Adam O

Joined on Mar 27, 2017

Comments

Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5
On article Fujifilm GFX 50R Review (1743 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hugo808: After downloading the Jpegs and looking at these pictures side by side I really can't see a difference between the two. Maybe if you zoom in there's very slightly less noise but that isn't how you enjoy looking at photo's.

There certainly isn't the "night and day" difference you'd get between 35mm and MF when shooting film. So any purchase would come down to lens availability, portability and system support. The Z7 has it then!

I agree with you Hugo808 and this test is definitely on the extreme end, but sometimes it is a necessity to pull back shadows and does show the advantages the larger sensor of the Fuj , and if you open up those details in the corners the Fuji is much sharper in those areas.

I would like to see a test of an image that has a greater dynamic range than these two with the highlights slightly blown out in both for a good comparison of recovery there as well. I suspect that the Fuji would show some advantages there as well.

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2019 at 21:10 UTC
On article Fujifilm GFX 50R Review (1743 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hugo808: After downloading the Jpegs and looking at these pictures side by side I really can't see a difference between the two. Maybe if you zoom in there's very slightly less noise but that isn't how you enjoy looking at photo's.

There certainly isn't the "night and day" difference you'd get between 35mm and MF when shooting film. So any purchase would come down to lens availability, portability and system support. The Z7 has it then!

Try downloading the raw files, open in Lightroom (or preferred editing software) and recover the shadows in both images. Side by side with a plus 5 stop exposure correction on both images - the Nikon doesn't hold a candle to the Fuji.

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2019 at 18:51 UTC
On article Fujifilm GFX 50R Review (1743 comments in total)
In reply to:

Duncan M: No difference - And those who tell different are sole lyers.
And yes I am a professional with a trained eye!

Fujifilm made a mistake with the GFX - They should have gone FF instead.
They could have better chosen to eat the tail from the APS-C market and slowly move their users over.

The focus is on Full Frame and here is the reason why in the end it would have been the best choice for them. The difference is too small, too expensive and the lenses for the GFX are too slow and the system in the end is too heavy.

I am not saying its a bad system by the way. But it is not able to compete enough.

Devil is in the details. Download both raw files and open in lightroom then recover shadow details and you start to quickly see where the medium format sensor of the Fuji shines.

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2019 at 18:42 UTC
In reply to:

TORN: I would have loved to see Fuji fix the defective sensor instead, getting a grip on the purple grid issue. Fortunately I sold mine long ago.

Happy for the people who do not run into that issue regularly. They got some nice new features.

There's a good article on Peta Pixel on this issue. Just search for "Why and How Fuji Cameras Produce a Strange Purple Flare/Grid Artifact"

The issue is related to on-sensor phase-detect autofocus and has been apparent since X-Trans II. I've noticed on a few images but now that I know to watch out for it you can easily avoid the issue.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2018 at 00:21 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Peterson in ATL: I guess I don't understand the importance of Adobe's set of profiles. Over the two years I've used LR, I've come up with my own set of 20+ profiles and not sure I've even looked at the built in ones.

Profiles are most useful when you are using built-in profiles of the manufactures camera film profiles... not Adobe's version. E.G. on Fuji X-Trans III cameras you have Fuji Acros (Y,R,G Filter), Classic Chrome, Velvia, etc... These profiles are only available for Fuji RAW files

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2018 at 15:15 UTC
Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5