Popular Content

Showing most liked content since 05/23/2017 in all areas

  1. 3 likes
    Since my little weevil has generated some interest I thought I'd start a topic and show some other examples of handheld stacking. My tips - your subject does have to be relatively cooperative - at least enough to stay pretty still for 5 or 6 to a dozen shots. You don't have to use every image you shoot in your stack and it's always better to have more than less, so over shoot rather than undershoot. The technique you use will vary with the equipment you are using - but your stacking software shouldn't care. If you use a tripod you'll have to readjust your focus to create your images. Handheld - move the camera. Tripod with a rail - move the camera. If you hand hold try to be as steady has possible it will work out best if you only move in one plane- tiny variations up/down side/side won't hurt you too badly, but changes in perspective (tilting the camera) will make for some strange artifacts. Post processing - I've only used Photoshop for this, so can't comment on other software packages. Put your images into layers in a single file - choose the layers you want to blend. In the "edit" menu use the "auto-align layers" function then "auto-blend layers" (choosing stacking in the options) Be prepared to go in and do some hand adjustments to the masking - and save your stack file as invariably (as you'll see below) you'll find some little glitch you missed the first time through. I'll try to answer any other questions that you might have. This crane fly was one of the first stacks that I tried. There are some spots on the legs on the that I definitely could have adjusted better.. The other two are fairly old - so I'd have to go onto my backup hard drive to dig up the info on how many shots I took to make the stack, but this one is pretty recent. There are 5 shots in the final stack and 3 I didn't use. I can recall taking a bit of time to correct the antenna though looking at it now, I can totally see a few glitchy bits in the grass I could use to fix.
  2. 3 likes
    Besides it being the answer to your prayers enabling, you to process DNGs in PS CS5 ACR (same as me but I also have LR6), but it handles the tricky demosaicing with which Adobe has problems. Below are my base settings for IXT if it is a help as a starting point. Sharpen with Nik sharpener for best results (IMO) - not LR or PS sharpening. Vic
  3. 3 likes
    The camera is four years old how long is a manufacturer either supposed to or legally required to cover something like a basic charger under warranty? When my X100s charger packed up 12 months ago I went to the local electronics store and got a generic replacement charger that is 100 times better than the Fuji unit (runs on AC plus DC from the car, charges multiple batteries with adjustable pins, auto sensing polarity, LCD display, USB charger port) for less than the cost of the time and postage involved in sending the original one back to Fuji.
  4. 2 likes
    Bandoneón, a restaurant in Bonn / Germany

    © Kağan Kayal

  5. 2 likes
    If it works for you that would be great but I actually can't think of anything worse than having a whole bunch of different file names. What happens if you go from CART to BARC and forget to rename your files as I know I would? If you want you can take a small paper notepad and write the name of each town or location on it and take a shot of the notepad at arrival then you will know all images until the next notepad shot are at the location. When you import images into LR if you use LR it is easy to add tags for each location on import.
  6. 2 likes
    hand held short stack (4 or 5 images stacked)
  7. 2 likes
  8. 2 likes
    Wow! What a great surprise. Your purchase will seem like a different camera - literally!
  9. 2 likes
    Entering Sequoia Nat'l Park in California recently through a nice fog layer. Dogwoods didn't hurt.
  10. 2 likes
    1. Go to Lightroom preferences and tick the box that says "treat jpeg files next to raw files as separate photos" 2. That is correct. Simulations are only applied to jpegs. You can re add the simulations to the raw files in LR but they are Adobes version not Fujis version so they are close but not identical.(LR Develop module, down the bottom on the right side of screen under Camera Calibration)
  11. 2 likes
    I don't know about you guys but I am feeling like a very talented guy for being able to use this camera in spite of all these faults.
  12. 1 like
    It is very small; I was forewarned about that. My 35/1.4 is no slouch, but the camera paired with my amazing 27 weighs 461g, about the same as my X100S. I am uncertain if the sensor is actually the same model as the XT2's, but it is amazing! i was a bit surprised that its RAW files are 48Mb, compared to 45Mb from my D810. The EVF is small so the user has to use every silly millimeter of the eye relief to view the entire frame but the video quality is excellent compared to older models like my XE1. A good buy for me at its price I think.
