Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/06/26

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Using the Fuji X Pro-1
From: mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 00:02:28 -0400

It would take a lot to get me to waste one second getting me to shoot Jpegs.
Do an search and see I you can find others using the Fuji X Pro-1 who feel
they have to shoot jpegs. I can't find them.
There will always be people who just don't give a hoot who will find a
reason to shoot jpegs.

- - from my iRabs.
Mark Rabiner
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/


> From: "Richard S. Taylor" <r.s.taylor at comcast.net>
> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 20:45:22 -0400
> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Using the Fuji X Pro-1
> 
> B.D., John, Howard - I do see the color smearing in the Adobe-processed 
> files,
> but only clearly visible at 200%.  No checkerboard anywhere, though, even 
> at
> 300%. 
> 
> I do not see color smearing or checkerboard in Silky Pix RAW converted 
> files.
> 
> Point taken in any case.  Guess I'll shoot JPGs for a while myself.
> 
> Thanks. 
> 
> Regards, 
> 
> Dick
> 
> 
> 
> On Jun 26, 2012, at 6:37 PM, B. D. Colen wrote:
> 
>> IF they are true RAW files, then the camera isn't doing anything to them -
>> they are simply the data captured by the sensor - no sharpening, no in 
>> camera
>> "correction." When they are converted to DNG, they are being converted to 
>> a
>> theoretically lossless compressed format, but, again, are unaltered. Then 
>> the
>> fun begins. Apparently the Adobe conversion is doing something wrong, 
>> because
>> the files end up with a weird pattern - a sort of checkerboard pattern, 
>> with
>> little crosses in the checkerboard squares, and dots, that I can see very
>> faintly at 66 percent, and painfully clearly at 100 percent.
>> Typed with big fingers on tiny keys
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Richard Taylor <r.s.taylor at comcast.net>
>> Sender: lug-bounces+bd=bdcolenphoto.com at leica-users.org
>> Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 18:24:29
>> To: Leica Users Group<lug at leica-users.org>
>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Using the Fuji X Pro-1
>> 
>> Ed - I don't if the X Pro-1 sharpens RAW files in the camera or not.  The
>> out-of-camera RAW files are 16 bits.   They're identified as .RAF files.
>> Silky Pix RAW saves 8 bit TIFs and JPGs from these files.  The DNG files 
>> are
>> 16 bits.    
>> 
>> Regards, 
>> 
>> Dick
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jun 26, 2012, at 5:28 PM, Edward Kowaleski wrote:
>> 
>>> It suggests that the Fuji conversion is doing some sharpening in the
>>> processing.  Is the processing going on in the camera or in the computer
>>> after you take the chip out of the camera?  Does the Fuji image produce 
>>> a 16
>>> Bit Fuji proprietary image (or a TIF) or a PSD file?  I'd be curious.
>>> 
>>> Ed
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: lug-bounces+ekowaleski=twmi.rr.com at leica-users.org
>>> [mailto:lug-bounces+ekowaleski=twmi.rr.com at leica-users.org] On Behalf 
>>> Of
>>> Richard Taylor
>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 11:36 AM
>>> To: Leica Users Group
>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Using the Fuji X Pro-1
>>> 
>>> Ed - I can't make a comparison to the Nikon RAW processor since I've 
>>> never
>>> used it.   The Fuji RAW processor--at least on the few images I've tried 
>>> it
>>> with--seems to produce slightly sharper images but they have noticeable
>>> splotchy color noise that I do not see using the Adobe RAW converter.  
>>> The
>>> splotchy noise isn't at all bad, but it is noticeable and I'd rather not 
>>> see
>>> it at all.  
>>> 
>>> I convert all my RAW files to DNG on import just as you do.
>>> 
>>> The camera will be with me when I go to Maine and by then we should know
>>> whether or not it's going to be a useful platform for my neglected Leica
>>> lenses.     
>>> 
>>> Regards, 
>>> 
>>> Dick
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Jun 26, 2012, at 11:56 AM, Edward Kowaleski wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Thanks for the update.  I'm looking forward to handling it when I see
>>>> you in Bar Harbor.
>>>> 
>>>> Do you have an opinion of the quality of images generated from DNG
>>>> files that have been converted from proprietary Fuji or Nikon RAW
