Fuji X100 pictures for ebay

I shot some pictures of the Fuji 100 for its auction on ebay.

Some pictures with the Fuji X100 - soon to be departing.

Unfortunately due to the fact that bright light triggers some rather unpleasant visual distortions in my eyes (Visual Migraine) I am now wearing a pair of very dark Polaroid sunglasses outdoors. This means that I can't use either the optical viewfinder on the X100 or the EVF. The optical framelines "disappear" and the screen goes completely black in the vertical position. Since I photograph almost exclusively outdoors in sunlight this means that I either stop using both the X100 and my m4/3 cameras, which have the same problem with the EVF, or go back to ordinary sunglasses, which aggravate the condition. I have chosen the former so I'm now going to be using optical viewfinders only. The Leica M9 isn't a problem. so I've just ordered a S/H M8 as a backup and I'll be continuing to use the Nikon D5100, which again has an optical viewfinder.

This is quite disappointing as I love using m4/3 and the X100 but I'd rather stop using them than have the problem. Its going back to the situation before EVF's came along and I was using DSLR's. Then I could work with no problem, ensconsed behind a pair of Raybans.

I've been working with non-polaroid glasses since using m4/3 and the incidence of the visual problems has been gradually rising. The Polaroids do help, and also help with glare and general light sensitivity that I have.

So it looks like the end of the X100 and my m4/3 use. Not out of any disatisfaction with either system, but out of a desire to cut down on these sight distortions, which I've had for over 25 years. I'll console myself with the fact that I'm going to be using my Leica M9 a lot more!

If this was to be my last session with the X100 then it couldn't have been in better light. Lovely golden pre-sunset sunshine with huge long shadows everywhere.

Sharpening

While working with the Nikon D5100, I came up with some sharpening parameters in Photoshop Adobe Camera Raw that I liked. I've been working on this and trying something similar for other cameras. The idea is to get some nice crisp sharpening without increasing the luminance noise significantly.

Olympus E-PL2 + Panasonic 20mm f/1.7

No Sharpening

Sharpened in Photoshop ACR

Fuji X100

No Sharpening

Sharpened in Photoshop ACR

Panasonic GH2 + 7-14mm

No Sharpening

Sharpened in Photoshop ACR

Nikon D5100 + 18-55mm

No Sharpening

Sharpened in Photoshop ACR

Heres the Adobe Raw Settings I was using in the main. Depending on the file I would change these slightly, but most are very close to this.

Sharpening is quite difficult to guage. The commonly held view is that you sharpen depending on size and use. However, sending off files to stock libraries its impossible to know this. Many libraries ask for unsharpened files, but I've always sent them sharpened. 

Firstly, for any other camera except a Leica, all files do need sharpening. Secondly the assumption that the client will always sharpen the files is wrong. Many don't, and now in the days of Microstock, images are being bought and used that never go through a repro house and by people who know nothing about sharpening anyway.

A good rule is to sharpen at full size, even with this if files are reproduced smaller, particularly in published print, they will always need to be sharpened further, though often this doesn't get done.

I'm pleased with what I've come up with, and it makes the files look crisper on the screen. Since the majority of my images have to go through a selection process at a picture library anyway, it makes them look good on a monitor. In all cases, for every camera, these converted and sharpened raw files look better than the camera jpg. Crisper, clearer and more attractive. They are not oversharpened, indeed with this level of sharpening they look about the same as an unsharpened Leica M9 file. See below.

Fuji X100 flash

Would you believe these were taken with a compact camera flashgun? No neither would I.

The X100 has a marvellous fill-in flash function, which even works close-up. It gives one of the most natural flash results I've ever seen. In a typically X100 way if you want to change a few settings it gets complicated and things change seemingly by themselves. However I'm going to try and work this one out since this is very impressive.

I got this little gem from Ken Rockwells review of the X100. As ever a very entertaining read.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/fuji/x100.htm

Is this as good as micro four thirds gets? Where does it go from here?

Panasonic GH2 20mm f/1.7

The question "Is this as good as micro four thirds gets?" is not meant in a negative way. The combination of the GH2 sensor and the 20mm and 45mm Panasonic lenses would be most peoples choices for the best quality in both camera and lenses.

Indeed I've certainly found this to be the case. By using top quality m-mount lenses, the Voigtlander 25mm and the Leica D 4/3 lenses, I have been able to get slightly sharper results from the GH2, but in terms of the system itself these two prime lenses give very satisfactory results.

