STICKY:  Fuji Users Unite - Post your comments, questions and images here

F2Bthere wrote in post #18685704
Yeah, a shot like that requires good light, a sharp lens and higher-end Retouching skills.

And a model with great skin and a lovely makeup artist!

Osa713 wrote in post #18685735
And a model with great skin and a lovely makeup artist!

is that asking for too much.. really ..

beautiful girls are not that hard to find.. but great skin.. ,, even good skin would be nice..

well its good PS practice

rantercsr wrote in post #18685741
is that asking for too much.. really ..

beautiful girls are not that hard to find.. but great skin.. ,, even good skin would be nice..

well its good PS practice

For "makeup brand" level images, you need great skin plus good PS chops or good skin plus great PS chops .

The challenge is, the skin texture needs to be sharp AND look real AND be flawless in texture.

PLLphotography wrote in post #18685607
Yikes

https://nextshark.com …otographer-money-can-buy/

I got dizzy looking at those shots. A lot of cowboys out in the wedding game. I’ve read about other photographers having their shots stolen and displayed as someone else’s portfolio too.

There used to be a great clip on youtube with Judge Joe Brown. The case was against a wedding photographer who took sh*tty pictures, printed them off at Walmart, etc. Seems like the video is gone now, but was funny because the "photographer" didn't realize Judge Joe Brown is a photography buff himself.

interesting video.
https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=2oqDfsxCcjE

Of course, they were using the Fuji 35/1.4 which isn't a speed demon in focusing.

Fuji is a "hobbyist camera". Not for professional use.

PLLphotography wrote in post #18685850
Fuji is a hobbyist camera. Not for professional use.

I don't think so.

PLLphotography wrote in post #18685607
Yikes

https://nextshark.com …otographer-money-can-buy/

Doesnt surprise me in the least. The small claims tribunal here in Australia is full of these complaints.....

Mind you if the photog shot the wedding in raw some of the outdoor images shown could probably be fixed in post...or at least fixed to the point where the whites would not have been anywhere near as badly blown as in the images shown. The wedding photography co didn't even attempt to do this by the look of it which says to me the whole wedding photography co was a sham not just the photographer who did the shoot. As for the other shots...one word for it .... Sad

..

PLLphotography wrote in post #18685850
Fuji is a "hobbyist camera". Not for professional use.

You know I love Fuji but I am somewhat inclined to agree when it comes to heavy use. Portraits and laid back sessions it is definitely a pro camera. I do weddings (3-5 per year) and have now had a lens and two cameras break. I am not rough with my gear. No more rough than I was with canon. I have had the XH1 lock up on 2 weddings in a row (battery in body being low, but grip being fresh issue I believe).

I simply don't have the same "trust" in the cameras as I did with my Canon system. It isn't a deal breaker as I obviously still shoot only Fuji and enjoy every second of it. For my work the benefits far outweigh the cost because I can shooter better with them (lighter, quieter, EVF, etc.).

However I can see someone who shoots 30+ weddings a year or full time sports not seeing it as a professional camera. Especially because when it breaks it seems to take 6-8 weeks to get back.

bobbyz wrote in post #18685710
Most modern glass at f8 should be super sharp.

Interesting you mention f8. ...... I was talking to one of Fujis techs recently and the subject of image IQ came up on some of my images at f16 that looked terrible and which I was showing him on my laptop. Anyway I nearly fell of the chair when he said to me his recommendation was not to use f16 and infact to try and not go past f8 when shooting the Xt-20 no matter what lens I had on it!. When I asked why he said unlike older sensors these newer sensors tended to start suffering from diffraction at much earlier f stops than the less denser sensors . And the recommendation not to go past F8 to ensure optimum image quality still held even with Fujis in camera lens modulation turned on ( this corrects for lens distortion, vignetting as well as diffraction) ... . And diffraction of course affects the image which will affect the sharpness depending on level of diffraction .

There is some interesting info here on this in this link( although a bit dated ) especially in para headed "Does it affect all cameras identically"? https://tomstirrphotog​raphy.com/diffraction. Ofcourse the article is dated(2015) so doesnt take the newer and denser sensors and even lower f-stops than mentioned in article but it gives a good idea what causes this early f-stop appearance of diffraction. Also this link can see the diffraction as it relates to the actual pixel. https://www.cambridgei​ncolour.com …ffraction-photography.htm

clipper_from_oz wrote in post #18685884
Interesting you mention f8. ...... I was talking to one of Fujis techs recently and the subject of image IQ came up on some of my images at f16 that looked terrible and which I was showing him on my laptop. Anyway I nearly fell of the chair when he said to me his recommendation was not to use f16 and infact to try and not go past f8 when shooting the Xt-20 no matter what lens I had on it!. When I asked why he said unlike older sensors these newer sensors tended to start suffering from diffraction at much earlier f stops than the less denser sensors . And the recommendation not to go past F8 to ensure optimum image quality still held even with Fujis in camera lens modulation turned on ( this corrects for lens distortion, vignetting as well as diffraction) ... . And diffraction of course affects the image which will affect the sharpness depending on level of diffraction .

