I just posted some shots from Block Street in Fayetteville, attributed to the Fuji X-E1 and most of them were. Actually a couple were from my second X1. I decided to shoot hdr and set the stupid thing (actually I'm the stupid one) to bracket by +/-, 1 1/3 stops but failed to put both control knobs to "A" for automatic, thus placing the camera in "Program" mode and it took multiple exposures but didn't bracket. You've got to turn the drive mode to C for continuous [actually it'll bracket in S mode as well] and put both the other knobs to A for Program, THEN you when set the exposure bracketing on, it'll work. I set the Fuji properly and those shots were combined and toned. Anyway, here are a couple of shots from the old/new X1 which came with one other flaw than the dent, it's battery tab was missing and nothing held the battery down, save the battery door. I contacted the seller and he gave me an adjustment and I removed the battery spring so it wouldn't push on the battery door. Now I have to upend the camera for the battery to come out. I said the camera has a high build quality and well, that's only partially true. I still really like it and likely will never part with it.
As you can see from my reflection, I've yet to find a viewfinder I like for it and am chimping, which works quite well with the X1 anyway. I am using an old metal Canon 35mm viewfinder which works if you can't see the screen but it's a bit of tunnel. It was cheap ($30) so there's that.
I sold the X1 about a year ago.
That should have been that. I now have better cameras that took its place. The problem is, I shoot a lot of frames. A photographer friend (a real one) wonders at the digital camera's ability to produce high quantity output with ease. In his film days, he would load a roll of 24 or 36 exposures and very carefully take the photographs he needed to fulfill a job assignment. Once in a while he'd shoot for pleasure or for something that was important to him but still he was constrained by the physical need for more film to be loaded after each roll was used up and pay the cost/labor for that roll of film and its development. It was cheaper (once you made the equipment investment) to do your own developing but labor intensive. Those physical constraints tended to dictate how carefully he needed to conserve his input/output. When I sent him a link to several hundred shots I made of the civil war reenactment done locally a couple years ago, he commented that he was amazed at how many exposures I made that day and compared it to his old film days.
The reference here is germane in one major way. I shoot a lot of frames. I often will process the best of them and print or post them. It's my hobby/sanity machine. But I keep all of them. On a rainy or snowy or icy day, I'll open up a folder and review what I shot, hisotrically. I'll look for frames I didn't think worthy for a first go round. Each camera and lens combination tends to have it's own signature. When I review the X1's output, I'm intrigued. Here's an straight-out-of-camera jpg taken in Crested Butte from the X1 I'm referring to in this post:
The OOC jpg pretty much nails white balance, exposure, color balance and micro contrast. It does blow out the highlights but the sun was setting behind the restaurant and was almost unavoidable to allow enough light in to capture the shaded scene. It has a unique lens signature which appeals to me. It's a subjective thing, of course. What I like isn't necessarily what others admire. Here's another shot taken when the Dali Lama was in town, from the Tibetan side show circus:
One more from that day:
It was exposed for the crowd and blew out the sky. Finally here's one from the Prairie Grove annual clothesline fair:
Perhaps under exposed a bit but it captures the under the trees shade/ sunny background as a compromise of the matrix.
I really like how the X1 renders. It is unique to the camera. It needs little or nothing done to it. You can ramp it up for more pop and get some fairly amazing results but it really isn't necessary. I said when I parted with it, I might find another one after the prices approach salvage value. We're not there yet but we're real close. I got one with a small ding on the bottom at a bargain rate (I think 500 is salvage and I paid 6 ahead of schedule but time will tell) and it's in the mail from California. It's a great little camera. High build quality, very quiet shutter which also allows a daytime sharp wide open, f2.8 at 1/2000 and it's output is unique and Leica-like. Should be here Saturday and I hope to take it out and continue to be pleased and amazed at its output. Now I need to sell something to cover that cost. And so it goes.
I've been up on Kimple's balcony several times to get a shot of what's across Dickson, which is Chi Omega Greek Theatre. Bell Engineering is just behind. I got a new printer and printed an 11 x 17 of just that shot last week. When I showed it to someone, they asked about the new auditorium, which is nearby but not shown, since it was taken a couple years ago. Since the new Hillside Auditorium was completed last year, I decided to re-take the shot. I used the 12-50mm lens on 12mm to get the wide 24mm angle. I shot three bracketed at 0, +1, -1, exposures and did an hdr combine in Photoshop and then sharpened in Topaz. Looking at the photo, you can see the auditorium and also see the new Architecture wing further back. All in all, fairly satisfying.
Got a used fisheye for the Q. Set it for what I assumed to be infinity and shot away. Awful. Toy lens, indeed. Then consulted my learned friend, the internet to discover that the lens near <--> far settings were pretty much at the end of their respective ranges not at the end of the range settings, but rather about half-way there (plus a scoach). The feeble marking on the lens above denotes about infinity (on this example of the lens). Yes, you can use manual focus peaking and enlarge the image but on an f5.6 tiny lens it shouldn't be necessary IF you can set it at infinity (for outdoor wide shots). Close and indoors, no. Anyway, I set it to auto hdr [my favorite setting on this camera] and shot some more photos and was a lot more pleased. Here are some examples (some merged, some not) that were corrected in Photoshop to remove the fisheye distortion (I just used a preset lens correction filter for a Pentax 8mm fisheye, which worked). I also tweaked them a bit with PS's hdr ability. So what? Well, here's what. If you want to shoot really, really wide and get a good result and you want it small and cheap, this is the way to go. Check Amazon's used pricing for the camera, the original Q, which is a step up from the 2nd camera, the Q10 and you'll see camera bodies for around a 100 beans or so. The fisheye is another 100 beans or so. That's an amazing bargain to shoot this wide AND be able to carry it around casually. This is a very small camera.
