Fuji’s double kit offer to come? (X-E1 + 18-55 + 55-200)

Share

photo bh_zpsb24b8e62.png

Do you remember the crazy X-superkit deals here? You missed them? Don’t worry. I’ve the feeling that we could enjoy them again in future ;). This time the 2 lenses in offer should be the [shoplink 10279]XF 18-55mm[/shoplink] and XF 55-200mm. So, if you plan to switch to the Fuji X-series, this could be an interesting deal: buy both XF-zoom lenses and you’ll grab the X-E1 for a significantly reduced price.

I don’t know the price and when the zoom lenses kit deal will exactly be launched, but I’m looking forward to it. Lemme see if I can tell you more about it soon.

Share

Apple Camera RAW, X-Trans and EXR

Share

by Rico Pfirstinger

Talk to Rico (questions & feedback) – Rico’s Flickr photosteam

Considering the lively discussion that is going on about Apple Camera Raw and Aperture finally supporting Fujifilm cameras with X-Trans sensors, earlier reports about Aperture’s death appear to be a bit premature. As was to be expected, most of the discussion focuses on heavy pixel peeping, so this is what I am not going to talk about in this edition of my X-Pert Corner column. That’s because with all the pixel peeping, it’s easy to lose sight of the big picture. There’s more to processing a RAW file than looking at perceived artifacts in 100%-400% magnification modes. Let’s instead focus on the following:

  • How usable is Apple Camera Raw for highlight recovery?
  • How is Apple Camera Raw dealing with digital lens correction and RAW metadata?
  • How is it handling RAW files that were taken in extended dynamic range modes, like DR200% and DR400%?

If you open a “standard” (that is DR100%) X-Trans RAW file in Apple Aperture using the latest Apple Camera Raw, chances are it won’t look that much different from a standard Provia SOOC JPEG file. Why bother, then? We could just use the JPEGs from the camera (maybe with additional tweaking in its internal RAW converter) and carry on with our lives, right? Yes, we could, at least in many instances. However, there are situations that the camera’s built-in JPEG engine cannot handle. This is where external RAW processing options shine—at least some of them, because not all external RAW processors are equally well-suited for specific tasks, such as highlight recovery.

Let’s have a look at a practical example. This is a (cropped to taste) SOOC JPEG image I recently recorded with a XF55-200mmF3.5-4.8 R LM OIS prototype lens:

You can immediately see that the dynamic range of this subject grossly exceeds the range of the JPEG: shadows are blocked, highlights (clouds and sky) are blown-out. No matter how you deal with this RAW file in the camera’s internal converter, you won’t get a balanced result showing the full tonal range of the scene. For example, redeveloping the JPEG in-camera with soft (-2) shadow and highlight tone settings won’t rescue the clouds:

Neither will “pulling” the image -1/3 or -2/3 EV using the built-in converter’s push/pull function:


-1/3 EV


-2/3 EV

It is important to note that both -1/3 EV and -2/3 EV versions shown here don’t induce any any clipped highlight warnings, neither in the camera’s “info display” view nor in Apple Aperture. This means that no matter how much further I might pull the RAW in-camera, the texture in the clouds won’t magically re-appear. The internal RAW converter simply cannot rescue this shot. However, a state-of-the-art external converter can.

I shot this sample using the basic “ETTR exposure technique for RAW shooters” that I am recommending in my book. This means setting the camera to DR100% and using the live histogram to set the “right” exposure, clipping the relevant highlights in the histogram just so much that they can still be recovered in Lightroom/ACR or, in this case, Apple Camera Raw and Aperture.

Here’s what the standard import of the RAW file looks like in Apple Aperture:

Share
** CLICK HERE to Read the Rest of the Article **

Official European Zeiss lens price info!

Share

Thanks to the Munich store Sauter we got the info about the new “Touit” Zeiss lens primes:
Touit 32mm f/1.8 for 799 Euro (Click here).
Touit 12mm f/2.8 for 1099 Euro (Click here).

There is still no info about the price in US/Canada. To get notified when these lenses will be sold on eBay login our Slidoo-eBay website and save this searches: Touit 32mm and Touit 12mm. You will can change the country in your settings. And here is the HowTo to learn how all this works (P.S.: Slidoo Amazon is in the works and will be announced in a few weeks).

Share

X-Trans and Aperture feedback (and LR5)

Share

photo Untitled-7_zps52c42ff7.jpg

image courtesy: soundimageplus

1) soundimpageplus posted part 1 of his first impressions and comparison pics on his website here. For part 2 click here. Among the others in the first part he says that:

“[…] when I looked at typical ‘problem’ areas for the Fuji files, dense areas of green foliage, it was a different story. The Aperture files, as you can see, are clearly superior and don’t have that unnatural look that the Adobe files have, even with the latest version of ACR. There is none of that ‘smudging’ of detail and the look that some kind of dodgy filter effect has been added. Great you might think, but this does come at a (slight) price. There is definitely some colour noise and moire present in the Aperture files. […]  So overall, I’m VERY impressed with the Aperture renditions and the colour problems I can deal with easily. Finally, this is commonly used raw conversion software (if you use an Apple-Mac that is!) that does justice to the Fuji files and I got some spectacularly good conversions using it.”

2) Also thedigitalstory posted his Aperture vs Lightroom comparison pics here. “In my opinion, both applications do an excellent job of handling .RAF files. And the fact that both Apple and Adobe had the RAW updates so quickly after the release of the new X-Trans cameras (X-20 & X100S), says that both are taking these cameras seriously. Well done.“

3) Thomas Fitzgerald also took a closer look at Aperture, and in his second part he could not confirm the the very good impressions he had in his first look. The good “Sharper in detail areas. Retains textures and fine detail well in certain circumstances. Sharpens up well with some careful edge sharpening. Good saturation. Ability to switch between Raw and Jpeg very useful.” The bad? “Unacceptable level of chroma noise. Strange mottling in the blue channel, Moire is uncontrolled and uncontrollable. Random scattering of pixels in detail areas.  Initial sharpening can be a little weak, and the raw fine tuning sharpening is not great – you need to know how to use edge sharpening to get the best results.” Check it out here.

4) Jim Gamblin compared different RAW converters: Adobe Camera RAW 7.4, SilkyPix which came with the Camera, Raw Photo Processor 64, Apple’s newest update to Aperture and the SOOC jpeg. “Given I have done nothing other then open the RAW (RAF) file in each of the RAW converters and resize them for this site, my opinion is Apeture does the nicest job.  The color and detail to me seem the best of the lot.  Opinions will vary on this, I am sure .[…]  The SOOC jpeg doesn’t look too bad either.  In fact the Apeture version and SOOC jpeg look very similar to me, so I did double check and they repersented faithfully.” See the comparison pics here.

5) A review of the new features of Lightroom 5 can be read over here at andreinicoara. His favorite feature is the new radial filter. Check this youtube video.

Share