A Private Party with the XP1

[Ryan1938]

Just some quickies... PP'ed with Silver FX Pro....

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7236/7107065947_c666f29e42_c.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8161/7107066315_fa272acbfc_c.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7234/6960997952_6e9b4c393b_c.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7215/7107067293_26483df51f_c.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8168/6960998888_3a74f7ee7d_c.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8006/6960998500_c5a3188d7c_c.jpg

[chris00nj]

April, crawfish, and corn on the cob. You must be in Louisiana!

[huntjump]

great shots. More and more XP1 shots coming out that are looking better and better

[celluloidprop]

Excellent work.

[Ryan1938]

Thanks guys... I'm just a very amateurish guy in Austin, TX that sold his M8 off for an XP1. Thus far, I have to say I really like the camera. It works for me and what I like to do...

A few random shots from a day at the fair:

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7242/6960110028_4d6d682482_c.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8018/6960112306_a79e46141f_c.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8008/6960111040_1884070742_c.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7235/6960110400_b452f460dd_c.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8164/6960111386_9a566f1de8_c.jpg

[rbelyell]

enjoying your shots. are you using M lenses?
tony

[Ryan1938]

enjoying your shots. are you using M lenses?
tony

These are all with the fuji 35... I've decided to save my m-lense testing until Fuji comes out with their own adapter. That said, I'm really enjoying this little Fuji 35. At my level of talent, I don't know that I could do much better with a 35 lux. And I've been quite surprised with how seamlessly I can switch from my M6 to this XP1 on the fly from a usability standpoint. It all feels pretty natural to me.

The autofocus hasn't caused me a bit of grief.

[j.scooter]

Some really nice work with the Xpro1. This is my favorite and is really good as is, but would be better IMO with a little more dof so the bag was in focus.
Just some quickies... PP'ed with Silver FX Pro....

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8161/7107066315_fa272acbfc_c.jpg

[Ryan1938]

I totally agree. Like a lot of amateurs, I tend to get carried away with aperture when I have a fast lense.

[digitalintrigue]

The autofocus hasn't caused me a bit of grief.

This doesn't fit the narrative! What are you trying to do, ruin things for everyone? :)

[fiddlergene1]

Very nice pics. Gotta love Nik's SEP2 along with the XP1 - it's a powerful one two punch.
Check my blog at genelowinger.blogspot.com
And yeah, who the hell are you to have no problems with the autofocus, dude, you have special dispensation from God?

[FA Limited]

those are some really nice B+W conversions

[x.z.]

Really great shots.

As to the performance of camera, Fuji did a good job to simulate film.

[Speedfreak]

Really great shots.

As to the performance of camera, Fuji did a good job to simulate film.

What you see here is more Silver FX than Fuji. There is nothing "like film" in a digital camera. But it can be tweaked in post. (Which leads me to the question why not just shoot film in the beginning, but whatever...)

Nice shots anyway.

[x.z.]

What you see here is more Silver FX than Fuji. There is nothing "like film" in a digital camera. But it can be tweaked in post. (Which leads me to the question why not just shoot film in the beginning, but whatever...)

Nice shots anyway.

Yes could be Silver FX, sorry didn't notice this at the first place.

X Pro 1 does have some film simulation options doesn't it? I'm not sure I got your point regarding "like film".

[Ryan1938]

What you see here is more Silver FX than Fuji. There is nothing "like film" in a digital camera. But it can be tweaked in post. (Which leads me to the question why not just shoot film in the beginning, but whatever...)

Nice shots anyway.

Yeah. I agree. I use some grain when I convert simply because I'm still sort of stuck in the film world and like the texture. My main camera is a Leica M6, but I enjoy the instant gratification of digital as well. It's just fun.

I know a lot of guys on online forums are sticklers for this and that. I'm not. Hell, I'm not even a stickler for my own output. I don't take pictures for a living... In fact, I don't have any illusions about my talent. I'm an amateur hack. I just do it for fun and I have a lot of it. I also really enjoy looking at what other folks do for fun. To me, that's what it's all about... Not so much technique or mediums or even gear... and I love gear.

In any case, here's one of the above shots straight from the camera. Ironically, I think I like it better in color.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7126/6963889354_360de2c252_c.jpg

[Ryan1938]

And just for more fun and comparison, here's a shot from my M6 and 50mm Cron using 400 Tri-X pushed to 1600.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7256/7106176459_f137fc0680_c.jpg

And a similar shot taken shortly after using the XP1 and converted again with SFX.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7065/7109996059_bf04146ceb_c.jpg

[domagojs]

beautiful shots, all of them. i wish i had as little talent as you do ;-) and really crafty conversions...

re the last two shots, i still prefer the film one. i like that windows are not glaring patches of white and skin tones on the boy's face in the digital one look slightly metallic, imho. but i'm sure it's just acquired taste...

[Ryan1938]

beautiful shots, all of them. i wish i had as little talent as you do ;-) and really crafty conversions...

re the last two shots, i still prefer the film one. i like that windows are not glaring patches of white and skin tones on the boy's face in the digital one look slightly metallic, imho. but i'm sure it's just acquired taste...

I prefer the film shot too... A big part of my problem is that I can't seem to pick out the details and figure out why. You mentioned the skin tones and I totally agree now that you bring it up, but I didn't notice it before.

[domagojs]

my biggest issues with digital are skin tones and big white blotches. at least i don't see that changed with newest cameras so i'm not tempted by them. and people on RFF tend to prefer costly cameras too ;-) but i'm never sure if it's technology or just my lack of pp skills and not being willing to learn how to do it...

