Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 52

Thread: X20 and X100s... nice :)

  1. #1
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,343
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    889
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    I find its a pity they didn't improve the rear LCD screen. Otherwise it's pretty interesting now they have the worlds fastest AF, I wondering if it tracks though!
    ___________________
    Po-Ming Chu
    POPHOTO

  3. #3
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    From Fujifilm.eu:

    The newly-developed X-Trans CMOS II sensor has built-in Phase Detection pixels which provide the X100S with the world’s fastest AF in as little as 0.08 seconds (*1).

    ...

    *1 Fujifilm research as of November 2012. Compared with other compact digital cameras equipped with an APS-C sensor and a non-interchangeable lens based on CIPA standards and conducted in High Performance mode.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by pophoto View Post
    I find its a pity they didn't improve the rear LCD screen. Otherwise it's pretty interesting now they have the worlds fastest AF, I wondering if it tracks though!
    Jeez, never satisfied huh?

  5. #5
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,867
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Both cameras are highly interesting for me, only I will not buy them as long as there is no RAW support in Aperture - which so far not even supports XPro1 and X10

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Maggie O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Standards Are Down All Over
    Posts
    3,064
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    Both cameras are highly interesting for me, only I will not buy them as long as there is no RAW support in Aperture - which so far not even supports XPro1 and X10
    That's kind of how I feel about the announcement. Then again, I've been using the JPEGs out of my X10 happily, so I reckon it's not that big of a deal, though losing RAW support in the X100s is.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Uppsala, Sweden
    Posts
    187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    The X20 looks very interesting as a family snap shot camera. Glad that they didn't push the pixelcount up. I'd rather have them pull it down to 8-10 mpix, but that isn't likely to happen for marketing reasons I guess.
    Leica Monochrom, Olympus EM-5, Ricoh GR

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    Both cameras are highly interesting for me, only I will not buy them as long as there is no RAW support in Aperture - which so far not even supports XPro1 and X10
    You and me both bud - it's now the bottom line for me - no Aperture, no buy. It's just too much of a hassle to change.

    Just this guy you know

  9. #9
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Amin View Post
    From Fujifilm.eu:
    HI Amin
    so I guess that means it's faster than the Leica X2 and . . . . . erm . . The X100? I'm sure there's another fixed focal length APS/c camera . . . isn't there?

    all the best

    Just this guy you know

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    541
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Yes Jono, there's a series of cameras from a well known (budget) lens manufacturer, but AF speed...
    My Flickr

  11. #11
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by OlliL View Post
    Yes Jono, there's a series of cameras from a well known (budget) lens manufacturer, but AF speed...
    Dammit - of course - those Sigmas . . . but they aren't quite APS/c are they? Whatever, not an AF challenge I understand

    Actually, I'm sounding sarcastic - these sound like good cameras. Although i guess the Sony RX1 and RX100 are pretty tight competition (smaller cameras with bigger sensors).

    all the best

    Just this guy you know

  12. #12
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,343
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Actually, I'm sounding sarcastic - these sound like good cameras. Although i guess the Sony RX1 and RX100 are pretty tight competition (smaller cameras with bigger sensors).

    all the best
    The RX100 is certainly smaller, but also a totally different style of camera compared to the X20, and it lacks a viewfinder.

    The RX1... the body might be smaller but:

    - That kewl Zeiss lens sticks out like a sore thumb and makes it difficult to fit even in the pockets of my cargo shorts. The X100 fits without problems.
    - The RX1 weighs nearly twice as much as the Fuji.
    - The Sorry has no built-in viewfinder. Attach one and it's even less smaller (but more less cheap).
    - Look at the ergonomics. To start with, the Fuji has more buttons, which is nice, but they have also made half of the top of the camera lower than the rest, so that top controls and hotshoe are flush with the left part. That way, there are less changes that they will catch loose threads in my pocket or simply be knocked off in an accident. Me thinks Fuji has made a camera or two before
    - The Fuji is around a third of the price, leaving me enough extra cash to buy the next version and then the next, or simply go for a holiday in Japan, snapping photos of those cute Japanese girls


    Copyright: tokyofashion on flickr

    50% more pixels? That's 22.5% more linear resolution. Big deal. The RX1 does offer slightly less DOF wide open of course, which can sometimes be useful, but I'm not even sure that I would prefer the Sony if the two cameras were sold at the same price.
    Things I sell: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/epixx?language=en
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado
    Posts
    2,077
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Maggie O View Post
    That's kind of how I feel about the announcement. Then again, I've been using the JPEGs out of my X10 happily, so I reckon it's not that big of a deal, though losing RAW support in the X100s is.
    Maggie

    You may want to look at Capture one V7.02. I am beta testing this version and their raw converter for the Fuji X's is quite good. Plus you have all the features associated with this state of the art image processor.

