View Full Version : One BIG disappointment
noimmunity
03-30-2012, 02:49
Now that I've got your attention, it's just this: the XP1 apparently does not allow the user to set adjustable framelines in the OVF.
I am assuming/hoping that this and other functions related to adapted lenses will be addressed in the firmware update accompanying the release of the official Fuji adapter(s).
Not a show stopper, but I was looking forward to using wide angle M lenses in zone focus mode on the XP1, soft corners and all.
(Or have I missed something? Has anybody found a way to do this yet?)
I am assuming/hoping that this and other functions related to adapted lenses will be addressed in the firmware update accompanying the release of the official Fuji adapter(s).
If I was Fujifilm, I would have made the focal length storable in a memory area of the adapter, so that the frame lines switch with the adapter (and the users will be drawn towards buying one adapter per alien lens, which nicely reduces the problem of lacking lens sales that generally keeps makers less than enthusiastic about cameras too easy to use as a alien lens host). In which case the associated menu area might be hidden unless a adapter is attached...
chris00nj
03-30-2012, 03:00
What about the Focal Length setting in the shooting menu?
On the plus side, this camera can do double exposures. I'm not well versed in digital cameras, but this is the first one I've seen that can do it. Here's a sample (http://www.flickr.com/photos/chris00nj/6882990802/in/photostream)
Now that I've got your attention, it's just this: the XP1 apparently does not allow the user to set adjustable framelines in the OVF.
I am assuming/hoping that this and other functions related to adapted lenses will be addressed in the firmware update accompanying the release of the official Fuji adapter(s).
Not a show stopper, but I was looking forward to using wide angle M lenses in zone focus mode on the XP1, soft corners and all.
(Or have I missed something? Has anybody found a way to do this yet?)
Umm... I'm 99.9% sure you can actually set focal length setting for the optical viewfinder.
jsrockit
03-30-2012, 04:19
I thought I've heard of people adjusting then 50mm framelines to 53mm in camera...
noimmunity
03-30-2012, 06:59
Umm... I'm 99.9% sure you can actually set focal length setting for the optical viewfinder.
The framelines can be user set, and the camera can be set to "fire with no lens", but the combination does not produce user-defined framelines *in the optical viewfinder*.
Page 70 of the English manual details instructions for the user-selectable focal lengths, but there is no mention whatsoever that these changes will be reflected in the OVF.
I have the camera, have tried to set the focal length while selecting "shoot w/out lens"; heck, I have even tried it without a lens just to see.
Please do not bother with RTFM comments. I would like responses from people who actually have the camera and have discovered a way to initiate framelines of user-defined focal length in the OVF.
The other 99.9% is just hot air, thank you.
Tim Gray
03-30-2012, 07:07
The framelines can be user set, and the camera can be set to "fire with no lens", but the combination does not produce user-defined framelines *in the optical viewfinder*.
What does the frame line setting do then? I would have thought it's only purpose was to produce frame lines in the finder.
j.scooter
03-30-2012, 07:08
I thought I've heard of people adjusting then 50mm framelines to 53mm in camera...
Yes. This is the thread in question. Although there is not much detail how he changes the framelines.
http://http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=117604
ray*j*gun
03-30-2012, 07:22
The framelines can be user set, and the camera can be set to "fire with no lens", but the combination does not produce user-defined framelines *in the optical viewfinder*.
Page 70 of the English manual details instructions for the user-selectable focal lengths, but there is no mention whatsoever that these changes will be reflected in the OVF.
I have the camera, have tried to set the focal length while selecting "shoot w/out lens"; heck, I have even tried it without a lens just to see.
Please do not bother with RTFM comments. I would like responses from people who actually have the camera and have discovered a way to initiate framelines of user-defined focal length in the OVF.
The other 99.9% is just hot air, thank you.
I don't know what RTFM comments are but with that attitude you won't be getting any comments at all.
stormhalvorsen
03-30-2012, 07:30
Yes. This is the thread in question. Although there is not much detail how he changes the framelines.
http://http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=117604
That thread appears to be gone now, so I guess he couldn't make it work after all. Meanwhile, I have set my lens choice to 53mm, but I cannot tell if there is any difference.
Maybe not as the frameline is selected automatically for original Fuji lenses? And anyway, shouldn't it be set to 35mm and not 50 if is uses the actual Fuji lens specifications and not what it is roughly equalent to on an FX system?
noimmunity
03-30-2012, 07:36
I don't know what RTFM comments are but with that attitude you won't be getting any comments at all.
