Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-16-2016, 08:55 AM   #31
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
luftfluss's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,493
QuoteOriginally posted by jpzk Quote
The resulting OOC (JPEG) files sure are NOT what I expected: nothing close to what I have been used to with the K5 and K7 (and K10D/K20D before that).
I mean: the results, especially for landscapes/foliage, do not impress me one bit.
The Fuji does, however, a great job at portraits ... my personal opinion; nothing scientific.
So, now that I also got the K3 for birding (to "replace" the K5) I am using the K5 for such things as landscapes/outdoor stuff besides birding. Great results as I am used to with the Pentax family!
There has been a plethora of complaints on the Internet about Fujis not doing well with landscape photos - primarily the greens used for foliage and loss of fine detail. I don't know about sooc settings, but RAW converters have been improving in rendering the images.

06-16-2016, 03:42 PM   #32
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 11,252
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
Are both of you using a fairly thin DOF?
I had one of the K5's with AF that was completely unusable. If I stopped down to f/11 it was still hit or miss as to whether I would have enough DOF to put the subject in reasonable focus. It worked well outside in broad daylight, but anything else was pretty bad.
06-16-2016, 04:10 PM   #33
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: America's First Wilderness
Posts: 529
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
I was speaking solely in the context of the processing process. It's something I do late at night. I much prefer being out in the field making photos, but for me that is a crepuscular and daytime activity (as responsibilities allow). But late at night, playing my tunes, partaking of a favorite beverage and maybe a snack, sorting and adjusting photos is a good time.... except for when I drive myself a little crazy because of the processing possibilities.
I consider post processing part and parcel to the process of digital photography. Much like black and white, it's a process. Do I prefer snapping photos vs editing, heck yeah. I much prefer to be outside seeing sights and enjoying the world. Unfortunately, I am not retired and I have to work most of the week. Which means I happen to have 4 days a week I can spend on photo editing.

Also should note, I don't feel the need to post every shutter actuation. So, even if I take 200 photos in a day, once I star rate them, I'm down to 20 one star photos. A second cull gets me down to maybe 10 and a third gives me 1-5, three star photos. From that I process the raws.

Most raw processors are quite adept at batch editing. So if the lighting is similar, it's mostly either automatic after the first, or I batch process all with one setting and fine tune from there. We are talking less than an hour if I don't need something like grad ND or a bunch of corrections to salvage. Modern raw processing software is often pretty close to one click adjustments for many things and presets make things even faster.

I figure half that is spent star rating them, which I assume JPEG shooters are doing anyway.



06-16-2016, 04:38 PM   #34
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 11,252
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
There has been a plethora of complaints on the Internet about Fujis not doing well with landscape photos - primarily the greens used for foliage and loss of fine detail. I don't know about sooc settings, but RAW converters have been improving in rendering the images.
That would be the wiggly worms complaint that was mostly (entirely perhaps) a complaint with Adobe's raw conversion. It's one of those things that I heard a lot about but never saw, so I didn't worry about it.

06-16-2016, 06:38 PM   #35
retired sw engineer
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,885
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
I was speaking solely in the context of the processing process. It's something I do late at night. I much prefer being out in the field making photos, but for me that is a crepuscular and daytime activity (as responsibilities allow). But late at night, playing my tunes, partaking of a favorite beverage and maybe a snack, sorting and adjusting photos is a good time.... except for when I drive myself a little crazy because of the processing possibilities.
Yes, that is when I'm scanning and processing scans.
06-16-2016, 08:38 PM   #36
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hamilton, Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 686
Original Poster
Incidentally. . . Fuji seem to be going for a change in lens strategy. I've already mentioned how big and heavy the 16mm and 90mm lenses are. It seemed sort of perverse. They're much bigger than the corresponding Pentax-M and Pentax-A series lenses I had for my 35mm SLR. I thought mirrorless cameras were supposed to save us from DSLR system bloat, not make it worse.

One of the first lenses Fuji released for the X system was a 35mm F1.4. Recently they revisited that focal length and introduced a 35mm F2 which is considerably more compact, less expensive, weather sealed, and has faster and quieter autofocus. The somewhat smaller aperture and reliance on software correction made it possible, apparently. Then they were caught completely off guard by the huge demand for this lens, to the point that it's sold-out everywhere now (except for some silver ones!), and nobody knows when more will be available.

Gosh, who would have thought that a compact and lightweight prime lens with exquisite build quality and optics, albeit somewhat smaller aperture, would be popular? That's just crazy! *cough*Limited*cough*

So, the rumor mill says they are now reworking their lens roadmap to accommodate more compact, less expensive primes and fewer of the super-fast, super-pricey behemoths.
06-16-2016, 08:44 PM   #37
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: America's First Wilderness
Posts: 529
I enjoyed Ken Rockwell review of the fuji lenses. Metal, high quality optics, nothing like what has been made for 20 years. I was sold. Then I looked at my camera on the desk, DA 21...ooops, Ken. And next to that was my 43 and 15....oh, well, I understand his point, but I guess he thinks Fuji reinvented the wheel.

06-16-2016, 08:50 PM   #38
retired sw engineer
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,885
QuoteOriginally posted by Tony Belding Quote
Incidentally. . . Fuji seem to be going for a change in lens strategy. I've already mentioned how big and heavy the 16mm and 90mm lenses are. It seemed sort of perverse. They're much bigger than the corresponding Pentax-M and Pentax-A series lenses I had for my 35mm SLR. I thought mirrorless cameras were supposed to save us from DSLR system bloat, not make it worse.

One of the first lenses Fuji released for the X system was a 35mm F1.4. Recently they revisited that focal length and introduced a 35mm F2 which is considerably more compact, less expensive, weather sealed, and has faster and quieter autofocus. The somewhat smaller aperture and reliance on software correction made it possible, apparently. Then they were caught completely off guard by the huge demand for this lens, to the point that it's sold-out everywhere now (except for some silver ones!), and nobody knows when more will be available.

Gosh, who would have thought that a compact and lightweight prime lens with exquisite build quality and optics, albeit somewhat smaller aperture, would be popular? That's just crazy! *cough*Limited*cough*

So, the rumor mill says they are now reworking their lens roadmap to accommodate more compact, less expensive primes and fewer of the super-fast, super-pricey behemoths.
As someone who started off using Kodachrome 25, being able to go to higher and higher ISO settings has been un-nerving, but the more I see, the more I expect to see of that. Cell phones succeed in certain areas because of the processing power they can throw at problems. I believe what we're going to see in the future is more and more cases where camera makers do things which would have been unheard of, but succeed because they are able to follow the cell phone strategy of processing their way past problems caused by ISO {allowing lenses to have smaller aperture}, distortion, and diffraction.

06-16-2016, 09:02 PM   #39
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hamilton, Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 686
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
I believe what we're going to see in the future is more and more cases where camera makers do things which would have been unheard of, but succeed because they are able to follow the cell phone strategy of processing their way past problems caused by ISO {allowing lenses to have smaller aperture}, distortion, and diffraction.
The 01 lens (8.5mm F1.9) on the Pentax Q system uses the same software correction strategy, and it works well, and I dare say that lens is a favorite of many in the Q catalog. I'm no optical engineer, but the limited experience I have with lenses suggests to me that software correction or optical correction (with more lens elements) both produce very similar results. The practical difference is that doing it with software allows your lens to be smaller and less expensive.
06-16-2016, 09:17 PM   #40
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 11,252
QuoteOriginally posted by Tony Belding Quote
Incidentally. . . Fuji seem to be going for a change in lens strategy. I've already mentioned how big and heavy the 16mm and 90mm lenses are. It seemed sort of perverse. They're much bigger than the corresponding Pentax-M and Pentax-A series lenses I had for my 35mm SLR. I thought mirrorless cameras were supposed to save us from DSLR system bloat, not make it worse.
I think when that mantra was being written, the manufacturers weren't counting on images being inspected at the pixel level and equipment being trashed based on flaws that would never show up in a print.
For better or worse, we got what we asked for, but it came at a price. Bigger rear elements, and expensive glass intensive designs increased both the size and cost of lenses.
The Fuji glass is second to none, but it isn't cheap.
06-17-2016, 03:40 AM   #41
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 19,935
QuoteOriginally posted by Tony Belding Quote
Incidentally. . . Fuji seem to be going for a change in lens strategy. I've already mentioned how big and heavy the 16mm and 90mm lenses are. It seemed sort of perverse. They're much bigger than the corresponding Pentax-M and Pentax-A series lenses I had for my 35mm SLR. I thought mirrorless cameras were supposed to save us from DSLR system bloat, not make it worse.

One of the first lenses Fuji released for the X system was a 35mm F1.4. Recently they revisited that focal length and introduced a 35mm F2 which is considerably more compact, less expensive, weather sealed, and has faster and quieter autofocus. The somewhat smaller aperture and reliance on software correction made it possible, apparently. Then they were caught completely off guard by the huge demand for this lens, to the point that it's sold-out everywhere now (except for some silver ones!), and nobody knows when more will be available.

