leicarox Posted June 10, 2012 Share #21  Posted June 10, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) The RAW and JPEG images of the same shot captured on the X2 appear different. The RAW image is brighter, almost like EV+1/3, and more saturated. The JPEG image appears more 'natural' and retains better highlight and shadow details. Strangely, it seems to my untrained eyes like the JPEG was the original and RAW processed! Even more strangely, landscape shots on the RAW image appears to be 1-pixel zoomed-in. Doesn't happen on portrait shots though.  Anyone else experiencing the same?  Yes, you'll actually see that the JPEG image size is a few pixels different in size than the DNG. I also had a few test snaps from an M8 where the JPEG and DNG sizes are not the same. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 10, 2012 Posted June 10, 2012 Hi leicarox, Take a look here X2 Out of Camera JPEGs. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
andystac Posted June 10, 2012 Share #22 Â Posted June 10, 2012 What feudal1's photos demonstrate and what he clearly states in his post is the way the camera reproduces color., red in particular. I have not used any other digicam that renders red correctly, that in itself is pretty remarkable. There is a very red rose in our yard that my canon would render as a redish blob. My x2 captures the color perfectly with a wide range of reds in detail. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feudal1 Posted June 10, 2012 Share #23 Â Posted June 10, 2012 What feudal1's photos demonstrate and what he clearly states in his post is the way the camera reproduces color., red in particular. I have not used any other digicam that renders red correctly, that in itself is pretty remarkable. There is a very red rose in our yard that my canon would render as a redish blob. My x2 captures the color perfectly with a wide range of reds in detail. Â Exactly. It was always a lot of work to get Canon (and Nikon) SLRs to properly render reds. You had to shoot raw, severely underexpose, and then do post-processing work to equalize the different levels. The beauty of the X2 (and X1) is that it's correct right out of the camera, with no need to shoot raw or underexpose, and no need for post-processing. Reds are red with the X2, not pink or orange. I love that. It's a strength of the JPG engine, and worth noting for everyone to know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
therbert Posted June 11, 2012 Share #24 Â Posted June 11, 2012 Reds are red with the X2, not pink or orange. I love that. It's a strength of the JPG engine, and worth noting for everyone to know. Â I guess I was ahead of myself when I said that I didn't see any "red flags" from looking at the sample JPGs. Â Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted June 11, 2012 Share #25 Â Posted June 11, 2012 Thanks for posting. I think the so-called superiority of RAW over JPG is exaggerated. Sure, you can tweak the pic to your satisfaction or personal taste -- but in-camera software can often surpass one's own efforts playing with post processing. It's also a lot faster. JPEG quality does vary from camera to camera, however. Â These pics look very accurate for color, but the lighting is very soft and subdued. I guess our lighting is always very bright and contrasty compared with Europe. Â Dust is a worry. It does get onto the sensors of fixed lens cameras and it's impossible to clean them. It's happened to several compact cameras I know of. Partly it's because we live in a very windy country and like taking cameras into the outdoors. I am not sure what the solution is beyond better weather sealing (which I would far rather see than some glitzy new special edition fashionista model). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alred Posted June 11, 2012 Share #26 Â Posted June 11, 2012 Thanks for posting I like what I am see coming from the X2 I have mine on order with the EFV,yes dust is somewhat of a problem I send my X1 back to Germany for cleaning and came back clean. Now my problem I will have an X1 and X2 the X1 will have to go can't afford both. Geez all these cameras. Â Best to All Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfowler Posted June 12, 2012 Share #27 Â Posted June 12, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I just bought an extended warranty on my new X2 just so that if it gets sensor dust within 5 years then it will be cleaned. I have a spare camera that will just have to hold me over while it gets cleaned. Problem solved. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonshine Posted June 12, 2012 Share #28 Â Posted June 12, 2012 ^^ great idea, i might do the same.. sorry for the stupid question but how do you get the extended warranty? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfowler Posted June 12, 2012 Share #29 Â Posted June 12, 2012 I bought it thru Adorama. I asked them if I had to buy the camera thru them to get the extended warranty and they said no. I could buy the camera from anywhere and buy just the extended warranty thru them and its covered. This warranty goes into effect after the manufacturers warranty ends. So thats a total of 5 years of coverage. Â "3 Year Still Digital Camera Extended Warranty This warranty covers all parts and labor for a period of 3 additional years after expiration of manufacturer's warranty. The equipment will be guaranteed to operate properly according to manufacturer's specifications or Mack Camera shall repair equipment to operate properly at no charge to you. " Â Mack (1202) 3 Year Extended Warranty f/ Digital Still Cameras Up to $2000 1202 Â For $59.00 its a piece of mind I like. I hope I never have to use it, but if I do - I will. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted June 12, 2012 Share #30 Â Posted June 12, 2012 What a wonderful little camera ... makes me want to buy one now. Thanks a lot for posting, guys. They are very nice pictures indeed! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfowler Posted June 12, 2012 Share #31  Posted June 12, 2012 My first shots with the X2. All standard settings. Using the Leica EVF. Straight out of camera - just resized. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/181426-x2-out-of-camera-jpegs/?do=findComment&comment=2038477'>More sharing options...
prk60091 Posted June 12, 2012 Share #32  Posted June 12, 2012 Thanks for posting I like what I am see coming from the X2 I have mine on order with the EFV,yes dust is somewhat of a problem I send my X1 back to Germany for cleaning and came back clean. Now my problem I will have an X1 and X2 the X1 will have to go can't afford both. Geez all these cameras. Best to All  care to make any comparisions between the x1 & x2?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
warnica Posted June 12, 2012 Share #33  Posted June 12, 2012 The RAW and JPEG images of the same shot captured on the X2 appear different. The RAW image is brighter, almost like EV+1/3, and more saturated. The JPEG image appears more 'natural' and retains better highlight and shadow details. Strangely, it seems to my untrained eyes like the JPEG was the original and RAW processed! Even more strangely, landscape shots on the RAW image appears to be 1-pixel zoomed-in. Doesn't happen on portrait shots though.  Anyone else experiencing the same?  Agree; I see it as overexposed for the raw, but maybe it is more like EV +2/3. Shot the X2 against the Nex 7, (both raw) and the X2 was brighter every time. Honestly though, I think it may be the auto settings--the X2 wants to shoot f2.8 in every situation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfowler Posted June 13, 2012 Share #34 Â Posted June 13, 2012 Pictures I took and placed on Flickr. Here you will see an entire set of my first pictures taken with the X2. I have been playing with the types like B/w and Vivid and Natural and Standard to see what the look will give me in pictures. These are straight out of the camera. No processing done at all in Lightroom or PS. Â Leica X2 - a set on Flickr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satijntje Posted June 14, 2012 Author Share #35  Posted June 14, 2012 2 more, JPEG with a bit LR4 fine-tuning  John Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/181426-x2-out-of-camera-jpegs/?do=findComment&comment=2040256'>More sharing options...
sfowler Posted June 14, 2012 Share #36  Posted June 14, 2012 2 more, JPEG with a bit LR4 fine-tuning John   What was your settings? Standard, Natural?? Just wondering. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicarox Posted June 14, 2012 Share #37 Â Posted June 14, 2012 What was your settings? Standard, Natural?? Just wondering. Â Ditto--love the colors, esp the second shot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satijntje Posted June 14, 2012 Author Share #38 Â Posted June 14, 2012 I haven't experimented a lot with different settings, so all on Standard. Â John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
therbert Posted June 15, 2012 Share #39 Â Posted June 15, 2012 Agree; I see it as overexposed for the raw, but maybe it is more like EV +2/3. Shot the X2 against the Nex 7, (both raw) and the X2 was brighter every time. Honestly though, I think it may be the auto settings--the X2 wants to shoot f2.8 in every situation. Â I just got an X2 a couple of days ago. First thing I noticed was that the raw was too bright with the default Adobe Camera Raw settings. (I do have the latest update for ACR.) There is also a difference in color and, I think, less sharpening than with the JPG. The out of camera JPG is really nice and I have a hard time getting the DNG to look as good. Â Overall, I'm really happy - the photos are really nice. Â Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JensR Posted June 15, 2012 Share #40  Posted June 15, 2012 2 more, JPEG with a bit LR4 fine-tuning John  Das Foto JAN1 gefällt mir.  VG Jens Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.