"99.9% sure" (see post #4) - from someone who probably doesn't even have the camera.
noimmunity
03-30-2012, 07:38
Yes. This is the thread in question. Although there is not much detail how he changes the framelines.
http://http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=117604
Yes, I had read that thread.
Since you have the camera, would you be so kind as to try to verify for yourself whether there is any change in the OVF framelines?
I have used a tape measure running laterally across the bottom of the frame to test possible change and could not detect any.
semordnilap
03-30-2012, 07:38
Proper link to that thread is here:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=117604
noimmunity
03-30-2012, 07:44
One possible explanation is that since adapted lenses can only be reliably focused using the EVF (there is no focus confirmation in the OVF using the third-part adapters available now), Fuji did not include the ability for user-defined focal length framelines in the OVF.
Perhaps Fuji will change this with a future update, hopefully one that coincides at the latest with the official M adapter.
On the plus side, this camera can do double exposures. I'm not well versed in digital cameras, but this is the first one I've seen that can do it. Here's a sample (http://www.flickr.com/photos/chris00nj/6882990802/in/photostream)
The Nikon DSLRs have had multiple exposure for a while now. And a builtin intervalometer, which I think is great. Wish I had one.
Paul Luscher
03-30-2012, 07:53
What about the Focal Length setting in the shooting menu?
On the plus side, this camera can do double exposures. I'm not well versed in digital cameras, but this is the first one I've seen that can do it. Here's a sample (http://www.flickr.com/photos/chris00nj/6882990802/in/photostream)
My understanding is that the Olympus EM-5, when it comes out, will also do double exposures.
j.scooter
03-30-2012, 09:42
Yes, I had read that thread.
Since you have the camera, would you be so kind as to try to verify for yourself whether there is any change in the OVF framelines?
I have used a tape measure running laterally across the bottom of the frame to test possible change and could not detect any.
Will do. I will post results this evening.
I've played with this and I can see what Jon is saying.
The OVF "lines" don't really change - at least I can't detect that. So the "framelines" remain the same - what DOES happen though is there's a "magnifier" that gets slipped across the viewfinder which changes the magnification through the viewfinder depending on what lens you have in place.
So, with the 18mm lens you always see the "wide angle" type of view and the framelines look like they cover a good chunk of, but not the entire, viewfinder. With the 35mm lens, once you put it on after the 18mm has been on the camera, and you turn the camera on, you see the "magnifying" glass get slid into the viewfinder. Take a look yourself and see - put on the 18mm lens on the camera and then turn the camera on, view the framelines, turn the camera off. Remove the 18mm lens from the camera. Put the 35mm lens on the camera. Look through the viewfinder AND THEN turn the camera on. You'll see what I mean.
That said, in the manual on page 20
This display is immune from digital video effects and allows the subject to be viewed directly with no display lag. Subjects are always in focus allowing you to check their expression at any time while a field of view slightly larger than that of the lens makes it easier to locate your subject without removing your eye from the viewfinder. The viewfinder window however is at a slight distance from the lens, with the result that the display in the viewfinder may differ from the final photograph due to parallax.
That sort of explains it for me - in other words - the OVF is not perfect and Fuji admits this. Not that it isn't disappointing to those who were hoping for matching up framelines to lenses via the OVF. The best hope, I guess, is to use both the OVF and EVF when shooting with manual focus lenses.
The "focal length setting" menu item seems only to be used when you are using non Fujinon XF lenses - so Fuji knows this camera will be used with other focal lengths - but using this setting with the Fujinon XF lenses seems to be pointless since the lens tells the camera what its focal length is......
Cheers,
Dave
noimmunity
03-30-2012, 12:35
Hey Dave, congratulations on getting the camera! You're in for a lot of fun, and I will look forward to seeing your photos!
Changing the magnification has no effect on the (non)ability to set user-defined brightlines in the OVF. The VF magnification can be changed by holding the "viewfinder selector lever" in the up position for several seconds (a quick flip of the selector lever will toggle to EVF).
So there is still as yet no way for the user to set user-defined framelines in the OVF.
Just try going into the menu and changing the focal length. You can even try changing the setting to make the camera fire without a lens. Still, one does not see in the OVF framelines corresponding to those entered by the user.
I think we were all confused by that one earlier post (which did not provide any details) and our good-natured assumption that Fuji would most certainly include such capability in the design of the camera.
Enjoy your camera! The 35 is so good and the camera fits my style of use so well, it doesn't really matter to me whether I can use adapted lenses.
I've played with this and I can see what Jon is saying.
The OVF "lines" don't really change - at least I can't detect that. So the "framelines" remain the same - what DOES happen though is there's a "magnifier" that gets slipped across the viewfinder which changes the magnification through the viewfinder depending on what lens you have in place.