    Doesn't help Peter and Jono, who continue to use Aperture but for others this may be a great solution. Also there is a product from Sandy McGuffog called Accuraw which also does a good conversion but is not yet a full featured converter like Capture One or Lightroom/Photoshop. THe Lightroom conversions still suck but once the Capture One gains traction you can bet they will catch up.

    Woody

  14. #14
    Member Zlatko Batistich's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Cresskill, New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    102
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    I don't know what the situation with Aperture is, but it seems to be ok with Lightroom. I have some X-Pro1 RAF files and they seem to render fine in Lightroom, at least at ordinary sizes. That makes me optimistic about support for the X100S.

    I noticed this interesting comment by Kinematic Digit on DPReview yesterday (talking about raw support for Fuji X cameras generally):

    "As one of the people who has spent a lot of time researching into this and answered many people's concerns over it. It is a little overblown. Support by Adobe exists and the 'fine details' is something only seen in specific cases, and even in those cases are only apparent at 200-400% pixel resolution."

    "I did a spot sample of 5 different processing techniques and printed it on fine art papers to simulate a 5 foot fine art print, and in each of the swatches they all held up well. The Adobe examples do show some break down of fine details, but most people will not be printing 5+ feet prints from this. Regardless, Adobe will be updating this in ACR 7.3, and Capture One is developing a beta that will have a finer detail renderer that provides stunning details that even compared to higher MP outputs would put them to shame."

    quoted from: Fujifilm X100S retains retro looks while adding cutting-edge technologies: Digital Photography Review

  15. #15
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Maggie O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Standards Are Down All Over
    Posts
    3,064
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    I'm pretty invested in Aperture, too. As in, years of files. So, no joy.

  16. #16
    Contributing Editor ustein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    The problem with LR and X-Trans is real:

    outbackphoto - Lightroom Artistry - Using other Raw Converters as Lightroom*Pre-Processor

    C1 seems to solve my problems.
    Uwe Steinmueller
    -------------------

    Editor&Owner of Digital Outback Photo
    http://www.outbackphoto.com

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Devon, UK
    Posts
    777
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Re Aperture: why does it insist I keep upgrading my OS each time a new version comes along? I can't run the latest on my Snow Leopard iMac ... mind you I can't really run C1 either but that's just lack of memory! LR copes ok.

    Lee

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    The RX100 is certainly smaller, but also a totally different style of camera compared to the X20, and it lacks a viewfinder.

    50% more pixels? That's 22.5% more linear resolution. Big deal. The RX1 does offer slightly less DOF wide open of course, which can sometimes be useful, but I'm not even sure that I would prefer the Sony if the two cameras were sold at the same price.
    Hi Jorgen
    I'd prefer the X100s at the same price as well - I guess I was being a bit of a devil's advocate here.

    Not quite so sure about the X20/RX100 comparison - of course I agree about the viewfinder, but the RX100 works quite well.

    My problem is Maggie's - no Aperture support for the Fuji RAF files.

    Woody - I've looked at C7 7 - I was just beginning to get into it when it started crashing my computer (17"mbp with 2.5Ghz i7 with 16gb RAM and 512SSD). The Catalog function might just do what I want - at least it means I can run the two together for a while. I'm just downloading 7.2 to have another look. . . . but as Maggie says - it's a HUGE step to change, especially with a 75,000 image catalogue, all properly keyworded in Aperture HUGE!

    all the best

    Just this guy you know

  19. #19
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,343
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    I visited the little shop where I buy my camera gear today and had a chat with the owner about Fujis and Sonys. He's been selling some of the Fuji X-models in quantities of 100+ per month. When asked about the Sony top models (RX1 and A99), he said that he ordered two of each per delivery. He was also extremely optimistic with regards to the X100s and said that the electronic split screen is a real killer. X-Pro2, anyone?

  20. #20
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,601
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    XE-2, I will take one.

  21. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    XE-2, I will take one.
    I think you'll be waiting about 1.5 more years for this...

  22. #22
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,601
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Even longer than the M?

