X-Pro 1 as Point and shoot ??!!

[dee]

Despite having no more funds for ' toys ' I was considering a compact dig-box with fixed lens to make it easier as a carry all camera .

By dee fault , under pressure , I now have an Apple Phone [ so that others can chase me down as required ] but it feels weird as a 'camera'.

However , when the X-Pro came up as £170 plus a 27mm @ £150 , I had to jump in .
I was not concerned about the IQ - a Panasonic LX 100 would have been good - other fixed lens cameras are too expensive or have a 35mm or 28 mm lens equivalent . The 41mm equ is simply perfect and so useable at f2.8 !

So, other than the excellent exposure compensation dial ,my poor X-Pro 1 has often been dee-moted into a point and shoot !!
Of course , I can quickly activate it's potential as required , but as shoulder bag camera it's perfect .

How the mighty have fallen when lesser mortals can afford it !! LOL

dee

 

[zuikologist]

Dee, my apologies. I think I first mentioned this in another thread - it was not meant as an insult but actually as a comment from a fellow "point & shooter" using the same set up, in so far as I like the camera to get out of the way of the process of taking photos, something like the "F8 and be there" approach.

For me that can mean pre-focus on a specific spot where action is or will take place or switch to manual and use hyperfocal, use a relatively small aperture to cover focus errors and a highish ISO to give a good shutter speed. The beauty of the Xpro 1 is the OVF which means 27/35mm lenses used without too much visual disruption or as you described in another thread by visualising the focal length and shooting blind.

So for me it is more about the "point & shoot" mind set rather than the equipment.

 

[willie_901]

In some circumstance every camera can be used as a point and shoot camera. Today the term almost has nor meaning.

Once upon a time, when full automation was new to analog photography, the term meant you let the camera decide the exposure and focus. When small are digital sensors became available this concept was continued. Digital brought a simplification. The small sensor areas meant the AF automation was not as demanding. They also introduced a complication since ISO was became automated. Some people think auto-ISO is a simplification but in fact Auto-ISO often degrades IQ compared to thoughtful use of the lowest possible ISO.

 

[skopar steve]

Sounds like a "sleeper" set up to me. All the convenience of a fixed lens auto everything point and shoot (minus the under powered flash). Then at a moments notice it can jump into a fully controllable, run every fuji lens or legacy lens image making machine. Perfect solution to a small budget problem.

 

[Jdi]

However , when the X-Pro came up as £170 plus a 27mm @ £150 , I had to jump in .
I was not concerned about the IQ - a Panasonic LX 100 would have been good

An iPhone will do you just fine.

 

[dee]

zuikologist - I did not notice any insults - just support and info.
Jdi - I-phone IQ maybe a touch too basic .
Scopar steve - I like the idea of a camera which can do dumb and smart , and the X-Pro , like several others , does just that .
wille 901 - I have just learned about the problems with auto ISO , so , like with film , set ISO 100 - 200 . if I have to snap shot in dim light , I guess I can change settings from dumb to smart !
Thanks all .
dee

 

[Jdi]

auto-ISO is a simplification but in fact Auto-ISO often degrades IQ compared to thoughtful use of the lowest possible ISO.

Care to explain that? Any auto-ISO camera I've ever owned has gone out if it's way to select the lowest possible shutter speed before raising ISO. It takes a refocus from ISO to shutter speed though. That's where the thinking comes in, not on the ISO side.

I have my xp1 auto ISO set from base to 6400. Set it an forget it. Shutter speed is controlled with preset shooting configurations or the top dial.

 

[zuikologist]

Can the Xp1 be set up as effectively an "ISO less" camera where it is possible to set a base level ISO and recover in-post?

Care to explain that? Any auto-ISO camera I've ever owned has gone out if it's way to select the lowest possible shutter speed before raising ISO. It takes a refocus from ISO to shutter speed though. That's where the thinking comes in, not on the ISO side.

I have my xp1 auto ISO set from base to 6400. Set it an forget it. Shutter speed is controlled with preset shooting configurations or the top dial.

 

[willie_901]

My experience is different. ISO is often higher than it needs to be. The people who wrote the automation algorithms have to guess about situations they will never experience in person.

I prefer to record data with the highest possible analog signal-to-noise ratio and dynamic range when the shutter is open... i.e. maximize exposure.

Since ISO increases the global brightness after the shutter closes, increasing ISO decreases the signal (light amplitude) while the electronic noise level remains constant. The main concern is: if ISO is higher than required there is unnecessary loss of IQ in shadow shadow regions. Of course auto-ISO doesn't always choose a higher than needed ISO.

For JPEG shooters the situation is worse. Th XP1's electronic ISO amplification stops at ISO 1600, Above 1600 the increase in brightness is accomplished by raw data digital multiplication in-camera. Fujifilm also overrides (increases) the noise filter parameter set in the Menu system (although the XP1 use a much less aggressive filter than newer cameras.

My method is to use automatic brightening of raw files during post production. The XP1 is pseudo ISO invariant to ISO 1600 (data here). So I leave ISO at the base value (200); select the appropriate shutter speed and aperture as required; and increase the brightness as needed in post production. The only time the meter matters at all is to to avoid sensor overexposure. Sometimes I automatically bracket exposures to overexposure unimportant highlights. This method always produces data with the highest possible SNR and analog dynamic range. While chimping is compromised, I alway get the maximum out of the sensor. I also have complete control over noise filtering as the raw file is not filtered in-camera at ISO 1600 and below.