  13. 1 like
    Hey guys hope everyone is doing well. First off I'm super excited because I just ordered myself an X-T2. Being one of the first among my peers in my area to jump into the Fuji ecosystem with the X-E1, X100/S/T & X-T1 I'm excited for this new camera that is on its way! With that being said I ordered it from Digitalrev.com this will be my third order from them over the span of 4 years, I live in Orange County California I don't know how they do it but they have super fast shipping from China (2days). Yes, this is a grey market camera but my experience with Digitalrev has been amazing, every order ive placed with them has arrived in pristine condition and with very good packaging protection. I picked up the X-T2 body for $1,269 USD. Not sure how long this pricing will last so if you have been looking for a deal here it is! I will be posting photos of my X-T2 and from my X-T2 as soon as it arrives (Tomorrow) Take care now! www.Ishriosphoto.com
  14. 1 like
    Thanks for the link, Christopher. I haven't seen an XT2 EVF., but so far the micro-tv concept is not very appealing to me. I use the OVF of my X100S and the SLR is also an OVF system, which for this old guy is faster to acquire and compose with. i don't know if I want an XPro2.
  15. 1 like
    The X100F isn't much of a deal, it's the X-T2 that is currently a bargain at $1269 USD: https://store.digitalrev.com/product/fujifilm-x-t2-body/MTEwNDkyNw_A_A. That's compared to the $1599 average price still being asked in the US.
  16. 1 like
    I bought my X100S from DigitalRev for 1049.00 US some years ago from an ad on Fuji Rumors. On your link >store I'm seeing prices basically the same as dealer prices here. I'm looking at buying an X100F;am I missing something?
  17. 1 like
    The focus point joystick is my absolute favorite thing ever! I second shot a wedding last weekend with my X-T1 and X100T, and I missed that damn joystick the whole time. That's the only big change in ergonomics, once you have that quick control you'll be moving your focal points all the time. The X-T2 is also so much more responsive, it's a big leap forward in focus speed, EVF performance, and greatly minimized shutter blackout time. I usually have an X-T2 available for me to use, but it was in already in use that weekend, I missed it dearly. Have you ever had to send anything back to DigitalRev for warranty service? I hope to replace my X100T with an X100F and DigitalRev might be an option when I'm hunting for deals.
  18. 1 like
    The internal workings of Fuji cameras are proprietary and very closely guarded. That is one one of the reasons why software manufacturers have had so much difficulty getting the demoisacing correct with X-Trans. There is no and I suspect never will be any sort of public API for Fuji cameras. I'm sure any direct inquiry will simply be met with a polite negative response.
  19. 1 like
    Just finished painting.
  20. 1 like
    I envy your trip to NYC with your X100 . You have some great street photography. I agree with you about your camera choice for street photography, the X100 series Fuji cameras can't be beat.
  21. 1 like
  22. 1 like
    Thanks guys I definitely appreciate the info. Thanks for also taking the time to check out my stuff and reply!👍
  23. 1 like
    Excellent pictures - no poor ones at all but some are inevitably better or more striking than others. As Artuk says, while you'll obviously keep them all they do need thinning out to a selection of the very best in a manageable length of slide show. This keeps viewers attention fresh and maybe leaves them wanting more instead of tiring of hitting the next button.
  24. 1 like
    There are some very nice pictures on your website. I do think there is some repetition that would benefit from a smaller selection of photos (e.g. there are 3 photos looking out from a glass fronted building, there are several very similar looking at the Empire State Building), so viewers get to see the ones you think are "best". It is also a pity that the weather when you visited central park wasn't very conducive to outdoor photography (grey skies etc) - it's always frustrating as on short trips there isn't much you can do, but perhaps consider a black and white treatment, or perhaps shooting in a different way to avoid the weather and grey skies? There were a few that I thought were a little weak (big concrete block dominating the frame in the photo of the Lamborghini) or perhaps didn't really belong as a "set" (dog on the subway). I hope you won't take his negatively, there are some really good photos there, but I think they would have much more impact with a tighter selection, and bring out the vibrancy you were trying to convey.
  25. 1 like
  26. 1 like
    I originally posted that I had the same experience but then I noticed that the OP is talking about the digital teleconverter not the WCL and TCL. In that case I have no idea. As its a digital teleconverter and all the camera is effectively doing is cropping the sensor image then with software boosting the size again there is no change in the focal length as far as EXIF is concerned because what is being done is all software related.