  23. #23
    Senior Member Show Performance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    To all those shooters who are holding back because of RAW support, I would suggest trying the X-Trans cameras in JPEG + RAW. The JPEGs are so good and plenty malleable in post. I've shot RAW exclusively for many years but I could care less on the X-Pro.

    Sometimes we get carried away striving for clinical perfection in our images when, for most personal photos (and some commercial) it is the soul of the photo that matters most.

    I just picked up another Contax G2 and the images from my test roll were as expected - textured, rich, sharp (but not overly). To get that same feel on the X-Pro I actually have to degrade the image from its baseline digital "perfection".

    Long story short, jump in, the water is fine here

  24. #24
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,867
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Show Performance View Post
    To all those shooters who are holding back because of RAW support, I would suggest trying the X-Trans cameras in JPEG + RAW. The JPEGs are so good and plenty malleable in post. I've shot RAW exclusively for many years but I could care less on the X-Pro.

    Sometimes we get carried away striving for clinical perfection in our images when, for most personal photos (and some commercial) it is the soul of the photo that matters most.

    I just picked up another Contax G2 and the images from my test roll were as expected - textured, rich, sharp (but not overly). To get that same feel on the X-Pro I actually have to degrade the image from its baseline digital "perfection".

    Long story short, jump in, the water is fine here
    While I believe what you say - I will just not change my workflow because of Fuji not supporting their RAW files with any SW (like Aperture). I have invested huge amount of time to get all my images into AP and will not undergo this burden again - for no camera!

    But maybe we will finally see support for the X100s and X20 in AP

  25. #25
    Senior Member Show Performance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    While I believe what you say - I will just not change my workflow because of Fuji not supporting their RAW files with any SW (like Aperture)...
    I guess that's my point, you don't have to change your software. Shoot RAW + JPEG and process JPEGs just like you would a RAW file while retaining the actual RAW for a later date when support is available. I'm satisfied enough with the nice flat and deep Fuji JPEG that I'm not even capturing the RAW file, just not that critical to me - ymmv.

    I use LR but I'm not going to bother changing my workflow to Capture One just to eek out a tiny extra bit of performance from the files - they are awesome as is. At some point the RAW issue will be worked out to satisfaction although as usual, Apple will be last to the party. I don't blame Fuji for the delay - if Phase and some of the smaller developers can do it, why can't Adobe and Apple?

    Best,
    Chad
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  26. #26
    Senior Member Show Performance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    If you don't believe me that Fuji X-Trans JPEGs are amazing, would you trust National Geographic?

    Nomad Expediciones Fotográficas blog: National Geographic, how I won and lost the contest in less than one second

    Bummer for Harry. He shot his wonderful image in JPEG and was awarded winner of the Nat Geo 2012 Photo Contest in the Places category, only to have the award rescinded because he removed a plastic bag from the scene.

  27. #27
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,601
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    That is the saddest story I read regarding photo contests. It says nothing about a Fuji camera's capabilities or lack thereof.

  28. #28
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Maggie O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Standards Are Down All Over
    Posts
    3,064
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by ustein View Post
    The problem with LR and X-Trans is real:

    outbackphoto - Lightroom Artistry - Using other Raw Converters as Lightroom*Pre-Processor

    C1 seems to solve my problems.
    For quite a while I was using C1 LE to process RAWs and then putting the JPEGs or TIFFs into Aperture, but at some point, at least for DNGs out of my Leicas, Aperture caught up with C1 LE and that was the tipping point for my total move to Aperture with PS and SEXFP2 as plug-ins.

  29. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    302
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Show Performance View Post

    Bummer for Harry. He shot his wonderful image in JPEG and was awarded winner of the Nat Geo 2012 Photo Contest in the Places category, only to have the award rescinded because he removed a plastic bag from the scene.
    That's what he gets for being a perfectionist. The bag actually works in the composition.

  30. #30
    Senior Member Show Performance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    That is the saddest story I read regarding photo contests. It says nothing about a Fuji camera's capabilities or lack thereof.
    Sure it does. It says that an X-Pro JPEG file, with the assistance of a talented photographer, can impress Nat Geo judges enough to award a top prize.

    Which circles back to my original point, the "I won't shoot X-Trans because it can't do RAW in my processor" is slightly obsessive. The camera and photographer can do wonderful things in JPEG.