There is some interesting info here on this in this link( although a bit dated ) especially in para headed "Does it affect all cameras identically"? https://tomstirrphotog​raphy.com/diffraction

?????? nothing new. this has been talked about for years with newer sensors in all camera brands.

benji25 wrote in post #18685883
You know I love Fuji but I am somewhat inclined to agree when it comes to heavy use. Portraits and laid back sessions it is definitely a pro camera. I do weddings (3-5 per year) and have now had a lens and two cameras break. I am not rough with my gear. No more rough than I was with canon. I have had the XH1 lock up on 2 weddings in a row (battery in body being low, but grip being fresh issue I believe).

I simply don't have the same "trust" in the cameras as I did with my Canon system. It isn't a deal breaker as I obviously still shoot only Fuji and enjoy every second of it. For my work the benefits far outweigh the cost because I can shooter better with them (lighter, quieter, EVF, etc.).

However I can see someone who shoots 30+ weddings a year or full time sports not seeing it as a professional camera. Especially because when it breaks it seems to take 6-8 weeks to get back.

I too am inclined to agree. Good part of me really wants to move exclusively to Fuji. I really like the smaller size, design, and colors. My X100F might just the most inspiring camera I've had.

I do roughly 10 paid gigs a year, most of which are weddings. And so far I've been shooting with Canon and Sony (mostly adapted lenses). I've been reluctant to jump from Canon over to Sony, because I don't really like Sony when it comes to aesthetic and other non-quantifiable aspects. The colors aren't nice, native lenses are often expensive, and so are the bodies. But even with that, recently I've started looking at the pure objective aspects. And there are just too many upsides on Sony. Most importantly the dynamic and clean ISO range, eye-AF/face recognition and consistent AF. Fuji just doesn't pull these off like Sony does. And neither does my Canon (5D3).

I do carry my X100F with me at weddings and make us of it, just because I like it so much. Last wedding, I decided to us it for taking the family and other group portraits. I was so used to consistent AF that I didn't even consider that when taking multiple shots in row the AF wouldn't focus properly on each shot. So I ended up missing a lot of shot, mostly due to front focus issues.

For my personal work I don't mind the technicalities so much. Just for myself, I tend to shoot with X100F almost exclusively. It just is that inspiring.

But when it comes to paid work, I've noticed that Sony gives me files that are the most consistent. And they also give me the most room and latitude for adjustments in post. I've been criticizing Sony for a long time for being too technical and sterile. And therefore it's almost awkward that I'm not seriously thinking of jumping from Canon to Sony.

What I'd really like to do is go all in on Fuji. But I'm not ready to do that until they up their came at least on dynamic range, ISO capabilities and AF consistency. The latter might be better on other bodies/lenses I assume. But the sensor is the same through the product line, so I can't trust on that.

If I were to quit doing paid work, then I'd probably jump over to Fuji system. I still feel like they're the most intriguing system. I just don't want to trust them for work that other people pay for.

That all said, though, I recognize that a lot of professionals, including wedding photogs, are shooting Fuji exclusively. So I personally can't label them a hobbyist cameras.

05Xrunner wrote in post #18685885
?????? nothing new. this has been talked about for years with newer sensors in all camera brands.

Maybe for you but its news to people that dont get into the technicalities of diffraction like I and probably 98% of the population dont. And Ive been shooting from film days to now on many many cameras but never ever noticed it until recently with the xt 20 . So for the people that dont know its worthwhile mentioning these things . Thats what forums are for.

clipper_from_oz wrote in post #18685899
Maybe for you but its news to people that dont get into the technicalities of diffraction like I and probably 98% of the population dont. And Ive been shooting from film days to now on many many cameras but never ever noticed it until recently with the xt 20 . So for the people that dont know its worthwhile mentioning these things . Thats what forums are for.

its been posted on this forum for years.

Ramona Falls, Oregon - I've been wanting to tick this waterfall off my list for a few years but I have been hesitant due to the lack of bridge when crossing the Sandy River, turned out to be worth it!

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/LpyJ​Ua

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2abj​t5k