Gosh, who would have thought that a compact and lightweight prime lens with exquisite build quality and optics, albeit somewhat smaller aperture, would be popular? That's just crazy! *cough*Limited*cough*

So, the rumor mill says they are now reworking their lens roadmap to accommodate more compact, less expensive primes and fewer of the super-fast, super-pricey behemoths.
The problem is that Fuji, as a crop only camera system, has sold themselves to users as "full frame quality in a smaller package." There was that whole video out there where some Fuji-paid photographer spent twenty minutes ranting about the fact that the difference in size between APS-C and full frame sensors wasn't big compared to the difference between, say, full frame and large format film sizes.

Anyway, if you have a full frame camera and a 50mm f1.4 or a 31mm f1.8 and you want to get equivalent angle of view and ability to shoot narrow depth of field, you need pretty fast lenses. And the reality is that a 50mm f1.4 for full frame is going to be at least as small as a 33mm f1.0 lens for a crop sensor camera. If you don't need super-fast lenses, then you can make your lenses a lot smaller -- like the DA limited lenses are.
06-17-2016, 08:14 AM   #42
retired sw engineer
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,885
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
I think when that mantra was being written, the manufacturers weren't counting on images being inspected at the pixel level and equipment being trashed based on flaws that would never show up in a print.
Yes, I seem to be one of the few who still evaluates a picture by what I see when I look at it as an entirety ,,, much as I did when I projected Kodachrome slides and sat with my wife just behind the projector.
06-17-2016, 12:28 PM   #43
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: America's First Wilderness
Posts: 529
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The problem is that Fuji, as a crop only camera system, has sold themselves to users as "full frame quality in a smaller package." There was that whole video out there where some Fuji-paid photographer spent twenty minutes ranting about the fact that the difference in size between APS-C and full frame sensors wasn't big compared to the difference between, say, full frame and large format film sizes.

Anyway, if you have a full frame camera and a 50mm f1.4 or a 31mm f1.8 and you want to get equivalent angle of view and ability to shoot narrow depth of field, you need pretty fast lenses. And the reality is that a 50mm f1.4 for full frame is going to be at least as small as a 33mm f1.0 lens for a crop sensor camera. If you don't need super-fast lenses, then you can make your lenses a lot smaller -- like the DA limited lenses are.
I'd personally like to see pentax release more fast lenses. Ideally they'd have a compact line, a consumer zoom line, a pro zoom line and a handful of fast prime lenses optimized for wide apertures.

They basically have all the above except the fast primes, with the exception of the FA limiteds.



06-18-2016, 01:12 AM - 1 Like   #44
Pentaxian
Jonathan Mac's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 5,699
QuoteOriginally posted by Mountain Vision Quote
I'd personally like to see pentax release more fast lenses. Ideally they'd have a compact line, a consumer zoom line, a pro zoom line and a handful of fast prime lenses optimized for wide apertures.

They basically have all the above except the fast primes, with the exception of the FA limiteds.
The Fuji lenses are exactly what Pentax need in their line-up - modern, sized for APS-C, with fast apertures at equivalent traditional focal lengths. The only one at present is the DA* 55 and it's reputedly slow-focusing and has the dreaded SDM.
06-18-2016, 04:20 AM   #45
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: America's First Wilderness
Posts: 529
QuoteOriginally posted by Jonathan Mac Quote
The Fuji lenses are exactly what Pentax need in their line-up - modern, sized for APS-C, with fast apertures at equivalent traditional focal lengths. The only one at present is the DA* 55 and it's reputedly slow-focusing and has the dreaded SDM.
Agreed. We also have the 14mm 2.8 which is fairly fast. But beyond that, not many fast primes from the digital era.

Sigma, fortunately has sort of filled that gap, but many of those lenses are discontinued or were not incredible performers in the first place. Not to mention they aren't sealed, which isn't necessarily horrible in the first place, but I wouldn't mind a 23mm fast sealed prime, that was equivalent to my old 35mm f/2. That's definitely a lens I could leave on the camera.

Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
10-17mm, 14mm, 16mm, 90mm, brightness, camera, dfa, dng, evf, files, focus, format, fuji, image, iq, k-s2, lens, lenses, m4/3, pentax, photos, q7, quality, samsung, size, sunlight, test, x-t1
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K3 or Fuji X-T1 for a better shooting experience for me? chiane Pentax K-3 33 02-20-2015 09:01 AM
FA 77mm mount on Fuji X-T1 Eagle_Friends Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 06-03-2014 08:14 PM
Is it just me or does the new Fuji X-T1 look a lot like an LX? Jamey777 Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 7 02-19-2014 12:16 PM
Fuji X-T1 announced twilight_samurai Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 16 01-31-2014 03:12 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:58 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top