The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

Bah, it turns out getting the official Fuji hood from B&H from New York with DHL shipping (£47) cost LESS than getting Squarehood from Square Hood (£63).

The only thing is the Fuji one doesn't come with a lens hood cover but I already have a spare one of that as it's the same size as the 35/1.4.
 
snerkler said:
I've been looking into Fuji's X Raw Studio and am compiling a load of sims that I'll have a play about with at times but it got me thinking about the DR setting and whether converting the raw after the event would be exactly the same as doing it in camera at the time. What I mean is that changing the DR setting changes the exposure by bumping up the ISO and then doing some voodoo magic to give the final picture and so if this was not applied to the raw file at the time of shooting how can it be applied retrospectively? For example, I used a recipe yesterday with DR400, it was shot at ISO 500. Without DR (or should I say DR100) the shot would have been at ISO 125, converting this retrospectively in X Raw Studio wouldn't give the same result would it?

Am I missing something obvious
Click to expand...
You are missing something, but its far from bloody obvious. It's not documented anywhere; but various Youtubers have basically figured it out.

Essentially it works like this:

DR100 - No Change
DR200 - The camera under exposes by 1 stop; and then raises the shadows by 1 stop
DR400 - The camera under exposes by 2 stops, and then raises the shadows by 2 stops

The DR setting exists to protect (prevent blown) highlights; and as its essentially applying a two-phase process to your images it affects the RAW files permanently. How it chooses to under-expose the photo will likely depend on which setting you are shooting in - if you're in Aperture Priority it will (probably) use ISO; if you're in Shutter Priority it might use Aperture; but this is just a guess. Logic would dictate it uses ISO every time.

Basically, if you're shooting RAW I'd recommend keeping DR on Auto or 100. Auto never uses DR400.

EDIT: Sorry; didn't see a Youtube vid had already been posted! Oh well, now you have it in writing too ;)
 
Last edited:
macvisual said:
wOw - superb set of quality images !

Regards;
Peter
Click to expand...
Thanks, very kind.
colourofsound said:
You are missing something, but it’s far from bloody obvious. It's not documented anywhere; but various Youtubers have basically figured it out.

Essentially it works like this:

DR100 - No Change
DR200 - The camera under exposes by 1 stop; and then raises the shadows by 1 stop
DR400 - The camera under exposes by 2 stops, and then raises the shadows by 2 stops

The DR setting exists to protect (prevent blown) highlights; and as its essentially applying a two-phase process to your images it affects the RAW files permanently. How it chooses to under-expose the photo will likely depend on which setting you are shooting in - if you're in Aperture Priority it will (probably) use ISO; if you're in Shutter Priority it might use Aperture; but this is just a guess. Logic would dictate it uses ISO every time.

Basically, if you're shooting RAW I'd recommend keeping DR on Auto or 100. Auto never uses DR400.

EDIT: Sorry; didn't see a Youtube vid had already been posted! Oh well, now you have it in writing too ;)
Click to expand...
Thanks, I’ve not had time to watch the video yet. Do you mean over exposed as it’s raising the ISO?
 
snerkler said:
Do you mean over exposed as it’s raising the ISO?
Click to expand...

No - Its not changing the ISO to over-expose the image; its changing the ISO to give it range to under-expose the image :)

Dynamic Range settings above 100 don't kick in until ISO400. So, if you set it at Auto then you either set your ISO below 400, or the camera assesses that the ISO is best below 400, essentially nothing happens (the DR setting will be 100).

If you set both DR and ISO to auto and the camera assesses that the scene will have blown highlights, it will set the minimum ISO possible to initiate DR200, under-expose the image by 1 stop and raise the shadows by 1 stop. Depending on the mode you're in (Aperture or Shutter Priority) it will adjust those settings to maintain its ideal exposure.

If you force the DR setting to either 200 or 400, and your camera is set to automatic for ISO, then it changes the ISO to the lowest setting that the DR setting will allow, to give it the range to under-expose the photo and then bump up the shadows by 1 or 2 stops.

