Post your x-pro1 FW2.0 impressions

[willie_901]

Kieth,

People do tend to over react, be impatient and are swayed by negative posts. The hybrid APS-C Fujis are complicated compared to many people's prior experience. This is even more reason for the firmware to be well developed.

On Fuji forums there are several posts of people who sold their cameras and then 3 to 6 months later repurchased the same camera. The updated firmware changed their view when they used their second camera. So, your point is well-taken.

I may have been very frustrated if I had not used an analog rangefinder extensively before I bought an early X100.

[semilog]

Originally Posted by Sapphie

They have done a great job but could do better with the JPEG output. I only have to open a RAW in RPP (http://www.raw-photo-processor.com/RPP/Overview.html) to see that there can be so much more detail available than appears in the JPEG. A pity really.

Lee, I disagree. I have used RPP 64 very extensively and it is the best stand-alone RAW processor for X-Pro files. But it has significant limitations.

First, RPP64 is -- by design -- enormously processor-intensive, because it uses floating point rather than integer math. This means that it is slow and that in a portable device (a camera) it would suck down the battery before you could say "Oscar Barnack."

Second, RPP64's auto white balance is lousy.

Third, RPP64 still leaves a lot of edge artifacts, particularly sawtoothing, on horizontal and vertical edges. The Fuji JPEG engine avoids this problem.

I'm a huge RPP64 booster but it is far from perfect and its technical approach should absolutely not be the model for Fuji's in-camera JPEG engine.

I am looking forward to seeing what Capture One's RAW engine for the X-trans sensor can do. Fuji is helping Capture One develop it.

[semilog]

Originally Posted by Benjamin Marks

Maybe this is just re-phrasing what has been said before, but I think that software development is the kind of task that does not lend itself well to production deadlines. There is always more tweaking that can be done and more elegant ways to solve a problem: kind of like 90% of the value going into the last 10% of effort (or 90% of the results going into the last 10% of the schedule -- (I am just making up numbers, but you get the idea)). Today's crazy product cycles impose their own nutty timing requirements that are not driven by the need to create perfect software. . . just good enough to get the job done.

Combine the above with a new sensor (Fuji's) that has the native ability to do something better than the pack . . . and I think you've got your answer. From the executive's perspective there is no reason to shoot for "better than adequate" by the launch deadline.

So true. And "better than adequate" may have been impossible to accomplish by the deadline, regardless of the available programming resources. In software development, adding more people to a project will often actually slow it down.

[GaryLH]

Originally Posted by semilog

So true. And "better than adequate" may have been impossible to accomplish by the deadline, regardless of the available programming resources. In software development, adding more people to a project will often actually slow it down.

So true... It's not the number of SW developers but the number of good ones on a project. Also some people expected the fixes from x100 to translate to xp1 from day one but in reality, given the difference in the base hw, a lot of low level drivers had to be created first and if a lot of that is in assembly language, all the more harder..

Gary

[Jamie Pillers]

Originally Posted by GaryLH

Frame lines are not an issue.. U just need to know the trick.. It turns out that there are two settings for display brightness.

When u are not looking thru the ovf, q menu LCD brightness is for the LCD. after u set this to your liking, the ovf one can be set by placing your eye up to the vf and using the q menu again. The evf brightness follows the ovf in the past. Not sure if new fw changed this behavior (ovf/evf pairing)...

Gary

Gary, this method of adjusting the OVF framelines works GREAT! Thank you so much!

[GaryLH]

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/09...ro1-and-lenses

They even have a video showing the difference in the af performance before and after for the slowest lens - the 60..

Gary

[GaryLH]

Originally Posted by Jamie Pillers

Gary, this method of adjusting the OVF framelines works GREAT! Thank you so much!

No problem.. I found out about it via someone else's post - just passing down the info..

Gary

[Arjay]

Originally Posted by Benjamin Marks

Maybe this is just re-phrasing what has been said before, but I think that software development is the kind of task that does not lend itself well to production deadlines. There is always more tweaking that can be done and more elegant ways to solve a problem: kind of like 90% of the value going into the last 10% of effort (or 90% of the results going into the last 10% of the schedule -- (I am just making up numbers, but you get the idea)). Today's crazy product cycles impose their own nutty timing requirements that are not driven by the need to create perfect software. . . just good enough to get the job done.

Combine the above with a new sensor (Fuji's) that has the native ability to do something better than the pack . . . and I think you've got your answer. From the executive's perspective there is no reason to shoot for "better than adequate" by the launch deadline.

