The Official Fuji X10/X20/X30/XF1/XQ1 Thread

souldeep said:
Yes it would. But if you Zone focus and lock then you can snap away in manual focus mode to your hearts content, minus the lag, grabbing loads of nice sharp pictures :-)
Click to expand...

Thanks,
But what is this zone focus you speak of??

//// off to google me thinks
 
Bottom line - LR 4.2 seems unchanged :)
My original gate example, reset and reworked using similar approach looked very similar.

Here's a better test.
An image I took last weekend that has never been touched by LR 4.1.
All I've done is changed the exposure slider, everything else is at LR defaults.
In the original image the tops of the limestone pavement (the brightest bits) register only 10% brightness.

In this example we are getting less than two stops of highlight recovery (and it is not the most natural look) and a whopping 4 stops of shadow recovery that is genuinely usable.
My advice to expose for the highlights still stands :)

+4 stops exposure
i-fTD3nFN-X3.jpg


+2 stops exposure
i-TpPhrTx-X3.jpg


Unmodified
i-MPPzHwX-X3.jpg


-2 stops exposure
i-NvgDrJH-X3.jpg


-4 stops exposure
i-vKd3n78-X3.jpg


Souldeep - can you post an example of where you have seen something odd going on - ta :)
 
jamin100 said:
Thanks,
But what is this zone focus you speak of??

//// off to google me thinks
Click to expand...

More of an old method with film for street shooting.

Basically you set your aperture (f8 being the most famous - an infamous street photographer from back in the old film days coined the phrase "f8 and be there"), ISO (tend to be set higher so you can have faster shutter speeds - grain is the compromise but then this tends to add a gritty edge to a street shot) and shutter speed (fast so you freeze the movement) to capture subjects sharply from say 3 foot to 15 foot. When a subject roams into that "zone" you snap away knowing you've got a sharp shot. More keepers and no lag.

Just to add;

With digital photography the method still has value - to remove lag.

For old film style 35mm cameras - it was a way to be certian you got nice sharp shots of your subjects (without having to adjust, and guess, all the time on the camera).
 
Last edited:
Thanks for taking the time to test that Duncan! I can't post an example at the moment as I'm at work but if you don't witness the issue as your photo example clearly show - then maybe I need to try and reinstall 4.2.
 
i just updated the firmware so,
in case anyone's interested here's a few of the new built in effects ,
its not something id usually play around with

edit -
the top and bottom pics are the selective colour mode(partial colour red)
the others iam not sure about ,
there ether pop colour, high key,dynamic tone
oddly i cant find the info in the exif data -id of keep notes in id of realized


DSCF0343 copy by nik-o 2012, on Flickr


DSCF0342 copy by nik-o 2012, on Flickr


DSCF0341 copy by nik-o 2012, on Flickr


DSCF0340 copy by nik-o 2012, on Flickr


DSCF0335 copy by nik-o 2012, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Thanks Nik :-)

If you get a chance would you mind listing the functions by each image so it's easy to correlate, and maybe post the original image in that post as well?

The second down is the most interesting shot for me - looks a bit HDR (yep I said HDR this time Rob) ;-)

Haven’t got round to downloading it for my X10. After seeing the results of the colour function I was less motivated to rush the firmware onto the camera.

Anyone tried the tilt-shift (miniature effect) yet?
 
Last edited:
souldeep said:
Thanks Nik :-)

If you get a chance would you mind listing the functions by each image so it's easy to correlate, and maybe post the original image in that post as well?

The second down is the most interesting shot for me - looks a bit HDR (yep I said HDR this time Rob) ;-)

Haven’t got round to downloading it for my X10. After seeing the results of the colour function I was less motivated to rush the firmware onto the camera.

Anyone tried the tilt-shift (miniature effect) yet?
Click to expand...

hi mate ,just updated post as i couldnt find it in the exif data
this is basically the same colour function that people where showing earlier in the thread

the second from the bottom i think is a shot with no effects (if not the fx didn't do much:D).i think the one you prefer is called dynamic tone
 
Last edited:
Aha - would make sense. Dynamic tone is the way to produce a HDR shot :-)

I'm guessing the third down is the vibrancy option and the other two (minus the original) are the selective colour function.

