Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Error in X100s review: histogram on OVF  (Read 1299 times)
Pelao
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 199



« on: February 14, 2014, 07:19:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Alain,

A very thorough review. This bit though, is incorrect:

Quote
I also like the fact that I can see the histogram in the EVF. Unfortunately this option is not available in the optical viewfinder. I wish it was because when shooting it forces me to alternate between optical and EVF just to see the histogram.

You can in fact display the histogram, and all sorts of other goodies, in the OVF. It's very useful. Have a peak at the manual.

Stephen
Logged
alainbriot
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 669



WWW
« Reply #1 on: February 14, 2014, 01:21:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you Stephen.  I added an update to reflect this in my review.  The process is not as simple as it seems!  I listed all the necessary steps in the review.

I also added an update for a power plug adapter to replace the cord that comes with the Fuji battery charger.  

Thank you to all who emailed me to let me know about these options.

Best regards,

Alain
« Last Edit: February 14, 2014, 01:38:57 PM by alainbriot » Logged

Alain Briot
Author of Mastering Landscape Photography, Mastering Composition, Creativity and Personal Style., Marketing Fine Art Photography and How Photographs are Sold.
http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5060


« Reply #2 on: February 14, 2014, 07:25:44 PM »
ReplyReply

The brand name is Fujifilm, as can be seen clearly in photos of the camera. "Fuji" is a brand of bicycles, along with being part of the name of numerous other Japanese companies.
Logged
alainbriot
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 669



WWW
« Reply #3 on: February 14, 2014, 07:47:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi BJL,

I am using Fuji instead of Fujifilm because this is how I refer to this camera.  I say 'the Fuji X100s' and not 'the Fujifilm X100s'.  The photographers I spoke with about this camera all use the same terminology.  My goal is to use the language photographers use.  This is not an error but a deliberate choice.  As you say, I see 'Fujifilm' written on top of the camera each time I pick it up so it is hard to miss.
Best regards,

Alain
« Last Edit: February 14, 2014, 07:49:35 PM by alainbriot » Logged

Alain Briot
Author of Mastering Landscape Photography, Mastering Composition, Creativity and Personal Style., Marketing Fine Art Photography and How Photographs are Sold.
http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
jeremyrh
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 223


« Reply #4 on: February 15, 2014, 10:15:45 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm struggling to see how using the Apple battery connector is a better solution than using a short cord.
Logged
alainbriot
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 669



WWW
« Reply #5 on: February 15, 2014, 10:36:50 AM »
ReplyReply

It saves space in your battery chargers bag.  The Fuji cord is not short.  it's 5 feet long.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2014, 09:16:17 PM by alainbriot » Logged

Alain Briot
Author of Mastering Landscape Photography, Mastering Composition, Creativity and Personal Style., Marketing Fine Art Photography and How Photographs are Sold.
http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
barryfitzgerald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 548


« Reply #6 on: February 15, 2014, 10:59:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Very useful review I quite enjoyed reading that somewhat different from the normal take and all the better for it.
Logged
jeremyrh
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 223


« Reply #7 on: February 15, 2014, 11:51:04 AM »
ReplyReply

It saves space in your battery chargers bag.  The Fuji cord is not shot.  it's 5 feet long.

I use one which is sort - 6 inches or so. It saves space and avoid conflicts when using a power strip.
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5060


« Reply #8 on: February 15, 2014, 01:12:44 PM »
ReplyReply

I am using Fuji instead of Fujifilm because this is how I refer to this camera.  ... The photographers I spoke with about this camera all use the same terminology.  My goal is to use the language photographers use.
I agree that it is a very common error, perhaps worthy of being considered a nickname, and not likely to cause much confusion. Then again, I dount that saying or typing "Fujifilm" would cause any confusion, and my style is to be more precise in written (especially published) communication that in normal speech.

I was mostly commenting in the spirit of these forums of seeking perfection in all things!


P. S. It would seem to be past time for the company to change its name, but I understand it still makes lots of money selling transparent plastic films, without photographic emulsions on them.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2014, 05:48:49 PM by BJL » Logged
alainbriot
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 669



WWW
« Reply #9 on: February 15, 2014, 04:02:14 PM »
ReplyReply

I was mostly commenting in the spirit of these forums of seeking perfection in all things!

Do not seek perfection. You'll never reach it. Salvador Dali.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2014, 06:22:08 PM by alainbriot » Logged

Alain Briot
Author of Mastering Landscape Photography, Mastering Composition, Creativity and Personal Style., Marketing Fine Art Photography and How Photographs are Sold.
http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
David Sutton
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 862


WWW
« Reply #10 on: February 16, 2014, 01:26:03 AM »
ReplyReply

A  good read Alain. Thank you.
The "posterization" problem is a strange one. I am making two foot wide prints from an X-Trans sensor and can't see anything wrong with the detail.
One thing though, I wouldn't use Lightroom for the initial raw conversion. Have you tried putting those files through a trial version of Irident or PhotoNinja?
I'm also finding the way I handle the processing from this sensor to be fairly different and haven't really gotten on top of it yet. Images can take a lot more sharpening for print without coming apart, but my colour adjustments have to be toned right down to achieve the same look that I used to get from Canon.
Cheers, David
Logged

alainbriot
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 669



WWW
« Reply #11 on: February 16, 2014, 10:09:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi David,

Thank you.  Yes, trying other converters is my next step.  I had many readers email me to let me know that the 'painterly look' issue is due to using Lightroom and that it is alleviated when using Capture One 7 or Iridient.  I'll be trying Iridient and C1-7 with photographs taken yesterday at the Fountain Hills Concours (car show).  I'll post an update to my review when I am done. I'll also reprocess the same clouds example photo featured in my review with both developers and post the results as an update.

Alain
« Last Edit: February 16, 2014, 10:47:29 AM by alainbriot » Logged

Alain Briot
Author of Mastering Landscape Photography, Mastering Composition, Creativity and Personal Style., Marketing Fine Art Photography and How Photographs are Sold.
http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
alainbriot
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 669



WWW
« Reply #12 on: February 16, 2014, 12:43:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Raw converters update posted.
Logged

Alain Briot
Author of Mastering Landscape Photography, Mastering Composition, Creativity and Personal Style., Marketing Fine Art Photography and How Photographs are Sold.
http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad