Imagefoundry

Joined on Apr 5, 2012

Comments

Total: 41, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

JackM: I don't get it, why don't they just keep selling the M9, but at a discount?

because you don't discount premium brands.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2012 at 21:54 UTC
On article Just Posted: Fujifilm X-E1 hands-on preview (277 comments in total)

I think Fuji have done a remarkable job positioning this camera. All the compromises are quite sensible and don't take away from X-Pro1 core strengths. Good job!
Now just have to wait for the new firmware for my Xpro1.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2012 at 17:06 UTC as 30th comment
On article Carl Zeiss announces CP.2 25mm T2.1 fast cinema prime (38 comments in total)
In reply to:

falconeyes: To anybody in the knows ...

I've got a question: Why is it that cine lenses (in general, and from Zeiss, comparing their cine and SLR offerings in particular) are much more expensive than SLR lenses -- while at the same time, the resolution requirement for cine lenses must be on the lower end even considering 4k video, i.e. 8MP?

Low production volume is one reason, to be sure. The other one is that cine lenses have design requirements that simply don't matter for still photography - for example, no focus shift whatsoever when changing aperture. Or precise colour matching to existing range of lenses.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2012 at 16:05 UTC
In reply to:

Imagefoundry: I've bought a Pentax-K adapter for my Xpro1 off ebay and spent an afternoon playing with my collection of Pentax glass. I can sum up the experience as follows:

1. manual focusing with X-Pro1, combined with manual aperture control, is plain painful. Until someone comes up with an adapter than can change aperture on Pentax-A lenses (fat chance, as this requires firmware support) I wouldn't touch this again.

2. The whole manual focusing approach needs to be re-thought. One, I would like to see a detail window at all times, not full-frame, and not just when I press a dial (which is awkward in itself); two - the focusing detail window needs to be stabilized.

Overall, although I ordered Leica M adapter I am not nearly as enthusiastic about trying it as I was before having a go with Pentax glass. I think I will get rid of it in a short order to free up some funds for more XF lenses.
The blame for the painful manual focusing experience can be laid at Fuji's feet, but what I realized alongside this is that existing XF lenses are very good, optically, and there's little reason in my mind now to try to adapt 3rd party glass.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2012 at 16:27 UTC
In reply to:

Imagefoundry: I've bought a Pentax-K adapter for my Xpro1 off ebay and spent an afternoon playing with my collection of Pentax glass. I can sum up the experience as follows:

1. manual focusing with X-Pro1, combined with manual aperture control, is plain painful. Until someone comes up with an adapter than can change aperture on Pentax-A lenses (fat chance, as this requires firmware support) I wouldn't touch this again.

2. The whole manual focusing approach needs to be re-thought. One, I would like to see a detail window at all times, not full-frame, and not just when I press a dial (which is awkward in itself); two - the focusing detail window needs to be stabilized.

...continued

3. This is a hybrid viewfinder. The distance from a lens center to a viewfinder window is known. Lens' focal distance is known. There's nothing really to prevent Fuji from displaying a traditional rangefinder-like double-image for focusing. That would absolutely rock.

4. I started to appreciate the build/quality of Fuji XF lenses even more after playing with other glass.

5. I never really had any trouble with Xpro1 autofocus. Goofing around for a day with manual lenses made me miss it, a lot.

6. Metering does not really work in manual mode - no histogram, and you can't judge the exposure on EVF/LCD as it keeps changing.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2012 at 16:26 UTC

I've bought a Pentax-K adapter for my Xpro1 off ebay and spent an afternoon playing with my collection of Pentax glass. I can sum up the experience as follows:

1. manual focusing with X-Pro1, combined with manual aperture control, is plain painful. Until someone comes up with an adapter than can change aperture on Pentax-A lenses (fat chance, as this requires firmware support) I wouldn't touch this again.

2. The whole manual focusing approach needs to be re-thought. One, I would like to see a detail window at all times, not full-frame, and not just when I press a dial (which is awkward in itself); two - the focusing detail window needs to be stabilized.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2012 at 16:26 UTC as 13th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

Imagefoundry: $5 on X-Pro2 announcement in Jan 2013. Otherwise this roadmap doesn't make much sense.

exactly what I am wondering about - that's a lot of upfront cash in lens development for only one body. Now that they skimmed the market with x-pro1 it's time to follow up with a simpler model

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2012 at 21:46 UTC

$5 on X-Pro2 announcement in Jan 2013. Otherwise this roadmap doesn't make much sense.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2012 at 16:01 UTC as 7th comment | 3 replies

That's pretty excellent news. I only ever used their large format Digitars, along with some older enlarger glass, - but if they manage to deliver a comparable quality in DX format I know I will be buying a few.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2012 at 20:47 UTC as 53rd comment
In reply to:

Imagefoundry: here's the DPReview X-Pro1 test image processed with dcraw. It has a whole lot of issues of its own, but you can see that the X-Pro1 sensor is capable of pretty excellent detail and color.

I think it's only matter of time before someone manages to get the processing right...

http://db.tt/90EXYcrJ

I got it here (link below, found on some other forums):

http://www.fujix-forum.com/index.php?/user/6779-wintoid/page__tab__posts

it runs on Win7-64 as a command line utility. Use at your own risk, though - I checked it for viruses but there are no guarantees obviously

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2012 at 21:21 UTC

here's the DPReview X-Pro1 test image processed with dcraw. It has a whole lot of issues of its own, but you can see that the X-Pro1 sensor is capable of pretty excellent detail and color.

