Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 9 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Fuji X-T1 news  (Read 31128 times)
armand
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1018



« Reply #40 on: January 29, 2014, 07:28:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Paul,

Capture One is excellent, and the other one that works rather well and can integrate well with Lightroom is Photoninja, very close to Irident, which makes sense since they both use DCRAW as the conversion engine. There is a rumor that Adobe will have a better version out soon, but that is only rumor. I really like the initial color from Capture One and the detail is much better that Adobe in my using it.

Alan

I tried Capture One and while it made slightly more detailed files I didn't think it was a big difference (at least on the files I tried then).
Now I have many shots from around San Francisco and to my surprise I find much more plasticky look than before which is becoming annoying and makes me think long about X-T1. I am trying Noise Ninja also and it does make the files look "normal" detail wise, I will try the colors soon (can't try Capture One as the trial expired and I'm still not sure it makes sense paying the 100$, even if in the grand scheme it's not much anymore).

Supposedly there might be better Lightroom processing coming soon, particularly with the film simulations.
Logged
Paul2660
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1969


WWW
« Reply #41 on: January 29, 2014, 07:35:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Photo Ninja does a good job, but I get tired of having to commit on every level of adjustments.  And I can't find a way to make a saturation adjust for the entire image, just the individual colors shown in the boxes.

Paul
Logged

Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
Photography > http://photosofarkansas.com
Blog> http://paulcaldwellphotography.com
armand
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1018



« Reply #42 on: February 01, 2014, 02:15:06 PM »
ReplyReply

I tried the Photo Ninja my test shot for color: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=80713.msg651675#msg651675
It's worse (or as good if you are a glass full person) as all the others, meaning it just cannot deal with it. Detail is quite good though.
Logged
datro
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 55


« Reply #43 on: February 01, 2014, 08:32:27 PM »
ReplyReply

... There is a rumor that Adobe will have a better version out soon, but that is only rumor.

Alan

Alan,
Do you have any more details on this?  I'm a relatively new owner of an X-E1 and a longtime LR user, but I'm close to licensing my trial copy of Capture One since it does seem to do better with many of my images.  But if a new LR with improved X-Trans processing is around the corner I might be wasting money and just adding more complexity to my workflow for no good reason.  Any sense of when the new LR functionality would be coming out?
Logged
David Sutton
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 899


WWW
« Reply #44 on: February 01, 2014, 11:14:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Alan,
Do you have any more details on this?  I'm a relatively new owner of an X-E1 and a longtime LR user, but I'm close to licensing my trial copy of Capture One since it does seem to do better with many of my images.  But if a new LR with improved X-Trans processing is around the corner I might be wasting money and just adding more complexity to my workflow for no good reason.  Any sense of when the new LR functionality would be coming out?
There's  rumour that the next update of LR 5 will include support for Fujiís Film Simulations. But I haven't heard that the processing will improve. That's not to say it won't either.
I still think Photo Ninja is top for raw processing, though I haven't tried Irident (and can't).
David
Logged

Paul2660
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1969


WWW
« Reply #45 on: February 02, 2014, 10:12:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Iridient has the best overall look and feel from the Fuji Files I have seen so far.  Since I run a Macbook Pro 15" with bootcamp, I can run Iridient.  They have a great feel for both the overall hue of a raw especially the blues and the details in the greens. 

Photo Ninja does a good job, and would be my 2nd choice (as I still feel LR leaves a lot to be desired as it quickly gets too plastic looking certain parts of images) and Capture One still has a bit of trouble with the greens.  Photo Ninja also can leave a strange over claritized (too much clarity) with the Fuji files much like I used to get with Bibble and my original S2 conversions.

By far the single biggest issue I see with LR conversion is areas where it's dark against light, like a brown oak leaf against a blue sky.  The conversion seems to have a lot of trouble here and leaves what I find are strange artifacts. 

