal length may be reduced to 100 mm. Who knows?
An adapted third party MF macro lens is really the best solution.
It is a close-up lens (not really a macro based on it's reproduction ratio). Fujifilm designed the lens AF system to be slow to enhance critical focusing performance.
It nay be a bit faster on newer bodies because their CPUs are faster.
There is a 120mm 1:1 macro lens on Fujifilm's lens roadmap. There are rumors the focal length may be reduced to 100 mm. Who knows?
An adapted third party MF macro lens is really the best solution.
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
Where did you see this rumor about a 23/2?
krötenblender
Well-known
http://www.fujirumors.com/rumor-fujinon-xf23mmf2-will-come-this-year-even-before-the-120mmf2-8/
Keep in mind, however, that I said rumor and that the site has this term in its domain-name also. So, don't bet your liver on it. But in the past they were often pretty good in predicting Fuji-announcements.
If it comes, I will buy it in the same second, there is a buy-button next to the price-tag...
jsrockit
Moderator
I would imagine that rumor will end up being true.
Photog9000
Well-known
krötenblender
Well-known
Me too. It would really make sense in the currently available lens collection.
Although I'm really 35mm-FOV-guy (on full frame sensors), the 35mm with its 50mm FOV is currently my always-on-lens. That combination is really a joy to use.
The only optimization, I would like to have, is a more easy to move aperture-ring with more distinct clicks. Coming from traditional manual lenses, I find the Fuji aperture-rings very stiff and not easy to move with just one finger.
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
Thanks for the link. Like you, I'd love to see a 23/2. Heck, I'd even scoop up a 23/2.8!
35photo
Well-known
Dumped my Nikon D800E for the X-Pro2 and 35 f2... Its going to be great along with my M9..
SamShio
hiking/walking photog
I apparently need to get the 35 f2, I have a few other lenses for my xpro2 but would really like to get the f2 35.
jsrockit
Moderator
I wouldn't mind seeing a 18mm 2.8 pancake (even smaller than the f/2 version).
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
I'm swinging by the local pusher this morning to see if he's gotten any more XP2s in. I really want to try one!
cz23
Well-known
Is that Calumet? I just tried their web site and was redirected to Ritz. Hadn't heard about that change.
John
Similar threads
