Fuji X-Pro1

A city at sleep | George Greenlee

Cork city, at 5am. Irelands second largest city. A ghost town, I walked for over 30 mins before meeting another person. Patrick Street was empty, there wasn’t  even a bus at the station. But slowly the workers arrive, and the deliveries start.
 
All shots Fuji Film X-Pro1, 18mm,  ISO3200, Handled at speeds 1/13-1/250th

See more pictures on wideanglecafe.wordpress.com

Urban Decay | Luc Pher

The Japanese concept of Wabi-Sabi, as described in Brainpickings, “connotes a way of living that finds beauty in imperfection and accepts the natural cycle of growth and decay. As objects age, it adds on layers of “battle scars” and accumulate what I would term as “character”. Urban Decay celebrate these “battle scars” and “character” exhibited in daily Urban objects.
 
See more pictures on lucpher.wordpress.com

Focal Reducer Lens Adapter Announced by Metabones | Thom Hogan

Over a decade ago I wrote about building your own DX focal reducer from cobbled parts (technically it was an afocal wide converter). The goal was to get back the 1.5x crop factor and make a lens work as you’d expect from it’s marked focal length. The result wasn’t very pretty, but it gave us true wide angle for our D1 cameras long before Nikon got around to making wide angle DX lenses. Unfortunately, those focal length reducers couldn’t be done simply, mostly because the mirror box pushes the mount forward, so you have to do the corrections far forward of where they’re optimally done. The nice thing about mirrorless cameras, though, is that the sensor to mount distances are far shorter; short enough to allow for a far simpler focal reducer approach.

Today, Metabones has announced a commercial focal length reducer and mount converter for NEX systems called the SpeedBooster. The initial versions work with Canon EF lenses and provide a 0.71x focal length reduction. In reducing the focal length, you also get an aperture change (as with teleconverters, which do the opposite of a focal reducer): you gain approximately one stop of aperture. The EF versions of these SpeedBooster adapters feature auto-aperture, IS support, EXIF data transfer, and even partial autofocus support on many recent Canon lenses (post 2006). The adapter also has a detachable tripod foot that’s also an Arca Swiss plate. The first version to be made available will be Canon EF to Sony NEX (E-mount), available later in late January (25th) for US$600. Other versions will be at different prices (Leica R to Fujifilm XF or Sony NEX is listed at US$400 on their site).

Since there’s a lot going on here, let me reiterate what the SpeedBooster does:

  • Mount conversion — initial version for Canon EF lenses to Sony NEX, but conversions to m4/3 and Fujifilm XF mounts are also coming. Also, Metabones claims they will eventually have Leica R, Alpa, Contarex, Contax C/Y, and Nikon F versions (if they did everything they currently write about, that would be 18 different versions of the SpeedBooster.
  • Focal length conversion — the focal length is reduced 0.71x. Thus, a 50mm Canon EF lens becomes a 35.5mm lens. That’s not quite a perfect reduction between full frame and APS, but close enough for most of us (the 50mm should become 33.3mm to be a „perfect“ 50mm equivalent on NEX).
  • Aperture adjustment — the effective aperture is increased by one stop. So an f/1.4 lens becomes an f/1 lens. This is again just about the right change for going from full frame to APS: you’d get about the same DOF on the Sony NEX with a lens mounted on this adapter as you would from a full frame camera if you kept all the other parameters equal. Some may wonder how the aperture gain is achieved. Simple: the image circle is reduced (concentrating the collected light into a smaller area).
  • MTF gain — the „compression“ effect of the focal length reducer also tends to reduce the size of aberrations, which are a primary driver of MTF. Metabones uses a Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 as their example for plotting the lens‘ normal MTF versus with use of the SpeedBooster, and there’s indeed a clear MTF boost in the central area on an m4/3 version of the adapter. The NEX version, however, shows more MTF loss as you move to the corners (the center is still higher than the original lens). The MTF gain claim is a little less reliable than the other claims: there’s going to be high variability in the size and position of the gains depending upon the lens used and the format you’re adapting to.
  • Telecentricity gain — digital sensors like light to hit at less than 15° to perpendicular. In some wide angle lens designs that’s difficult to achieve, so you get impacts from the slanted light. One simple to see impact is vignetting. One by-product of the focal reducer is that light is slightly more tele centric. The difference isn’t dramatic, but I’ll bet we see visible differences in some adapted lenses‘ vignetting performance.

If you want to read more about the technical details of the SpeedBooster focal reducer, Metabones has a White Paper on their Web site that describes the details at length. The Metabones adapter was designed by Brian Caldwell, the man who created some of the best corrected lens designs for Coastal Optics (the 60mm f/4 Macro, for instance, is one of the best performing lenses I know of for Nikon mounts, and it can pass UV and IR light as well as visible).

See full article on www.sansmirror.com

X-Pro1 – Bullfight in Spain | Patrick Cavan Brown

A few months back I attended the last Bullfight of the season in Seville, Spain… a Mano-a-Mano match, 2 men, 6 bulls. Jose Maria Manzanares vs Alejandro Talavante, with Jose Maria as the victor. These are a handful of my favorites.

Visit www.patrickcavanbrown.com/blog to see more Fuji X-Pro1 images

See more pictures on www.fujixseries.com

Capture One Fujifilm X-Trans Raw support tested | Digital Photography Review

capture one

Capture One v7.0.2, the latest version of Phase One’s image management and Raw conversion software, includes support for Fujifilm’s X-Trans cameras. Given the trouble this non-Bayer design has caused for third-party Raw converters (it remains to be seen how many will ever offer support), this has caused a lot of excitement in the Fujifilm community. So, just how well does Capture One do, and how significant is the problem , in the first place? To provide some context, the vast majority of digital cameras ever made perceive color using what’s known as a Bayer Color Filter Array, named after the late Kodak engineer Bryce Bayer. For its recent cameras, Fujifilm has developed its own color filter array pattern, which it calls X-Trans. The idea behind X-Trans is that its pattern repeats less often than the Bayer pattern, rendering redundant the low-pass filter that usually protects against moiré. The disadvantage of creating a non-standard color filter array (especially one that took two years to develop the demosaicing algorithm for), is that third-party software makers have to do a lot more work to provide Raw support….

„As you can see, Capture One’s color response is much closer to the camera’s results than Adobe’s default profile. The default results are also substantially more sharpened than the JPEGs are. In comparison with the camera JPEGs, there are hints of the same brushstroke effect that Adobe Camera Raw produces, though not to the same degree and mitigated, perhaps, by the better color response.“

See full article on www.dpreview.com

Capture One 7.0.2 (Support for FujiFilm X-Trans Files) | Terrance Lam

Today Phase One released an update for Capture One to support the FujiFilm X-Trans formats. This includes both the X-Pro1 and the X-E1 cameras.

I’ve been testing them out the last couple of weeks and been very pleased by the results. Although I’m hesitant to call it perfect (my own workflow still yield slightly better results in resolution) I’m pleased at least to say that there’s a professional raw processor that supports the FujiFilm X-format that has the same workflow efficiencies as Adobe Lightroom. It resolves much of the nagging issues that some users complain about using Adobe Camera RAW or Lightroom, and yields the professional and user friendly software of Capture One.

I’ve also used the latest Capture One (7.0.2) for several weeks with my Canon EOS 5Dmk3 files as well and there were no real surprises there, however the support for full tethering has been improved which was one of the earlier problems with the initial release of Capture One 7.0.

Adding support for the FujiFilm file format seemed to be a top priority by Phase One and this is certainly welcome considering the detail smearing that seems to plague any processor that seems to use the traditional processing on the FujiFilm files.

With this new player on the game, we now have all but DxO Optics as major raw processing engines that fully support the format, however rumour has it that Adobe is working on a new ACR 7.3 that will introduce some improvements to the X-Pro1 and X-E1 files in the coming months.

Regardless, the results speak for themselves. I found that Capture One not only improves in details, but also prevents some colour smearing which seems to be another issue in the Lightroom files (look especially at the log on the lower left where the log has lost a lot of wood grain details).

The dynamic range controls have also been improved from Capture One 6 to Capture One 7 which is a big upgrade, but also in comparison to Adobe Lightroom seems to have less clipping and noise issues when pushing those functions to extremes.

Now not everything is perfect here. There’s still issues with Capture One and the details. Moire seems to be an issue that causes an unusual maze like pattern to appear in specific textures and still some smearing of details happens. However the great news is that it smears at a much higher detail rate over Adobe’s implementation of these files.

I discussed the issues with Phase One over the past couple of weeks and have been sharing my own findings, and one of the simple ways to combat this issue is to turn off the Details slider in Noise Reduction Advanced (or reduce this). This seemed to correct for some of the smearing of details that is set by default.

I’m hopeful these minor issues will be resolved in the next version of Capture One, but for now, it’s very nice to have a professional RAW processor that at leasts matches the output quality of the JPG files out of camera, with far more flexibility found in RAW processing.

See more pictures on frontallobbings.blogspot.de

Long exposures with a Fuji X-Pro1 | Don Craig

Having happily used the X-Pro1 for my work and personal photography since I sold my Leica M9, I have been incredibly pleased to see how well the camera and X-mount lenses work for long exposures. I have always been intrigued by LE photography and have shot it with the same variety of cameras that I have used for my other photography. Starting out with DSLRs and moving to rangefinders, I never felt like I was achieving the results I wanted nor did I feel that I was using the appropriate equipment. Perhaps that has changed with the Fuji X cameras. Shooting LE photos with rangefinders was a step in the right direction. Since the viewfinder isn’t connected to the lens, there aren’t the same issues of keeping light out of the viewfinder and you can still frame your shot with ND filters in place. Also, I love the ability to use a simple cable release to trigger the shutter. That and all of the manual controls make LE photography a snap with a rangefinder. With the X-Pro1, I feel like I have the benefits of the rangefinders, plus a lot more versatility and amazing image quality. Not only can I use the camera like a rangefinder, I also have the benefit of using the rear screen like a view camera. The interactive horizon line is a big benefit for insuring that I have the camera level, as my tripod doesn’t have a level on the head. Also, when shooting in Bulb mode, for exposures of over 30 seconds, the X-P1 displays a timer on the rear screen. It’s great. The X-Trans sensor is also performing really well. Image degradation is often a problem with digital cameras as exposures get longer. White or dark pixels may start to appear in the image as the sensor heats up. My lovely Epson R-D1 couldn’t handle exposures of more than a handful of seconds; that old sensor just wasn’t up to the task. Even the Nikon D3 had a difficult time handling long exposures, particularly on hot days. My X-100 is very convenient for LE photography as it even has an internal, 3-stop ND filter. Yet, the sensor isn’t up to the quality of the X-Trans and I stay clear of exposures longer than a couple of minutes. Lens choice is a critical component of LE photography. Although wide-angle lenses are a common choice among photographers, I find that I prefer using the 35mm (53mm equivalent) X-mount. It produces outstanding results and it’s been interesting to stack a group of ND filters on it and shoot wide open. This results in a slower shutter speed, but not truly a long exposure, and a nicely out of focus background. The 18mm lens is a good alternative. I look forward to using the 23mm lens, when it’s available. Soon, I hope! The versatile X-Pro1 has enabled me to do more LE photography, with better results. This has inspired me to shoot more long exposures, which has led to an interesting new opportunity. In March, I will be teaching a LE workshop at Lúz Studio & Gallery. Since it’s Winter right now, that has meant doing a lot more standing around in the cold, but it has also opened up the way I use my camera and how I see the world……

