Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Welcome to Fuji X Forum!

Welcome to the Fuji X Forum, the largest online community of Fujifilm X camera users!

Creating a forum account is FREE!

The primary benefit to registering is so you can post in the community, and be notified when discussions are updated.

Other benefits include uploading photos, creating a photo gallery, getting answers to technical questions and assistance with trouble-shooting, communicate with other members via private messages, elgibility for contests, and more!

Registering is a simple process that requires minimal information. Become a part of the forum by signing in or creating an account. For your convenience you can sign in using Facebook, Twitter or Google.

We take pride in being the friendliest photo forum on the net.

Come on in join the fun!
Guest Message by DevFuse
 

Photo

Fujifilm X-Pro 1 Firmware v2.0 Update IN ENGLISH


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

#31 jknights

jknights

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 5,314 posts
  • Local time: 05:54 PM
  • LocationOliva, Valencia, Spain

Posted 12 September 2012 - 12:33 PM

I think he is talking RX1 FX camera.


Well if it cost less than the $2800 + $600 OVF or $450 EVF and had interchangeable lenses it might be a nice camera.
But for me it pushes no buttons other than overpriced!!
Always Nikon and Fuji cameras.

Still learning after all these years!
Website http://www.jmknights.com


#32 tjfbryant

tjfbryant

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 149 posts
  • Local time: 10:54 AM

Posted 12 September 2012 - 12:47 PM

A little, but important detail :unsure:

Interestingly others owner of D800E claims that is the best camera in the range and MF owner claims that neither FX or (the silly) APS-C could not match MF IQ.

Go figure...


I love my d800E. Amazing resolution for a full frame. For me its all about how I shoot and print my work. My work is considered artistic, soft and striking at the same time. With canvas prints and moderate to large prints... The Fuji and my D800 are on par in quality as finished work. Nevermind whats on screen.... its all about the prints for me. Thats how I judge a Cameras (and lens) ability in my bag.
In my eyes for a Fuji to be able to "keep up" with my D800e .... that says something about Fuji's committment to excellence.

#33 markopa

markopa

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 487 posts
  • Local time: 04:54 PM

Posted 12 September 2012 - 12:58 PM

I love my d800E. Amazing resolution for a full frame. For me its all about how I shoot and print my work. My work is considered artistic, soft and striking at the same time. With canvas prints and moderate to large prints... The Fuji and my D800 are on par in quality as finished work. Nevermind whats on screen.... its all about the prints for me. Thats how I judge a Cameras (and lens) ability in my bag.
In my eyes for a Fuji to be able to "keep up" with my D800e .... that says something about Fuji's committment to excellence.


You are basically stating that a 16mpix camera can produce equal quality end results when compared to a 36 mpix camera. Very interesting statement. How big do you print ?

Do you have a link to your work ? I would be interested to have a look. Maybe also point out which shots were taken with X-Pro1 and which with D800e. Thanks.

#34 mikeci

mikeci

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 262 posts
  • Local time: 11:54 AM
  • Locationnear New York City

Posted 12 September 2012 - 12:59 PM

I love my d800E. Amazing resolution for a full frame. For me its all about how I shoot and print my work. My work is considered artistic, soft and striking at the same time. With canvas prints and moderate to large prints... The Fuji and my D800 are on par in quality as finished work. Nevermind whats on screen.... its all about the prints for me. Thats how I judge a Cameras (and lens) ability in my bag.
In my eyes for a Fuji to be able to "keep up" with my D800e .... that says something about Fuji's committment to excellence.

How large of a print do you make? I have not printed anything bigger than 8.5 x11 w/ the fuji. My printer goes up to 17x22 which I have no problem w/ the full frame d700 or the d4 as soon as I get a print worthy shot w/ the fuji (it'sme not the camera) I'll go for it and get back to you.

#35 tjfbryant

tjfbryant

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 149 posts
  • Local time: 10:54 AM

Posted 12 September 2012 - 01:13 PM

How large of a print do you make? I have not printed anything bigger than 8.5 x11 w/ the fuji. My printer goes up to 17x22 which I have no problem w/ the full frame d700 or the d4 as soon as I get a print worthy shot w/ the fuji (it'sme not the camera) I'll go for it and get back to you.