Panasonic GH2 45mm f/2.8

There is however the question of where does it go from here? The GH2 has managed to combined more pixels with better high ISO performance, and I believe its the case that this ratio of MP's to noise will continue to improve. However there is always the question as to whether the choice of the smaller sensor is going ultimately to "loose out" in the long run to the APS-C size used by other manufacturers.

Panasonic GH2 20mm f/1.7  

In terms of what I've used, I see two different comparisons. Neither the Sony NEX or Samsung NX systems have so far proved to me that they are superior to m4/3. I've tried a NEX-5, an NX-10 and NX-100 and none of those cameras have persuaded me to give up my m4/3 cameras and lenses. However the Fuji X100 is a different proposition. The APS-C sensor in this camera produces stunning results. Quite simply, for me, the best non-full frame sensor I've ever used, both in terms of sharpness of results and high ISO performance. 

So while Panasonic and Olympus, look to me to be holding their own against Samsung and Sony (Though the rumoured 24MP sensor for the NEX, may change this significantly) the Fuji has indicated just how good the slightly bigger sensor can be.

Panasonic GH2 45mm f/2.8

So can m4/3 compete with this? Or should they even be trying? There are already indications that Panasonic and Olympus and indeed Sony are competing now in what might be called the "miniturisation market". Ever smaller cameras, trying to attract the lucrative "point and shoot" compact market. Again, only rumours but it seems both Panasonic and Olympus have smaller m4/3 cameras on the verge of being announced. 

However, they face a lot of competition and it could be argued that the particular uniqueness of the system is being lost.

Panasonic GH2 20mm f/1.7  

So have these companies finally decided that the best chance for profit is going down the small camera > upgrade path rather than the DSLR > high quality smaller lighter alternative one?

Personally I hope not. I hope that the E-P2 and GF1 don't become extinct lines. The fuss over the X100 (and it shows no signs of stopping) has indicated a tremendous interest and demand for a camera of this type. 

Though Fuji have obviously been affected by the recent disasters in terms of supply, they also admitted that they vastly underestimated the demand for their camera and hadn't made enough to fulfill pre-orders. Add in to this the fact that Voigtlander also underestimated how many people would want their 25mm f/0.95, and that is constantly in short supply, and the difficulties Leica had in their first year of making enough M9's to satisfy demand.

There is, I believe, a huge market for quality equipment. Smaller than the market for compacts certainly, but how big I guess nobody knows. Its certainly a market that tends to buy more gear and probably spends more money on it. 

I hope that m4/3 doesn't ignore this, to a large extent obviously because I'm part of it!, but also because I believe its an important part of the market. Not just because of its spending power but because its the most vocal, and the most likely to try new things (or in the case of some of the equipment I've mentioned - old things!) Panasonic and Olympus are in a prime position to take advantage of this. 

Its certainly going to be interesting to see what Olympus particularly come up with next. That will, I think, give us a very good idea as to where m4/3 is headed. We can then decide if its for us or not.

Panasonic GH2 45mm f/2.8

No Mirrors, No SLR's.

Back in 2009 I published this.

http://soundimageplus.blogspot.com/2009/10/g-series-pro.html

A few weeks ago my camera shelf looked like this:-

As of today it looks like this:-

I posted my Sony a850 off, finally, to its new owner a few hours ago and for the first time in my serious photographic life I have no (D)SLR.

It was a close run thing. Right up to the last moment I almost bottled out and kept the Sony. What if Vogue phone up? How can I be a professional photographer any more? I don't have a big camera. Thoughts like this kept running through my head. The fact that I can be at my local Jessops with a credit card in less than 15 minutes, didn't seem to register!

It does feel strange, I will admit that. I definitely have the sense that something is missing. So what do I have left.

Leica M9 50mm Zeiss T* Planar. One lens, no dust spots, amazing quality.

Fuji X100. Great quality. Wonderful Viewfinder. My low light camera.

Panasonic GH2 and Olympus E-PL2. Panasonic 7-14mm Zoom. Olympus 14-150mm Zoom. Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, Panasonic Leica 45mm f/2.8 Macro. My "Pro" outfit. 

Its what I've wanted to do for a long time, and I've decided its time to try it. The X100 filled in so many pieces of my "gear jigsaw". A small, light camera thats great in low light was something I've been looking for for ages. It's not perfect, but it works for me.