I agree. They wanted to get the camera to the market, knowing that their competition had interesting projects up their sleeve too. So they finalized an "acceptable" yet not a great release for product launch, and continuously worked on improvements. The updates we have seen after that showed that Fuji truly was listening to its users. V 2.0 is the proof. I haven't seen a similar succession of FW updates like this from any other large Japanese camera makers.

I was at Fuji's booth on the Photokina show yesterday, and I asked if somebody were interested in hearing my firmware improvement suggestions. One of the Japanese senior firmware developers actually took almost an hour's time to hear my ideas and my user experiences with the camera's firmware. Obviously, Fuji is genuinely interested to base its firmware development on real user experiences and needs - not just on their own vision of how things should be.

I'm very impressed, and I am confident that this wasn't the last firmware update we'll see for the X-Pro1.

[GaryLH]

Originally Posted by Arjay

I was at Fuji's booth on the Photokina show yesterday, and I asked if somebody were interested in hearing my firmware improvement suggestions. One of the Japanese senior firmware developers actually took almost an hour's time to hear my ideas and my user experiences with the camera's firmware. Obviously, Fuji is genuinely interested to base its firmware development on real user experiences and needs

thanks for this update... It is good to know that they took the time.

Gary

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by Arjay

I was at Fuji's booth on the Photokina show yesterday, and I asked if somebody were interested in hearing my firmware improvement suggestions. One of the Japanese senior firmware developers actually took almost an hour's time to hear my ideas and my user experiences with the camera's firmware. Obviously, Fuji is genuinely interested to base its firmware development on real user experiences and needs - not just on their own vision of how things should be.

Very cool... based on what I've seen you write on the Fuji forum, it was because you have great ideas from experience and can speak about them in an articulate manner.

[rasterdogs]

Originally Posted by Arjay

...snip

I was at Fuji's booth on the Photokina show yesterday, and I asked if somebody were interested in hearing my firmware improvement suggestions. One of the Japanese senior firmware developers actually took almost an hour's time to hear my ideas and my user experiences with the camera's firmware. Obviously, Fuji is genuinely interested to base its firmware development on real user experiences and needs - not just on their own vision of how things should be.

I'm very impressed, and I am confident that this wasn't the last firmware update we'll see for the X-Pro1.

Arjay,
Can you share the firmware improvements you discussed with the Fuji folks?

-Rasterdogs

[DtheG]

Originally Posted by Benjamin Marks

Maybe this is just re-phrasing what has been said before, but I think that software development is the kind of task that does not lend itself well to production deadlines.
...

Creating software is just like any other kind of writing in my experience. So, as any publisher will tell you, delivering manuscripts to deadlines is just not something you can count on from authors. Writing is a solitary task but the product can only be judged by how well it 'works' for others. The same applies to software, it would be nice if 'software engineering' was engineering, but it isn't. You can't create it without close attention to detail but that closeness is what makes judging how well something works for everybody else so difficult.

[Sapphie]

Originally Posted by semilog

Lee, I disagree. I have used RPP 64 very extensively and it is the best stand-alone RAW processor for X-Pro files. But it has significant limitations.

First, RPP64 is -- by design -- enormously processor-intensive, because it uses floating point rather than integer math. This means that it is slow and that in a portable device (a camera) it would suck down the battery before you could say "Oscar Barnack."

Second, RPP64's auto white balance is lousy.

Third, RPP64 still leaves a lot of edge artifacts, particularly sawtoothing, on horizontal and vertical edges. The Fuji JPEG engine avoids this problem.

I'm a huge RPP64 booster but it is far from perfect and its technical approach should absolutely not be the model for Fuji's in-camera JPEG engine.

I am looking forward to seeing what Capture One's RAW engine for the X-trans sensor can do. Fuji is helping Capture One develop it.

Hi

I didn't really mean to use the RPP de-mosaic software within the camera, just that I do see much more detail - in some shots -e.g. landscapes with lots of distant detail etc. I always use WB 'As Shot', usually choose the K64 film simulation, adjust exposure if required and then export to LR. I agree it can be slow but then so is LR's current offering, though maybe I am lucky - on my MacBook Air RPP is pretty fast.

I agree that RPP does leave some artifacts. In fact it is only using the VNG interpolation mechanism, which the author agrees is not optimal.

It's just a little frustrating to know that the RAWs do contain more detail than one can get via JPEG. Or maybe I need to experiment with my settings.

One day we will get an excellent RAW solution, no doubt.

It's a pity C1 doesn't support it already so I could try it - they have 50% until the end of Sept!

Lee

[x.z.]

Just noticed this one from dpreview

Originally Posted by dpreview

When EVF or OVF is used, the indicator lamp will turn off because the lamp comes to just in front of your right eye if you see the finder with your left eye.