[JHutchins]

What you see here is more Silver FX than Fuji. There is nothing "like film" in a digital camera. But it can be tweaked in post. (Which leads me to the question why not just shoot film in the beginning, but whatever...)

Nice shots anyway.

So I can answer your questions -- I don't suppose you'll answer mine?

Why not just shoot film in the beginning?

1) It's expensive. If one has film bodies to begin with but not a digital camera I guess you have to offset that expense with the cost of a digital camera and digital cameras become obsolete and are more often replaced than film cameras, but the reality is the X Pro body price amounts to about 3/4 of a year of film and processing costs for me and I do my own processing. I kept my last digital camera for almost five years so it's a pretty attractive proposition.

2) Film involves time and aggravation to process, you can't see right away what you've done & fix things there & then. Even apart from impatience and laziness, I think a digital camera can be an excellent tool to help a person become a more knowledgable and thoughtful photographer since you can play around and see the results of that play immediately as you do it.

3) Film is, slower what with changing rolls every 37ish exposures and it means carrying around extra film if you're anticipating taking more than 37ish shots. I often go out with a Rolleiflex and just the film that's in it. And that's nice. But it's also nice, and a lot more flexible, to go out with the Fuji, a lens selected according to my mood, and just the battery and memory card in the camera.

4) You can ruin everything in processing. It happens -- I've done it lots.


I like film. I use it still, and use it often. But it's just silly to the point of trolling to pretend that there aren't reasonably compelling reasons that would drive someone to use a digital camera in many circumstances, even if one preferred the look of film or wanted something like a particular film. So my question -- why the trolling? What's the fun in it?

[celluloidprop]

I shoot film, but when I need the shot (special occasions, etc.) I turn to digital.

I have a Epson V750 and a Plustek 7600i, and I have very little luck getting the tonality and range out of a negative that I can get with a good camera and Silver Efex Pro. Digital can blow out highlights and shadows, etc. - and some SEP2 film profiles do this automatically - but they don't have to.

[chrispiper]

Ryan - You're a step ahead of me so I'm hoping to learn a little before I make a potentially expensive (side) step. I shoot an M6 and am about to try an M8 for the same reasons you state: speed of digital workflow, ease of processing and shot-to-shot learning curve and use of my existing M glass. You say you had an M8 but decided to go XPro instead. Can I ask what the M8 didn't give you that the XPro does? I'm sure the greater ISO is nice, but do you miss the M style of shooting? Is it really fairly seamless between the M6 and XPro? If the XPro hadn't been invented would you still be happy with the M8 or was there something endemic to it that you disliked.

Thanks,
Chris

[Ryan1938]

I think the M8 is a great camera. I loved it... However, I grew tired of the uv filters and really wanted something that produced cleaner images at high ISOs. Of course, the XP1 has it's quirks, but it actually feels more together than the M8 to me.

At the end of the day, what I really want is an M9... or an M10 - whatever that ends up being... But I'm not a good enough photographer to use a $9000 camera.

[Macmook]

"No photographer is as good as the simplest camera".
Steichen

(in reference to your comment about being good enough for a $9000 camera - your work is mighty fine)

[bigeye]

Ryan:

Impressed by your shots - 'from the camera' or not. (It's amazing how much better the slide guitar shot is in B&W.)

As with Domagojs's comments on the comparison shots, there are some flared background bits (and some moire inside the picture in the background), that adds some tension to the fuji image.

- Charlie

[willie_901]

I think you are more than good enough to use a $9,000 camera. However your work will not suffer in the least if you keep using what you have now.

[brachal]

At the end of the day, what I really want is an M9... or an M10 - whatever that ends up being... But I'm not a good enough photographer to use a $9000 camera.

A friend of mine like to say, "It's not the wand that matters; it's the magician."

[Ryan1938]

Thanks fellas... Maybe I just got lucky and posted images that have some salt to them. In any case, I've got buddies that are real photographers. I'm not one of them and I'm totally cool with that!

As for the XP1, I'm still really enjoying it. So much so, that I'm now starting to think about that wide angle to sit along side my 35mm...

[Landshark99]

What you see here is more Silver FX than Fuji. There is nothing "like film" in a digital camera. But it can be tweaked in post. (Which leads me to the question why not just shoot film in the beginning, but whatever...)

Nice shots anyway.
unless you wet print in a darkroom, once you scan negatives you are shooting digital

[Leigh Youdale]

unless you wet print in a darkroom, once you scan negatives you are shooting digital

A bit pedantic I think, and not accurate anyway. I can't quite see that when the inputs are different in the first place you can say it's one or the other. Hybrid, yes. Digital, partly. Analogue, partly. Does it matter? No.
The image is the end product, whether on screen or print, and that's the objective. Everything else is simply a means of getting there. Some choose one road, others prefer another way. Who cares?

[Ryan1938]

I'm not one to care... at all. I just like take pictures. I prefer my M6, but the XP1 is a ball too...

http://ryancochran.me/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/39.jpg

[paulfish4570]

try the green filter setting for BW people shooting ...

[Landshark99]

A bit pedantic I think, and not accurate anyway. I can't quite see that when the inputs are different in the first place you can say it's one or the other. Hybrid, yes. Digital, partly. Analogue, partly. Does it matter? No.
The image is the end product, whether on screen or print, and that's the objective. Everything else is simply a means of getting there. Some choose one road, others prefer another way. Who cares?
I agree all that matters is the image in the end.