Fuji On my Blog: My Review of the Fuji X-System

phil62

Regular
Oct 27, 2013
Great review and lovely images. Personally I love the idiosyncrasies of the X cameras - they're a great antidote to some other products that just work without having to think about them. BTW, having previously argued otherwise and now thought about it a little more, I think you're right that Fuji shouldn't get involved in the current race to FF.
 

carlb

All-Pro
Feb 6, 2013
I have GAS for the new X-E2, but reading this my logical side says to wait - my X-E1 does fine for what I need of it now ... Sigh!
 

Miserere

Regular
Sep 22, 2010
Boston, MA
Good overview of the X system, John, though I was a bit surprised you didn't mention that most of the XF lenses are metal on the outside (excepting only the pancakes, I believe). Some people really love their metal lenses...

Your images were great, as always; I loved the subdued use of coloured flash in the foundry. Seeing the Now from the Then is a lovely image, but the one that truly gripped my heart was Eternal Timeout.
 

entropic remnants

Hall of Famer
Mar 3, 2013
John Griggs
Thanks, all.

Good overview of the X system, John, though I was a bit surprised you didn't mention that most of the XF lenses are metal on the outside (excepting only the pancakes, I believe). Some people really love their metal lenses...

Your images were great, as always; I loved the subdued use of coloured flash in the foundry. Seeing the Now from the Then is a lovely image, but the one that truly gripped my heart was Eternal Timeout.
I appreciate you taking the time to read it and you are right that it was an omission on my part. Hopefully, if anyone is interested, they will do their "due diligence" and discover all sorts of great details I missed, lol.

Yes, the bunny is quite a fellow -- in a creepy sort of way!
 

madmaxmedia

Veteran
Nov 10, 2010
Los Angeles
Really wonderful images, not only to look at but to show off the capabilities of Fuji's system!

I think it would be a great idea for you to do a blog post on your workflow, your final images have great range and punch.

I had 1 practical question about AF. I have plenty of experience with the X100 but only now starting out with Fuji X. Already I love love love the 35mm f/1.4, I am amazed at what you get from that lens wide open on X-Pro1.

I will likely be 'downgrading' from that body to a smaller one, either X-M1 or X-E1. If the X-M1 has faster AF then I will go with that (plus it's smaller and cheaper.)

I imagine the X-Pro1 and X-E1 have same AF performance, so my question is will the X-M1 be faster? I find the 35mm AF on the X-Pro1 to be adequate- solid but not particularly speedy. I could live with it, but would be happier with faster. Any tips based on your experience with all the bodies?

On a side note, I can't believe the current price for the 35mm with the Fuji rebate. It's so crisp at f/1.4, and without Olympus JPEG sharpening artifacts.

Thanks!
 

digitalandfilm

Regular
Aug 2, 2011
"I use Lightroom's RAW system when the material works with it, but some images – and particularly ones with a lot of green detail like foliage – call out for a better RAW development more like the JPG engine in the camera. To the rescue comes people like Iridient, Photo Ninja, and even Capture One I think is good with it now. X-Trans can deliver like no other sensor I've used BUT it's not something for the casual shooter I don't think. These cameras (except the X-A1) require a more skilled photographer to get the most out of them. Taking the time to learn how to do that is very rewarding."

I don't understand this assessment. If the software can read the RAW file, then all the parameters should be editable.. in LR, Iridient, or whatever.

I see no difference at all when I use LR or any other software/plug-in. The only wildcard was my Sigma DP2 w/Fovean sensor.. that was a totally different animal.

I looked at the greenest shot I took recently, and it was shot with legacy glass.. not coated as today's glass.. and I liked what I saw. Not too saturated, not *off* at all.

 

entropic remnants

Hall of Famer
Mar 3, 2013
John Griggs
"I use Lightroom's RAW system when the material works with it, but some images – and particularly ones with a lot of green detail like foliage – call out for a better RAW development more like the JPG engine in the camera. To the rescue comes people like Iridient, Photo Ninja, and even Capture One I think is good with it now. X-Trans can deliver like no other sensor I've used BUT it's not something for the casual shooter I don't think. These cameras (except the X-A1) require a more skilled photographer to get the most out of them. Taking the time to learn how to do that is very rewarding."

I don't understand this assessment. If the software can read the RAW file, then all the parameters should be editable.. in LR, Iridient, or whatever.

I see no difference at all when I use LR or any other software/plug-in. The only wildcard was my Sigma DP2 w/Fovean sensor.. that was a totally different animal.

I looked at the greenest shot I took recently, and it was shot with legacy glass.. not coated as today's glass.. and I liked what I saw. Not too saturated, not *off* at all.

If you can't tell the differences in the shots when de-mosaiced with the different packages then it doesn't matter to you which software you use and that's fine -- but it's not a parameter problem that the user can overcome with sliders and other adjustments. The actual conversion from the sensor data to a full-res RGB photo is tricky with the X-System and you should do some research on this as you'll find clear examples of it. I myself posted examples of foliage deterioration under Lightroom and the better result in Photo Ninja.

The material that you posted doesn't have the longer edges of green that the X-Trans conversions from Adobe can struggle with. I suggest studying RAW conversion and the X-System more as you don't quite seem to understand why RAW conversion isn't a simple, easily definable process that is controlled by the user because it generally isn't and this is particularly true with X-Trans.

Good luck regardless and thanks for the post.
 

Jman13

Regular
Mar 7, 2013
Columbus, OH
I second the request for any tips on your post processing workflow. The images are excellent, but you are doing wonders with the tonal range in these images: punchy, contrasty, but with gorgeous soft smooth transitions. That's very hard to achieve.
 

entropic remnants

Hall of Famer
Mar 3, 2013
John Griggs
Quick reply to acknowledge your request and thanks -- I will put something together and link something I did before on it. The general idea is a slide film look without slide film's dynamic range limitations. I think that's what you're seeing and thanks for noticing! :)

I'm traveling on business and not on my home computer so I don't have everything I'd like to have to reference, but I'll get something together soon.
 

madmaxmedia

Veteran
Nov 10, 2010
Los Angeles
Slide look without slide film's dynamic range limitations- that describes it perfectly...

Also, when you are back, I would love to hear any brief feedback on my question regarding AF speed of the X-M1 vs. older X bodies (X-E1, X-Pro1). Thanks!
 

Latest threads

Top Bottom