Once I get back to the office I can show you the 24x36 canvas of my son taken by my fuji X-Pro1 and I am in the process of printing an 18x24 metallic taken by my d800. Once I get that other print back.... I can show you the side by side comparison.
I am on the road at the moment. sorry guys.

FYI I use Miller's Photo Lab for prints.

#36 Pelao

Pelao

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 165 posts
  • Local time: 10:54 AM
  • LocationToronto

Posted 12 September 2012 - 03:34 PM

You are basically stating that a 16mpix camera can produce equal quality end results when compared to a 36 mpix camera. Very interesting statement. How big do you print ?

Do you have a link to your work ? I would be interested to have a look. Maybe also point out which shots were taken with X-Pro1 and which with D800e. Thanks.



There are clear differences between the cameras, but in terms of final print output, I don't see why a 16mp camera with good lenses cannot match a 36mp camera under many circumstances.

This makes interesting reading:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content



#37 AsylumPhoto

AsylumPhoto

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 630 posts
  • Local time: 10:54 AM

Posted 12 September 2012 - 03:40 PM

When did this turn into DPReview?
  • markopa likes this

#38 artuk

artuk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Local time: 03:54 PM

Posted 12 September 2012 - 03:42 PM

The only noticeable difference is in fact DoF. ISO/noise performance, resolution and DR is pretty much on par with 5D2 and 5D3 files.

I have a Sony Alpha A850, a 24Mp full frame camera, and I can safely say the X Pro 1 does not offer the same resolution. An AA filter removes about 2Mp of resolution - so Fujis 16Mp is similar to Canons 18Mp.

The Fuji sensor certainly has lower noise. The dynamic range in hard to judge, but my "feeling" is that my SLR has more headroom for clipped highlights - but that may be because it tends to expose "correctly", whereas the X Pro tends to "over expose", or at least be rather generous with it's exposure. I would agree the files seem to offer good ability to increase exposure in shadows etc without too much penalty. Fuji colours seem to go out of gamut more than my SLR.

The Fuji sensor is very good - although I do believe it's "low noise" is because NR is being applied to the raw data within the A-D conversion process - but I don't believe it offers an alternative to full frame any more than Sony's excellent 16Mp APS-C sensor does (which also shares low noise, high dynamic range etc).

#39 Eugene

Eugene

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts
  • Local time: 11:54 AM
  • LocationBayfield, Ontario, Canada

Posted 12 September 2012 - 04:49 PM

When did this turn into DPReview?

Good point - my guess - a few of the same folks with different names.

#40 Eugene

Eugene

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts
  • Local time: 11:54 AM
  • LocationBayfield, Ontario, Canada

Posted 12 September 2012 - 04:57 PM

Just saw this on youtube. I'm surprised no one else has listed

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

video about the firmware update


T
Just watched it - many thanks

#41 mattmoo

mattmoo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 92 posts
  • Local time: 10:54 AM

Posted 12 September 2012 - 07:25 PM

A Fuji extension tube set with AF contacts is what we need as that would allow other lenses other than the 60mm to be used and is a lower puchase cost.

HDR feature would be very good as well.


An excellent idea.

I think upgrading the HDR should not be an impossible task, but perhaps it takes a certain critical mass before Fuji makes it a firmware priority. So far only a few have mentioned an interest in greater HDR, so I guess I need to start email Fuji direct.

Hey, did I mention how AWESOME it is that Fuji is listening to us and doing an upgrade? I mean it's only 16MP and the X-Pro is or isn't the greatest camera on earth compared to (insert personal favorite here), but damn I like the images you can produce.

Sorry, couldn't resist. At least on the 18th we'll be able to stay on topic as reports come in about the firmware improvement. Who knows, there could be a surprise in there too.

