There was motion - so 1/125 seemed appropriate - I could have probably shot @ 1/30 if I wanted - but why risk it. It was fun for an old guy like me to use ISO 3200 considering I spent most of my life at 400 ASA or below. I gotta say this camera is amazing!
carstenw wrote:
Are you selling on this forum? What is the price?
No, I wouldn't even dream of trying to sell it outside of Sweden. I mean, the prices here are at least 30% higher. Not to mention all the uncertainties of dealing with postal and bank services abroad.
Anyway, it's sold now and I'm on the hunt for something to replace my D700 instead. Maybe an NEX-7 with ZM lenses would be nice. At least until "someone" releases something with a larger sensor.
Makten wrote:
No, I wouldn't even dream of trying to sell it outside of Sweden. I mean, the prices here are at least 30% higher. Not to mention all the uncertainties of dealing with postal and bank services abroad.
Anyway, it's sold now and I'm on the hunt for something to replace my D700 instead. Maybe an NEX-7 with ZM lenses would be nice. At least until "someone" releases something with a larger sensor.
JonasY wrote:
What was your main reason for selling the X100?
Worthless AF and many small flaws that together made me angry when using the camera. Things like the live histogram not showing what you get. No exposure compensation possible with auto ISO in manual mode made it impossible to go from one lighting condition to another without digging into the menues. Metering just way off very often. Impossible to move the AF point without taking the camera from your eye.
Makten wrote:
Worthless AF and many small flaws that together made me angry when using the camera. Things like the live histogram not showing what you get. No exposure compensation possible with auto ISO in manual mode made it impossible to go from one lighting condition to another without digging into the menues. Metering just way off very often. Impossible to move the AF point without taking the camera from your eye.
With all these quirks, one might mistake this thing for a Leica!
By the way, did you test to make sure you don't have the sticky aperture issue causing your exposure problems?
I'm personally finding this probably the most enjoyable digital camera I have ever used.
I think I read way too much about the camera before buying. The best thing was to just buy it and test it out myself. It's really not as hard of a camera to use as I thought it would be. I've only had this thing a few days, but I'm loving the image quality so far. I pretty much always shoot in low light, so having a large image sensor and good quality at high ISO was my main factor in buying the camera. I also love the design, and it's really easy to carry around. I agree though, it could use some additional firmware updates (manual focus ring useless right now).
f/2.0, 6400 ISO, 1/30 -- really low light in a bar
Stop reading what other people write about the camera and test it yourself if you can! I got mine from amazon knowing I would have 30 days to return it if i didn't like it. Needless to say, I think i'll be keeping it around for a while
Makten wrote:
Anyway, it's sold now and I'm on the hunt for something to replace my D700 instead. Maybe an NEX-7 with ZM lenses would be nice. At least until "someone" releases something with a larger sensor.
After a fun 5 months with this camera, I did the same and sold it this past weekend. Too many metering flubs - like exposing for the sky (which is less than 15% of an image) and leaving the foreground completely dark - led me down the path that I just couldn't shoot fast with it. Naturally, if the rest of you are happy with it, I am happy for you! For me, I need something different.
Yes this camera seems to nurture "love or hate" relationships. As I am switching from a D700 I should probably prepare myself mentally for a plethora of strange behaviors. However, during the last year I have approximately as many keepers with the D700 as my iPhone 3G (!), meaning that having a camera that can always be with me is a huge, huge advantage that hopefully can compensate for all the drawbacks ...
I usually use a 5DII, shoot raw, and convert to greyscale in Lightroom. I'm then free to alter tonality as much as I like.
I'm on th cusp of buying the X100, and tempted to shoot jpeg for convenience/write speed. Is this sensible? Or should I stick to raw for flexibility?
If I were to shoot jpeg, what workflow would anyone recommend to give me as much post processing flexibility as might be needed to raise the 'presence' (micro contrast/mid tone contrast) of any images that might need it?
Sean4: Love the second one. Really gives the feeling of being emerged in the environment.
Martin and corposant: hate to see you guys go. You were both an inspiration for me and drove me to learn this camera better. Good luck on your journey.
MarkWeston: Digging the last shot.
wolfloid: For a while I was shooting RAW + JPEG using a fast card and didn't find it to be that much of a hinderance. Yeah the write speeds were longer but I didn't come to the party expecting the performance of a 1D. Some times I used the JPEG B&W because there was no point fixing something that wasn't broken. Most of the times though I end up using the RAW file and using the levels adjustment in LR. If you follow Martin's PPing guide he posted in this thread you can't go wrong.
Shot from the hip in a matter of seconds as I was running across the street avoiding a TTC street car. Film grain was added in Photoshop using Silver Efex Pro. Daytrip to the Harbourfront by d[^.-]b..oO(MJWong), on Flickr
I usually use a 5DII, shoot raw, and convert to greyscale in Lightroom. I'm then free to alter tonality as much as I like.
I'm on th cusp of buying the X100, and tempted to shoot jpeg for convenience/write speed. Is this sensible? Or should I stick to raw for flexibility?
If I were to shoot jpeg, what workflow would anyone recommend to give me as much post processing flexibility as might be needed to raise the 'presence' (micro contrast/mid tone contrast) of any images that might need it?
A few things to consider. The jpegs are very good but you will still get better image quality and, of course, flexibility out of the x100 raws. You can also process an x100 raw within the camera itself and output a jpeg with whatever camera setting you wish later. Finally, the Adobe RGB color space for in camera jpegs is broken. If you shoot jpeg, leave the camera at the default SRGB color space. The only reason I can see for shooting jpeg is possibly speed. Thus, I think it makes sense to only shoot raw unless you really need the extra speed but I would test the raw speed first and see if you find it too slow. Also, using certain SD cards and formatting it every time you put it in the camera before shooting seems to speed things up considerably: http://jonathanjk.com/2011/03/16/fuji-x100-write-speeds/
That said, I'm just using a class 6 Transcend 16GB card and I find the raw speed fine for my needs. I can shoot at about one raw per second pretty much indefinitely (just tested it to 25 frames with no lock-ups to confirm). In still image/ single shot drive mode, I don't see any speed issues. If your going to use one of the higher speed continuous drive modes, then, yes, you may want to use the fastest Sandisk card in the above link.
MJWong wrote:
Martin and corposant: hate to see you guys go. You were both an inspiration for me and drove me to learn this camera better. Good luck on your journey.
Shot from the hip in a matter of seconds as I was running across the street avoiding a TTC street car. Film grain was added in Photoshop using Silver Efex Pro.
I think you'll manage fine on your own, MJ. Feel free to go out and buy a film camera and join us in the film threads - especially if you want to have some output where the grain comes automatically!
shot this at a wedding rehearsal .. this was the bride's parents lol
.. for the wedding, i had my cousin who was my assistant up in the balcony with the x100 taking some shots of the ceremony. Worked out nicely