Now - if you force DR to 200 or 400, and then configure your ISO - the camera will always respect the exposure triangle before it applies other processing, so if you set your camera manually to DR400 and ISO 125; you're actually getting DR100. The camera will illustrate this by turning the DR icon yellow.

Simples :ROFLMAO:

PS: The minimum ISO could well be different depending on the camera. I think for DR to kick in on my X100F, the ISO has to be above 400. On my X-T5, I think its 500. Which would make sense, as the newer, 40MP sensor probably inherently has more dynamic range before it needs to start applying processing.
 
Last edited:
colourofsound said:
No - Its not changing the ISO to over-expose the image; its changing the ISO to give it range to under-expose the image :)

Dynamic Range settings above 100 don't kick in until ISO400. So, if you set it at Auto then you either set your ISO below 400, or the camera assesses that the ISO is best below 400, essentially nothing happens (the DR setting will be 100).

If you set both DR and ISO to auto and the camera assesses that the scene will have blown highlights, it will set the minimum ISO possible to initiate DR200, under-expose the image by 1 stop and raise the shadows by 1 stop. Depending on the mode you're in (Aperture or Shutter Priority) it will adjust those settings to maintain its ideal exposure.

If you force the DR setting to either 200 or 400, and your camera is set to automatic for ISO, then it changes the ISO to the lowest setting that the DR setting will allow, to give it the range to under-expose the photo and then bump up the shadows by 1 or 2 stops.

Now - if you force DR to 200 or 400, and then configure your ISO - the camera will always respect the exposure triangle before it applies other processing, so if you set your camera manually to DR400 and ISO 125; you're actually getting DR100. The camera will illustrate this by turning the DR icon yellow.

Simples :ROFLMAO:

PS: The minimum ISO could well be different depending on the camera. I think for DR to kick in on my X100F, the ISO has to be above 400. On my X-T5, I think its 500. Which would make sense, as the newer, 40MP sensor probably inherently has more dynamic range before it needs to start applying processing.
Click to expand...
I think I need to read that a few times for it to sink in :lol:

What I’m struggling to understand is that I set the camera to Aperture priority with DR400, aperture was set at f8, and the camera chose ISO 500 and a shutter speed of 1/1500.

Normally in aperture priority it would have chosen ISO 125 and a shutter of 1/375 (or whatever the closest shutter speed is to that), this means that choosing DR400 made the camera use a 2 stop higher ISO than it needed to, if it’s deliberately under exposing why use a higher ISO :thinking:

I’ll hopefully watch that video at some point this weekend and it’ll all make sense :lol:
 
Craikeybaby said:
Yes, no gears or brakes. Sadly not made any more either. It is a fun sport to photograph though as it is lots of fast action 1 minute races.
Click to expand...
We used to make our own in the 70’s. Straightened the forks and built our own wheels. It was when there were a few independent bike shops where you could buy everything you needed at cheap prices.
 
snerkler said:
if it’s deliberately under exposing why use a higher ISO :thinking:
Click to expand...

Because it can’t under-expose at low ISOs. You can’t under-expose ISO125; there’s nowhere to go. In order for the camera to capture a wide dynamic range, it needs some leeway.

So on DR400, the minimum ISO will always be 500; and the shutter speed will increase to account for that.

I like to think of the dynamic range setting as a less aggressive HDR. DR takes one photo and essentially does a quick and dirty edit; HDR takes 3 photos at 3 different exposures and combines them.

For what it’s worth, I wouldn’t worry about it. Stick to DR100 if you’re shooting RAW. I had a quick look at your website and your images are really rather good, I don’t think DR is something you should worry about! :)
 
Last edited:
colourofsound said:
Because it can’t under-expose at low ISOs. You can’t under-expose ISO125; there’s nowhere to go. In order for the camera to capture a wide dynamic range, it needs some leeway.

So on DR400, the minimum ISO will always be 500; and the shutter speed will increase to account for that.

I like to think of the dynamic range setting as a less aggressive HDR. DR takes one photo and essentially does a quick and dirty edit; HDR takes 3 photos at 3 different exposures and combines them.