Thanks.
 
souldeep said:
:clap:

What a command of the camera - and your first picture post. Composition, colours, highlights and texture all perfect. Great shallow DOF as well - was this at f4? Love the reflection in the dogs pupil of you taking the photo. Very very impressed – guessing by your post count you are quite a talented photographer whatever tool is in your hand!
Click to expand...

The EXIF data says it's f2.8 at 1/60, (ISO 1250!).
 
Last edited:
souldeep said:
More of an old method with film for street shooting.

Basically you set your aperture (f8 being the most famous - an infamous street photographer from back in the old film days coined the phrase "f8 and be there"), ISO (tend to be set higher so you can have faster shutter speeds - grain is the compromise but then this tends to add a gritty edge to a street shot) and shutter speed (fast so you freeze the movement) to capture subjects sharply from say 3 foot to 15 foot. When a subject roams into that "zone" you snap away knowing you've got a sharp shot. More keepers and no lag.

Just to add;

With digital photography the method still has value - to remove lag.

For old film style 35mm cameras - it was a way to be certian you got nice sharp shots of your subjects (without having to adjust, and guess, all the time on the camera).
Click to expand...

Just wondering whether f8 on the X10 coincides with f8 on a 35mm film camera...
 
Last edited:
So finally got the Plitvik set up (left it downloading to FLICKR when I went off to work this morning).

Hope some of them appeal. This set felt a little less inspiring than others I have posted.

First some Portrait orientated shots.

8072167521_95d805708b_c.jpg


8072760221_5d02aba056_c.jpg


8072364312_f4eec232f8_c.jpg


8073208694_016dbaf077_c.jpg


8073289388_9e27b884cf_c.jpg


8073314495_f55a566f62_c.jpg
 
Followed by some animals and flowers which you know I can't resist having some fun with ;-)

8073318126_eededb9967_c.jpg


8073326341_b5077612db_c.jpg


8073312184_575ec17b07_c.jpg


8073326208_890bf6e162_c.jpg


8073346945_a0fa1a515d_c.jpg


8073343416_41116805a6_c.jpg
 
souldeep said:
So finally got the Plitvik set up (left it downloading to FLICKR when I went off to work this morning).

Hope some of them appeal. This set felt a little less inspiring than others I have posted.

First some Portrait orientated shots.

[/IMG]
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing, Souldeep. The last shot (flowers in a field) is a very interesting shot, composition wise; falls into my Likes category ;-)

Shots 1 and 3 are a bit over developed, for my taste, that is. But then again, the third shot is very interesting as far as the colours go...


I like the B&W wooden bridge/footpath!
 
Last edited:
DuncanDisorderly said:
Definitely up to your usual standards :D
Though the first one looks a bit over-cooked for my taste (over sharpened and halo around the tree tops)
Very nice set :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Good point Duncan - funny how I'm struggling with the new LR. Will re-work that one and thanks :-)
 
Thanks Rob - think I rushed them out on the new LR and I wasn't happy. Don't know why I don't get on with it so well as the last version but will head back to the drawing board.
 
souldeep said:
Good point Duncan - funny how I'm struggling with the new LR. Will re-work that one and thanks :-)
Click to expand...

There's a rule of thumb I still like.
If you can tell it has been edited, then it is overdone.

Things like vignetting you can get away without -10 before anyone can spot it.
But flicking between the original and vignetted copy look really obvious, but without the original you cannot tell!

IMHO if you can see sharpening artefacts then it is over sharpened.
Similarly, if you can see halos around edges then the local adjustment is too strong and badly applied; ditto for grads (both LR grads and real grads).

