I'm pretty lazy as well but then I've done basically the same thing for many years - taking images with the camera and processing them elsewhere, in the darkroom or on a laptop.Thanks. The reason I shoot JPEGs is process. I like that the process starts and finishes with the camera. I like that I can´t think "Just shoot, you can always adjust later". I do not want to process of creating pictures to be extended to my computer. That, and I am lazyBut I do understand and appreciate that many feel like you do.
-
Cameraderie, a friendly photography forum, join now for free!
Lightmancer
Legend
- Location
- Sunny Frimley
- Name
- Bill Palmer
Years ago - I shall try to dig it out - I wrote a piece that compared jpg and raw to slide and print film. I compared jpg to slide because what you did at the time of pressing the shutter dictated what you ended up with; there was very limited scope for post processing. This was a familiar discipline to me after decades of shooting colour positive materials. I equated raw to reversal print film - particularly because you could play around with it in post and drive out the result you wanted.
Now, I never enjoyed darkroom work and sitting in front of a PC years ago running a copy of Photoshop 7 and some user-hostile and flaky raw converter was never my idea of fun. I perfected a workflow that maximised the benefits of jpg and didn't require me to spend aeons tinkering in a spare bedroom.
Fast forward to today. SooC jpgs are in a different league, as are raw converters both built in and aftermarket. The photographer has more choice, more options and far more flexibility to determine his results at time of exposure and after the event.
Today I shoot raw+jpg as a matter of course. 95% of the time I work from the SooC jpg. If I process from raw it's to get a different effect, and again 95% of the time I do so with the in-camera converter on either my Fujis or my Ricoh GR. I'm happy with the results I obtain and the time I take to achieve them fits within my "ecology" and ensures that when we come back from a trip or an event my wife doesn't spend the next few evenings as a Photoshop widow.
Is it fast food? Hardly. I'd equate fast food to what gets spewed out of cameraphones and posted on Facebook and Instagram every day - tasteless and unimaginative pap, enlivened by crappy "filters" (would you like fries with that?) These days I would equate the jpgs produced by a "sensible" camera as table d'hote and raw files as a lá carte. And I've never seen a mushy green with either
Make sense?
Now, I never enjoyed darkroom work and sitting in front of a PC years ago running a copy of Photoshop 7 and some user-hostile and flaky raw converter was never my idea of fun. I perfected a workflow that maximised the benefits of jpg and didn't require me to spend aeons tinkering in a spare bedroom.
Fast forward to today. SooC jpgs are in a different league, as are raw converters both built in and aftermarket. The photographer has more choice, more options and far more flexibility to determine his results at time of exposure and after the event.
Today I shoot raw+jpg as a matter of course. 95% of the time I work from the SooC jpg. If I process from raw it's to get a different effect, and again 95% of the time I do so with the in-camera converter on either my Fujis or my Ricoh GR. I'm happy with the results I obtain and the time I take to achieve them fits within my "ecology" and ensures that when we come back from a trip or an event my wife doesn't spend the next few evenings as a Photoshop widow.
Is it fast food? Hardly. I'd equate fast food to what gets spewed out of cameraphones and posted on Facebook and Instagram every day - tasteless and unimaginative pap, enlivened by crappy "filters" (would you like fries with that?) These days I would equate the jpgs produced by a "sensible" camera as table d'hote and raw files as a lá carte. And I've never seen a mushy green with either
Make sense?
Lightmancer
Legend
- Location
- Sunny Frimley
- Name
- Bill Palmer
Blimey. I wrote this nearly a lustrum ago... Rangefound: Replacement therapy
Getting back to the OP!
IMO, the xp1 is all about the OVF, if you're not feeling that, then there's better out there.
But in terms of the XP1 being perfectly useable?
Of course it is, and in good light (ie a lot of light) and with the older XF lenses in single shot mode it's not that far behind far behind my XT1
In fact true be told, I only use my XP1 in 'back button' focus mode.
And I actually get less OOF shots than I do on the XT1 because I'm confirning focus for each and every single one before hand, whilst on the XT1 I trust the AF, but it's obviously not infallible, so you can get the odd hiccup!
The XP1 is the only camera I've ever bought twice! And about 85% of my blog is devoted too it <shameless plug>see my sig</shameless plug>
IMO, the xp1 is all about the OVF, if you're not feeling that, then there's better out there.
But in terms of the XP1 being perfectly useable?
Of course it is, and in good light (ie a lot of light) and with the older XF lenses in single shot mode it's not that far behind far behind my XT1
In fact true be told, I only use my XP1 in 'back button' focus mode.