So, with the 18mm lens you always see the "wide angle" type of view and the framelines look like they cover a good chunk of, but not the entire, viewfinder. With the 35mm lens, once you put it on after the 18mm has been on the camera, and you turn the camera on, you see the "magnifying" glass get slid into the viewfinder. Take a look yourself and see - put on the 18mm lens on the camera and then turn the camera on, view the framelines, turn the camera off. Remove the 18mm lens from the camera. Put the 35mm lens on the camera. Look through the viewfinder AND THEN turn the camera on. You'll see what I mean.
That said, in the manual on page 20
That sort of explains it for me - in other words - the OVF is not perfect and Fuji admits this. Not that it isn't disappointing to those who were hoping for matching up framelines to lenses via the OVF. The best hope, I guess, is to use both the OVF and EVF when shooting with manual focus lenses.
The "focal length setting" menu item seems only to be used when you are using non Fujinon XF lenses - so Fuji knows this camera will be used with other focal lengths - but using this setting with the Fujinon XF lenses seems to be pointless since the lens tells the camera what its focal length is......
Cheers,
Dave
Hi Jon,
I agree with you - there is no way to change the framelines with the OVF. No argument there :)
I didn't expect to be able to but I can see how, as you said, some people may be confused by these "framelines" within the OVF.
The combination OVF/EVF though does help with respect to MF - I am awaiting the delivery of the Kipon adapter (will hopefully be here next week) at which time I can better determine how to use the camera with non-AF (i.e non Fuji) lenses.
Still, the camera is a lot of fun and I love it so far.
Cheers,
dave
The framelines can be user set, and the camera can be set to "fire with no lens", but the combination does not produce user-defined framelines *in the optical viewfinder*.
Page 70 of the English manual details instructions for the user-selectable focal lengths, but there is no mention whatsoever that these changes will be reflected in the OVF.
I have the camera, have tried to set the focal length while selecting "shoot w/out lens"; heck, I have even tried it without a lens just to see.
Please do not bother with RTFM comments. I would like responses from people who actually have the camera and have discovered a way to initiate framelines of user-defined focal length in the OVF.
The other 99.9% is just hot air, thank you.
Forgive me for trying to help oh gracious one.
"99.9% sure" (see post #4) - from someone who probably doesn't even have the camera.
Lucky I left that .1% margin of error then right?
That previous thread was mine.
I just did a test and set the frame lines to 75mm to see if they'd change.
They didn't. It appears I was wrong. I apologize.
I'll fix the previous thread (or a moderator can delete).
In playing with my camera it appears the framelines are set by the lenses attached, and can not be adjusted.
Guessing (only a guess): this option is for M glass where no data is communicated.
Once again, sorry about this,
Nick.
j.scooter
03-30-2012, 14:03
I tried it with mine and nothing happened....
My theory is that those settings are for changing framelines for non fuji lenses.
Can someone with an adapter try?
noimmunity
03-30-2012, 14:21
Now we're finally getting to the bottom of this! Thanks to all who responded in a constructive fashion.
I have wondered, too, if the framelines would not appear when using an adapted lens. However, given the fact that the current adapter from Kipon is a ring of dead metal that does not communicate any information to the camera body--except perhaps the sole fact that a flange has been engaged--I am not very optimistic about this.
Could it be that Fuji has "pulled a Leica"? That is to say, is the XP1 designed to essentially "lock out" from non-native lenses a key feature like the OVF framelines, just as Leica did with the 6 bit coding on the M8?
I prefer to hold out hope that Fuji will address all this when the official adapter is released.
noimmunity
03-30-2012, 14:38
Very cool, Dave!
I'm going to get the 60/2.4 when I travel back to Taiwan next week. Pretty excited about that, too.
That was one awesome box opening video you posted recently. Just for the record, I'll be shooting the daytime part of the events next week in Taiwan on film, using the Fuji XP1 mostly for the night parts. It's the first time I'll be able to enjoy such excellent high ISO (my only digital camera before this was an M8).
Hi Jon,
I agree with you - there is no way to change the framelines with the OVF. No argument there :)
I didn't expect to be able to but I can see how, as you said, some people may be confused by these "framelines" within the OVF.
The combination OVF/EVF though does help with respect to MF - I am awaiting the delivery of the Kipon adapter (will hopefully be here next week) at which time I can better determine how to use the camera with non-AF (i.e non Fuji) lenses.
Still, the camera is a lot of fun and I love it so far.
Cheers,
dave
I have the adapters, MD->X and M->X. When you put those on, the frameline is gone.