I rarely use sharpening; two reasons.
1) By default LR applies a tiny bit of sharpening on export once it knows how big the image is going to be; this is adequate!
2) sharpening and clarity kill bokeh. Where you have shallow depth of field (like you do in a lot of your images), try using a local adjustment brush set to clarity just over the in focus part of the image. Leave the soft dreamy out of focus stuff alone.
 
Last edited:
souldeep said:
:clap:

What a command of the camera - and your first picture post. Composition, colours, highlights and texture all perfect. Great shallow DOF as well - was this at f4? Love the reflection in the dogs pupil of you taking the photo. Very very impressed – guessing by your post count you are quite a talented photographer whatever tool is in your hand!
Click to expand...

Hmm, not sure posts count is any indicator or ability, just means I have talked alot over the years :lol:

Picture was taken at f2.8, iso1250, 1/60 sec - its a very short, small dog - in other words distance from camera to dog was probably double that from dogs face to floor, so with those kind of distances I would expect f2.8 on this kind of sensor to be shallow-ish but not hugely pronounced. I am actually quite impressed with its performance so far. Its been very easy for Yves Geza to just point and shoot, and for me to twiddle a dial and do more of what I wanted. However the best bit has actually been the 'snaps' we wouldn't have otherwise got. I hate having my photo taken, but sitting there this morning with a baby donkey and my OH for once had a camera in his hand [as you can see, its normally my job] - it is only a snap, but I love it :love:


DSCF0334 by Yvonne White - WhiteGoldImages, on Flickr


I think I shall be planning a wander round London in the next few weeks to start pushing this little thing and see what I can do with it. I don't expect to be able to match some of the stuff in this thread, but will do my best. :thumbs:
 
DuncanDisorderly said:
Found one!
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm

A third of the way down that article is a DoF calculator.
It says that 35mm f8 on a 50mm lens is equivalent to X10 (2/3") f2, 13mm (50mm equiv)

f8 on Full Frame same as f2 on X10
Click to expand...

I thought the X10 had a 35mm setting on the barrel yet you're quoting 50mm equiv. Sorry to be ignorant on this subject, and I read the link you kindly posted, but now I'm really confused. If you get a chance would you mind explaining this in a bit more detail?

PS f8 is firmly in diffraction territory?
 
Last edited:
Thinking of selling the X10 :(

It was my lads birthday last night and I took a few snaps of him opening his presents, blowing the candles out etc..

However, im not totally happy with the results. I feel that the images should be sharper than what they are and im struggling with the focus to be honest. probably 50% of the shots i'd missed focus.

Id enabled face detection to try to help but the results were hit and miss to be honest.
I was using a mixture of Aperture Priority and Program mode. It was inside and was around 5pm so I had the iso set at auto800 and then auto1600 whilst we were doing the cake etc..

I only really take photos of my kids so I think its the AF on the X10 thats ruining it for me. Im thinking of going to a Nikon J1 as im reading that the AF is very quick all be it with a slower lens (which the bigger sensor should make up for?)

Anyone here had the J1?
 
souldeep said:
I thought the X10 had a 35mm setting on the barrel yet you're quoting 50mm equiv. Sorry to be ignorant on this subject, and I read the link you kindly posted, but now I'm really confused. If you get a chance would you mind explaining this in a bit more detail?

PS f8 is firmly in diffraction territory?
Click to expand...

The X10 barrel is marked in 35mm equivalent focal length (28 to 112), but if you look at the image EXIF data the focal length is the real focal length (28/4 to 112/4).
For DoF calculations you need to use the real focal length.

From the same cambridgeincolour link, there is a diffraction calculator and plugging in the X10 details give f4.3.
In other words, using an aperture smaller than f4.3 will soften the captured image due to diffraction.
This limit applies to the pixel level, but by the time you get to f8 the softening will be bad enough to affect normal sized prints.

Here's another calculator that show the X10 at f8 will slightly soften the detail typically resolvable in an 8x10 inch print viewed from one foot.
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm
That's not a very big print, I use A3 as my image quality goal!
 
jamin100 said:
Thinking of selling the X10 :(

It was my lads birthday last night and I took a few snaps of him opening his presents, blowing the candles out etc..