#42 Pelao

Pelao

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 165 posts
  • Local time: 10:54 AM
  • LocationToronto

Posted 12 September 2012 - 07:25 PM

I have a Sony Alpha A850, a 24Mp full frame camera, and I can safely say the X Pro 1 does not offer the same resolution. An AA filter removes about 2Mp of resolution - so Fujis 16Mp is similar to Canons 18Mp.

The Fuji sensor certainly has lower noise. The dynamic range in hard to judge, but my "feeling" is that my SLR has more headroom for clipped highlights - but that may be because it tends to expose "correctly", whereas the X Pro tends to "over expose", or at least be rather generous with it's exposure. I would agree the files seem to offer good ability to increase exposure in shadows etc without too much penalty. Fuji colours seem to go out of gamut more than my SLR.

The Fuji sensor is very good - although I do believe it's "low noise" is because NR is being applied to the raw data within the A-D conversion process - but I don't believe it offers an alternative to full frame any more than Sony's excellent 16Mp APS-C sensor does (which also shares low noise, high dynamic range etc).


I still think the A850 is one of the best FF cameras out there. Great value and performance, especially at lower ISOs.

There seems no doubt that the A850 can out resolve the Fuji. But that's only part of the story. In my experience it certainly means the Sony will have more versatility with some types of shots, and of course more cropping options. In the finished product though, say a 16 x 20 print, it's very unlikely that there will be a visible difference at standard viewing distances.

This by no means means the Fuji matches the Sony in outright performance. They are different beasts. Indeed the Sony falls behind in portability etc.

For my purposes I am simply delighted that I have a compact camera with great lenses that can make large, gallery quality prints. But it doesn't mean I don't also see a role for FF in my kit.

#43 jknights

jknights

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 5,314 posts
  • Local time: 05:54 PM
  • LocationOliva, Valencia, Spain

Posted 13 September 2012 - 02:16 AM

I think we are getting into the old 35mm v 120 v 5x4 discussion.

The outcome of that is that no matter what if the image is perfectly exposed and sharp then a bigun outshines a
Also remember that with similar pixel counts per image that the larger pixels will less noisy than their smaller counterparts.

  • markopa likes this
Always Nikon and Fuji cameras.

Still learning after all these years!
Website http://www.jmknights.com


#44 Borge

Borge

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 480 posts
  • Local time: 04:54 PM
  • LocationNorway

Posted 13 September 2012 - 03:05 AM

The Fuji sensor is very good - although I do believe it's "low noise" is because NR is being applied to the raw data within the A-D conversion process - but I don't believe it offers an alternative to full frame any more than Sony's excellent 16Mp APS-C sensor does (which also shares low noise, high dynamic range etc).


There is absolutely no NR applied to the raw data within the A-D conversion processo on the X-Trans sensor.
You can thank the new CFA and sensor design for the low noise.

When I compare the 16MP from my X-Pro1 to the 18MP from my Canon EOS 60D (with Canon's 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM - one of the sharpest lenses that Canon has produced) it is clear that there is a lot more resolution in the X-Pro1 files than in the Canon files. I am not using LR/ACR for comparison though, as LR is totally crappy in regards to details and resolution on the X-Pro1 raw files compared to Silkypix.
  • flysurfer and Wolftar like this

#45 markopa

markopa

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 487 posts
  • Local time: 04:54 PM

Posted 13 September 2012 - 04:27 AM

Deleted

#46 artuk

artuk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Local time: 03:54 PM

Posted 13 September 2012 - 11:25 PM

There is absolutely no NR applied to the raw data within the A-D conversion processo on the X-Trans sensor.
You can thank the new CFA and sensor design for the low noise.

When I compare the 16MP from my X-Pro1 to the 18MP from my Canon EOS 60D (with Canon's 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM - one of the sharpest lenses that Canon has produced) it is clear that there is a lot more resolution in the X-Pro1 files than in the Canon files. I am not using LR/ACR for comparison though, as LR is totally crappy in regards to details and resolution on the X-Pro1 raw files compared to Silkypix.


Have seen any technical data that makes you believe there is no NR at all in the raw files? I thought many CMOS sensors apply some form of NR to the signal within the A-D process.

