clarkt
Leading Member
Thanks Carl. I will try to get over there and participate. In the meantime, got yogurt? (R1 image):
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
busch
Forum Pro
I remember that shot and I still love it!
--
Busch
Take the scenic route! Life is too short to do otherwise.
http://www.pbase.com/busch
--
Busch
Take the scenic route! Life is too short to do otherwise.
http://www.pbase.com/busch
clarkt
Leading Member
Thanks.
Love my R1! I have discovered that I prefer Jpeg over RAW. I am using PSE with the latest ACR but the RAW files come with some grain after the ACR. Jpegs are clean, sharp, proper exposure and great colors. For me it works best with standard color - not vivid - and sharpness on Plus. The rest of PP, if neede, is done in PSE with layers. What are your findings?
C
cgarrard
Guest
I'm all raw and neat image if any noise removal is needed. More dynamic range available, more tonality, custom color profile, 16 bit TIFFs for prints- gorgeous 13x19" prints.
--
http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/
"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson
--
http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/
"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson
clarkt
Leading Member
That's interesting. Can you post a sample with your settings?
Adam-T
Forum Pro
There's no NR LOW in the JPG engine, all the detail captured by that sensor and the CZ lens is smeared away even at base ISO and as the ISO rises, it gets exponentially worse (800 looks like a peanut sensor P&S whereas in RAW, it's very usable indeed) , if Ron is happy with the JPGs that's great but even in 2006 I immedietly switched to RAW as fast as I could find the menu option, I'd honestly not give the JPGs another glance unless you're happy with about 5Mp's worth of resolution (I'm sure the 5Mp even older E1 outresolves it in JPG) ..............
Just my opinion and findings of course, many people don't care about resolution, look at all the fans the HX100V has !!!!
--
A Problem is only the pessimistic way of looking at a challenge
clarkt
Leading Member
I'm not all that impressed with the HX100V either.
C
cgarrard
Guest
Took it out today to get some landscapes, reviewing the images now. Nice getting to know it's fine points once again.
Getting the best out of the R1 can be a bit finicky at times, need to really nail the exposure just right- but when you do, stop the press!
C
--
http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/
"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson
Getting the best out of the R1 can be a bit finicky at times, need to really nail the exposure just right- but when you do, stop the press!
C
--
http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/
"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson
Adam-T
Forum Pro
Yeah same here - I've not had to alter white balance and the output is about the same sharpness as a Canon 40D + 17-55 F2.8 - not as sharp as a D2X by quite a way (AA filter) but very good - the lens is excellent for CA. Distortion and Vignetting (better than the various FF 24-xx DSLR lenses) but the long end is a bit soft especially at infinity (as were the others I've used previously in 2006 & the one I owned then)
Highlight recovery isn't bad at all (same as the D2X suprise suprise) , I find selecting the smallest focus point and aiming for the deepest part of a scene and shooting at F5.6 does the trick with landscapes - the AF is more consistent than any 10Mp Nikon or Canon body (D80, 200, 40X, 60 - 40D, 400D etc) , that's contrast detect for yaGetting the best out of the R1 can be a bit finicky at times, need to really nail the exposure just right- but when you do, stop the press!
--
A Problem is only the pessimistic way of looking at a challenge
C
cgarrard
Guest
Here's some work from today-
All f/8 ISO 160 ACR conversions.
This image below inparticular was really looking sharp in ACR, upsized it to 17mp to see how it'd look, held up great. Talk about a sharp lens. I'd use f5.6 for the long end but prefer f/8 for more even corner sharpness and a bit more DOF.
Here's a shot from mid week:
And here's a shot from 06, I reprocessed it tonight (Sedona AZ).
Cheerios,
Carl
http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/
"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson
All f/8 ISO 160 ACR conversions.
This image below inparticular was really looking sharp in ACR, upsized it to 17mp to see how it'd look, held up great. Talk about a sharp lens
. I'd use f5.6 for the long end but prefer f/8 for more even corner sharpness and a bit more DOF.
Here's a shot from mid week:
And here's a shot from 06, I reprocessed it tonight (Sedona AZ).
Cheerios,
Carl
http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/
"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson
orangethings
Active member
I've posted this R1 pic before so apologies if you've already seen it but it's one of my favourites and I thought I'd share it with anyone who hasn't
Adam-T
Forum Pro
I find the lens sharp right from F2.8 across the frame at 24mm - the 120 end needs F5.6 and preferably F8 if you're shooting stuff further away to get there - same with all the R1s I've used - I'd rather have the tack sharpness at the wide end with no edge or CA issues than like the Nikon 24-120VR which is awful at 24mm even at F5.6 (FF) and sharp at 120
--
A Problem is only the pessimistic way of looking at a challenge
C
cgarrard
Guest
Yet, this is the HX100V forum
C
--
http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/
"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson
C
--
http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/
"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson
C
cgarrard
Guest
It certainly doesn't suck wide open, much better performance than the SZ 16-80 on Alphas.
C
--
http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/
"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson
C
--
http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/
"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson
Adam-T
Forum Pro
Dunno, haven't used a 16-80 past the one dud one I tried in 2008 - the R1 doesn't "suck" at 120mm but it ain't sharp past 30 feet wideopen - sharp at close range though .