  31. #31
    Senior Member Show Performance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by JSRockit View Post
    That's what he gets for being a perfectionist. The bag actually works in the composition.
    Completely agree. I'm sure he is kicking himself non-stop.

  32. #32
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,601
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Show Performance View Post
    Sure it does. It says that an X-Pro JPEG file, with the assistance of a talented photographer, can impress Nat Geo judges enough to award a top prize.

    Which circles back to my original point, the "I won't shoot X-Trans because it can't do RAW in my processor" is slightly obsessive. The camera and photographer can do wonderful things in JPEG.
    It absolutely does not! He could have as well snapped that with a Panasonic GH-2, a Nikon something, a NEX-5,6,7, you name it. He did not win any price. The blog is a reminder to stick with the competition rules than anything, otherwise Fuji would have put that image up on their website or as he says, would have called a press conference.

    BTW, most of the people complaining about the "lack of a RAW" processor (although Fuji do supply one) are the owners themselves and not the would be owners.

  33. #33
    Senior Member Show Performance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Some people just like to pick a fight.

  34. #34
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,867
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Show Performance View Post
    Sure it does. It says that an X-Pro JPEG file, with the assistance of a talented photographer, can impress Nat Geo judges enough to award a top prize.

    Which circles back to my original point, the "I won't shoot X-Trans because it can't do RAW in my processor" is slightly obsessive. The camera and photographer can do wonderful things in JPEG.
    You can do wonderful things in JPEG, it is just not for me! OK, right!

    Thanks

    Peter

  35. #35
    Senior Member Show Performance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    You can do wonderful things in JPEG, it is just not for me! OK, right!

    Thanks

    Peter
    Of course Peter, to each his or her own.

    I spent many years looking down my nose at JPEG. Never say never I guess

    And all that said, I will happily use RAW again once I am confident the processor results are as good as Fuji's internal camera processing. RAW just makes sense from a traditional film workflow model.

    Until then, no complaints here. Having too much fun shooting.

  36. #36
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    GTA, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    176
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    That is the saddest story I read regarding photo contests. It says nothing about a Fuji camera's capabilities or lack thereof.
    Well, I am not sure you can be quite so definitive. There are many cameras that technically could have taken this photograph, in the hands of the same photographer. But those other cameras were not used, and this photographer prefers this camera.

    This forum alone has many posts about camera and lens preferences. Those cameras connect with the photographers and help them achieve their goals. At some level the design of the camera and lenses, and its ability to record images with the quality and feel preferred by that photographer is very relevant. To me it says a lot about the camera.

    If it says nothing, let's stop talking about gear.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  37. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,115
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Pelao View Post
    Well, I am not sure you can be quite so definitive. There are many cameras that technically could have taken this photograph, in the hands of the same photographer. But those other cameras were not used, and this photographer prefers this camera.

    This forum alone has many posts about camera and lens preferences. Those cameras connect with the photographers and help them achieve their goals. At some level the design of the camera and lenses, and its ability to record images with the quality and feel preferred by that photographer is very relevant. To me it says a lot about the camera.

    If it says nothing, let's stop talking about gear.
    I am going to have to bet to differ. It says nothing about the camera. This is the work of a photographer.

    Cameras do not take photographs by themselves. That a particular photographer picked a camera as a tool is one thing and an individual choice. That photo is his work, not Fuji's.

    We can talk about gear as a craftsmanship that goes into the tool but that is not photography, that is something else. All we can say is the camera provides a canvas of light a particular photographer wants, but it says nothing about camera-> photograph by itself. The photographer creates the image, not the camera.

    Otherwise all we need to do is buy a "better camera to become a better photographer" which unfortunately many believe and it's a complete lie. Of course, camera companies want you to believe exactly that.

    - Raist
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  38. #38
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,867
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Show Performance View Post
    Of course Peter, to each his or her own.

    I spent many years looking down my nose at JPEG. Never say never I guess

    And all that said, I will happily use RAW again once I am confident the processor results are as good as Fuji's internal camera processing. RAW just makes sense from a traditional film workflow model.

    Until then, no complaints here. Having too much fun shooting.
    Thinking over this - you actually might be right and I should give it another try WRT JPEG from Fuji. I know that I do not even like JPEG from Olympus (which is reportedly a pretty good JPEG engine) but maybe Fuji is really better. Also the only way to make use of the different film modes I guess.

  39. #39
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    GTA, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    176
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by raist3d View Post
    I am going to have to bet to differ. It says nothing about the camera. This is the work of a photographer.