I am also a little surprised that a zoom lens is one of the sharpest Canon has made, but never having taken any interest in Canon's lenses I can't comment directly. Of course, Canon's APS-C sensor is smaller than everyone elses, making their pixel density higher, with a corresponding negative result on overall performance, particularly noise. I have also seen comments from a professional user that the sensor size and resolution of their 18Mp sensor causes issues with getting pixel level sharpness across the frame on APS-C, due to interplay between resolution, sensor size, DOF and diffraction (Sony's 24Mp APS-C apparently also has the same issue). Certainly, other review and bench tests of the X Pro have suggested the benefit of the lack of AA filter seems to equate to about 2Mp of extra resolution.

#47 markopa

markopa

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 487 posts
  • Local time: 04:54 PM

Posted 14 September 2012 - 12:44 AM

Guys.... ....4 more days to Fuji X-Pro1 v2.0....

#48 jknights

jknights

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 5,314 posts
  • Local time: 05:54 PM
  • LocationOliva, Valencia, Spain

Posted 14 September 2012 - 02:22 PM

Guys.... ....4 more days to Fuji X-Pro1 v2.0....


Thanks goodness. Had a nightmare day today when I was out shooting today with the XPro1. I dont seem to have managed a single super sharp image other than the macros shots I took!!! The ordinary ones all look soft and no it wasnt the fact that I left it in Macro mode as I was using the OVF.

Bring on the v2 update.
:)
Always Nikon and Fuji cameras.

Still learning after all these years!
Website http://www.jmknights.com


#49 JasperD

JasperD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 540 posts
  • Local time: 05:54 PM
  • LocationLausanne, Switzerland

Posted 14 September 2012 - 11:02 PM

Yup that is the one I am referring to...

$2800 + $600 OVF or $450 EVF


Actually, that should read ´+ $600 slap on OVF or $450 slap on EVF´, and, AFAIC, also + $180 for the lens hood (if you want one, which I do)... :blink: :lol: :D :P



I have a Sony Alpha A850, a 24Mp full frame camera, and I can safely say the X Pro 1 does not offer the same resolution. An AA filter removes about 2Mp of resolution - so Fujis 16Mp is similar to Canons 18Mp.


There´s more coming with the X-trans sensor than the absence of an AA filter, thanks to that pseudo random 6x6 pattern instead of the traditional 2x2 Bayer... I shoot Sony A900 with a bunch of pretty good lenses, but honestly, except that it also delivers fantastic IQ up to ISO 400 or so, I wouldn´t say it´s better; more on par really, just like the Canon 5DII the X-Pro1 was compared with, and degrading fast from ISO 800 and higher. The strengths of the A900 are elsewhere, like DOF mainly IMO.

#50 Sapphie

Sapphie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 258 posts
  • Local time: 03:54 PM
  • LocationDevon, UK

Posted 16 September 2012 - 01:54 AM

With the X100, in one of the more recent firmware updates, they added the ability to zoom in to magnified view whilst in AF-S mode. Previously this was only available in MF mode. I was surprised to see that they didn't carry that over to the X-Pro1. I didn't really think I'd use it much but, actually, for the 60mm lens I think it would be a great improvement.

I am keeping my fingers crossed that they slip this one in this week!

Lee

#51 MuMinded

MuMinded

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Local time: 12:54 AM
  • LocationJapan

Posted 16 September 2012 - 03:32 AM

Biggest take away for me from this good video was Billy saying (Paraphrase) "We realize this is what the X-Pro1-1 should have been released with in the first place".

Kudo's to Billy and Fujifilm for having this attitude. Any reasonable person among us don't expect a camera to be perfect from the beginning. It speaks volumes, especially for a Japanese company, to admit that they could have done better from the beginning and are making updates now to correct it.

I have lived in Japan for the past 14 years and I work for a Major Japanese Electronics company. It's refreshing to see this type of candor coming from them and I think it bodes well for the future of the X-line of cameras and lenses.

Cheers,
MuMinded
  • Damien Lovegrove likes this




0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users