  27. 1 like
    You're not fully pimped until you have one of these John: http://rigu.co.uk/personalised-tan-leather-camera-strap-cam2233
  28. 1 like
    The cliff-face shots are especially appealing to me.
  29. 1 like
    What lens did you use for these shots? They are great.
  30. 1 like
    Another great show. Thanks, Merlin
  31. 1 like
    Wonderful and inspiring! As I continue to discover, photographic opportunities are only a shutter click away.
  32. 1 like
    The Dear Susan website has published another article I have written about fallow periods and struggling for inspiration. The article includes architectural photographs taken in Singapore, where I talk about looking for and finding inspiration in unexpected subjects. Dear Susan : The Powers of Darkness The photos were not taken with Fuji cameras, although other Dear Susan contributors own and write about Fuji's X system.
  33. 1 like
    Excellent detail but with your name beside it my subconscious told me to look for a Merlin nesting on the cliff - as they do. Still looking,
  34. 1 like
    Yes, an evf inset to one side. The frame lines on my XP1 go no smaller than fits 60mm but I believe the XP2 frame lines go a little smaller to fit 90mm lens - actually ideal size as a sighting frame. I've read some articles and forum posts on using the XP2 this way for BiFs, airplanes and motor sport and users seem happy with it. Contact sports photographers can sometimes see what is happening just out of view of the evf and either shift aim or be ready for what's coming. The problem of course is an already smaller evf being made even smaller as an inset. I assume that these users are owners of the XP2 who have adapted to using their cameras this way rather than actually choosing it as a sports/wildlife camera. IMO the XT2 is a better bet for the dedicated action/wildlife shooter. Late edit to previous post: I realise now that I wrote XP1 when I was referring to the XP2 inset evf. The inset evf feature is not available on the XP1.
  35. 1 like
    Personally I think Google bought Nik to update its photos application with interesting algorithms. They may buy other innovative companies in the future to augment their capabilities, but I don't seem them diluting their google photos brand to add another piece of standalone software. I don't think they would want to support plugin compatibility with Adobe etc. which doesn't yield them any benefit. But in any event, signing a petition doesn't cost anyone anything, except a few minutes, so I'd say pursue it, hope for the best, but expect the status quo.
  36. 1 like
    Photoshop makes it totally easy - it does all the masking for you, though you may find that you need to (and can) go in and fine tune small areas. You get all the images into layers in one file, first use the "auto align layers" then "auto blend layers" - there's a little turorial here":https://digital-photography-school.com/how-to-focus-stack-macro-images-using-photoshop/ The alignment function is super precise - much better than anything I could ever do adjusting by hand. The auto blend is not usually absolutely perfect right off the bat, but it's pretty darn good. Things that move like bug legs or antenna might need some attention in the final stack. This stack was hand held - as long as you are fairly steady it's possible, though it will only be a few images, rather than the 10's-100's that you can achieve with a stationary subject and camera on a tripod/focusing rail rig. When I hand hold stacks I usually get 4 or 5 shots in the stack. As an interesting side note... long ago, I learned a similar technique with real film. The difference was that you created a thin band of light and used a moving stage to pass your subject through it in front of your film.. digital makes it far easier and possible to use in natural settings/lighting and with live subjects, unlike the film way, which required a totally dark room and a subject that couldn't move. At the time it was a pretty freaky technique though - the original for this one is on 4x5 E-6.
  37. 1 like
    The XT2, XP2 and XT20 have a lossless compressed raw option and I believe most editors are now able to use the compressed files which seem to range between 22.5 (architecture and sky) to 26.8. (foliage).
  38. 1 like
  39. 1 like
    For God's sake! What is it with you miserable sod? No one is forcing you to sign and no one's forcing you to respond either. I put it there for anyone who is interested. I had no idea that you had proof that the majority used only Silver FX - I must have missed that count. In my experience, many use the same as me - Nik SFX, Nik Define, Nik raw sharpener and/or Nik output sharpener and Vivezza I also use CFX Tonal contrast. But of course you know all the photographers in the world don't you - or is that the few dozen that live in OZ. If you've got nothing worthwhile to say - say nothing.
  40. 1 like
    Lucky you. Definitely use it. I've been keeping an eye open for one myself. Good copies aren't cheap. Get the KF concept adapter, it is the best adapter of the several I've used and the price is very low - especially for the high level of quality..