For what it’s worth, I wouldn’t worry about it. Stick to DR100 if you’re shooting RAW. I had a quick look at your website and your images are really rather good, I don’t think DR is something you should worry about! :)
Click to expand...
Ahh that makes sense. And thank you for the kind words.
 
A couple from the weekend at Shelsley Walsh with the usual X-Pro1 & 35mm f2.
I really like using the X-Pro1 and 35mm wandering around the pits. Tempting to try out an X-T5 with a 16-55/50-140 combo. Thinking it could replace my Nikon gear, although not sure I’d gain much in weight savings if I did!

IMG_8178.jpeg

IMG_8179.jpegIMG_8181.jpegIMG_8180.jpeg
 
Hi everyone, I'm wanting to get a (hopefully cheap) lens for my X-T30 to make it more pocketable so that I actually bother to take it out with me. On those lines has anyone got any experience of the TTartisans 27mm F2.7 or the TTartisans 35mm F1.8 please?
I have a suspicion that the 35mm won't be that much smaller than the XF18-55 kit lens, so probably won't give that benefit; whereas the 27mm looks pretty tiny and light weight.
 
TopBanana said:
Hi everyone, I'm wanting to get a (hopefully cheap) lens for my X-T30 to make it more pocketable so that I actually bother to take it out with me. On those lines has anyone got any experience of the TTartisans 27mm F2.7 or the TTartisans 35mm F1.8 please?
I have a suspicion that the 35mm won't be that much smaller than the XF18-55 kit lens, so probably won't give that benefit; whereas the 27mm looks pretty tiny and light weight.
Click to expand...
If you mean the TTArtisans 27mm F/2.8 then I had one of those. I sold it and replaced with the Viltrox 28mm chip lens, which in hindsight was quite a downgrade. The TTArtisans lens is very good: it's light, sharp and the autofocus is good. Only thing to be aware of is it vignettes really heavily up to about F/8, although that's correctable (or just leave it, it didn't really bother me).
 
TopBanana said:
Hi everyone, I'm wanting to get a (hopefully cheap) lens for my X-T30 to make it more pocketable so that I actually bother to take it out with me. On those lines has anyone got any experience of the TTartisans 27mm F2.7 or the TTartisans 35mm F1.8 please?
I have a suspicion that the 35mm won't be that much smaller than the XF18-55 kit lens, so probably won't give that benefit; whereas the 27mm looks pretty tiny and light weight.
Click to expand...
I know it probably won’t help you because of cost.
The pictures above your post are from the Fuji 27mm. It only leaves my xe-1 if I need to use the 18mm for a wider shot
 
skullfunkerry said:
If you mean the TTArtisans 27mm F/2.8 then I had one of those. I sold it and replaced with the Viltrox 28mm chip lens, which in hindsight was quite a downgrade. The TTArtisans lens is very good: it's light, sharp and the autofocus is good. Only thing to be aware of is it vignettes really heavily up to about F/8, although that's correctable (or just leave it, it didn't really bother me).
Click to expand...
ooh, yes you're right I did mean F2.8 (y)
Good to hear you thought it was good. I've read about the vignetting and don't think it will bother me as I quite like the effect tbh!
 
leaky5 said:
I know it probably won’t help you because of cost.
The pictures above your post are from the Fuji 27mm. It only leaves my xe-1 if I need to use the 18mm for a wider shot
Click to expand...
I can't afford the Fuji lens at the moment but that's definitely helpful feedback about the focal length, thanks :)
 
TopBanana said:
ooh, yes you're right I did mean F2.8 (y)
Good to hear you thought it was good. I've read about the vignetting and don't think it will bother me as I quite like the effect tbh!
Click to expand...
If you want me to send you some uncorrected shots that I took with it drop me a message, I'll dig some out. These were taken with it, I can't remember how much I did to them now...


Leake Street graffiti tunnel by Kerry M, on Flickr


Coventry Cathedral by Kerry M, on Flickr

217F84BB-66C8-4EB0-9BFF-6CEDD378D3DE_1_105_c.jpeg

9F5F0B8C-381A-4809-A087-E4CEB98C50C0_1_105_c.jpeg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top