 

[Jdi]

Are you using auto-DR, as you mentioned jpegs? That's what's causing ISO to be higher than it needs to be. I find my xp1 religious in holding the ISO 200 until shutter speed reaches whatever minimum I've set (the mins are in my custom shooting profiles). DR is set to base, 100.

 

[Jdi]

Can the Xp1 be set up as effectively an "ISO less" camera where it is possible to set a base level ISO and recover in-post?

I had to look at how aggressive I get as I don't intentionally underexpose.

Within limits. It can underexpose and get back pretty much everything up to 3 stops. After that the shadows may not fully recover as what's not there has been lost. My 3 stops is conservative.

Overexpose at ISO 200 and you're cooked.

 

[f16sunshine]

Didn't Ansel Adams use a Hasselblad as his point and shoot?

 

[shawn]

Are you using auto-DR, as you mentioned jpegs? That's what's causing ISO to be higher than it needs to be. I find my xp1 religious in holding the ISO 200 until shutter speed reaches whatever minimum I've set (the mins are in my custom shooting profiles). DR is set to base, 100.

Same here. Camera holds ISO at base until it hits minimum shutter speed I set for AutoISO or I select a shutter speed that it can't meet with the lens fully open.

Shawn

 

[willie_901]

Are you using auto-DR, as you mentioned jpegs? That's what's causing ISO to be higher than it needs to be. I find my xp1 religious in holding the ISO 200 until shutter speed reaches whatever minimum I've set (the mins are in my custom shooting profiles). DR is set to base, 100.

I never use in-camera JPEG,s so since late 2010 I DR was set to 100.

 

[willie_901]

Can the Xp1 be set up as effectively an "ISO less" camera where it is possible to set a base level ISO and recover in-post?

...
Within limits. It can underexpose and get back pretty much everything up to 3 stops. After that the shadows may not fully recover as what's not there has been lost. My 3 stops is conservative.

Overexpose at ISO 200 and you're cooked.

Yes, three stops was my limit for color work with the Xtrans I data stream (X-Pro 1). For B&W I could tolerate 4 stops. Statistical analysis of raw file data (not rendered images) on a Forum that shall not be named indicate the XTrans I data streams are very close to ISO-invariant.

For the XTrans II data stream a four stop push for color work is right at my personal limit for color work.

The X-Pro 2 is has a dual-gain data stream (more info here). It has two base ISOs... 200 and 800. So it has two ISO invariant ranges: ISO 200 to 800 and then 800 to ~6400. I don't own a X-Pro 2 so I have no idea how many stops the higher ISO stage can be pushed using that stage's base ISO (800).

 

[Jdi]

@willie 901
Then there's something amiss. I've been through 7 Fuji bodies, ISO does not increase until what you've set for shutter speed won't support proper exposure. I've never noticed it varying from this unless DR is set to anything other than 100.

 

[adamjbonn]

@willie 901
Then there's something amiss. I've been through 7 Fuji bodies, ISO does not increase until what you've set for shutter speed won't support proper exposure. I've never noticed it varying from this unless DR is set to anything other than 100.

I THINK what Willie means is that the camera will ramp up ISO, when he feels it doesn't need to be, not that he has a problem with min ss and auto iso

But I'm sure he'll explain it himself!

 

[adamjbonn]

The pre X-Trans III sensors are only 100% ISO invariant after ISO1600.

If you expose with a 3 stop push in mind from 200, then no real drama, if you don't then you'll just end up amplifying signal noise in post.

The DR expansion modes are not a raw shooters friend. You'll just end up throwing away data trying to get something that's more achievable at base ISO than having a 1 or 2 stop underexposed raw file.

Then with dr 'expanded' (sic) RAFs the result will depend on what software you're using. Some SW will actually apply a global brightening curve on what it perceives as an under expsoed raw file

So you use DR expansion to preserve highlights, then your raw convertor whacks a stop of brigthening to the file... Yay, just what you wanted (not)

 

[willie_901]

The pre X-Trans III sensors are only 100% ISO invariant after ISO1600.

Yes... which is why I purposefully wrote "very close to ISO-invariant" and "psuedo ISO-invariant"

If you expose with a 3 stop push in mind from 200, then no real drama, if you don't then you'll just end up amplifying signal noise in post.

Increasing the global luminance during post production always "amplifies" the noise identically to how the signal is 'amplified'. As ISO increases the sensor's exposure deceases which decreases the SNR. The shdaow regions are the first areas a low SNR becomes problematic.

 

[narsuitus]

It is easier to convert a sophisticated camera into a point & shoot than the reverse.

If I wanted to convert my X-Pro1 into a point & shoot, here is what I would do:

1. Mount a 23mm f/1.4 (or 35mm f/1.4 or 35mm f/2) lens on the camera
2. Set f/stop on lens to auto
3. Set shutter speed on body to auto
4. If lens is a clutch lens, set clutch to auto focus position
5. Set lever on body to single auto focus
6. Set dynamic range in menu to auto
7. Set image type in menu to a high quality jpeg
8. Set white balance to auto
9. Set ISO in menu to auto with 400 base ISO; 6400 maximum ISO; and 1/60 second minimum shutter speed