And I actually get less OOF shots than I do on the XT1 because I'm confirning focus for each and every single one before hand, whilst on the XT1 I trust the AF, but it's obviously not infallible, so you can get the odd hiccup!
The XP1 is the only camera I've ever bought twice! And about 85% of my blog is devoted too it <shameless plug>see my sig</shameless plug>
I have both xpro 1 and xt1... both are very highly recommend. .. the 2 lenses you mention are my go to favourites. . Its hard to see where you can go wrong with a xpro1.. i paid 350£ new for mine and the guy has some left at closer to 300£ now.. heres a pic with the 35 ff2.0 sooc jpeg..
Iansky
All-Pro
- Location
- Cotswolds, UK
I picked up a brand new X-Pro1+18, 27mm and Fuji case for £600 before Christmas as many retailers were trying clear stock.
I have put 3.50 firmware on it and it performs really well (a tad better than even my X100s) and is a perfect camera for street/portrait/landscape.
I am so pleased with the form factor, IQ and speed that I have traded in all my little used Micro4/3 kit that has allowed me to pay up front for a new X-Pro2, grip, case, spare battery and 2 x 290mbs cards so now just have to sit back and await delivery.
I had been thinking about consolidation for a while so now have the Fuji kit and for airshows/car racing/sport I have the superfast Nikon D810 kit so a balance of kits for all eventualities.
I have put 3.50 firmware on it and it performs really well (a tad better than even my X100s) and is a perfect camera for street/portrait/landscape.
I am so pleased with the form factor, IQ and speed that I have traded in all my little used Micro4/3 kit that has allowed me to pay up front for a new X-Pro2, grip, case, spare battery and 2 x 290mbs cards so now just have to sit back and await delivery.
I had been thinking about consolidation for a while so now have the Fuji kit and for airshows/car racing/sport I have the superfast Nikon D810 kit so a balance of kits for all eventualities.
Akashi
Regular
Thanks for the input. I am so seriously not able to decide. I dont want to risk being disappointed with the AF. Argh, if only I could try it first
I have the feeling I either love or hate it. It is a used one for about 400 £, crap I dont know what to do. Do anyone know of any YT videos of a comparison of AF (low light or natural) between X-Pro1 and any mu4/3? With the newest X-Pro Firmware of course
Last edited by a moderator:
ean10775
All-Pro
- Location
- Cleveland, Ohio
- Name
- Eric
Thanks for the input. I am so seriously not able to decide. I dont want to risk being disappointed with the AF. Argh, if only I could try it first
I don't know of any videos, but if you're comparing it to SAF with a current generation micro four thirds camera you are very likely to be disappointed. My X100T doesn't even compare to my GX7 when it comes to AF speed, especially in lower light. Just like with micro four thirds though, some lenses are going to focus more slowly than others - for example, the 35mm f1.4 and 60mm f2.4 Macro are likely to be the slowest of the bunch, whereas something like the 35mm f2 WR will be faster.
400 pounds seems like a bit much to me, seeing as you can get new bodies in the US for $499, but obviously exchange rates are what they are.
Iirc £250 is approx. The going rate on ebay...
M4/3 will kick its bum in AF, for one thing the smaller sensor of M4/3 means DOF is larger for the same aperture, so it's easier for the camera to acquire focus, and for another the smaller sensor of M4/3 means the camera's processor has less data to process to ascertain that it has focus...
My LX100 murders my XP1 for AF... But my XP1 slaughters the LX100 on ISO performance above 1600 (the Fuji SOOC jpegs are nicer too)
M4/3 will kick its bum in AF, for one thing the smaller sensor of M4/3 means DOF is larger for the same aperture, so it's easier for the camera to acquire focus, and for another the smaller sensor of M4/3 means the camera's processor has less data to process to ascertain that it has focus...
My LX100 murders my XP1 for AF... But my XP1 slaughters the LX100 on ISO performance above 1600 (the Fuji SOOC jpegs are nicer too)
Lawrence A.
Hall of Famer
- Location
- New Mexico
- Name
- Larry
I just put the 27mm on my X-Pro and pointed it around the room with shades down and lit with electric light -- a dim room in other words, if not really dark -- and the camera focused in well under a second except in the dimmest places. (Shutter speeds were 1/30 to 1/85 at iso 6400, to give you an idea of the available light) Taking up the E-M5 (original) with the Olympus 25mm, the E-M5 was faster, but I didn't feel the Fuji was slow.
I use the 27mm lens on the camera about 90% of the time - and mostly legacy glass the rest of the time. The 40mm POV is just about like the 35mm rangefinders I first shot back in the ice age. The shot below was taken with it. It's plenty sharp and focuses quickly on the X-Pro 1. The 25's are better, but I like the field of view from this lens, and I've got the 50mm eqv. on my m43 system.
