MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => Photography Equipment => Cameras / Lenses => Topic started by: Ed on November 24, 2012, 21:48
-
Any opinions?
I've taken a new day job that has me working 10 - 12 hour days (but making a ton of money with great benefits). This leaves me with my lunch hour photos and the DSLR with a 24-70 is too big and too conspicuous...so I plan on spending the hour walking around and creating images.
Anyone have one? Any thoughts?
-
I like the Fuji myself but I think the range of different lenses is very limited compared to some micro 4/3 cameras. Also the auto focus speed is slow, hit and miss. Might not be good for action shots. But the quality of shots is very nice, natural looking.
-
Google: fuji chroma smearing
also: fuji watercolor effect
Also: A Few More Photos From Galway and a rant about the X-Pro1 (http://blog.thomasfitzgeraldphotography.com/2012/06/photos-galway-rant-x-pro1/#)
LSS - there seem to be unresolved issues with images made using the current sensor
-
Google: fuji chroma smearing
also: fuji watercolor effect
Also: A Few More Photos From Galway and a rant about the X-Pro1 ([url]http://blog.thomasfitzgeraldphotography.com/2012/06/photos-galway-rant-x-pro1/#[/url])
LSS - there seem to be unresolved issues with images made using the current sensor
It appears that the majority of the complaints I've read about surround post processing of RAW files - what you point out above. I have not read anything negative yet about Lightroom 4.2 (the latest upgrade - what I'm running) and the RAW file conversion. From what I understand, Adobe addressed this in the latest release. I'm also not too concerned in that my understanding is you can apply changes within the camera. If shooting a landscape, I can shoot in RAW, then apply the Velvia pre-set within the camera and export both the RAW and the JPG version on download.
I know there have also been some complaints about focus in low light, but I don't see that being any different than with a 5D MK II.
...this is why I'm asking if anyone has first hand experience. One thing I am noticing is that there are a lot of photographers providing reviews on the camera that appear to have forgotten the film days of getting it right in the camera...and how to use exposure compensation and such (I've seen a lot of examples of under-exposed or over-exposed images). Getting back to basics is also one of the reasons the camera is so intriguing to me.
This is one of those reviews => http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/tag/x-pro-1/ (http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/tag/x-pro-1/)
-
I have not read anything negative yet about Lightroom 4.2 (the latest upgrade - what I'm running) and the RAW file conversion. From what I understand, Adobe addressed this in the latest release.
Lightroom 4.2 and the Fuji X-Pro - oh dear..... (http://chromasoft.blogspot.com/2012/10/lightroom-42-and-fuji-x-pro-oh-dear.html)
The guy who writes that blog is a software developer who also writes RAW conversion software. I have been following his posts for a while - because I will probably buy one of the Fujis when they have definitely ironed out the bugs. His belief seems to be that the design of the new sensor is fundamentally flawed. I have no idea whether he is right.
-
I have not read anything negative yet about Lightroom 4.2 (the latest upgrade - what I'm running) and the RAW file conversion. From what I understand, Adobe addressed this in the latest release.
Lightroom 4.2 and the Fuji X-Pro - oh dear..... ([url]http://chromasoft.blogspot.com/2012/10/lightroom-42-and-fuji-x-pro-oh-dear.html[/url])
The guy who writes that blog is a software developer who also writes RAW conversion software. I have been following his posts for a while - because I will probably buy one of the Fujis when they have definitely ironed out the bugs. His belief seems to be that the design of the new sensor is fundamentally flawed. I have no idea whether he is right.
Interesting. Thanks.