View Full Version : X100 in Chinatown
Took the X100 to my usual lens test area: Chinatown, Singapore
Here are some shots.
Fujifilm X100
Film Simulation: Monochrome with Yellow Filter
Focusing style: AF and MF (can't remember which is which)
Post Processing: minimal (added a little "black")
#1. I am 兵
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5060/5519615722_46ca8a8b80_b_d.jpg
#2. deep blue II
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5135/5519023939_40ce1b2f3c_b_d.jpg
#3. headache
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5253/5519022979_2f97d97983_b_d.jpg
#4. reading the news
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5016/5519613024_ea96f002e1_b_d.jpg
#5. caged
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5098/5519021399_8065de9ea4_b_d.jpg
eurotramp
03-12-2011, 04:42
Nice candid pictures.
How would you rate the OOC (out of camera) monochrome performance (Does it need a lot of post processing) ?
Very nice tones throughout. How does the camera handle for this type of candid work?
/
Nice candid pictures.
How would you rate the OOC (out of camera) monochrome performance (Does it need a lot of post processing) ?
OOC monochrome is not bad at all. I did very minimal post processing to this set of photos.
However, I do find it rather too "clean". I'm playing with Silver Efex Pro to add some film qualities.
Very nice tones throughout. How does the camera handle for this type of candid work?
/
The X100 is lighter than the any Leica M but is heavier than the Leica X1. The shutter (using Silent Mode) is very quiet...quieter than the M9.
Hence, the small form factor, the good handling and quiet shutter make it a perfect tool for candid/street photography. AF is a tad slow but it is bearable for me.
eurotramp
03-12-2011, 05:35
However, I do find it rather too "clean"
Thanks. Currently it looks like Neopan 100.
RTOP. Read the original post!
Am sorry but
(added a little "black")
Doesn't convey much to me ...
Finally some "real" X100 photos. Like the last one best - you and the camera are getting along fine, it seems.
f16sunshine
03-12-2011, 06:08
Real photos!! They look great. Did you shoot all at wide open ? I agree about too clean. Silver effex will be a nice companion to this camera.
Nikon Bob
03-12-2011, 06:12
Looks good for my tastes, never too clean for me.
Bob
Wongsan, these are great photographs!
I hope you don't mind - I ran these through a typical editing process of my own to see how they looked. Basically I just sharpened the jpegs, and then ran them through Nik silver effex with the delta 100 preset, and then did some curve adjustments. Took about a minute for both. OP, please let me know if you'd like me to take these down - if you'd like me to I will do so immediately.
http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q51/fdigital/5519615722_46ca8a8b80_b-1.jpg
http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q51/fdigital/5519023939_59b7929dc2_b.jpg
Looks fantastic to me! From the IQ the camera seems to be a real winner!
Pickett Wilson
03-12-2011, 06:31
I like these much better than the too clean originals.
These pictures turned out nicely! Even the somewhat flat originals are good because you can always boost contrast - the other way round would be more problematic ...
Instantclassic
03-12-2011, 06:42
Took the X100 to my usual lens test area: Chinatown, Singapore
Here are some shots.
Fujifilm X100
Film Simulation: Monochrome with Yellow Filter
Focusing style: AF and MF (can't remember which is which)
Post Processing: minimal (added a little "black")
#1. I am 兵
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5060/5519615722_46ca8a8b80_b_d.jpg
#2. deep blue II
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5135/5519023939_59b7929dc2_b_d.jpg
#3. headache
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5253/5519022979_2f97d97983_b_d.jpg
#4. reading the news
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5016/5519613024_ea96f002e1_b_d.jpg
#5. caged
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5098/5519021399_8065de9ea4_b_d.jpg
I like your photos. The best X100 argument. It seems like a very good product, indeed.
Thanks guys!
The X100 is certainly a very credible camera!
I'm using LightRoom 3.
Some EXIF data:
ISO: 400 and 800
Aperture: all at F2.0
Shutter speed: 1/350 to 1/1000
Image Quality: FINE JPEGs
@fdigital: Your PP images are wonderful. I downloaded the demo Silver Efex Pro 2. Here is a set using the Trix400 preset.
#1. gatekeeper in chinatown
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5131/5519449089_8ac1efa3f3_b_d.jpg
#2. old friends chatting
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5174/5519446739_8cb0c27231_b_d.jpg
#3. "what is he doing?!"
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5296/5519444587_32d42e9369_b_d.jpg
#4. smoking hand
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5092/5519442323_0db998262d_b_d.jpg
#5. focus
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5178/5519439897_3a4870c976_b_d.jpg
eurotramp
03-12-2011, 07:05
Basically I just sharpened the jpegs, and then ran them through Nik silver effex with the delta 100 preset, and then did some curve adjustments. Took about a minute for both.
Bingo! Gavin, if i didn't know any better i could swear this was shot with Illford 400 and then scanned.
Cheers!
willie_901
03-12-2011, 07:06
These examples are beautiful. Thanks for sharing your work and for telling us how you achieved this look.
Your photos have inspired me to shoot B&W in-camera using the RAW + jpeg mode as soon as my X100 arrives.
Bingo! Gavin, if i didn't know any better i could swear this was shot with Illford 400 and then scanned.
Cheers!
I agree - silver effex is very very good. Sometimes I mix up digital and film files from one shoot and the quickest way to tell them apart is to look for the dust on the film scans.
I like the originals, I am not much for spending a lot of time adjusting on the PC, much more fun to just take the photos.... like what I see in the originals..... looking forward to get the camera I have ordered!
Jon R
AM*shoots*SF
03-12-2011, 07:33
Thanks for these. I'm still probably a month away from ownership...and look forward to shooting in san gran's Chinatown as well :)
I like the tones of the original ones. They make no film pretense so they feel real and simple... Just a little bit of grain with photoshop and they're fine.
The other over-processed ones look gimmicky, not film-like but trying hard to be film-like.
Keep it simple, the whole point of b&w photography is simplicity.
AM*shoots*SF
03-12-2011, 07:38
P.s. How the heck do I add a signature line to my posts? I looked in udder profile and found nada. Help!
tom.w.bn
03-12-2011, 07:50
Really nice photos. Reminds me of the look of Fuji Acros 100.
Spider67
03-12-2011, 08:08
Great photos! Seems the x100 was the right tool for those moments
helenhill
03-12-2011, 08:10
LOVELY...very NICE
I actually Love the ORIGINALS Best but would just Crank Up the 'Contrast' a tad....Nothin More...Simplicity & Ease of Workflow
Me Thinks I May Now WANT one....:cool: am Lucky 8 on the List
The Question is: Will this FILM Gal Really succumb ???
hard Choice when I think of all the Film & Prints I can do with that $1299.00
CONGRATS ...!!
AM*shoots*SF
03-12-2011, 08:16
.......
Kewl!
Helen,
I am settling for an Olympus EP2 with EVF to use my lenses with.
It also costs less than a Fuji X100 with a fixed lens.
I sold my Hexar AF because it had a fixed 35/2.
Helen - I got my X100 to complement the MP & M2. My old Digilux 2 is getting tired now. The X100 sits in the bag with a film M perfectly and takes up less room than the Digilux so I can now carry more rolls of Double-X. It will slide in your purse easily.
sparrow6224
03-12-2011, 12:03
I fyou look at #1 in the originals there's a beautiful reflection of the player's face, in the foreground of the picture. Details of that are lost in the Silver Efx version, at least on my monitor. I'm with Helen -- just bump the contrast a bit in PS Camera Raw and you're done.
They look too harsh on my LED Apple monitor.
That's probably because new apple LED monitors crank contrast and blacks a lot. But then I like my black and white shots contrasty with deep lows and higher highs personally, so they're definitely on the contrasty side.
These look great. Both the use you've put the camera to, and the results.
Gradskater
03-12-2011, 14:54
I have been keeping my eye on this camera for weeks, but until now I hadn't seen anything that looked like the film pictures I prefer. Also, I have a bunch of nice film camera bodies and lenses, and after seeing these pictures, it might be time to start auctioning them off...well, maybe I'll just sell the bodies for now...great pictures.
P.s. How the heck do I add a signature line to my posts? I looked in udder profile and found nada. Help!
There is a "quick links" tab on top right (between "search" and "log out") with a drop down menu, click on that drop down arrow and you will see "edit signature".
dave lackey
03-12-2011, 15:10
Is it my monitor or do I see some distortion (stretching horizontally) in most of the photos?:confused: Especially the corners, but the images appear to be wider than proportionally expected.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5131/5519449089_8ac1efa3f3_b_d.jpg
Note the upper left corner of #3...as well as the one above.
Agree that the SilverFX versions are a step too far -- the originals looks great. A tiny touch more contrast, and a little teeny tiny bit of SilverFX grain would be great.
I use SilverFX all the time, but the presets are too extreme for my taste. Subtlety is key! Adding grain is like sharpening: the right amount does wonders, but too much is a disaster.
Nikon Bob
03-12-2011, 16:27
I don't know, but I am not seeing much in the way of apparent distortion in the photos.