My theory is that this is a feature related to the Fuji adapters. It seems they are taking awfully long time to do something that other ppl did in such short time. I think their adapters will be rangefinder coupled. That would make far more sense.
Otherwise, this feature is pretty much useless.
j.scooter
03-30-2012, 15:20
Now we're finally getting to the bottom of this! Thanks to all who responded in a constructive fashion.
I have wondered, too, if the framelines would not appear when using an adapted lens. However, given the fact that the current adapter from Kipon is a ring of dead metal that does not communicate any information to the camera body--except perhaps the sole fact that a flange has been engaged--I am not very optimistic about this.
Could it be that Fuji has "pulled a Leica"? That is to say, is the XP1 designed to essentially "lock out" from non-native lenses a key feature like the OVF framelines, just as Leica did with the 6 bit coding on the M8?
I prefer to hold out hope that Fuji will address all this when the official adapter is released.
I think it might work with the Kippon (fingers crossed) I reread the manual and it said "use focal legnth (setting) when a lens does not supply focal legnth to the camera."
It would be great if someone with an adapter could verify this.
It would be even better if Fuji with a firmware upgrade made the framelines adjustable or even tightened them up.
As it stands they are pretty far from accurate.
When I framed this shot, the balcony floor was not in the framelines. :bang:
On the bright side this was shot at iso 6400 and we do have the EVH for accurate framing.:D
j.scooter
03-30-2012, 15:22
I have the adapters, MD->X and M->X. When you put those on, the frameline is gone.
My theory is that this is a feature related to the Fuji adapters. It seems they are taking awfully long time to do something that other ppl did in such short time. I think their adapters will be rangefinder coupled. That would make far more sense.
Otherwise, this feature is pretty much useless.
Thanks for this.
This must be their way to ensure everyone buys Fuji adapters.
noimmunity
03-30-2012, 15:41
I have the adapters, MD->X and M->X. When you put those on, the frameline is gone.
My theory is that this is a feature related to the Fuji adapters. It seems they are taking awfully long time to do something that other ppl did in such short time. I think their adapters will be rangefinder coupled. That would make far more sense.
Otherwise, this feature is pretty much useless.
I don't think I'll be able to get any sleep tonight :)
Thanks for this.
This must be their way to ensure everyone buys Fuji adapters.
If it does do that, I would buy it in a heartbeat.
I have the adapters, MD->X and M->X. When you put those on, the framelines are gone
Did you select "shoot without lens" from the menus?
Ok I think I figured it out, and it works!
I dont have the kipon adapter, but I do have the body cap, which as far as the camera is concerned it's the same thing: a foreign body that it doesnt know what it is.
So, with the body cap on, I selected "shoot without lens". Then I selected a wide focal length and the camera gave me wide framelines in the OVF. Then I selected a longer focal langth, and it gave me narrow framelines. And as soon as I hit 35mm, it added the magnifier as well so that the framelines aren't too small.
So it works, you can change framelines in the OVF with adapted lenses :)
Of course the framelines will not compensate for parallax, because the camera doesnt know where you're focused (the adapter has no coupling). But, being such a nice and obliging camera, it actually gives you two sets of framelines, a white one and a blue one, very close to each other. I suspect the white one represents infinity and the blue one middle to close focus distances. It's not the same as parallax correction, but if you are experienced with rangefinders it gives you an idea where your frame goes as you focus in and out.
Not the most elegant of solutions but as far as I'm concerned it's the best possible solution given the circumstances (an adapter that conveys no info). I approve :)
Spyro,
AWESOME :) I am awaiting my Kipon adapter - I ordered it earlier today :)
Cheers,
Dave
noimmunity
03-30-2012, 20:25
Lo and behold, when I tried it with the body cap on, it works.
However, there's still a problem.
In the menu option for focal length selection:
Framelines only show for the pre-programmed selections 1-4 (21mm, 24mm, 28mm and 35mm). They will show in either VF magnification setting.
But for the user-definable selections 5 and 6 (which the user can self-define focal length in increments of 1mm), I cannot get any framelines, irregardless of the focal length input.
The mystery continues!
Indeed
and that has to be a design fault, otherwise I have no idea what is the purpose of setting those focal lengths :confused:
noimmunity
03-30-2012, 20:48
Indeed
and that has to be a design fault, otherwise I have no idea what is the purpose of setting those focal lengths :confused:
As it stands, the only useful purpose would seem to be in setting EXIF info.
The framelines can be user set, and the camera can be set to "fire with no lens", but the combination does not produce user-defined framelines *in the optical viewfinder*.
Page 70 of the English manual details instructions for the user-selectable focal lengths, but there is no mention whatsoever that these changes will be reflected in the OVF.
I have the camera, have tried to set the focal length while selecting "shoot w/out lens"; heck, I have even tried it without a lens just to see.
Please do not bother with RTFM comments. I would like responses from people who actually have the camera and have discovered a way to initiate framelines of user-defined focal length in the OVF.
The other 99.9% is just hot air, thank you.
"99.9% sure" (see post #4) - from someone who probably doesn't even have the camera.
So basically I was right about being able to select the frame lines in my first post.
noimmunity
03-31-2012, 04:11
So basically I was right about being able to select the frame lines in my first post.
No. Please refer to the OP:
the XP1 apparently does not allow the user to set adjustable framelines in the OVF.
As we have ascertained in this thread, the XP1 with the firmware as it is now indeed does not allow the user to set adjustable framelines. It only allows the user to select four pre-defined framelines (21, 24, 28 and 35). There are two user-definable focal length fields in the menu, but adjustment of these values does not produce corresponding framelines, nor indeed any framelines at all.
As we have ascertained in this thread, the XP1 with the firmware as it is now indeed does not allow the user to set adjustable framelines. It only allows the user to select four pre-defined framelines (21, 24, 28 and 35). There are two user-definable focal length fields in the menu, but adjustment of these values does not produce corresponding framelines, nor indeed any framelines at all.
I was still partially right. But as said before, I'm quite sure fujifilm will enable those user definable frame lines with a firmware update along with the release of their M-mount adapter. They've proven to be great with updating - the x100 went from a good camera to a fantastic camera through software updates. It's an interesting tactic to presumably stop people from buying 3rd party adapters... It also might mean they have some tricks up their sleeve for their genuine adapter...
Gavin,
I would agree - I guess I can't wait for the Fuji adapter *LOL* - My understanding, unless someone has a different timeline than what I've been told, is that it won't be released till probably June/July - I would like to use my m-mount lenses by end of May for vacation :)
Would be nice though to have it by then but I doubt it will be available. I would expect, just my guess mind you, that with the Fuji adapter there will be a firmware update accordingly.
Cheers,
Dave
jsrockit
03-31-2012, 04:54
I thought the adapter was due in April?
noimmunity
03-31-2012, 09:46
Fuji showed an M-XF adapter already nearly two months ago.
I think it was first reported on a French site:
http://www.focus-numerique.com/cp-2012-monter-optiques-leica-pro1-est-possible-news-3086.html
We're all looking forward to its release!
There is also the eventual adapter coming from Hawk Peng, that will allow close focusing. I'm pretty excited about using that one!
Benjamin Marks
03-31-2012, 10:35
Now you all just have to start posting images from your M lenses so we can all hone our envy!
Ben
chris00nj
03-31-2012, 11:30
So this is how it goes. The framelines do change, somewhat.
From 18mm to 28mm, the magnifier is at the wide view. 18mm is the full frame, and the framelines change by changing the focal length number.
If you select the focal length 35mm, the magnifier will change and there will be framelines at 35mm. Beyond 35mm there are no framelines. It allows you to use the optical viewfinder up to about 60mm. By 70mm, it insists that you use the EVF.
I thought the adapter was due in April?
If that's the case I'll be happy, I was under the understanding that it wasn't going to be due until about 6 months after the release of the camera.
That said, I've been wrong with previous information (look how wrong I was at my belief that the camera itself would take a bit longer - like mid April - to be in stock in North America) so I can certainly imagine me being incorrect with respect to Fuji's release date on their adapter.
Cheers,
Dave
Fuji showed an M-XF adapter already nearly two months ago.
I think it was first reported on a French site:
http://www.focus-numerique.com/cp-2012-monter-optiques-leica-pro1-est-possible-news-3086.html
We're all looking forward to its release!
There is also the eventual adapter coming from Hawk Peng, that will allow close focusing. I'm pretty excited about using that one!
My guess is there'll be another "One BIG disappointment" thread started when photographers start using M lenses in larger numbers on this camera.
All save those who shoot very fast lenses wide open up close 100% of the time.
noimmunity
04-01-2012, 09:26
My guess is there'll be another "One BIG disappointment" thread started when photographers start using M lenses in larger numbers on this camera.
All save those who shoot very fast lenses wide open up close 100% of the time.
Yes, if people expect sharp performance corner-to-corner, they could be very disappointed.
Yes, if people expect sharp performance corner-to-corner, they could be very disappointed.
I always wondered about that - why "corners" seem to be so critical to some folks - maybe to landscape folks? - My subject matter is rarely in the corners of the image...