    Cameras do not take photographs by themselves. That a particular photographer picked a camera as a tool is one thing and an individual choice. That photo is his work, not Fuji's.

    We can talk about gear as a craftsmanship that goes into the tool but that is not photography, that is something else. All we can say is the camera provides a canvas of light a particular photographer wants, but it says nothing about camera-> photograph by itself. The photographer creates the image, not the camera.

    Otherwise all we need to do is buy a "better camera to become a better photographer" which unfortunately many believe and it's a complete lie. Of course, camera companies want you to believe exactly that.

    - Raist
    I really don't think we differ. I didn't propose that this was Fuji's work. It clearly is not. Neither did I try to define photography, and I certainly don't feel a better camera will always make a better photographer.

    I simply feel that to dismiss the camera from the taking of the image is an overstatement. If we do so, why be on forums discussing the merits of how a particular camera works better for some people, or why a particular sensor or lens performs in a certain way? Many photographers have preferred tools. They feel those tools help them achieve their goals. That makes the tools relevant, and reflects on the makers of those tools.

  40. #40
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    GTA, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    176
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    Thinking over this - you actually might be right and I should give it another try WRT JPEG from Fuji. I know that I do not even like JPEG from Olympus (which is reportedly a pretty good JPEG engine) but maybe Fuji is really better. Also the only way to make use of the different film modes I guess.
    The jpegs really are good. In my view though, I still get more room and better results for printing when shooting RAW - at least for some subjects. But this is very subjective. Maybe I am just too particular.

  41. #41
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,601
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    I appreciate Raist' s post. No one is putting Fuji down here (not me, not my intention).

    The bottom line is that there are many cameras out there for the past several years with an APS-C sensor and 16mp output that are quite good.

    It is nice of Show to post a link to the sad story but his understanding and others' of that differ.

    I also think that it is factually incorrect to keep saying that there are no RAW processors for the X-trans sensor output. There is one and it comes with every camera.

  42. #42
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,343
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    I used to shoot jpeg with the S3 for a few years. Colours and contrast were great, but I lost a bit fine details, typically in hair and similar structures, due to the jpeg compression. The most important reason why I switched to RAW was the convenience of adjusting WB if needed.

  43. #43
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    GTA, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    176
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    I appreciate Raist' s post. No one is putting Fuji down here (not me, not my intention).

    The bottom line is that there are many cameras out there for the past several years with an APS-C sensor and 16mp output that are quite good.

    It is nice of Show to post a link to the sad story but his understanding and others' of that differ.

    I also think that it is factually incorrect to keep saying that there are no RAW processors for the X-trans sensor output. There is one and it comes with every camera.
    Good point about the RAW software. No doubt that for some people, and some subjects, the current conversion options have faults / limitations. But it seems to work for many people too.

  44. #44
    Senior Member Show Performance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    I appreciate Raist' s post. No one is putting Fuji down here (not me, not my intention).

    The bottom line is that there are many cameras out there for the past several years with an APS-C sensor and 16mp output that are quite good.

    It is nice of Show to post a link to the sad story but his understanding and others' of that differ.

    I also think that it is factually incorrect to keep saying that there are no RAW processors for the X-trans sensor output. There is one and it comes with every camera.
    I'm afraid both you and Raist missed the point completely. The original discussion point (at least mine) was that the Fuji JPEGs were good enough (excellent really) for me to not be concerned with RAW processing and that those who were holding back because Aperture or Adobe did not have "the best" RAW solution, might think about shooting RAW + JPEG. Also, that there is so much more to image making than the technical perfection of eeking out every ounce of performance from a RAW file - we tend to forget this. I used the example of my Contax G2 photos I just got back from the lab and their, rich, textured "feel" and how I would actually have to degrade my digital photos to get that same effect.

    So, my link to the Nat Geo post was simply an example of the photographer's vision and skill being enough to shoot with JPEG on a good camera platform. You both are correct that it could have been many different cameras that were used but the main concept is that it is the photographer, and shooting RAW was not a factor in his submission.

    And of course everyone's mileage varies. Peter is a landscape photographer who captures lots of foliage in some of his photos so perhaps an excellent Fuji RAW solution is more critical to him. I'm not pretending to know what is best for each photographer, just making an observation and suggestion to those open to it.

    I like the people here but there is an underlying current of aggressive dissent that is just unnecessary and frankly, not very enjoyable at times.