Bob
Is it my monitor or do I see some distortion (stretching horizontally) in most of the photos?:confused: Especially the corners, but the images appear to be wider than proportionally expected.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5131/5519449089_8ac1efa3f3_b_d.jpg
Note the upper left corner of #3...as well as the one above.
Dave, I think that is not distortion so much, rather it is diverging verticals caused by the camera not being kept level. If you check the exact centre of the frame on this shot you'll see the camera is pointed downwards. In fact I think all the shots shown have been taken this way - camera pointed slightly down.
dave lackey
03-12-2011, 16:36
Yeah, noticed that too. The heads of the people seem abnormally wide. especially in the left upper quadrant. Is this an effect from the wider lens? Maybe I have been shooting 50mm lenses for way too long but the heads, bodies and even some of the lines in other images appear to be stretched somehow. I dunno.:confused:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5253/5519022979_2f97d97983_b_d.jpg
Chanced upon this ball game and decided to shoot some test shots in colors. Don't really know how to shot colors but here goes...
Shot using ASTIA preset.
PP in LR: some cropping and reducing of Vibrance and Saturation
#1. between shadow and light
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5094/5521616635_a3de922074_b_d.jpg
#2. eighty-nine
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5140/5521615745_e087711cba_b_d.jpg
#3. player #16
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5292/5522205164_0713da2b9d_b_d.jpg
#4. 10.02.13
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5258/5521614087_b4715eab1e_b_d.jpg
#5. dry leaves
[Not using Macro mode. Focusing distance is about 0.4m which is only possible with MF. AF minimum focusing distance is 0.8m]
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5136/5522202718_5fce73a4d8_b_d.jpg
thanks for posting these, wongsan! both the b&w and the colour shots are great. i'm really surprised how much the x100 was able to throw the background out of focus in the above shot. very nice!!
Hey Jon, hope things are OK for you back home.
Yeah...the bokeh in that shot is pretty good.
From these posts and similar ones on other forums, it seems to me that there is a misconception that equates strongly o-o-f background with "good bokeh": actually bokeh refers to the quality of the o-o-f back ground whether it's a bit or a lot o-o-f. The bokeh in the picture above does not look good to me, but that is, of course, a matter of taste. On the other hand, focus on a subject as close as 0.4m will throw the background o-o-f, although much more mildly, even at f/8.
—Mitch/Bangkok
Paris au rythme de Basquiat (http://www.flickr.com/photos/malland/5117748797/in/set-72157625048893585/lightbox/)
Indeed. Those leaves are so close that the background would be OOF even with a small sensor camera.
But, the people shots show you can get just about enough blur behind the subject. The bokeh would be good enough for me; although the smaller sensor means you would get less blur than with, say, the Hexar AF in subdued light, the ND filter will even the fight somewhat given the Hexar's max shutter speed.
tom.w.bn
03-13-2011, 03:57
A lot of very promising stuff here. But the discussion about #5 (leaves) is a bit weird. I know that it's only a testshot but everybody talks about the quality of the oof-area and no one talks about the lack of sharpness of the main subject.
These threads are going to drive anyone who's waiting for their X100 round the twist IMO because people seem to be looking for faults to latch on to and run with.
Until such time as I have the camera in my hands, with images on my monitor in front of me that I've taken, I don't care about bokeh, coma, flare, fall off, distortion, fringing or any other technical term I have yet see in my X100 pics. :rolleyes:
:D
shadowfox
03-14-2011, 17:41
wongsan,
Those are photos of characters. Good photos, and I like them for the content and the atmosphere. And the fact that the camera allows you to capture those, speaks highly of its design (and of course, your utilizing it).
But I don't see anything "special" about the images themselves.
They look like any Nikon D-whatever, Canon whatever-D, Leica M8, Sony A-whatever, Pentax K-whatever, Olympus E-whatever out there.
It's just another modern digital camera with a modern lens, modern sensor technology, how bad can it be?
wongsan,
Those are photos of characters. Good photos, and I like them for the content and the atmosphere. And the fact that the camera allows you to capture those, speaks highly of its design (and of course, your utilizing it).
But I don't see anything "special" about the images themselves.
They look like any Nikon D-whatever, Canon whatever-D, Leica M8, Sony A-whatever, Pentax K-whatever, Olympus E-whatever out there.
It's just another modern digital camera with a modern lens, modern sensor technology, how bad can it be?
Hi Will
Thanks fo rthe comment.
I agree with you.
The X100 is just another camera.
My buddy said "his GRD3 is better".
Another said "X100 is a modern cam in grandfathers clothes".
I'm just sold on the retro rangefinder styling and the integrated OVF.
It should complement my analog RF/MF cameras.
Cheers
Vincent
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.