Cheers,
Dave
noimmunity
04-01-2012, 12:06
I always wondered about that - why "corners" seem to be so critical to some folks - maybe to landscape folks? - My subject matter is rarely in the corners of the image...
Cheers,
Dave
I know what you mean.
With a lens like the Rollei 40/2.8 Sonnar in LTM, that thing is designed to have lovely soft corners relative to the exceptional sharpness on center.
Sean Reid makes a compelling case that sotfness at the edges can be used to great effect, effectively drawing the gaze towards the central theme.
I was asked to show some photos of the fujinon 18 for the purpose of assessing corner to corner sharpness particularly at infinity (or close).
So I tried to think of a subject to shoot, which would be corner-to-corner in the same plane of focus (ie in the same distance from me) it would have comparable detail in center and corner, it would be far away from me and still big enough to fill the 18mm frame.
Couldnt think of anything that didnt involve 2 hours of driving and gave up. Thats how relevant corner sharpness is to my shooting :P
I always wondered about that - why "corners" seem to be so critical to some folks - maybe to landscape folks? - My subject matter is rarely in the corners of the image...
For me, my lenses are capable of achieving good sharpness edge to edge even on full frame cameras; maybe the capability isn't used all the time, but that capability does indeed get used and certainly not just for distant landscapes at infinity.
The issue isn't just slightly soft corners on the X Pro 1 nor is the problem limited to infinity focus. Some RF lens/camera combos look truly awful. In the case of the X-Pro 1, I've seen examples where detail smearing started with some M lenses quite far into the frame and was noticeable even at web resolutions and size, not just when pixel peeping or if images were to be printed large. If the effect causes a relatively small web image to not look right, chances are it will affect more folks than just that subset which does a lot of landscape or architectural photography.
The native XF35 looks great; probably I'd even like the 60. They aren't expensive so using native lenses is an option.
But not all the native lenses turn my crank. I don't like the Fujifilm XF18 and I can't put my known to be excellent M mount 18 on it without detail being put askew like a bad prescription for astigmatism, leaving me with no compact alternative (this is a compact system after all, it does matter) but maybe a bigger and heavier SLR 18mm would be immune to the problem but along that route the camera is looking less and less practical. Likewise a 24 or 25mm solution isn't available today and I can't use my terrific ZM25 on it.
In short, the camera feels like a step backwards, for me, if I want to use it with my rangefinder lenses. With native lenses only? Attractive but just not enough for me to overcome the objection of not being able to repurpose my RF glass on it too.
For me, my lenses are capable of achieving good sharpness edge to edge even on full frame cameras; maybe the capability isn't used all the time, but that capability does indeed get used and certainly not just for distant landscapes at infinity.
Leaving the X-Pro1 aside I'm curious about this.
When does the capability to get "good sharpness edge to edge" get used and what for?
Thanks,
Dave
Leaving the X-Pro1 aside I'm curious about this.
When does the capability to get "good sharpness edge to edge" get used and what for?
Well I use it a lot for architecture and landscapes currently, on a 5D that is. That was part of the reason for using a 24/f3.5 TSE, which for my needs is the best wideangle there is. Bulky but then this is more of a replacement for a medium format system, with added movements. Together with the tilt-shift the "good sharpness edge to edge" thing really makes sense, even though I wish it would focus past infinity.
I wouldn't bother with it for portraiture or street or cat shots.
That's what I would figure - for landscapes (and I neglected architecture since there are, to the best of my knowledge, no tilt/shift lenses in m-mount).
For someone who's main subject(s) is/are people I don't know how important an edge-to-edge sharpness would really be. I would concur that, now bringing the X-Pro1 back to the conversation, if there is really really bad smearing going on, so much so that it impedes the viewing of the centre of the image, that it's probably not a good idea to be using that legacy lens on the camera. But for myself, if it's just the corners, I won't be "as concerned" as I would be if it were the centre of the image.
Cheers,
Dave
digitalintrigue
04-02-2012, 03:07
For some portraits, one doesn't even want sharp centers. I include myself in that group. :)
The question for me isn't really about sharp/unsharp. It's more related to how large of an image is going to be created, and viewing distance. Yes, if one pixel peeps it's easy to find flaws but unless one is creating wall sized images and looking at them from two feet away, the lack of sharpness is not necessarily evident. And thirdly, is the viewer going to be looking at the merits of the photograph itself, or the technical qualities of the image?
Have a look at this test of the 18, unsharpened crops at f8 and f11
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1100128
plenty sharp in my book, softens a bit at f16 because of diffraction
However, to be honest, for landscape shots where you'll be carrying a tripod anyway, I dont know why anyone would bother with a lens whose main advantages are f2, AF and 100gr of weight.
Why not get a massive retrofocus SLR lens like a Zeiss ZE or a Nikon.
In fact, I dont think many of those shooters will bother with a lightweight system like the FujiX anyway, most will stick with their full frame SLRs and MF/LF film cameras.
jsrockit
04-02-2012, 03:49
I always wondered about that - why "corners" seem to be so critical to some folks - maybe to landscape folks? - My subject matter is rarely in the corners of the image...
Some of us compose with the whole frame and don't just center everything.
Have a look at this test of the 18, unsharpened crops at f8 and f11
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1100128
plenty sharp in my book, softens a bit at f16 because of diffraction
However, to be honest, for landscape shots where you'll be carrying a tripod anyway, I dont know why anyone would bother with a lens whose main advantages are f2, AF and 100gr of weight.
Why not get a massive retrofocus SLR lens like a Zeiss ZE or a Nikon.
In fact, I dont think many of those shooters will bother with a lightweight system like the FujiX anyway, most will stick with their full frame SLRs and MF/LF film cameras.
My thoughts exactly. I'd want this to complement my SLR-and-tripod setup for landscapes, architecture and slow portraiture, to have something light with a the equivalent of a 21 and a 50. If I can sometimes put the oddball LTM lens in front of it I won't mind either. For that it looks alright, and Fuji seems to have a surprisingly good track record of ironing out early quirks (judging by the X100).
Some of us compose with the whole frame and don't just center everything.
I never said anything about "centring" everything.
If you are not shooting landscapes or architecture, why are the corners "important" - it's more a curiosity than anything else really.
Many of my portraits shot in landscape mode have the subject off centre but, obviously, not up in one corner or the other, so to me, corners don't seem to be that important yet I continue to see people complain or bemoan the fact that "corners are soft" and immediately dismiss a lens (or in this case a camera) because of it.
I don't see, as of yet, for those that do not shoot landscapes or architecture a compelling argument why corner sharpness must be critical.
Cheers,
Dave
jsrockit
04-02-2012, 05:25
I never said anything about "centring" everything.
If you are not shooting landscapes or architecture, why are the corners "important" - it's more a curiosity than anything else really.
Many of my portraits shot in landscape mode have the subject off centre but, obviously, not up in one corner or the other, so to me, corners don't seem to be that important yet I continue to see people complain or bemoan the fact that "corners are soft" and immediately dismiss a lens (or in this case a camera) because of it.
I don't see, as of yet, for those that do not shoot landscapes or architecture a compelling argument why corner sharpness must be critical.
Cheers,
Dave
I make photos of a lot of store fronts and windows... where there is a lot of info edge to edge... a lot of text mostly on the same plane. Most lenses are fine for this for my needs (especially Zeiss C-Biogon and Planar), however, a few haven't been (Perar). Some lenses the soft corners go way out into the frame (Elmar).
Not everyone photographs the same way and people's needs vary. Just because one person thinks that soft corners are no big deal, other's may disagree.
I make photos of a lot of store fronts and windows... where there is a lot of info edge to edge... a lot of text mostly on the same plane. Most lenses are fine for this for my needs (especially Zeiss C-Biogon and Planar), however, a few haven't been (Perar). Some lenses the soft corners go way out into the frame (Elmar).
Not everyone photographs the same way and people's needs vary. Just because one person thinks that soft corners are no big deal, other's may disagree.
I concur. I'm not saying that "just because I don't need them doesn't mean others don't"; I am saying that other than landscape or architecture photographers who else WOULD need corner to corner sharpness.
Cheers,
Dave
jsrockit
04-02-2012, 05:47
I concur. I'm not saying that "just because I don't need them doesn't mean others don't"; I am saying that other than landscape or architecture photographers who else WOULD need corner to corner sharpness.
Cheers,
Dave
I understand, but I don't consider myself a landscape or architecture photographer and I like to have corner to corner sharpness. However, I have plenty of photos that don't have that kind of sharpness and still use them.
There are no doubt pixel peepers who don't need edge to edge sharpness that will complain. However, you cannot take stats and specification junkie seriously...because their priorities regarding photography are not, IMO, in the right place.
I make photos of a lot of store fronts and windows... where there is a lot of info edge to edge... a lot of text mostly on the same plane.
I don't know what you're doing with those photos and hence whether that edge-to-edge precision is something you need or merely something you like (a.k.a. pixel peeping). If I were to photograph that sort of thing and needed the precision for whatever reason, I'd presume that precise framing would matter too. Hence a camera with an optical viewfinder wouldn't be the first thing I'm thinking of. Classic SLR job in my book. Also I'd presume that holding the camera perpendicular to the store front would matter too, which calls for a three-way spirit level in the accessory shoe and probably at least a monopod.
not up in one corner or the other, so to me, corners don't seem to be that important yet I continue to see people complain or bemoan the fact that "corners are soft" and immediately dismiss a lens (or in this case a camera) because of it.
I'm not dismissing the camera because of corners, the worst case area of the sensor. Lots of lens/camera combos do poorly in the corners.
No, I'm talking about edges, and not just the extremes, but astigmatic smearing of detail noticeable progressively out from the centre with some lens / focal length / aperture combinations, to the point where the outer 1/4 to 1/3 of the long edge of the frame is noticeably impacted and can be visible at normal viewing image sizes.
The effect is of course more pronounced the shorter the focal length and wider open the aperture. Some lenses never fully clean up the edges even when stopped down to where diffraction takes its toll.
No doubt some will be able to work around this limitation. Others won't.
I'm sure many of us who do shoot wider lenses can think of images where losing detail over 1/2 to 2/3 of the horizontal dimension of the frame would be a problem.
Those that shoot a 50 f/<2.0 wide open all the time and up close probably won't even realize there is a problem.
traveler_101
04-02-2012, 23:55
Corner to corner sharpness has become a technical criteria enthroned on camera discussion boards, such as dpreview, where the gear, rather than the image, is for all practical purposes the exclusive concern.
At the same time, some one might very well like to have a small highly portable digital camera with good corner to corner sharpness in order to document buildings or street layouts . . . for presentations for example. There is no particular reason why that person should be required to carry heavy gear to get these results.
On the other hand, for more "impressionistic" shooting corner to corner sharpness is a hindrance. Depends on what you're doing. Of course in this case you are better off with a film camera anyway.
I don't see, as of yet, for those that do not shoot landscapes or architecture a compelling argument why corner sharpness must be critical.
Corner sharpness may be unimportant in many cases, but I find edge-to-edge sharpness fairly important. The resulting photograph will anyway show the effects of both the lens and the sensor.
At the same time, some one might very well like to have a small highly portable digital camera with good corner to corner sharpness in order to document buildings or street layouts . . . for presentations for example. There is no particular reason why that person should be required to carry heavy gear to get these results.
It's been a long time since I've given or seen a presentation that requires a level of detail beyond the equivalent of more than 1-2 megapixels. I agree that in principle it's nice to be able to blow up every pixel to poster size, but a necessity it's not.
I think corner to corner sharpness is more of a Top Trumps sort of thing.
sorry to chime in, but the corner to corner sharpeness thing is imo only a marketing bulb and completely overrated, good only for the spec-sheet wars, olympus has been doing this for years (with mixed succes) all their 43rds lenses were and are telecentric and overenginnered, and due to the small sensor deliver near perfect edge to edge sharpness, but they never had a sensor to do the glass justice. all you get from smaller sensor is sharp corners, and files with that dead digital and clinical look.
I'm surprised that this topic pops up always again once in a while though,
i'll take any FF camera anyday despite some shadows in the corners which imo 1. add to the picture, 2. can be corrected with one click in PP.
jsrockit
04-03-2012, 04:08
I don't know what you're doing with those photos and hence whether that edge-to-edge precision is something you need or merely something you like (a.k.a. pixel peeping). If I were to photograph that sort of thing and needed the precision for whatever reason, I'd presume that precise framing would matter too. Hence a camera with an optical viewfinder wouldn't be the first thing I'm thinking of. Classic SLR job in my book. Also I'd presume that holding the camera perpendicular to the store front would matter too, which calls for a three-way spirit level in the accessory shoe and probably at least a monopod.
You are correct technically speaking. However, I do perfectly fine without a SLR and a three-way spirit level. I know my framelines and how they react. I can see my results in the LCD too remember. I'm a lot looser than you are thinking as well. More street still life. I'm not making large format style photos of store fronts. People who know my work, know that what I do works with the equipment I use (for my needs).
So, do I need it? No. Do I want it? Yes. AND there is nothing wrong with just wanting it especially when Zeiss lenses and a M9 can deliver.
By the way, make large prints with a lens that has very soft corners and many will find that they do not like it either.
The bottom line is that this is a subjective topic and what you or I believe may not be what the next guy believes. No one is wrong either.
Jubb Jubb
04-04-2012, 19:10
Interesting review of the X-Pro 1 on the Steve Huff site..
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2012/04/04/the-fuji-x-pro-1-digital-camera-review-by-steve-huff/
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.