See full article on doncraigphoto.wordpress.com

A First Look at Capture One’s X-Pro 1 Support | Thomas Fitzgerald

If you’re a fuji user or even just a fan you’ve probably been reading the reports of upcoming X-Pro1 and XE-1 support to be added to Capture One, the high end Raw converter from Phase One. Reports had been steadily leaking out from people using the beta and the general consensus was that it was an improvement over Adobe’s implementation in Lightroom. They released the final version today, and I decided to have a look and see if it lived up to the hype. In case you’re not following this blog regularly, let me just tell you where I’m coming from with regard to this subject, just so you can put my opinions in context. I had been a relatively early adopter of the X-Pro1 but I had eventually sold mine, partly due to the lack of a good workflow for handling the raw files. It was actually the Lightroom support that pushed me over the edge. I was very critical of it, and found the “watercolour” artefacts to be completely unacceptable. Needless to say I got a lot of criticism for those comments (from both die hard Fuji fans who think the X-Pro1 is perfect in every way, and die hard Lightroom fans who believe the same thing about Lightroom.) I’ve done a lot of testing and playing around with settings trying to find a way to live with Lightroom’s conversions, but I stand by my opinion, that the quality of the raw processing of X-Pro1 files in Lightroom is seriously sub par. To be fair, I am hyper-critical when it comes to image quality. I have worked for years in broadcast television, and a critical part of my job is making sure the images I produce meet broadcast standards, so quality control is drilled into me. Anyway, I just want to put that out there, because I was so critical of the raw conversion to date, that it says so much more when I say that am blown away by the difference with Capture one. DP Review did some initial testing today and they were somewhat skeptical of the differences, but I have to disagree with their findings. I’ve spent a few hours with it now and I have to say the difference is night and day. There is still a degree of the watercolour effect with capture one, but it is much less obtrusive than Adobe’s. Images are also much sharper even with the default settings. In fact, in my opinion you need to turn the sharpness down a little. I don’t want to go mad with lots of comparison images because there are lots of them out there on the web already, and you can download a 60 day trial and try it for yourself if you want to do your own comparisons. But I do want to point out a few things. It should be noted that it’s not just the smearing that Capture one does better. The whole image seems to be much sharper, and also there is much better colour in details too……

See full article on blog.thomasfitzgeraldphotography.com

Old Summer – Landscape Photography with Fuji X-Pro1 |
Maciek Sokulski

If you have been listening to my podcast Shutter Time with Sid and Mac, you know how my workflow works.  About this time, I create a new Lightroom catalog, and start cleaning up my previous year catalog, getting it ready for archival.  While I was going through it, to see if maybe I missed something, I found a little stack of images, that I haven’t even touched.  They were taken last June, on one of our excursions into the country side.  I have no idea how I missed them, and forgot about them. Sacrilege! All these were shot with Fuji X-Pro1, and some are HDR as well.  The funny thing is, that I remembered that day very well, and always asked myself about the pictures from that trip.  Knowing my scatter brain, I always quickly forgot to look for them.  I’m glad I found them. So I took a cue from my boys, and instead of cleaning, I started playing  It’s a great feeling to be working on landscape photos from the summer, when it’s cold and snowy outside.

See on www.miksmedia.net

X-Pro1 RAW Comparison – Lightroom vs Capture One | Cody Hatch


 
I have been using the Capture One beta version 7.0.2 for a bit and wanted to share an example of the difference in processing RAW files from the X-Pro1 between Adobe Lightroom and Capture One’s beta. Yes, yes, I know the Capture One is beta. I’m not going to speak to the details of its stability, any errors, etc. Anything like that I would report to Phase One. Since I mainly shoot landcapes, I’d like to illustrate the difference between the two RAW processing engines using an image with a bunch of foliage. The image I’m showing is one I shot at North Fork near Ogden, Utah during autumn. There was great light but I wasn’t too happy with the lack of foreground interest when I took the photo. Since there is mainly foliage and grass in the shot, it’ll serve to illustrate the stark difference between Lightroom and Capture One. The image was shot using the 35 mm prime lens, ISO 200, 1/15 second, f/16, with a polarizing filter. In both Capture One and Lightroom, my standard sharpening was used. I cannot push the Lightroom sharpening much at all or details get even more mushy where it seems I can push Capture One as far as I’d like. Amazing. First comparison is a 100% crop of the trees, first from Adobe Lightroom 4.3 and the second from Capture One 7.0.2 ….

See full article on www.codyhatch.com

Page 74 to 148« First...102030...7273747576...8090100...Last »