I think it's only matter of time before someone manages to get the processing right...

http://db.tt/90EXYcrJ

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2012 at 19:08 UTC as 7th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Imagefoundry: getting some really nasty color tearing with ACR 7.1 and Fuji X-Pro1. In some cases (not too often, thankfully) it makes images borderline unusable - example crop below:
http://db.tt/k0qScmMa

@Usee

Let me start by saying that you are probably mis-reading my posts. I am not here to bash Fuji, Adobe or makers of SilkyPix. It's frustrating that there's no reliable raw conversion tool available, this long after the camera launch.

You obviously like SilkyPix a lot, and I don't have any issues with you championing the product in the forums. However:

Can you in all fairness expect me to spend USD$342.90 on SilkyPix Developer Studio Pro5 just to get the basic raw functionality?
And, looking at the examples you linked to, I am sorry they don't look convincing at all. Specifically, look at white type in Fiddler's Elbow. Top of the "W" is pink. It's supposed to be white. This is exactly the same issue as with ACR 7.1, just less severe.
I see no point in your second example - we already know that tonal detail is pretty great on X-Pro1.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2012 at 16:30 UTC
In reply to:

Imagefoundry: getting some really nasty color tearing with ACR 7.1 and Fuji X-Pro1. In some cases (not too often, thankfully) it makes images borderline unusable - example crop below:
http://db.tt/k0qScmMa

I just re-read this thread and I don't see anyone blaming Fuji - although I could if I wanted to, mostly for failing to deliver a professional-grade raw converter in time.

And no, I don't believe that included limited edition of SilkyPix qualifies. For example, they just managed to fix a gray balancing tool in the last update, before it was producing psychodelic color. And none of color presets in SP produce a believable color anyway - I got around it by profiling the camera with Colorchecker SG+Profilemaker; that's about $1500 and not everyone can afford it. And lastly, color-tearing issues present in ACR output are present in SP too - just look for any instance of fine white type on bright colored background.

OOC jpeg color detail looks better than both ACR and SP (talk about irony), but this route has its own issues - for example many sharp colorful objects have faint colored halos around them, and the detail is not as sharp as what is expected from a camera w/o AA filter.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2012 at 00:03 UTC
In reply to:

Imagefoundry: getting some really nasty color tearing with ACR 7.1 and Fuji X-Pro1. In some cases (not too often, thankfully) it makes images borderline unusable - example crop below:
http://db.tt/k0qScmMa

I don't know, I doubt it.
Feeling pretty bummed right now - ACR is basically broken, SilkyPix is producing ridiculous colours (and also has colour smearing issues), and in-camera raw processing doesn't offer batch processing to TIFF format and has colour halos around everything.

Hopefully someone steps up to the plate and fixes this mess soon. Because right now it is a hobbyist camera; I can't afford to shoot a job with it - too many issues.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2012 at 19:52 UTC

getting some really nasty color tearing with ACR 7.1 and Fuji X-Pro1. In some cases (not too often, thankfully) it makes images borderline unusable - example crop below:
http://db.tt/k0qScmMa

Link | Posted on May 30, 2012 at 17:07 UTC as 23rd comment | 10 replies
On article Leica M-Monochrom Hands-on Preview (451 comments in total)
In reply to:

Imagefoundry: Don't know about this one, but if Fuji puts out a monochrome version of X100 I'll get one like in a flash

I know, I have one.
There are many reasons to want B&W images straight out of the camera.

Back to my original point, a small retro-styled camera like X100 would be pretty attractive to me if it was offered as a B&W-only option. 36MP in grayscale is a pretty attractive proposition, and I think the lens on X100 can handle it.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2012 at 18:42 UTC
On article Leica M-Monochrom Hands-on Preview (451 comments in total)

Don't know about this one, but if Fuji puts out a monochrome version of X100 I'll get one like in a flash

Link | Posted on May 11, 2012 at 04:42 UTC as 123rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

mr moonlight: I know this is just the Beta version of the software, but wow! Image quality on the Xpro1 looks like it blows the other cameras out of the water at all ISO's

Wow?!
I thought the samples looked pretty bad.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2012 at 00:29 UTC

yup. the chattering is gone. The portrait orientation playback cropping issue is still present though... :(

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2012 at 21:12 UTC as 35th comment
In reply to:

Imagefoundry: I'll try to explain this autofocus controversy -

there are two AF modes on X-Pro1: "Multi/Area" and a single focus point (with 49 selectable).

I find that "Multi" is basically junk, - it's slow and fails often, while "Single AF point" works like a charm.

Ironically it seems that Q-menu AF settings icons got mixed up, and what looks like a single point AF is actually area AF, and the icon for Area AF is actually for single point AF.

I would appreciate if other X-Pro1 owners could have a look and tell me if I'm wrong/right...

You are correct; and I did not elucidate my point properly.
The icons for Multi and Area are consistent for main menu and Q-menu.

I was under impression that icon looking like four square brackets facing away from the center was for Multi, and the not the other way around; I'm pretty sure that's how it was on my previous camera (Pentax). I don't have an X100 to compare to.
Anyway, sorry about the confusion.

The point I was trying to make was: the difference in AF performance between Multi and Area AF modes, on X-Pro1, is pretty dramatic in my opinion. The former is borderline unusable, while the latter is actually very fast.

I wonder if the wide range of opinions re: AF in this thread has to do with people just trying one mode and not the other and coming to wrong conclusions.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2012 at 05:02 UTC
Total: 41, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »