The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

Hi,

I am having some problems with connecting both my X-T3 and x-H1 to my MacBook pro, I am looking to set it up for tethered shooting, as well as Video if possible. The cal=mera will charge via the USB port, but it does not show up in finder and I can't even transfer files either. I have tried the different settings in the camera menu on both cameras, but it still isn't recognised by the MBP, is there something I need to enable on the Laptop?

Thanks
 
rick448 said:
Hi,

I am having some problems with connecting both my X-T3 and x-H1 to my MacBook pro, I am looking to set it up for tethered shooting, as well as Video if possible. The cal=mera will charge via the USB port, but it does not show up in finder and I can't even transfer files either. I have tried the different settings in the camera menu on both cameras, but it still isn't recognised by the MBP, is there something I need to enable on the Laptop?

Thanks
Click to expand...

I believe there’s a built in program on the Mac called Image Capture. Try opening it with the camera connected. I sometimes use it for stubborn cases when finder misbehaves.
 
trevorbray said:
I believe there’s a built in program on the Mac called Image Capture. Try opening it with the camera connected. I sometimes use it for stubborn cases when finder misbehaves.
Click to expand...
I'll take a look, the camera is showing in the system information folder, but not in finder, so therefore I can't do anything with it.

Thanks :)
 
Well, interestingly the image capture application picks it up, but it still won't show up in finder, or be recognised by the Fujifilm Acquire app.

Do any of you use tether video, or still shooting, f so how are you doing this via a MB?
 
I don't think I'd go for the 16-80, looks a nice lens but I'd prefer something brighter going into the winter, will stick with the 16 1.4 and 50F2 combination for now. Seems to work well for most of what I shoot. I need some form of tele lens though
 
weebleswobble said:
Anyone else waiting for the 16-80 to be released?

Can’t wait!
Signed ‘impatient’
Click to expand...

I kinda was, but after much consideration, I opted for the 55-200 instead, as the 16-80 covered what I already have in primes. GAS, but only light ;)
 
weebleswobble said:
Anyone else waiting for the 16-80 to be released?

Can’t wait!
Signed ‘impatient’
Click to expand...

I moved to Fuji a couple of weeks ago and did intend to wait for the 16-80. Impatience, and the trade-in deal that Jessops had at the time, got the better of me and I got the 16-55 instead. I’m glad tbh as it’s nice to have the 2.8 if I need it. Not fussed about the lack of ois on the 16-55.
 
Jelster said:
So I've been playing with C1. Two images below, one with my usual LR touches, and then a version of the same RAW file dealt with in C1.

Comments? Which do you prefer, and which is which?

Image 1
Stourhead 1 by Steve Jelly, on Flickr

Image 2
Stourhead 2 by Steve Jelly, on Flickr
Click to expand...


The first one for me, purely because the presentation has more contrast & depth to the colours, particularly noticeable in the sky.

George.
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
The first one for me, purely because the presentation has more contrast & depth to the colours, particularly noticeable in the sky.

George.
Click to expand...
I agree :)
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
The first one for me, purely because the presentation has more contrast & depth to the colours, particularly noticeable in the sky.

George.
Click to expand...

Thanks George. I think I may of over done the sharpening on the first one though... Lack of PP skills on my part :facepalm:
 
I’ve been away from Fuji for a couple of months now, and although I’m enjoying the Sony, I’m hankering after a smaller more compact body for my street.
I’ve been offered an X100F at what seems to be a decent price, but I know zero about the camera. What would you compare it to? I’ve had the XT2 XT3 (which I didn’t like) and the XH1. Any comparison? Or is it a completely different beast?

Cheers,
Nick
 
Jelster said:
So I've been playing with C1. Two images below, one with my usual LR touches, and then a version of the same RAW file dealt with in C1.

Comments? Which do you prefer, and which is which?

Image 1
Stourhead 1 by Steve Jelly, on Flickr

Image 2
Stourhead 2 by Steve Jelly, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Just to be the outlier, I prefer 2 simply because it looks more natural and less processed. I prefer the warmer tones to the greenery and bridge stonework. It lacks the punch of 1 but that could easily be added with some contrast and clarity adjustments. I usually export a tiff from C1 and run it through camera raw so I can apply some graduate filters and subtle tweaks that I can't do in the free version of C1.
 
NickTB said:
I’ve been away from Fuji for a couple of months now, and although I’m enjoying the Sony, I’m hankering after a smaller more compact body for my street.
I’ve been offered an X100F at what seems to be a decent price, but I know zero about the camera. What would you compare it to? I’ve had the XT2 XT3 (which I didn’t like) and the XH1. Any comparison? Or is it a completely different beast?

Cheers,
Nick
Click to expand...

No comparison to X-T or X-H bodies.
X100 series have a fixed 23mm lens.
Same sensor as X-T2
Great camera for street
The F version is the best X100 for handling with its joystick.
Super jpegs, but you probably know that of Fuji.
 
Jelster said:
So I've been playing with C1. Two images below, one with my usual LR touches, and then a version of the same RAW file dealt with in C1.

Comments? Which do you prefer, and which is which?

Image 1
Stourhead 1 by Steve Jelly, on Flickr

Image 2
Stourhead 2 by Steve Jelly, on Flickr
Click to expand...

I would prefer #2 if it had a little more contrast, as for me #1 looks a little over cooked. I also like the lack of people in #1
You could try putting the sky from #1 int #2 ;)
 
trevorbray said:
No comparison to X-T or X-H bodies.
X100 series have a fixed 23mm lens.
Same sensor as X-T2
Great camera for street
The F version is the best X100 for handling with its joystick.
Super jpegs, but you probably know that of Fuji.
Click to expand...

Thanks,Should have worded that better. What I meant was the output. I’m seriously tempted by the simplicity of the set up. The last thing I want is to start buying lenses Again!
 
NickTB said:
Thanks,Should have worded that better. What I meant was the output. I’m seriously tempted by the simplicity of the set up. The last thing I want is to start buying lenses Again!
Click to expand...

Easy. Same output as X-T2
 
I ended up with this one as my "keeper"...
Kei said:
Just to be the outlier, I prefer 2 simply because it looks more natural and less processed. I prefer the warmer tones to the greenery and bridge stonework. It lacks the punch of 1 but that could easily be added with some contrast and clarity adjustments. I usually export a tiff from C1 and run it through camera raw so I can apply some graduate filters and subtle tweaks that I can't do in the free version of C1.
Click to expand...


I decided to rework the second one (but take the people out) and ended up with this...

Stourhead by Steve Jelly, on Flickr
 
Jelster said:
So I've been playing with C1. Two images below, one with my usual LR touches, and then a version of the same RAW file dealt with in C1.

Comments? Which do you prefer, and which is which?

Image 1
Stourhead 1 by Steve Jelly, on Flickr

Image 2
Stourhead 2 by Steve Jelly, on Flickr
Click to expand...
I think 2 is Lightroom.

FWIW I prefer 2 as 1 looks like it has been taken too far.
 
I (stupidly stupidly) thought my "all singing/all dancing" Nikon system would have out performed the Fuji X system, how WRONG was I.....!!!!

Looking to sell/trade/swap my Nikon system back to the fabulous Fooji X camp when I return from holiday this weekend.

For me the Nikon cannot produce the goods colour wise against the Fuji files (raw/jpg), simple as that.


Think I'll start my search for a X-Pro1 body and follow on from that platform as I ADORE the output files.


Peter
 
Jelster said:
Wrong way round.... In fact I know I overworked the LR version, but it didn't look that bad when I did it. I have reworked it since and calmed it down.....
Click to expand...
Doh. I went through the back to back comparisons of Lightroom vs C1 and although I preferred the C1 images, I could get close, with way less effort in Lightroom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top