For sharpening, I find that it's best to do just a bit in the raw conversion then move to Focus Fixer which does an excellent job on the Fuji converted tiff.

Paul
Logged

Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
Photography > http://photosofarkansas.com
Blog> http://paulcaldwellphotography.com
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 921



« Reply #46 on: February 02, 2014, 12:51:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Iridient has the best overall look and feel from the Fuji Files I have seen so far.  Since I run a Macbook Pro 15" with bootcamp, I can run Iridient.

Iridient runs on OS X. ?? Or do you mean you run Windows-based photo software as well as native apps?

I agree re. Iridient's capability with Fuji X files. Funny enough, my two iOS RAW processors (dcraw-based, I assume) also do a real nice job. Maybe Adobe is suffering from a bit of NIH (Not Invented Here) syndrome.

-Dave-
Logged
snoleoprd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 459



WWW
« Reply #47 on: February 02, 2014, 01:40:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Alan,
Do you have any more details on this?  I'm a relatively new owner of an X-E1 and a longtime LR user, but I'm close to licensing my trial copy of Capture One since it does seem to do better with many of my images.  But if a new LR with improved X-Trans processing is around the corner I might be wasting money and just adding more complexity to my workflow for no good reason.  Any sense of when the new LR functionality would be coming out?

I have a feeling that the processing will not change, it was only a rumor, the more substantiated part seems to be the addition of the color profiles. Adobe never states much in what they plan to release. There are good solutions, the more I use Capture One the more I like it, it can work well with LR doing the DAM and Capture one doing the conversions.


Alan
Logged

Alan Smallbone
Orange County, CA
Paul2660
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1969


WWW
« Reply #48 on: February 02, 2014, 04:58:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Iridient runs on OS X. ?? Or do you mean you run Windows-based photo software as well as native apps?

I agree re. Iridient's capability with Fuji X files. Funny enough, my two iOS RAW processors (dcraw-based, I assume) also do a real nice job. Maybe Adobe is suffering from a bit of NIH (Not Invented Here) syndrome.

-Dave-

Dave

When I run Iridient I will boot up in the MAC side.  I wish they would port to win however as they would gain more footprints. 

Paul
Logged

Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
Photography > http://photosofarkansas.com
Blog> http://paulcaldwellphotography.com
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #49 on: February 02, 2014, 05:40:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Iridient runs on OS X. ?? Or do you mean you run Windows-based photo software as well as native apps?

yes, it does  Roll Eyes, however OSX runs on PC in VmWare... and as Iridient does not use any graphic card acceleration (god bless that !) we have the following :



I run both Iridient and RPP on my PC/Win notebook with just 2.5Gb "RAM" virtual machine.

« Last Edit: February 02, 2014, 05:43:45 PM by Vladimirovich » Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #50 on: February 02, 2014, 05:52:01 PM »
ReplyReply

dcraw-based
people tend to forget that in "raw converters" the data extraction from raws (that is what dcraw illustrates) is not all - color profiles, etc means a lot and that is not in dcraw (except simple matrices of course) and then there are other options like various demosaick algorithm tunings (more so for XTrans) and NR and shapening and so on... so this constant mantra about "dcraw based" raw conversion is quite tiresome (w/ all due respect to the great services that dcraw provides in terms of getting the data from raw files that found its way in many of them).... get RPP or Iridient or RT with some options available in both then try to reproduce the output (color/tone wise) in dcraw for once.
Logged
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 921



« Reply #51 on: February 02, 2014, 07:22:31 PM »
ReplyReply

so this constant mantra about "dcraw based" raw conversion is quite tiresome (w/ all due respect to the great services that dcraw provides in terms of getting the data from raw files that found its way in many of them).... get RPP or Iridient or RT with some options available in both then try to reproduce the output (color/tone wise) in dcraw for once.

Hey, I was just pointing out that the iOS RAW processors, PhotoRAW anyway, are likely built on a solid foundation. I have & use Iridient, and like it a lot.