However, im not totally happy with the results. I feel that the images should be sharper than what they are and im struggling with the focus to be honest. probably 50% of the shots i'd missed focus.

Id enabled face detection to try to help but the results were hit and miss to be honest.
I was using a mixture of Aperture Priority and Program mode. It was inside and was around 5pm so I had the iso set at auto800 and then auto1600 whilst we were doing the cake etc..

I only really take photos of my kids so I think its the AF on the X10 thats ruining it for me. Im thinking of going to a Nikon J1 as im reading that the AF is very quick all be it with a slower lens (which the bigger sensor should make up for?)

Anyone here had the J1?
Click to expand...

Hmm - if you have been following the 5DIII thread you may have spotted one of the forum regulars posting that the 5DII is inadequate at children's parties and he is now using a pair of 5DIII's which cope much better.
You may simply be expecting too much from a pocket camera.
It will be interesting to see you you get on with your X10 replacement.
 
Really - so then when I'm shooting landscape, typically with a very small aperture (f11+), I will really suffer with this image softening you describe? But you describe how are you are happy to print at A3 for the LPRS panel work that must be shot greater than an f4 aperture based on the DOF I see in your work.

So to get really great sharp images I shouldn't be considering using aperture greater than f4. This creates problems with landscape.

Am I totally misunderstanding?
 
souldeep said:
Really - so then when I'm shooting landscape, typically with a very small aperture (f11+), I will really suffer with this image softening you describe? But you describe how are you are happy to print at A3 for the LPRS panel work that must be shot greater than an f4 aperture based on the DOF I see in your work.

So to get really great sharp images I shouldn't be considering using aperture greater than f4. This creates problems with landscape.

Am I totally misunderstanding?
Click to expand...

I think you have it.
f11 will be soft enough that it will probably be noticeable on a 6x4 inch print.

Every single image is a compromise forced by real world conditions.
There is nothing wrong using apertures greater than f4, but it should be a conscious decision made knowing the consequences.
Equally, there is nothing wrong shooting at f2 when trying to keep the shutter speed high enough to hand hold. Again, it is knowing the affect on the resultant image.

The only thing I take issue with is f4 being a problem for landscape.
Using the DoF calculator again...
f4 at 32mm (8mm real) is equivalent to f16 on a full frame DSLR.
That seems like it should be acceptable in most circumstances?
 
DuncanDisorderly said:
Hmm - if you have been following the 5DIII thread you may have spotted one of the forum regulars posting that the 5DII is inadequate at children's parties and he is now using a pair of 5DIII's which cope much better.
You may simply be expecting too much from a pocket camera.
It will be interesting to see you you get on with your X10 replacement.
Click to expand...

Maybe I am expecting too much, I don't know.
I'll post up some shots later that I took last night to see what you all think.

In the meantime ive read that to help increase the keeper rate I could try burst mode, face detection and continuous AF...
 
jamin100 said:
Maybe I am expecting too much, I don't know.
I'll post up some shots later that I took last night to see what you all think.

In the meantime ive read that to help increase the keeper rate I could try burst mode, face detection and continuous AF...
Click to expand...

Yes - please post some examples.
I've used the X10 at some boisterous grown up parties; there are examples in the early parts of this thread.
They were lively affairs, but the X10 coped.
Be interesting to see if we did anything different.
 
DuncanDisorderly said:
I think you have it.
f11 will be soft enough that it will probably be noticeable on a 6x4 inch print.

Every single image is a compromise forced by real world conditions.
There is nothing wrong using apertures greater than f4, but it should be a conscious decision made knowing the consequences.
Equally, there is nothing wrong shooting at f2 when trying to keep the shutter speed high enough to hand hold. Again, it is knowing the affect on the resultant image.

The only thing I take issue with is f4 being a problem for landscape.
Using the DoF calculator again...
f4 at 32mm (8mm real) is equivalent to f16 on a full frame DSLR.
That seems like it should be acceptable in most circumstances?
Click to expand...