I got my X-Pro 1 in August after everyone knew a new version was on the way. If an optical viewfinder is important to you, you will love, unless you really do need state of the art, best in class auto focus. It won't give you that, but it will give you a shooting experience that is wonderful and hard to match.
Unlike Bill from Sunny Frimley, I loved darkroom work and worked at enlargers in custom photo labs for over 30 years, and I also enjoy working with my raw files. The X-Pro 1, though, and probably the entire Fuji stable, produce jpegs that are astonishingly good, frankly.
From one person who had wanted to the X-Pro 1 for a long time and finally saw a chance to get a kit I could afford, I say "just get it". I had thought of selling mine to get the new Pen-F, but I just cannot do it. I love the camera too much.
I use the 27mm lens on the camera about 90% of the time - and mostly legacy glass the rest of the time. The 40mm POV is just about like the 35mm rangefinders I first shot back in the ice age. The shot below was taken with it. It's plenty sharp and focuses quickly on the X-Pro 1. The 25's are better, but I like the field of view from this lens, and I've got the 50mm eqv. on my m43 system.
I got my X-Pro 1 in August after everyone knew a new version was on the way. If an optical viewfinder is important to you, you will love, unless you really do need state of the art, best in class auto focus. It won't give you that, but it will give you a shooting experience that is wonderful and hard to match.
Unlike Bill from Sunny Frimley, I loved darkroom work and worked at enlargers in custom photo labs for over 30 years, and I also enjoy working with my raw files. The X-Pro 1, though, and probably the entire Fuji stable, produce jpegs that are astonishingly good, frankly.
From one person who had wanted to the X-Pro 1 for a long time and finally saw a chance to get a kit I could afford, I say "just get it". I had thought of selling mine to get the new Pen-F, but I just cannot do it. I love the camera too much.
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Iansky
All-Pro
- Location
- Cotswolds, UK
I have not been dissapointed with the AF since updating the firmware to 3.50 (latest X-Pro1 version) and it is faster than my X100s and very accurate.
It also focusses very well in low light and I use it with the 18mm f2 / 35mm f1.4 / 56mm f1.2 and to date have no complaints and it is perfect for street where superfast speed is not essential.
I have to say that prices here in the UK have gone up again and now a new X-Pro1 will cost you between £649.00(John Lewis) with the cheapest price from a reputable dealer being £382.00 from Calumet Photographic so prices that before Christmas included 2 lenses and a Fuji case are back to being just for the camera alone!
Still a great buy with a superb sensor so if you have the lenses its a bit of a no brainer providing you like camera style / format.
A few images taken with the superb 35mm f1.4.
It also focusses very well in low light and I use it with the 18mm f2 / 35mm f1.4 / 56mm f1.2 and to date have no complaints and it is perfect for street where superfast speed is not essential.
I have to say that prices here in the UK have gone up again and now a new X-Pro1 will cost you between £649.00(John Lewis) with the cheapest price from a reputable dealer being £382.00 from Calumet Photographic so prices that before Christmas included 2 lenses and a Fuji case are back to being just for the camera alone!
Still a great buy with a superb sensor so if you have the lenses its a bit of a no brainer providing you like camera style / format.
A few images taken with the superb 35mm f1.4.
Last edited by a moderator:
Akashi
Regular
After the review from TCS
where they say that AF is not improved my much over the X-Pro1, that certainly makes a used X-Pro1 look better and better. What do you think?
Lightmancer
Legend
- Location
- Sunny Frimley
- Name
- Bill Palmer
Who's TCS?
Akashi
Regular
Lightmancer
Legend
- Location
- Sunny Frimley
- Name
- Bill Palmer
Ah. I'm not a big video person, either doing or watching; I confess I didn't click on the above. I find it incredibly frustrating as a medium for the consumption of facts; I'd far rather read, at my own pace and in the order that I want, skipping over some stuff and focussing on what interests me, reading and rereading as necessary. I find video (and audio) far too restrictive due to it's "linear" nature.
Some more impressions from some knowledgeable folks; c'est ca. Anyway, they primarily compared the AF performance to the X-T1 (didn't they?) and when it comes to my needs - no sports/kids but a lot of candid portraits of people that move, most of the time shot with large apertures I'm using the X-Pro1 in MF mode with back button focusing and manual corrections as needed. For me that's the fastest and most reliable way to focus that camera and I usually end up with a high keeper rate. So for my stuff I'm really tempted by some of the new features (Af joystick!), but not enough to place an order - the X-Pro1 is still good and fast enough for what I use it for.