    Best,
    Chad
    Last edited by Show Performance; 10th January 2013 at 18:17.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #45
    Senior Member Show Performance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Excerpt from a post on DPR regarding a statement made by a Fuji rep about the fact Adobe has had all the formulas and details of X-Trans for over a year.

    Re: Fuji hands-on at CES 2013
    In reply to Fenwoodian, 8 hours ago
    Fenwoodian wrote:

    Chris, great report, thanks much!

    Did you discuss with the Fuji guys the problem with RAW conversions using ACR and Lightroom? Did they have any encouraging news for us on that front?

    Also, the sensor in the new X100S, how is the IQ expected to campare with with the IQ from the XP1?

    Dave
    Yes - I bought up the question around Fuji and Adobe - and the Fuji rep expressed frustration at Adobe.

    He said that Adobe were given all of the X-Trans data and formulas from Fuji over a year ago, for software development. He was frustrated that people had found Adobe to be slow to market, and said that work was on-going, but that I would need to ask Adobe how it was going.

    I did not ask around X100S vs X-Pro1 - I'll ask that question tomorrow
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  46. #46
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,601
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Show Performance View Post

    I like the people here but there is an underlying current of aggressive dissent that is just unnecessary and frankly, not very enjoyable at times.

    Best,
    Chad
    Chad, That came from your vigorous defense of your impressions (differing from mine) of the link story. The photo in question wasn't even an OOC Jpeg. That guy modified it and that was the root of the problem.
    If you want to characterize my post as "aggressive dissent", that your your prerogative.

  47. #47
    Senior Member Show Performance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Wow, how did you know that was directed at you Vivek

    Sorry, I'm not going to continue this. You win, you have the last word, enjoy and savor it.

  48. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,115
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Pelao View Post
    I really don't think we differ. I didn't propose that this was Fuji's work. It clearly is not. Neither did I try to define photography, and I certainly don't feel a better camera will always make a better photographer.

    I simply feel that to dismiss the camera from the taking of the image is an overstatement.
    I dot think so. Even the very nation geographic exmple shows very clearly the acceptance / reject of a photo has nothing to do with the camera. There could be a very specific point of the camera as a tool. It's interesting if the photographer says "here's what I like this tool" but that's so ethi g that you can't really tell for the image. That's different. nd that's gear as tool talk, not talking a out the photograph.

    If we do so, why be on forums discussing the merits of how a particular camera works better for some people, or why a particular sensor or lens performs in a certain way?
    You are making that too easy to respond to ;-). Ask yourself how many people are taking *real* photographs. How many are upgrading from a perfectly good cameras they bought just a year ago (six months ago?) to "next greatest and latest" and how come their photography doesn't seem to improve.

    There are other reasons why people talk about the tools all the time from reasonable interesting ones of here's why I picked this for this kind of work (and have a real portfolio of photos to back that up) to lots and lots of themes and explanations that have nothing to do with photography but more about playing with a toy, equipment collecting or solving "the puzzle" how a piece of technology behaves amongst other reasons (and hey all of these can be fine as long as they arent a bad addiction. And are not confusing it with the art of photography, IMHO )

    They feel those tools help them achieve their goals. That makes the tools relevant, and reflects on the makers of those tools.
    It makes the tool relevant in workflow talk. Or in tool craftsmanship talk. It doesn't make it relevant by just looking at that national geographic photo and the issues of its acceptance/rejection. Not one bit other than Trivia.

    - Raist

  49. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,115
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    So, my link to the Nat Geo post was simply an example of the photographer's vision and skill being enough to shoot with JPEG on a good camera platform. You both are correct that it could have been many different cameras that were used but the main concept is that it is the photographer, and shooting RAW was not a factor in his submission.
    Please keep in mind I wasn't replying to your post but the reply on Vivek and the meme that represents. That said, its understandable Giving the example just so people can see that jpegs are ok- but if you ask me it should be almost a given that a photographer with vision can make a compelling photograph with whatever.

    But I understand. I used to shoot mostly in jpeg with Olympus 4/3 And got lynch attempts by the raw mob at dpreview, just by saying it was possible, ok, professional even and had shots i had made.

    - raist
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  50. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,115
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: X20 and X100s... nice :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Show Performance View Post
    Wow, how did you know that was directed at you Vivek

    Sorry, I'm not going to continue this. You win, you have the last word, enjoy and savor it.
    Directed at me then? ;-)
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •