Loving the X-Trans Sensor

jm10 · Aug 20, 2015

A few vacation pictures from my trip to Utah in May. Capitol Reef National Park. All shots taken with X-E1 and either 14mm or the 18-55mm lens. Your C&C is welcome. Thanks!

jacob

[ATTACH alt="1) 14mm, ISO=200, F8, 1/280; The so-called "Fluted Wall" is a result of water erosion. The red color of the cliffs is due to high iron oxide content"]1060997[/ATTACH]
1) 14mm, ISO=200, F8, 1/280; The so-called "Fluted Wall" is a result of water erosion. The red color of the cliffs is due to high iron oxide content

2) 14mm, 200, F8, 1/640; Eight-mile long Scenic Drive

3) 14mm, 200, F9, 1/80; The rocks of Capitol Reef were once sediments (silt, sand, volcanic ash, clay, and gravel) laid down in many different environments during the past. Younger rocks lie on top of older rocks

4) 27.7mm, 200, F8, 1/420; Fishhook cactus

5) 21.4mm, 200, F10, 1/170; A farm barn - part of historical Gifford Homestead located 1 mile from the Visitor's Center

6) 20.9mm, 200, F9, 1/420; Panorama (with a cut-off top...)

7) 18mm, 200, F10, 1/220; Hwy 24 - on the way to Torrey

A few more pictures can be found here:

Loading…

picasaweb.google.com

Whitesands · Aug 20, 2015

Stunning results...Great photos thanks for showing them.

akin_t · Aug 20, 2015

Nice!

What RAW editor did you use?

jm10 · Aug 20, 2015

Whitesands said:
Stunning results...Great photos thanks for showing them.

Thanks for your nice comments Whitesands!

jacob

jm10 · Aug 20, 2015

akin_t said:
Nice!

What RAW editor did you use?

Thanks akin_t. RAW files demosaicked in Photo Ninja (plug-in in LR) and processed in LR5.7.

jacob

Phil BH · Aug 20, 2015

Great work! Number 3 is my favorite by far. Very nice work with the 14mm. Number 7 is second and they are all very nice. Thanks for posting.

jm10 · Aug 20, 2015

Phil BH said:
Great work! Number 3 is my favorite by far. Very nice work with the 14mm. Number 7 is second and they are all very nice. Thanks for posting.

Thanks Phil! I like 3 also. In retrospect should have stitched a few vertical shots taken from this spot...

jacob

Phil BH · Aug 20, 2015

jm10 said:
Phil BH said:

Great work! Number 3 is my favorite by far. Very nice work with the 14mm. Number 7 is second and they are all very nice. Thanks for posting.

Click to expand...

Thanks Phil! I like 3 also. In retrospect should have stitched a few vertical shots taken from this spot...

jacob

How are you liking the 14mm? I have been torn between it and the 16mm. The 16 is amazing and very versatile, but the 14mm give more of a wide angle perspective and is smaller. I like the size of the 14mm vs the 16.

jm10 · Aug 20, 2015

Phil BH said:
jm10 said:

Phil BH said:

Great work! Number 3 is my favorite by far. Very nice work with the 14mm. Number 7 is second and they are all very nice. Thanks for posting.

Click to expand...

Thanks Phil! I like 3 also. In retrospect should have stitched a few vertical shots taken from this spot...

jacob

Click to expand...

How are you liking the 14mm? I have been torn between it and the 16mm. The 16 is amazing and very versatile, but the 14mm give more of a wide angle perspective and is smaller. I like the size of the 14mm vs the 16.

I like the 14mm a lot. We all have our biases but here are my reasons. Small size and weight - it is a perfect compliment for the 18-55mm while on vacation. Practically no distortions. Good for architectural shots inside and outside. The files are a little different from the zoom lens (which is not a slouch either) - it requires considerably less processing and the details and texture really stand out. Very happy that I picked it up a while ago. No experience with 16 mm - never felt the urge

Nice badlands shots by the way; must have been a great trip...great donkey shot!

ScottD1964 · Aug 20, 2015

jm10 said:
akin_t said:

Nice!

What RAW editor did you use?

Click to expand...

Thanks akin_t. RAW files demosaicked in Photo Ninja (plug-in in LR) and processed in LR5.7.

jacob

Hmm, I think you need to post some of these in the thread where the guy is selling his X-T1 and leaving Fuji because his results with LR are so horrible and blames the camera. I think your results have squashed his argument and shifted it towards operator error. These look amazing. Well done.

scott

Phil BH · Aug 20, 2015

jm10 said:
jm10 said:

I like the 14mm a lot. We all have our biases but here are my reasons. Small size and weight - it is a perfect compliment for the 18-55mm while on vacation. Practically no distortions. Good for architectural shots inside and outside. The files are a little different from the zoom lens (which is not a slouch either) - it requires considerably less processing and the details and texture really stand out. Very happy that I picked it up a while ago. No experience with 16 mm - never felt the urge

Click to expand...

Nice badlands shots by the way; must have been a great trip...great donkey shot!

Thanks, it was a great trip. I want to go back, there is so much to see.

Your biases are well founded. I am leaning towards the 14mm due to its size. Of course performance wise it is no slouch either. One of the problems is that the 16 and the 14 are both very good lenses. The 16 overall is sharper, but in real world images it won't make much difference, if at all. The extra two stops would be nice, but it isn't necessary for a lot of what I shoot. The 16 does focus closer and does give a bit more versatility, but I think I am leaning towards the 14mm due to its size and field of view.

Thanks for your comments, they help. I'm glad you're happy with the lens. Your images helped as well. It is nice to see some good real world examples from the lens.

Phil BH · Aug 20, 2015

ScottD1964 said:
jm10 said:

akin_t said:

Nice!

What RAW editor did you use?

Click to expand...

Thanks akin_t. RAW files demosaicked in Photo Ninja (plug-in in LR) and processed in LR5.7.

jacob

Click to expand...

Hmm, I think you need to post some of these in the thread where the guy is selling his X-T1 and leaving Fuji because his results with LR are so horrible and blames the camera. I think your results have squashed his argument and shifted it towards operator error. These look amazing. Well done.

scott

I agree. I use Lightroom as well and like my results.

jm10 · Aug 20, 2015

ScottD1964 said:
jm10 said:

akin_t said:

Nice!

What RAW editor did you use?

Click to expand...

Thanks akin_t. RAW files demosaicked in Photo Ninja (plug-in in LR) and processed in LR5.7.

jacob

Click to expand...

Hmm, I think you need to post some of these in the thread where the guy is selling his X-T1 and leaving Fuji because his results with LR are so horrible and blames the camera. I think your results have squashed his argument and shifted it towards operator error. These look amazing. Well done.

scott

Thanks for the nice comments Scott!

The idea crossed my mind...hence the title of the thread

jacob

VWFC · Aug 20, 2015

ScottD1964 said:
jm10 said:

akin_t said:

Nice!

What RAW editor did you use?

Click to expand...

Thanks akin_t. RAW files demosaicked in Photo Ninja (plug-in in LR) and processed in LR5.7.

jacob

Click to expand...

Hmm, I think you need to post some of these in the thread where the guy is selling his X-T1 and leaving Fuji because his results with LR are so horrible and blames the camera. I think your results have squashed his argument and shifted it towards operator error. These look amazing. Well done.

scott

@Scott
I was thinking the exact same thing about the raw file converter and the post earlier today!

Great pics by the way.
Nice composition even the pano looks good,
don't worry about the cut off, we've all done something similar at some point.

Thanks for sharing.
I love the 14 lens and the 90 degree perspective it gives.
I think for landscapes/architecture better choice than the 16mm especially since you are using the 18-55 lens.
The 16 isn't that much wider. The 14 stands out more to complement the 18-55 and is more noticeable and different, makes you use it.
Unless you need the speed and don't mind the size/weight trade off.

Thanks again!
Love to visit those places one day.

knows_nothing · Aug 21, 2015

Hi, colourful shots. Are these straight shots, or did you need to balance the exposure for the sky and ground somehow?

slimandy · Aug 21, 2015

Phil BH said:
ScottD1964 said:

jm10 said:

akin_t said:

Nice!

What RAW editor did you use?

Click to expand...

Thanks akin_t. RAW files demosaicked in Photo Ninja (plug-in in LR) and processed in LR5.7.

jacob

Click to expand...

Hmm, I think you need to post some of these in the thread where the guy is selling his X-T1 and leaving Fuji because his results with LR are so horrible and blames the camera. I think your results have squashed his argument and shifted it towards operator error. These look amazing. Well done.

scott

Click to expand...

I agree. I use Lightroom as well and like my results.

I agree too - and the OP is using an older version of Lightroom. LR6 replaced LR5 and has since been updated to 6.1.

aymeric · Aug 21, 2015

jm10 said:
ScottD1964 said:

jm10 said:

akin_t said:

Nice!

What RAW editor did you use?

Click to expand...

Thanks akin_t. RAW files demosaicked in Photo Ninja (plug-in in LR) and processed in LR5.7.

jacob

Click to expand...

Hmm, I think you need to post some of these in the thread where the guy is selling his X-T1 and leaving Fuji because his results with LR are so horrible and blames the camera. I think your results have squashed his argument and shifted it towards operator error. These look amazing. Well done.

scott

Click to expand...

Thanks for the nice comments Scott!

The idea crossed my mind...hence the title of the thread

jacob

He blames LR - mostly because of its demosaicing algorithm, and you said that you used Photo Ninja for demosaicing your Raw files. I don't understand how it could be an argument against his point?

(I use LR myself and am very happy with it so don't take it personally)

Elyharbour · Aug 21, 2015

Very nice!!

Elyharbour · Aug 21, 2015

The OP in the other thread is not prepared to change from LR for his work flow, but doesn't either seem ready to follow the procedure here when necessary. I don't want to change from LR either, so I do the same as this OP - demosiac with PN within LR, then use LR for all other procedures. It's a viable option for many of us and can give better results even with non-Fuji / non-X-Trans cameras. But I only try it for my 5-star picks, not everything, and sometimes the results from LR are better!

aymeric · Aug 21, 2015

Elyharbour said:
The OP in the other thread is not prepared to change from LR for his work flow, but doesn't either seem ready to follow the procedure here when necessary. I don't want to change from LR either, so I do the same as this OP - demosiac with PN within LR, then use LR for all other procedures. It's a viable option for many of us and can give better results even with non-Fuji / non-X-Trans cameras. But I only try it for my 5-star picks, not everything, and sometimes the results from LR are better!

I should give it a try, I'm generally pleased enough with LR results but have to agree that sometimes I'm disappointed.

If it's easy enough, and only for a few pics, why not?

Loving the X-Trans Sensor

Veteran Member

Attachments

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

New member

Well-known member

Forum Pro

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts