worldcup1982
Lives in
United States
Joined on
Sep 21, 2010
|
Comments
 |  |
| Life after Earth 2017 DP by MarioSS from Life after... | Blue mood by darub from Fixed lens shootout. |
Beginner's GuidesGetting Started
In-depth testingLatest Camera Reviews
Beyond the studio testsFeature Articles and Videos
real world performanceField Test Videos
see how we seeSample Galleries
In-depth ReviewFujifilm X100F
Show CoverageHits and Misses from CP+ 2017
Throwback ThursdayClassic Cameras from Days Past
2457FeatureWhat is equivalence?
What's that Noise?Shedding some light on the sources of noise
LWW: I've been following these comments with some interest - and I am pleased. So very pleased that those of us that know and can accomodate the short comings of these cameras can rise above the banal, and do some unique stuff. The less 'shooters' take them up, the more 'photographers' with these tools, will make good the attributes they provide. They are not for the pixel peeper, they are for those that can recognise an opportunity, whack you between the eyes with impact, and tell a story. They have changed my approach, and what I see. The less of them about the happier I'll be in my point of difference.
Pretty much any modern camera can produce something unique...
Very fair review, thanks...
IdM photography: Even if both the Sony RX1R II and the Fujifilm X100F have 35mm (35mm equivalent for the Fujifilm) lenses, it is difficult to compare an APSC sensor with a FF sensor... Obviously the RX1R II camera is much more expensive, but if you want to do very serious (or professional) phoography, this camera is the only option... The RX1R II has the best existing FF sensor... It also has a central shutter (no vibrations when taking your photo), and should be declared Winner.
@IdM photography ...who said i am serious? :)
IdM photography: Even if both the Sony RX1R II and the Fujifilm X100F have 35mm (35mm equivalent for the Fujifilm) lenses, it is difficult to compare an APSC sensor with a FF sensor... Obviously the RX1R II camera is much more expensive, but if you want to do very serious (or professional) phoography, this camera is the only option... The RX1R II has the best existing FF sensor... It also has a central shutter (no vibrations when taking your photo), and should be declared Winner.
Serious photographers stay away from dpreview endless gear discussions
PhotoKhan: You can "change the game" as much as you want, resorting to DNG included.
All these samples show color casts that are very difficult to balance, as samples 63 to 65 clearly and aptly show.
Foveon sensors far from being a photographers ally make color an enemy to contend with.
It has been so for 15 years and, apart from proving that a significant part of the population is, indeed, color blind, it is a mystery tantamount to commercial suicide why Sigma insists on this technical solution.
@PhotoKhan ...its hard to discuss here at dpreview. People get very upset, like the cameras made them better photographers. The SD1 price drop was embarrassing...these purple/green spots/blotches are really strange...at iso 400...
https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6057976272/photos/3619575/
PhotoKhan: You can "change the game" as much as you want, resorting to DNG included.
All these samples show color casts that are very difficult to balance, as samples 63 to 65 clearly and aptly show.
Foveon sensors far from being a photographers ally make color an enemy to contend with.
It has been so for 15 years and, apart from proving that a significant part of the population is, indeed, color blind, it is a mystery tantamount to commercial suicide why Sigma insists on this technical solution.
@Mark Banas. If im not mistaken, it's a private company, so no one knows how much money they make from cameras...
PhotoKhan: You can "change the game" as much as you want, resorting to DNG included.
All these samples show color casts that are very difficult to balance, as samples 63 to 65 clearly and aptly show.
Foveon sensors far from being a photographers ally make color an enemy to contend with.
It has been so for 15 years and, apart from proving that a significant part of the population is, indeed, color blind, it is a mystery tantamount to commercial suicide why Sigma insists on this technical solution.
Photo 51 shows some strange colors at the guys face...purple, green...unless his skin is like that...and at iso 400. I guess its a low iso camera
worldcup1982: I really see no difference from any other 24mp camera file converted with a good software
@Mescalamba...true, the merrills have a particular look and more detail, i like them...it does look like film...too bad...
worldcup1982: I really see no difference from any other 24mp camera file converted with a good software
Im not trying to be provocative or anything...merrills and previous had huge difference from bayer sensors...i've downloaded files from the quatros...sky is noisy...sharpness and detail for foliage are simply not there anymore...
I really see no difference from any other 24mp camera file converted with a good software
aramgrg: No mirorrless in the shaw. Yet...
The real surprise is not having any Iphones....but we will see them soon enough :)
Nick Brundle - Photography: Watching the opening football match between Brazil and South Africa in Rio, you really notice how many pro's are using white Canon lenses on the side lines.
Wonder where the Nikon guys are hiding?
and an awful match
I can finally buy a canon camera with great DR!
oh wait...
too little too late
entering a niche with a bigger camera, more expensive and worse lens performance...
bad news for Fuji...
missed opportunity..
the X70 could be a cheaper x100, say 500 usd less...
now it is up against a camera that can shoot both 35mm and 50mm eq in RAW (fuji cant if im not mistaken)...a cheaper option that has been around forever
the simple fact that the camera has almost no discussions on the fuji forum and already went down on prices shows that fujis product strategy didnt work..
misspiggy01: i know, everybody says how great the x-trans sensors are. i would love to love it too! so i have been duly looking at all the sample galleryies and studio tests since the x-pro 1. but i just can´t see it! all i see is a mushy mess at pixel level. and colors that are between waxy and watercolor at iso above 800. even around base iso on pixel level there is low contrast and softness that for me doesn´t make "the film look".
i´m not trolling here. i love fuji, since their film days. i love how the cameras look. i´m still shooting their slide films. and my first digital camera was the e900. perfect at the time! but for me the x-trans just doesn´t do it! to me there is something very "digital" about it.
no digital camera produces "the film look". Do your own PP and you get the film look that you want...both my X30 and X-E1 raw files are good for PP and i do get "the film look" you are looking for...cameras are just tools...
too little (but bigger and more expensive than competition) too late...
And now to the comments:
"wow, m4/3 cameras are stupid" or "jehh, how can anyone use a camera with a sensor that small"...."the images lack...(fill the blank)". And etc and etc...
And very few or none like: i dont like it but i understand (or respect) the ones that like the system...
of course, if its not good for you, than it must be awful to anybody else...huh?
this kind of thought is inexplicable coming from a "photographer", but from a dpreview forum user on the other hand....
Its pretty easy (here at dpreview) to see complaints or rants about absolutely any modern camera.
Nowadays, the biggest problem is what operates it. The one behind the camera. Any modern camera can take great photos.
worldcup1982: Its incredible how ACR still SUC@#$%k to convert the X-TRANS files
me too...DCRAW (used in RT) seems better for rendering details
for any camera...