This improvement is not listed on Fujifilm.com. Probably just a minor change compare to other improvement, but it is really great to me. Eventually the lousy tape on my xp1 can be removed.

[Benjamin Marks]

Originally Posted by Arjay

I asked if somebody were interested in hearing my firmware improvement suggestions.

Great story. And, I think, part of a Fuji recipe for success at the retail level.

Arjay - Would you care to share your list of suggestions?

Ben

[Benjamin Marks]

Just as a follow-up, I am currently using the XP-1 to do promotional photos of a nearby organic farm and cheese-making operation. I am using an M9 and the XP1 (with a Nikon D3 as backup). The new XP1 firmware makes the camera much easier to use, particularly being able to take additional pictures while the buffer clears. You still can't use the focus magnification feature while the buffer is clearing, but it is a distinct improvement over the camera's prior performance.

Ben

[GaryLH]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwBhw...e_gdata_player

Some posted on utube the af speed improvement with the fw 2.0 upgrade by doing a comparison of the xp1 vs omd.

To me the gap as closed significant... It may be my imagination, but the omd is now only a hair faster...

Gary

[gavinlg]

Originally Posted by GaryLH

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwBhw...e_gdata_player

Some posted on utube the af speed improvement with the fw 2.0 upgrade by doing a comparison of the xp1 vs omd.

To me the gap as closed significant... It may be my imagination, but the omd is now only a hair faster...

Gary

considering the m4/3 sensor has a lot more effective DOF it doesn't need to be as precise as fujifilm, so that speed about makes sensor. Bugger all difference in it IMO.

[gdi]

The new firmware seem like a huge improvement, especially the manual focusing of XF lenses and the 3x Focus Assist. I'll have to investigate the rest of the changes.

But I have the both the Fuji and the Oly and just compared the AF for the 35mm XF and the Pan Leica 25 1.4. When focusing back and forth from about 3 feet to 25 feet, the Oly is still about twice as fast. Nothing wrong with that, the Fuji is better than before, but it has a way to match the Oly.

An off topic question - where are people ordering VF diopter correction lenses? I need to try one.

[GaryLH]

Originally Posted by gdi

The new firmware seem like a huge improvement, especially the manual focusing of XF lenses and the 3x Focus Assist. I'll have to investigate the rest of the changes.

But I have the both the Fuji and the Oly and just compared the AF for the 35mm XF and the Pan Leica 25 1.4. When focusing back and forth from about 3 feet to 25 feet, the Oly is still about twice as fast. Nothing wrong with that, the Fuji is better than before, but it has a way to match the Oly.

An off topic question - where are people ordering VF diopter correction lenses? I need to try one.

The video was between two objects no more than maybe three feet away. I think your test is more real world.. Thanks for update.

Gary

[gdi]

I might also add that my test was inside at night with only desk lamps for lighting. This was much darker than the test in the video - maybe not a worst case scenario, but a pretty tough one and the Fuji was very respectable. The biggest weakness was that the XF still would hunt now and then prior to locking on the closer target.

[jsrockit]

To me, the difference is this... the X-Pro1 used to hesitate when focusing and now it doesn't. It feels right for the camera now...even if not the fastest on the market.

[GaryLH]

Originally Posted by jsrockit

To me, the difference is this... the X-Pro1 used to hesitate when focusing and now it doesn't. It feels right for the camera now...even if not the fastest on the market.

So far I am pretty happy with the fw update. Agreed still not on par with the best of the af cameras but it is a lot better than before. Shots in very dark places that would cause af to hunt will af focus lock or give up immediately, not this constant hunting any longer. With the af lock happening more often and quicker then before. My x100 used to be faster on af lock in similar conditions, now the xp1 feels so much faster.

The 3 and 10x mag is very welcome... Now using mf lenses larger than 50mm is much better experience. Add focus peaking and ricoh gxr style approach to using mf lenses and this becomes a universal digital back , I can sell off the nex5n with its crappy UI...

Overall, it feels like a faster camera..

Gary

[olelovold]

The autofocus is definitely vastly improved with 2.0. It's a really easy to focus camera now. And as opposed to SLRs, if the autofocus isn't catching onto the subject, i.e. in a very dark/low contrast situation, just press command wheel and do quick and super precise manual adjustments. For this reason, and the incredible high ISO performance, I think the X-Pro 1 is one of the very best low light cameras available, at any price.

[Herjulfr]

Autofocus is now much better! I don't see any improvement with manual focusing however. At first I thought my lens (35mm) didn't get the upgrade, but it did. It takes an eternity to go from infinity to 0,5m. I don't really mind, as I only use manual focusing while doing pseudo macro shots. The 3x magnification is a very nice addition.