  41. 1 like
    Thank you all for these helpful observations. I do wear reading glasses Vic which I've been using to double-up for screen work. The simple test of leaning closer to the screen does reveal the RAW as less fuzzy to my eye on my iMac. I'm starting to feel the same about the 16-55 Christopher. The problem I'm struggling with, though, is that I do like the range of that lens (nicely replacing a 24-70 Nikkor in full frame Nikon days) and it seemed fine to me on my X-T1. As it does, by the way, on my XPro1). All of which does rather confirm some of the comments above. That said, I'm much enjoying the speed and agility of the X-T2. I'm grateful for the time and trouble people have taken to look at this for me.
  42. 1 like
    the sensor isnt larger, but it has more pixels on the same surface area. Greater pixel density reveals poor technique and reveals the need for critical focus and adequate dof - it's likely your build 16mp camera simply didn't have enough resolution to reveal depth of field issues, whereas the new one does. many adopters of other brand apsc 24mp cameras made years before Fujis found issues with diffraction as the greater need for dof and pixel level sharpness meant stopping down more, which introduced diffraction and Generalised softness
  43. 1 like
    If I lean back to view the full size image - and - remove my reading specs which are for close up, then the image does look sharper. Do you wear reading glasses Chris Poole?
  44. 1 like
    I agree, looking at veejaycee's JPG, the image doesn't seem particularly sharp up close. I tried to find a distinct point of focus but couldn't. Could the shutter speed be an issue? My experience with the 16-55mm f/2.8 has often been the same. Perhaps I also have a bad copy, but I find the lens to focus poorly or seem soft, even when I aim for higher shutter speeds to avoid camera shake. It's not a lens I really use anymore, I just feel like I cannot trust it in my workflow.
  45. 1 like
    Hi Chris, here is the link to my processed jpg from the raw file. It is sharper than the original jpg but I don't know what in camera settings were used for that. I can say that my XT2 and 16-55mm f2.8 are tack sharp with the DoF as I'd expect. The larger size of the image from a the XT2 24mp sensor means viewing distance should also be greater. If viewed at the same distance as a 16mp image you will in effect be peering more closely at the image. The only sure way to check this is to print one from each sensor and view from the correct distance for each size. Alternatively crop a detail from each with the 24mp at max screen size and the 16mp at a suitably reduced size (same screen res for both). There is still to my eye, a slight lack of complete clarity over the entire image - unless I'm looking too critically but I too am viewing at full size from close proximity. Perhaps others can chime in. https://www.dropbox.com/s/p05a3rc9o9wjw09/DSCF1501.jpg?dl=0 I think it is all down to viewing distance - and screen type - it's probably wonderful on an HD screen or better. Edit with IXT to DNG, LR for quick basic process and Nik Define and Nik output sharpener and final fine sharpen with high pass filter in PS.
  46. 1 like
    I've never cared too much about the bells and whistles on a camera body, so I'd go for the one with more glass myself. As far as not having weather sealing goes - unless you intend to go out regularly in downpours I wouldn't fuss to much about it. I took my XE-1 hiking all over the place until I busted the diopter adjustment and handed it down to my husband, who doesn't care. Now I take my XE-2. Neither has had any problems. The only thing that ever worried me was being on a dune with blowing sand. I did stick the camera under my jacket until we got away from there, and I certainly didn't attempt to change the lens under those conditions - but weather sealing wouldn't help if the lens was off anyway.
  47. 1 like
    XT1, XT20, XT2, XP2, X100F, GFX 50S, plus XT2 manual vers 2 All links here: http://www.fujirumors.com/fujifilm-releases-new-kaizen-firmware-for-fujifilm-x-t2-x-pro2-and-gfx-50s/
  48. 1 like
    Hello everyone, I made more tests with similar results. I've contacted Fuji and my Xt-2 was sent for repair. I hope this will solve the problem. I'll keep you posted! Claude
  49. 1 like
    I assumed the OP has a XT series camera as the post is in the XT section of the forum.
  50. 1 like
    Thanks for the points. After all, .my Fuji pieces are all out of warranty anyway except my new XT20 In my old-age cantankerousness I tend to bristle at the demand for irrelevant information as an implied condition for warranty coverage. I have not been good at keeping order documents, clearly a mistake.