There are (were) a couple of DSLR's I might (have) been interested in. The Sigma SD-1 was one but at £6200 I think I'll pass! The other is the Sony A77. I'd like to think I will go with whats above but there's still that little nagging voice that says "You're not a real photographer without a DSLR" I'll see if it persists or fades away.

Interesting times ahead!

Fuji X100 review at Dpreview.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmx100/

On the last page of the review they have this list of what they call "bugs" Quite amazing really. I've decided to describe the X100 as "alternatively configured!!"

• ISO and DR are set independently for each exposure mode, and for the Motion Panorama drive mode
• When the ISO is set manually it overrides the DR setting, but in Auto ISO the DR setting takes priority
• ISO 100 (L) and 12800 (H) are unavailable (greyed out) when shooting raw
• ISO bracketing, film simulation bracketing and dynamic range bracketing drive modes will turn off raw file recording without warning (and aren't greyed-out when shooting raw)
• When using AEL/AFL to autofocus with the camera set to MF, no focus confirmation is displayed (and equally, there's no warning when correct focus can't be attained)
• In Manual exposure mode, Live Histogram always implies correct exposure, regardless of settings
• In Manual exposure mode, camera will allow shooting at incompatible shutter speed / aperture combinations (e.g. 1/4000 sec F2)
• Program shift only works if Auto ISO is disabled and flash mode is set to Suppressed.
• Program shift counts rear dial or thumb lever commands beyond the point where the aperture is set to its largest or smallest (F2 or F16), and requires those commands to be reversed before it will stop down or open up again
• Drive and macro mode settings are discarded on changing exposure mode, entering playback or auto power-off
• OVF Power Save Mode disables live histogram, but leaves the box in which it's normally displayed blank in the viewfinder
• Drive mode, macro and flash mode buttons behave differently from the white balance button, and differently again from the AE and AF buttons
• AF point cycles from anywhere on the top row to the bottom right position by pressing the 'up' key, and from the bottom row to the top left by pressing 'down'
• When using the EVF or LCD, the AF point size is reset by switching to manual focus, or using the OVF
• In video mode, a full-press of the shutter is required to start recording, but only a half-press to stop
• In video mode, autofocus is continuous regardless of focus switch position (AF-S / AF-C)
• Magnified manual focus assist is not available in video mode
• The ND filter is not available in motion panorama or video modes
• Depth of field scale appears to have been calculated for a 35mm actual (rather than equivalent) lens, making it distinctly conservative
• When shooting JPEGs in 16:9 aspect ratio, the EVF and LCD displays are cropped accordingly, but the OVF displays 3:2 framelines. It's possible to enable 16:9 guidelines, but unlike the framelines they're not parallax-corrected
• Camera can only be woken from auto power off by half-pressing and holding the shutter button
• In playback, when magnifying a portrait format image the enlarged area is shown in a 3:2 portrait format area (even if shot at 16:9), wasting most of the screen area
• Images can't be deleted in the Detailed Information playback mode
• Images shot in 16:9 JPEG + RAW can only be reconverted in-camera to 3:2 JPEGs
• Images shot in continuous drive mode use a completely different file naming convention (which causes problems with sorting)
• Battery can be inserted the wrong way round, despite having an asymmetric shape
• Supplied charger won't accept the battery directly, instead it requires a (supplied, but unlabelled) adapter piece to be fitted first

Fuji X100 compared to Olympus E-PL2 plus Panasonic 20mm f/1.7

Tweet

Here's a comparison between images shot with the Fuji X100 and the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7. 

As before click through to flickr for larger files.

These are a lot closer in terms of sharpness than with the Zeiss 18mm. Showing just how good a lens the 20mm f/1.7 is. These are out of camera jpgs with no adjustment whatsoever. The Fuji is on its Velvia setting and the Olympus is set to Vivid. There is still a different look to the images and the Fuji seems smoother and cleaner to me but there's so little in it as to be relatively insignificant. I also prefer the Velvia colour but thats personal choice. 

So does this mean that the the 20mm lens is better than a Zeiss 18mm costing 4 times as much? Well the answer is probably yes for m4/3 cameras. If I had shot at higher ISO's then the Fuji would have produced better files but at base ISO there's very little in it.

I'm not giving up m4/3 and in particular the 20mm lens any time soon. Its still an excellent system for what I use it for and interchangeable lenses is obviously a terrific advantage.