[Leica] Using the Fuji X Pro-1

[john at chiaroscuro.co.nz (John McMaster)]

Some technical tests on the different software if interested

http://chromasoft.blogspot.co.nz/2012/05/demosaicing-fuji-x-pro1-and-its-x-t
rans.html

john

-----Original Message-----

Ed - I can't make a comparison to the Nikon RAW processor since I've never
used it.   The Fuji RAW processor--at least on the few images I've tried it
with--seems to produce slightly sharper images but they have noticeable
splotchy color noise that I do not see using the Adobe RAW converter.  The
splotchy noise isn't at all bad, but it is noticeable and I'd rather not see
it at all.  

I convert all my RAW files to DNG on import just as you do. 

The camera will be with me when I go to Maine and by then we should know
whether or not it's going to be a useful platform for my neglected Leica
lenses.     

Regards, 

Dick



On Jun 26, 2012, at 11:56 AM, Edward Kowaleski wrote:

> Thanks for the update.  I'm looking forward to handling it when I see 
> you in Bar Harbor.
> 
> Do you have an opinion of the quality of images generated from DNG 
> files that have been converted from proprietary Fuji or Nikon RAW 
> files?  I know you find the conversion a little (or lots) longer but 
> is there any qualitative difference?
> 
> I have been converting all my Panasonic or Nikon RAW images to DNG as 
> soon as I take the chip out of the camera.  It makes subsequent 
> processing and storage simpler (to me) and keeps all my RAW files on 
> one platform  which I feel confident that Adobe will maintain similar to
their Acrobat PDF files.
> I'd appreciate your thoughts on this.
> 
> Ed
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> 
> I've had my X Pro-1 for two weeks now and in thought you might be 
> interested in my impressions of the camera.  There are many images on 
> line testifying to its excellent image quality at low and high ISO so 
> I'm not going to add more--at least for now.  What they show is all 
> true, though, in my experience.
> 
> If you've been following the discussions about the camera, not all of this
> will be new to you.     
> 
> In a nutshell, it is the most M-like digital camera I've yet run across.
> The aperture dial is on the lens where it belongs, ditto for the 
> shutter speed dial and exposure correction dials on the body, and you 
> can set the Fn button to bring up ISO settings, so everything you're 
> likely to need in routine shooting is right out in the open.  The body 
> is just a bit smaller than the M9 and weighs about half as much.
> 
> With the Fujinon lenses, focus is just like the Leica, except it's 
> automatic.  Aim the focus rectangle in the OVF at the point you want 
> in focus, half press the shutter, watch the frame lines jump into 
> place, reframe if necessary and shoot.  Perfect!  When you're close in 
> you've got to use the lower right focus rectangle to correct for 
> parallax, but otherwise the procedure is the same.  Focus speed is 
> more than fast enough, but nowhere near as fast as my Panasonic GX-1.
> 
> If you place the focus rectangle correctly, the focus will be spot-on. 
> 
> OTH, the camera, despite the inclusion of a "Multi-Spot" mode, really 
> doesn't have one as far as I've can tell.  If you put it in 
> Multi-Spot, it will choose the single most contrasty spot in the frame 
> to focus on, whether it's your subject's eye or a lightbulb in the far 
> corner of the frame.  I don't see why this method would work under any 
> circumstances, but maybe one of you can enlighten me.
> 
> The only way you can shoot from the hip is to lock focus on an 
> appropriate middle distance and stop way down, again just as you would do
with an M.
> 
> I can see the frames lines and data in the OVF with my regular glasses on.
> If I'm wearing polarizing sunglasses and holding the camera horizontally,
> though, I can't either in the OVF or anything at all in the EVF.   With
the
> LCD on the camera back it's the other way around.  It's readable with 
> the camera horizontal, but not vertical.
> 
> Opinions can differ on this of course, but for my purposes LR 4 does a 
> better job of processing the RAW files than the Fuji RAW converter does.
> There is less blotchy chroma noise and sharpness is almost as good.  
> OTH, converting the RAW files to DNG and importing them into LR seems 
> to take forever, maybe 3-4 times as long as it takes to import files from
my D300.
> 
> The only thing about the camera that drives me nuts is the power switch.
> Whoever designed it needs to go in for some remedial work on detent
design.
> Even the slightest brush of the hand or the side of a camera bags turns
the
> camera on.   Bad, bad, bad. 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Dick
>