I've been looking for the F32X flash but not many about (debuted with the F828) - the 1000 flash is supposed to work too but runs off a cable to get TTL (the 707 flash if I remember)
--
A Problem is only the pessimistic way of looking at a challenge
C
cgarrard
Guest
And my answer will probably be no. No camera that Fuji has made yet is without bugs that bugged me personally. They make quirky camera's as far as I am concerned and often have wonderful features included within the quirks. The sum total is what disappoints me, not the good parts .
The X100 seemed to be a dream camera for me, till I tried it out. Great build, great viewfinder, great IQ- horrible menu system, too many visual and menu related item distractions, and poor, poor organization. A camera should flow when using it, naturally.
The R1 is excellent in it's execution in this regard, albeit a bit dated looking menu wise and just slightly lacking some extra functionality that would have really nailed the coffin shut. As is, I give the R1 a 95% excellent rating as a sum of its total, the X100, maybe a 75% at best. It simply looks nothing like it operates.
For my dollar the rangefinder styled digicam with a fixed lens is the Digilux 2, still the best implemented design in this type to this day.
I doubt Fuji will ever get on with the organized menu system of Panasonic and/or Leica.
Stick a Ricoh styled menu system in an X100, with comparable features (like the GRD III) and It would have been mine the day before yesterday.
C
--
http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/
"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson
.The X100 seemed to be a dream camera for me, till I tried it out. Great build, great viewfinder, great IQ- horrible menu system, too many visual and menu related item distractions, and poor, poor organization. A camera should flow when using it, naturally.
The R1 is excellent in it's execution in this regard, albeit a bit dated looking menu wise and just slightly lacking some extra functionality that would have really nailed the coffin shut. As is, I give the R1 a 95% excellent rating as a sum of its total, the X100, maybe a 75% at best. It simply looks nothing like it operates.
For my dollar the rangefinder styled digicam with a fixed lens is the Digilux 2, still the best implemented design in this type to this day.
I doubt Fuji will ever get on with the organized menu system of Panasonic and/or Leica.
Stick a Ricoh styled menu system in an X100, with comparable features (like the GRD III) and It would have been mine the day before yesterday.
C
--
http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/
"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson
Adam-T
Forum Pro
The R1 actually is about Fuji level with bugs - very un-Sony like . the X100's foibles are less damning really if annoying to some (doesn't stop me using it for indoor silent shoots for work which I bought it for) -
Unlike every other EVF cam the R1 won't give a constant view when shooting external non-TTL flash or strobes, it's always in preview mode (even if you select monitor) and with no OVF you can't see what you're shooting, The cam's amazing flash Sync capability is totally lost
..It writes twice as fast to MS as to CF cards which is a total pain as you have to use MS to get usable shot to shot speeds in RAW
It uses full length MS sticks so you have to use DUOs in an adapter although it was made long after DUO sticks) --
the command dials can't be configured (reversed in operation etc) --
the JPG engine is horrific at high ISOs even by Sony standards, modern P&Ss like the S90 beat it at ISO800/1600 !! in JPG (it's very very usable in RAW at 800/1600 though and leaves P&Ss for dead) --
you have to tell it when there's a non TTL flash fitted (though it doesn't matter as you can't see what you're aiming at half the time)
The eye detector for the Auto EVF switch is totally useless as it stops you using the cam at waist level - it's way way too sensitive
Saying all that - I love the weird Quirky R1 and always did (I could do a longer post on POSITIVE points ! , my point is that it's NOT really the cam to use to compare Bug-free-ness with the X100 or anything else - it's even more half baked in more serious ways IMO (EVF view with Ext flash etc)
.
--
A Problem is only the pessimistic way of looking at a challenge
C
cgarrard
Guest
Hmm not sure I agree with "bugs" in that way.
I'll take your word for it, never use flash for my work, bounce flash occasionally for interior family shots.Unlike every other EVF cam the R1 won't give a constant view when shooting external non-TTL flash or strobes, it's always in preview mode (even if you select monitor) and with no OVF you can't see what you're shooting, The cam's amazing flash Sync capability is totally lost
Hmmm, I did a test using a Sandisk Extreme III card vs the Pro HG Duo card and found very little difference in speed. CF card was about a second or two longer. With faster cards the R1 doesn't really lag like it did back when it first came to the market.
I don't consider that a design bug.
I have no issue with that.
I've seen worse Jpeg engines honestly. Even from Sony's DSLRS. But I shoot raw so... its moot
.Not for me. I just keep it out and away if I have it on Auto, got quite used to it. And if I intend on using the LCD on top, I just make a quick switch. But thats me, not you. All personal opines here.
Not sure if you've used the X100 or not, but there's no way the R1 is on that same level, at least to me. Everything seems to be fluid for me using the R1- makes sense in other words.
Prior to the fw updates, that camera was a nightmare, and still is really for the most part. Its complicated where it should be simple and simple where it should have more features. The MF is horrid, total turn off in every respect. The menu system is confounding, and frustrating, and it's missing some external controls that I really like to have on the outside of the camera.
To each his own of course, but I never found the R1 nearly as frustrating as the X100 in use.
C
--
http://photographic-central.blogspot.com/
"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson
Similar threads
