I'm still flirting with the idea of owning the X-Pro 1 as my main workhorse camera and selling off everything else including my trusty Pentax 67s. I don't need to just get another camera. After looking at the official X-Pro web site Akira Kumagai talks about film quality with 8X10 film cameras etc and is really enthused with the X-Pro. Now tell me this ........ surely when one goes to process raw say in Lightroom the color quality is now up for grabs. So are these Fuji colors and film like tones coming from out of camera jpgs?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Akira Kumagai X-Pro 1
- Thread starter Plakanina
- Start date
lnbolch
Senior Member
We are still dealing with first generation RAW converters, but the results are very good except when viewed at 100%—standard operating procedure with gear-heads, but unknown among those who appreciate photography. The near invisible defects will eventually go away.
What is truly important with shooting RAW is that the photographer—not the camera, or arbitrary saturation settings with film names—is in total control of colour, saturation, vibrance, and all the other controls.
The full name of Fuji is "Fujifilm". Where another company may have a preset for "vivid", Fuji marketing calls it "Velvia". They label "normal" as "Provia" and "muted" as "Astia". If you still firmly believe in the Tooth Fairy, this is a big feature. If you believe in your own eyes, it is at best a short-cut that you can later fine tune.
Shooting infrared with a Hoya R72 filter—which works extremely well without having to get the camera modified—gives a quite accurate preview of the image if you use the monochrome settings. However, the RAW version looks like a colour negative with the image reversed. The joy is that you still have all the controls of ACR when doing the monochrome conversion.
Film simulation is a useful feature up to a point. However, if you are a photographer, you will use Lightroom or Photoshop to fine tune the colour to your own taste and sensitivity for that image, rather than accepting with faith the bright idea of a marketing executive who came up with the idea of marking presets with the name of Fuji films—however loosely they may apply.
--
larry!
http://www.larry-bolch.com/
What is truly important with shooting RAW is that the photographer—not the camera, or arbitrary saturation settings with film names—is in total control of colour, saturation, vibrance, and all the other controls.
The full name of Fuji is "Fujifilm". Where another company may have a preset for "vivid", Fuji marketing calls it "Velvia". They label "normal" as "Provia" and "muted" as "Astia". If you still firmly believe in the Tooth Fairy, this is a big feature. If you believe in your own eyes, it is at best a short-cut that you can later fine tune.
Shooting infrared with a Hoya R72 filter—which works extremely well without having to get the camera modified—gives a quite accurate preview of the image if you use the monochrome settings. However, the RAW version looks like a colour negative with the image reversed. The joy is that you still have all the controls of ACR when doing the monochrome conversion.
Film simulation is a useful feature up to a point. However, if you are a photographer, you will use Lightroom or Photoshop to fine tune the colour to your own taste and sensitivity for that image, rather than accepting with faith the bright idea of a marketing executive who came up with the idea of marking presets with the name of Fuji films—however loosely they may apply.
--
larry!
http://www.larry-bolch.com/
baobob
Forum Pro
To complete already posted comments, I would like to add the in JPEGS the numerous settings for DR, shadows and highlights lead to 12.5 EV
This is most valuable for many highly contratsty situations such as light in the forest, light in old narrow streets, architecture, sunsets, sunrises
Quite often it takes me quite a while to get from RAW in ACR as good results as the JPEGS regarding these aspects
IMHO the best is to fot a 16/32GB UHS card in the X Pro and systematically recors RAW + fine JPEG and then use the one you think the most relevant for you
But the JPEGS are really stunning!
--
Good judgment comes from experience
Experience comes from bad judgment
This is most valuable for many highly contratsty situations such as light in the forest, light in old narrow streets, architecture, sunsets, sunrises
Quite often it takes me quite a while to get from RAW in ACR as good results as the JPEGS regarding these aspects
IMHO the best is to fot a 16/32GB UHS card in the X Pro and systematically recors RAW + fine JPEG and then use the one you think the most relevant for you
But the JPEGS are really stunning!
--
Good judgment comes from experience
Experience comes from bad judgment
R
rattymouse
Guest
Except that Astia is much more saturated and contrasty than Provia in Fuji's digital cameras with film simulation. Something that has confounded many people for a looong time. How could Fujifilm mess up their own films???
--
Help Fight Disease!
http://folding.stanford.edu/English/HomePage
Please join and be part of the solution! Lives can be saved.
lnbolch
Senior Member
I expect that the designations came from the marketing department, rather than the engineers. If that is the case, it is much easier to mess up.
--
larry!
http://www.larry-bolch.com/
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum