/p/ - Photography » Thread #3107429

[47 / 5 / ?]

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 12:04:30 No.3107429 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3107531 >>3107578 >>3107728 >>3107946 >>3108040

>no IBIS
>no OIS on primes
>proprietary Bayer array that causes issues with RAW editors
>primes are soft wide open
>zero interest from third-party lens manufacturers
I don't understand how they're still in business, when they refuse to progress with the times.

t. disgruntled Fujifilm film camera user

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 12:31:08 No.3107448 Report

Quoted By: >>3107536

Why do turbofags like OP keep making pointless, shitty bait threads like this?
You're the cancer that's killing /p/.

Saged.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 14:21:46 No.3107531 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107429
fuji has never built a large, extensive, competitive camera system. you got what you paid for.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 14:30:03 No.3107536 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107448
Agreed.

>t. disgruntled Fujifilm film camera user
You're not fooling anyone, sonygger.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 15:29:39 No.3107559 Report

Quoted By: >>3107578

Because they still have the best image colors and control dials out there. Pretty simple, honestly.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1372554944961.jpg, 4KiB, 125x119

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 16:13:47 No.3107576 Report

Quoted By: >>3107594

>claims to shoot film
>doesn't understand how Fujifilm are still in business
Well, I would never expect some fucking pleb who shoots in aperture priority and manages to miss the gear thread by a fucking continent to understand something so simple.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 16:17:22 No.3107578 Report

Quoted By: >>3107581

>>3107559
for jpeg, sure. it's subjective and some people still prefer canon but if you're shooting raw it doesn't matter because you can post process whatever colors you want.
>>3107429
fuji is a nostalgia brand now financed by their instax line
their forray into medium format is interesting though, I'm excited to see the line grow

Sony is good on spec sheets, but their menus are for goddamn robots. the images are fine, but they definitely aren't my first choice either

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 16:25:49 No.3107581 Report

Quoted By: >>3107633

>>3107578
>but if you're shooting raw it doesn't matter because you can post process whatever colors you want

You would think this is the case but I find images from Fuji cameras to look better than other digital cameras. Maybe it's placebo...

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 16:45:11 No.3107594 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107576
This desu.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 16:55:21 No.3107597 Report

Quoted By: >>3107605

As someone who shoots fujifilm, I genuinely wish it had ibis. A stabilized x100 would be tits.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 17:12:01 No.3107605 Report

Quoted By: >>3107608

>>3107597
rumors are that ibis is coming

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 17:17:11 No.3107608 Report

Quoted By: >>3107616

>>3107605
They've said on the past their image circle wasn't large enough to support it, or something.

What's changed?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 17:38:36 No.3107616 Report

Quoted By: >>3107618

>>3107608

That sounds like bullshit. m4/3 has a smaller image circle than Fuji. Hell, the iPhone plus has OIS.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 17:49:16 No.3107618 Report

Quoted By: >>3107626

>>3107616
Wouldn't it be the size of the image circle relative to the size of the sensor? Easy to control on iPhone. Maybe there's no room for error with Fuji's lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 17:58:25 No.3107621 Report

Quoted By:

Stop replying to these threads. We've had this very same "discussion" over and over and over again. FFS, /p/.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 18:08:29 No.3107626 Report

Quoted By: >>3107630

>>3107618

Pretty much all lenses from any manufacturer are built to have the smallest image circle possible and still cover the sensor. That's why vignetting is a thing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 18:23:52 No.3107630 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107626
Okay, but they'd build a lens to create a larger image circle if they intended it to be used with a body with IBIS, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_stabilization

>In-body image stabilization requires the lens to have a larger output image circle because the sensor is moved during exposure and thus uses a larger part of the image. Compared to lens movements in optical image stabilization systems the sensor movements are quite large, so the effectiveness is limited by the maximum range of sensor movement, where a typical modern optically stabilized lens has greater freedom. The required sensor movement (both speed and range) increase with the focal length of the lens being used, making sensor-shift technology less suited for very long telephoto lenses, especially when using slower shutter speeds because the available motion range of the sensor quickly becomes insufficient to cope with the increasing image displacement.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 18:25:50 No.3107633 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107581
I mean if you're using Lightroom, I can see that since Adobe hates the xtrans sensor. if straight out of camera it's already close to what you want that means a simpler workflow which is always a plus.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 18:35:10 No.3107635 Report

Quoted By: >>3107643 >>3107646 >>3107650 >>3107652 >>3107926 >>3107927 >>3107960

How overblown are the RAW issues anyways?
Is it something only pixel peepers or people who do prints will notice?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 18:55:06 No.3107643 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107635

You can see it at web sizes sometimes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 18:58:31 No.3107646 Report

Quoted By: >>3107661

>>3107635
It's just adobe and their shit (de)coders, massively exacerbated by the photofag's propensity for oversharpening.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 19:04:21 No.3107650 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107635
It's really not as big a deal as some on here make it out to be.
Still, now it's available on Windows, I prefer working with files first converted to DNG with Iridient X-Transformer to (more than) satisfy my pixel peeping needs.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 19:05:36 No.3107652 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107635
It's an issue only for pixel peepers who are too dumb or lazy to learn new things. In reality you can get good results with lightroom, you just have to do different adjustments. E.g. the "details" in the noise reduction should be zero and sharpening radius 1 or smaller among other things. I'd also recommend trying other software. On1 photoraw, capture one and rawtherapee all do even better job than LR. I'm just now trying out rawtherapee and while it isn't as streamlined as LR, there's a ton of powerful tools in it. The learning curve is steep, but it is free, faster than LR and with just some basic settings it can give you really nice images. It doesn't do file managing like LR, but I personally don't like to use that feature in LR either. I'll post some pics later.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 19:35:24 No.3107661 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107646
this

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 19:57:43 No.3107673 Report

Quoted By: >>3107730 >>3107731 >>3107960

Why would you want IS on primes?
When you are shooting prime, you are probably trying to attain the highest image quality possible, and IS would be detrimental to IQ. Prime lenses also tend to be fast, and of such focal lengths, that there is no point in having IS on them.

Also, if you can't get steady shots without IS then you should probably hone your shooting technique. Since you are probably shooting stationary subjects, just take your time and shoot until you get a shake-free one. With honed technique one should be able to take steady shots with 1/2 second shutter speed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 22:19:53 No.3107728 Report

Quoted By: >>3107834

>>3107429

Probably because they make the only camera system that is actually reminiscent of the golden age of 35mm photography when we had many Japanese manufacturers putting out small, finely made SLRs with exquisite primes that were fun to shoot with.

If you want to dick around with menus or have fat cameras with plastic wheels instead of physical dials, then you already have that with almost every other manufacturer. And if you actually need stabilisation on a prime you should start reconsidering your technique. For everything else Fuji offers excellent ois in lens, just look at the 50-140mm. I have got crisp sharp shots with that at 2 second exposures with that lens, I shit you not.

Clearly Fuji resonates with an older generation of photographers who didn't want to have the ugly late-90s style of camera forced upon them with plastic bodies and shitty ergonomics, which were followed by more of that garbage with digital instead of film.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 22:21:47 No.3107730 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107673

Fuck off luddite.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO fuck IS.jpg, 59KiB, 650x424

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 22:23:59 No.3107731 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107673

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jul 2017 00:45:51 No.3107834 Report

Quoted By: >>3107941 >>3108000 >>3108496

>>3107728
>implying Olympus doesn't have all of those characteristics, including physical dials

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jul 2017 06:38:39 No.3107926 Report

Quoted By: >>3107927

>>3107635
I printed a 16x24 from x100f to see how it went on an alright photo and it looks fine. If you pixel peep the photo on a screen you can see some corner blurriness but on the wall it looks fine

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image.jpg, 47KiB, 533x710

Anonymous Wed 05 Jul 2017 06:39:57 No.3107927 Report

Quoted By: >>3108011

>>3107926
>>3107635
whoops forgot the image

ive loaded the same file up with xtransformer and its definitely sharper so I'd recommend using xtransformer if you want peak sharpness