>>>> files?  I know you find the conversion a little (or lots) longer but
>>>> is there any qualitative difference?
>>>> 
>>>> I have been converting all my Panasonic or Nikon RAW images to DNG as
>>>> soon as I take the chip out of the camera.  It makes subsequent
>>>> processing and storage simpler (to me) and keeps all my RAW files on
>>>> one platform  which I feel confident that Adobe will maintain similar to
>>> their Acrobat PDF files.
>>>> I'd appreciate your thoughts on this.
>>>> 
>>>> Ed
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: lug-bounces+ekowaleski=twmi.rr.com at leica-users.org
>>>> [mailto:lug-bounces+ekowaleski=twmi.rr.com at leica-users.org] On Behalf
>>>> Of Richard Taylor
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 8:29 AM
>>>> To: Leica Users Group
>>>> Subject: [Leica] Using the Fuji X Pro-1
>>>> 
>>>> I've had my X Pro-1 for two weeks now and in thought you might be
>>>> interested in my impressions of the camera.  There are many images on
>>>> line testifying to its excellent image quality at low and high ISO so
>>>> I'm not going to add more--at least for now.  What they show is all
>>>> true, though, in my experience.
>>>> 
>>>> If you've been following the discussions about the camera, not all of 
>>>> this
>>>> will be new to you.
>>>> 
>>>> In a nutshell, it is the most M-like digital camera I've yet run across.
>>>> The aperture dial is on the lens where it belongs, ditto for the
>>>> shutter speed dial and exposure correction dials on the body, and you
>>>> can set the Fn button to bring up ISO settings, so everything you're
>>>> likely to need in routine shooting is right out in the open.  The body
>>>> is just a bit smaller than the M9 and weighs about half as much.
>>>> 
>>>> With the Fujinon lenses, focus is just like the Leica, except it's
>>>> automatic.  Aim the focus rectangle in the OVF at the point you want
>>>> in focus, half press the shutter, watch the frame lines jump into
>>>> place, reframe if necessary and shoot.  Perfect!  When you're close in
>>>> you've got to use the lower right focus rectangle to correct for
>>>> parallax, but otherwise the procedure is the same.  Focus speed is
>>>> more than fast enough, but nowhere near as fast as my Panasonic GX-1.
>>>> 
>>>> If you place the focus rectangle correctly, the focus will be spot-on.
>>>> 
>>>> OTH, the camera, despite the inclusion of a "Multi-Spot" mode, really
>>>> doesn't have one as far as I've can tell.  If you put it in
>>>> Multi-Spot, it will choose the single most contrasty spot in the frame
>>>> to focus on, whether it's your subject's eye or a lightbulb in the far
>>>> corner of the frame.  I don't see why this method would work under any
>>>> circumstances, but maybe one of you can enlighten me.
>>>> 
>>>> The only way you can shoot from the hip is to lock focus on an
>>>> appropriate middle distance and stop way down, again just as you would 
>>>> do
>>> with an M.
>>>> 
>>>> I can see the frames lines and data in the OVF with my regular glasses 
>>>> on.
>>>> If I'm wearing polarizing sunglasses and holding the camera 
>>>> horizontally,
>>>> though, I can't either in the OVF or anything at all in the EVF.   With
>>> the
>>>> LCD on the camera back it's the other way around.  It's readable with
>>>> the camera horizontal, but not vertical.
>>>> 
>>>> Opinions can differ on this of course, but for my purposes LR 4 does a
>>>> better job of processing the RAW files than the Fuji RAW converter does.
>>>> There is less blotchy chroma noise and sharpness is almost as good.
>>>> OTH, converting the RAW files to DNG and importing them into LR seems
>>>> to take forever, maybe 3-4 times as long as it takes to import files 
>>>> from
>>> my D300.
>>>> 
>>>> The only thing about the camera that drives me nuts is the power switch.
>>>> Whoever designed it needs to go in for some remedial work on detent
>>> design.
>>>> Even the slightest brush of the hand or the side of a camera bags turns
>>> the
>>>> camera on.   Bad, bad, bad.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Dick
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information




Replies: Reply from jsmith342 at gmail.com (Jeffery Smith) ([Leica] Using the Fuji X Pro-1)
Reply from john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] Using the Fuji X Pro-1)
In reply to: Message from r.s.taylor at comcast.net (Richard Taylor) ([Leica] Using the Fuji X Pro-1)