-Dave-
Logged
sandymc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 270


« Reply #52 on: February 03, 2014, 05:33:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Hey, I was just pointing out that the iOS RAW processors, PhotoRAW anyway, are likely built on a solid foundation. I have & use Iridient, and like it a lot.

-Dave-

PhotoRaw's demosaicing algorithm is not from DCRaw (although some of it's raw file read code - e.g., decompressing NEF files, etc, is). PhotoRaw's code is actually a close cousin of AccuRaw's demosaicing algorithm.

BTW, the latest version of AccuRaw has X-T1 support already, and a new version of PhotoRaw with X-T1 support will be out in a week or two.

Sandy
« Last Edit: February 03, 2014, 05:35:27 AM by sandymc » Logged
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 921



« Reply #53 on: February 03, 2014, 03:37:58 PM »
ReplyReply

PhotoRaw's demosaicing algorithm is not from DCRaw (although some of its raw file read code - e.g., decompressing NEF files, etc, is). PhotoRaw's code is actually a close cousin of AccuRaw's demosaicing algorithm.

BTW, the latest version of AccuRaw has X-T1 support already, and a new version of PhotoRaw with X-T1 support will be out in a week or two.

Thanks for the info...good to know!

-Dave-
Logged
thierrylegros396
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 691


« Reply #54 on: February 04, 2014, 11:41:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Take a look at DSCF350 at DPR !

For an ISO6400 it's really A-ma-zing

Really, color, DR, details, incredible.

Have a Nice Day.

Thierry
Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #55 on: February 04, 2014, 11:52:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Take a look at DSCF350 at DPR !

For an ISO6400 it's really A-ma-zing

Really, color, DR, details, incredible.

Have a Nice Day.

Thierry

you might want to compare with the likes of Nikon D7000, Pentax K5 before  A-ma-zing... with equal aperture and shutter speed (equality of "nominal" ISO does not matter, sensor saturation you select to be the best for you specific camera and raw converter combo).
Logged
thierrylegros396
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 691


« Reply #56 on: February 04, 2014, 12:37:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Of course, you are right, it's not THE panacea.

But don't forget the size, weight, and compactness of the X-T1.

Seems to be a very good compromise.

Have a Nice Day.

Thierry
Logged
barryfitzgerald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 608


« Reply #57 on: February 15, 2014, 11:14:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Interesting camera but a few observations.
Priced not too badly esp v the EM-1 in comparison.

Still puzzled by the limitation of ISO 6400 for raw capture, if the sensor is this good what's the problem? Bar some odd under the hood stuff going on

IMO the biggest problem for Fuji is their lack of flash system this is basically the reason a lot of people won't consider them right now. Just a basic TTL system with re badged Sunpak pretending to be the top end model, it just doesn't convince. Fuji really need to sort this out if they are serious about getting some users. Wireless and HSS are essential for many users.
Logged
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 921



« Reply #58 on: February 15, 2014, 01:19:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Still puzzled by the limitation of ISO 6400 for raw capture, if the sensor is this good what's the problem? Bar some odd under the hood stuff going on

With my X-E1 I just let the camera underexpose at 6400 if necessary and then bring up the exposure in post. Works fine. I'd guess even 6400 is a mathematical "ISO" anyway, so what's a little more math? As to why Fuji doesn't let you choose 12800 or even 25600 in RAW mode...not a clue.

-Dave-
Logged
Paul2660
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1969


WWW
« Reply #59 on: February 15, 2014, 02:46:13 PM »
ReplyReply

I would also love to see ISO 100 on the other end. 

I have found that the Fuji is a bit more tricky on the highlights.  But the exposure with the X-E2 being wysiwyg does make this easier. 

I thought I saw where they allowed this on the X-e1 with a firmware update. 

Paul C

Logged

Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
Photography > http://photosofarkansas.com
Blog> http://paulcaldwellphotography.com
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 9 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad