What he does is actually a traffic safety hazard. Other drivers could be temporarily blinded by the light and hit something or someone. This guy needs to rethink what he's doing.
Direct link |
Posted on Apr 14, 2013 at 16:35:45 UTC
as 26th comment
| 1 reply
Joed700: I'm surprised by how this camera received the Gold Award! I was planning on getting this camera but the fact that it requires occasionally reboots changed my mind. I would think that issue like this should had been resolved before Fujifilm starting charging its customers $1,000 for a beta version of their product. Let's hope a firmware update will follow soon.
I've owned this camera for four months and I've never had to reboot it.
Direct link |
Posted on Mar 2, 2013 at 12:49:22 UTC
Amateurbob: To determine picture quality the first places I look are dynamic range and sample gallery. The sample gallery confirms the results of the dynamic range comparisons – the X-E1 set at DR 100 cannot match my Nex C3. Why was picture DSCF9046 not taken at DR 200 and DR 400 so one can get an idea of what the camera can do. Why not set the camera at DR 200? Is there some disadvantage in doing so? It is stated that DR200 is like underexposing a stop to retain highlights then adjusting the brightness afterwards, and DR400 is like underexposing by two stops and adjusting further. How does that increase dynamic range? It was shown that it increased dynamic range. If one underexposes the highlights they also underexpose the shadows. What is the dynamic range of a sensor?
None of the D-Lighting like features really increase DR. They just adjust for exposure, shadow and highlight curves, then apply a brightness correction. RAW files do have an advantage in that it captures a bit more headroom.
However, I do like and use those features because they work well in high contrast scenes to lift shadows and tame highlights without me having to make manual adjustments to get the same effect.
Direct link |
Posted on Mar 2, 2013 at 12:46:06 UTC
Mdopp: I am still puzzled by this "camera locks up" issue. I own the X-E1 for over two months now together with three lenses (the zoom, the 35 and the 14mm). During that time I have shot some 2500 pictures with it and the camera never ever locked up. Not even once.
Same here. I've haven't had any issues, especially since the new firmware improved the autofocus speed.
Direct link |
Posted on Mar 2, 2013 at 12:40:10 UTC
As a XE-1 owner I can say the review is fair. The camera delivers great image quality but does have a few quirks, like every other camera. It's not designed to be an action/sports camera so don't judge it for what it isn't. Fuji designed it to be a great street/travel camera, and it excels at that.
But I did find the comment in the "Cons" section: "Large and chunky build won't suit everyone" to be strange. The camera is boxy, sure, but it isn't large or chunky: It's just about the same size as my FE-2, minus the mirror box. I wouldn't call that large or chunky.
Direct link |
Posted on Mar 2, 2013 at 12:37:09 UTC
as 64th comment
| 6 replies
On kiss in the The Kiss challenge
(6 comments in total)
I love it! These little moments are why we take our cameras with us.
Direct link |
Posted on Mar 2, 2013 at 12:26:43 UTC
as 3rd comment
Back in the days of film (and I know it isn't dead yet) a camera company could charge a premium because the mechanical quality of the camera and lenses were top shelf; the film was just the film.
But a digital camera is much more than a box to hold film. The sensor and all the related technology packed into the camera is what counts the most. Nikon, Canon and Pentax all have much better camera technology than Leica (which still makes great lenses but not for the price they charge!).
I'm surprised that people are still sold on Leica being superior when it is clear they can't match the technological chops of even Pentax.
Direct link |
Posted on May 12, 2012 at 13:44:53 UTC
as 51st comment
| 3 replies
Tape5: Shadows should to be treated with more dignity and respect and not illuminated just because the software engineers said so.
Shadows that are opened up too much look unnatural. Always opening up shadows, just because we can, doesn't improve an image. I always like to see a range of tones.
Direct link |
Posted on Apr 24, 2012 at 16:02:46 UTC
Michael Ma: I don't doubt with A LOT effort, you can pull this off with pho blur. Maybe mask based on content aware selections and isolated color selects. And then flip the selection and do a dual gradient mask on the floor.
But it is the quintessential example of "putting perfume on a pig." The fact that you shot the photo this way probably means it came off something like a smart phone or you snapped a pic with your camera with no regard or care. And the outcome you are trying to go for is something frame-worthy. You cannot start with a mediocre photograph when you are trying to achieve something great. The effort required is far more greater than the second of forethought of bringing a capable camera or shooting with the right settings. The fake blur results will never surpass the results you would have gotten if you had taken the shot right the first time.
I agree. Adobe put it in CS6 because they could. Shooting aperture priority and thinking a bit first instead of clicking away makes a better photographer.
Direct link |
Posted on Mar 30, 2012 at 11:06:31 UTC
Zoltan Csuka: I am not getting it... What is the point of releasing this camera without an evf? Size is the same.
I think the market is going to move away from mirrors, at least below the pro level. This could have been a replacement for a mirrorless intro model. Why they did't include an EVF is a mystery. For this reason alone the camera may bomb.
Direct link |
Posted on Mar 22, 2012 at 11:30:34 UTC
wetsleet: Interesting to see that a Pro takes jpegs, is happy to save money by not following the herd into buying what the received wisdom tells you to buy in order to be admitted as a Pro, and uses his phone if he needs to capture video. Nice to know that you can just be judged by your results instead.
I used to shoot raw all the time, having bought into the hype. I've since switched to jpg. If you know your camera and set it up correctly and take well composed pictures of something interesting the camera will give you the results you need with only some minor tweaking post capture.
Direct link |
Posted on Feb 23, 2012 at 12:04:51 UTC
CT, United States
What he does is actually a traffic safety hazard. Other drivers could be temporarily blinded by the light and hit something or someone. This guy needs to rethink what he's doing.
Geez, I thought they just threw someone in the pool.
thanks for the heads up skiphunt13. You're correct.
Joed700: I'm surprised by how this camera received the Gold Award! I was planning on getting this camera but the fact that it requires occasionally reboots changed my mind. I would think that issue like this should had been resolved before Fujifilm starting charging its customers $1,000 for a beta version of their product. Let's hope a firmware update will follow soon.
I've owned this camera for four months and I've never had to reboot it.
Amateurbob: To determine picture quality the first places I look are dynamic range and sample gallery. The sample gallery confirms the results of the dynamic range comparisons – the X-E1 set at DR 100 cannot match my Nex C3. Why was picture DSCF9046 not taken at DR 200 and DR 400 so one can get an idea of what the camera can do. Why not set the camera at DR 200? Is there some disadvantage in doing so? It is stated that DR200 is like underexposing a stop to retain highlights then adjusting the brightness afterwards, and DR400 is like underexposing by two stops and adjusting further. How does that increase dynamic range? It was shown that it increased dynamic range. If one underexposes the highlights they also underexpose the shadows. What is the dynamic range of a sensor?
None of the D-Lighting like features really increase DR. They just adjust for exposure, shadow and highlight curves, then apply a brightness correction. RAW files do have an advantage in that it captures a bit more headroom.
However, I do like and use those features because they work well in high contrast scenes to lift shadows and tame highlights without me having to make manual adjustments to get the same effect.
Mdopp: I am still puzzled by this "camera locks up" issue.
I own the X-E1 for over two months now together with three lenses (the zoom, the 35 and the 14mm). During that time I have shot some 2500 pictures with it and the camera never ever locked up. Not even once.
Same here. I've haven't had any issues, especially since the new firmware improved the autofocus speed.
As a XE-1 owner I can say the review is fair. The camera delivers great image quality but does have a few quirks, like every other camera. It's not designed to be an action/sports camera so don't judge it for what it isn't. Fuji designed it to be a great street/travel camera, and it excels at that.
But I did find the comment in the "Cons" section: "Large and chunky build won't suit everyone" to be strange. The camera is boxy, sure, but it isn't large or chunky: It's just about the same size as my FE-2, minus the mirror box. I wouldn't call that large or chunky.
I love it! These little moments are why we take our cameras with us.
Well, I'm sure the technology is great, but it's not much to look at.
Sounds like a place holder to give Ricoh/Pentax some time to think about what direction they want to go.
Back in the days of film (and I know it isn't dead yet) a camera company could charge a premium because the mechanical quality of the camera and lenses were top shelf; the film was just the film.
But a digital camera is much more than a box to hold film. The sensor and all the related technology packed into the camera is what counts the most. Nikon, Canon and Pentax all have much better camera technology than Leica (which still makes great lenses but not for the price they charge!).
I'm surprised that people are still sold on Leica being superior when it is clear they can't match the technological chops of even Pentax.
sno1man: Hmm...
Interesting idea. I'd like to see someone like Nikon try something similar...
Nikon FM3dm
16 MP FX, Manual focus, manual exposure, manual film advance ,ISO 102000
The new OM-D, EP-5 (silly long name) is pretty close. Nikon will never do this because there really isn't a reason to do so.
Tape5: Shadows should to be treated with more dignity and respect and not illuminated just because the software engineers said so.
Shadows that are opened up too much look unnatural. Always opening up shadows, just because we can, doesn't improve an image. I always like to see a range of tones.
How about a set of fast primes?! I'm going to get this camera in due time but Olympus needs to flesh out the m43 lens lineup.
Michael Ma: I don't doubt with A LOT effort, you can pull this off with pho blur. Maybe mask based on content aware selections and isolated color selects. And then flip the selection and do a dual gradient mask on the floor.
But it is the quintessential example of "putting perfume on a pig." The fact that you shot the photo this way probably means it came off something like a smart phone or you snapped a pic with your camera with no regard or care. And the outcome you are trying to go for is something frame-worthy. You cannot start with a mediocre photograph when you are trying to achieve something great. The effort required is far more greater than the second of forethought of bringing a capable camera or shooting with the right settings. The fake blur results will never surpass the results you would have gotten if you had taken the shot right the first time.
I agree. Adobe put it in CS6 because they could. Shooting aperture priority and thinking a bit first instead of clicking away makes a better photographer.
Zoltan Csuka: I am not getting it... What is the point of releasing this camera without an evf? Size is the same.
I think the market is going to move away from mirrors, at least below the pro level. This could have been a replacement for a mirrorless intro model. Why they did't include an EVF is a mystery. For this reason alone the camera may bomb.
Funny stuff! A good eye is all it takes.
IcyVeins: What is the point of having ACR and Lightroom when they edit photos in exactly the same way?
LR has a much better user interface: No layers needed. That alone is reason enough to use it over PS, unless you're a graphic artist.
Mescalamba: Now what about some new camera, dear Pentax?
K-5 is pretty good camera, but something new and exciting wouldnt hurt. Like full-frame for example.
How about an LX-D. That sounds nice.
wetsleet: Interesting to see that a Pro takes jpegs, is happy to save money by not following the herd into buying what the received wisdom tells you to buy in order to be admitted as a Pro, and uses his phone if he needs to capture video. Nice to know that you can just be judged by your results instead.
I used to shoot raw all the time, having bought into the hype. I've since switched to jpg. If you know your camera and set it up correctly and take well composed pictures of something interesting the camera will give you the results you need with only some minor tweaking post capture.