But surely if I try and shoot a landscape shot at f2 - but focus on, let's say, a distant mountain - then I will have a very shallow depth of field in the foreground right? Your pics that you repeat the mantra about looking great printed at A3 size must be shot with a much higher aperture like f11 because they have a large DOF?

BTW - coincidentally cambridgeincolour website was the site that inspired me to start moving away from point and click photography quite a few years ago. I see the site has expanded somewhat since then :-)
 
Last edited:
Oh and quick question...

You may notice a few of the images on this page have some time lapsed photography with water. I have been trying my best from beaches to waterfalls to create the silky look I've seen in some peoples photographs across the net. I used an ND filter 8 to bring down the light being exposed to the sensor but I have failed miserably. I did see Si posted a brilliant one near the beginning of this thread in which he time lapsed and EDDY in a stream. Has anyone else tried this with the X10 and please please please - what’s the secret?
 
souldeep said:
But surely if I try and shoot a landscape shot at f2 - but focus on, let's say, a distant mountain - then I will have a very shallow depth of field in the foreground right? Your pics that you repeat the mantra about looking great printed at A3 size must be shot with a much higher aperture like f11 because they have a large DOF?

BTW - coincidentally cambridgeincolour website was the site that inspired me to start moving away from point and click photography quite a few years ago. I see the site has expanded somewhat since then :-)
Click to expand...

Hmmm - I'm not sure you have got this yet :)
Try f2 at the wide end and at the long end of the lens.
Same results?
They should have totally different DoF.

As posted earlier, f2 on the X10 is equivalent to f8 on a full frame DSLR.
Traditional landscapes are shot at the wide end on the lens, and f8 is usually more than enough. The only exception is the style of landscape shot with something really close in the foreground; if you want these sharp right the way to the horizon then it is always going to be a challenge and it isn't really any easier with the DSLR than it is with the X10 - but that's where tilt/shift lenses and large format field cameras come into their own as they re-write the rules about DoF.

In summary - there is very little difference between the X10 and a DSLR providing:
1) compare equivalent focal length (X10 focal length written on the barrel)
2) compare equivalent aperture (f2 X10 = f8 35mm, f4 X10 = f16 35mm)
The bit in bold is the important bit :)
 
souldeep said:
Oh and quick question...

You may notice a few of the images on this page have some time lapsed photography with water. I have been trying my best from beaches to waterfalls to create the silky look I've seen in some peoples photographs across the net. I used an ND filter 8 to bring down the light being exposed to the sensor but I have failed miserably. I did see Si posted a brilliant one near the beginning of this thread in which he time lapsed and EDDY in a stream. Has anyone else tried this with the X10 and please please please - what’s the secret?
Click to expand...

Can you find it and link to the post?
 
DuncanDisorderly said:
Yes - please post some examples.
I've used the X10 at some boisterous grown up parties; there are examples in the early parts of this thread.
They were lively affairs, but the X10 coped.
Be interesting to see if we did anything different.
Click to expand...

Here's 3 of the best ones. obviously PP'd in lightroom but this is the best from probably 60 shots


10th October by BenR167, on Flickr


10th October by BenR167, on Flickr


10th October by BenR167, on Flickr
 
FWIW I did an experiment regarding depth of field comparing my X10 and a full frame camera using as close to the same framing and same focus point on the subject with both apertures set to f4.5.

X10:

DSCF2069.jpg


FF:

DSC_2677.JPG
 
jamin100 said:
Here's 3 of the best ones. obviously PP'd in lightroom but this is the best from probably 60 shots
Click to expand...

Last one with the cake is wonderful!

Please describe how you were focussing with the X10.
What were you getting in the missed focus shots?

Ed Sutton said:
FWIW I did an experiment regarding depth of field comparing my X10 and a full frame camera using as close to the same framing and same focus point on the subject with both apertures set to f4.5.
Click to expand...

Do you have the FF f18 shot?
I think it may look similar to the X10.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top