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jul 2017 08:00:55 No.3107941 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107834
> micro 4/3

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO e1e177.jpg, 84KiB, 800x533

Anonymous Wed 05 Jul 2017 08:20:20 No.3107946 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107429

>2017
>buying a digitql camera from a chemical company

I mean, what did you expect?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jul 2017 09:06:48 No.3107960 Report

Quoted By: >>3108034

>>3107635
When all the lenses are at a premium price point but images all come out as sharp as a soligor lens from the 80's it gets a bit disheartening. Web sizes can look ok but you lose that 3d pop.

The sharpening "fix" in adobe is bullshit too, unless you like halos and artifacts. None of this fixes the smeared colours either, next time you see teeth or eyes in a fuji shot, look at how they are tinted slightly skin coloured.

>>3107673
An extra 2 to 3 stops is frequently useful, versatility is what a better body offers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jul 2017 11:46:58 No.3108000 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107834
>implying it does

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jul 2017 12:06:58 No.3108011 Report

Quoted By: >>3108072

>>3107927
>xtransformer

Do you need a Mac for this?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jul 2017 13:04:06 No.3108034 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107960
I thought you were colourblind lad?

Maybe leave the discussion on iq to those who are actually in a position to judge.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jul 2017 13:19:44 No.3108040 Report

Quoted By: >>3108046 >>3108484

>>3107429
Does the lack of third party support really affect Fuji cameras, I'm trying to make money off my photography but if the workflow isn't fluid then I shouldn't be using the Fuji ecosystem am I right?

Should what you have stated above, deter me from buying Fuji and get a Nikon or canon instead for more "professional" and business work?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jul 2017 13:31:45 No.3108046 Report

Quoted By:

>>3108040
>putting decisions about your livelihood in the hands of this board.

Not even once senpai.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jul 2017 14:43:01 No.3108072 Report

Quoted By: >>3108451

>>3108011
no it works on all platforms

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jul 2017 21:51:14 No.3108287 Report

Quoted By: >>3108451

>http://mirrorlesscomparison.com/fujifilm-vs-olympus/omd-em1-mark-ii-vs-fuji-xt2/
Basically, it's all the same shit in the end.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Jul 2017 07:45:26 No.3108451 Report

Quoted By: >>3108482

>>3108072
I don't know about that, it says only demo version for Windows...

>>3108287
No it really isn't, did you read the article even?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Jul 2017 09:33:30 No.3108482 Report

Quoted By:

>>3108451
Did you?
It basically boiled down to

Fuji
>better continuous AF
>APS-C means higher ISOs can be used for moving subjects in low-light

Olympus
>better everything else
>live composite is fucking amazing and worth the trade-off of not being able to shoot moving subjects at low light

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Jul 2017 09:35:50 No.3108484 Report

Quoted By: >>3108520 >>3108525

>>3108040
The lack of flash options make it unsuitable, a 3 strobe kit and master controller is pretty standard for a pro, with godox/yongnuo it's about $500 for the lot, on fuji it's just under $500 per flash and you need an extra one as a master controller as fuji don't do a stand alone unit.

Also pros tend to use the holy trinity of zooms, 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200, ideally all f2.8 and on full frame. None of these lens equivalents exist in the fuji system.

You will also be limited by the sensor size, bigger sensor = less noise & sharper images, full frame has over double the surface area of fujis crop sensors.

Sony, canon and nikon all have fantastic pro options and it comes down to whether you want an evf or ovf, or is there any specific features that you need, for example nothing on the market comes close to the a7sii for low light video.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Jul 2017 10:02:24 No.3108496 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107834
>MFT

You are like a little baby

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Jul 2017 11:50:51 No.3108520 Report

Quoted By:

>>3108484
Neck thyself, basement dweller.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Jul 2017 12:11:39 No.3108525 Report

Quoted By:

>>3108484
What is the 10-24mm f4, 16-55mm f2.8, 50-140mm f2.8 then?

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches