Chris W Posted March 22 Share #161 Posted March 22 Advertisement (gone after registration) 4 minutes ago, Telemetric said: Anything you touch, is a nightmare. Not for me. And again you are just saying 'Leica'. The Q look is completely different IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 22 Posted March 22 Hi Chris W, Take a look here Leica Q3 or Fujifilm GFX 100RF. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Dazzajl Posted March 22 Share #162 Posted March 22 1 hour ago, Telemetric said: Hassel has the best color science by far. My colorist always says that if all photographers used Hassel, he wouldn't have any work. Well, it would be daft to refute the word of a working pro. I will have to take another look and see if I actually still agree with myself ☺️ 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted March 22 Share #163 Posted March 22 34 minutes ago, Chris W said: Too many variables. The M8, M240 and M10 have a vastly different look. I didn't like the M240 colours. M11 owners say it looks different to the M10. The Q series again looks very different and I loved it, it didn't need much editing. I know a photojournalist who almost exclusively uses the M11 and his images are stunning. I don't know how hard he works on them, but he usually has a fast turnaround time (in the hotel , late after a day of shooting on assignment). In that case it was a Leica SL. This is the opinion of the colorists, not mine. I like Leica colors in most cameras, although unfortunately they vary from camera to camera. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted March 22 Share #164 Posted March 22 However, I never use the Leica camera profile in Lightroom. In my opinion, it is always terrible, so I choose Adobe Standard as a starting point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithlaban.co.uk Posted March 22 Share #165 Posted March 22 Thankfully I no longer have to be a slave to colour science. At best the raw files from any camera and software are merely a starting point to match my vision for a given image: which admittedly can vary wildly. 😉 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telemetric Posted March 22 Share #166 Posted March 22 1 hour ago, Chris W said: Not for me. And again you are just saying 'Leica'. The Q look is completely different IMO. 🤷♂️ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telemetric Posted March 22 Share #167 Posted March 22 Advertisement (gone after registration) 40 minutes ago, keithlaban.co.uk said: Thankfully I no longer have to be a slave to colour science. At best the raw files from any camera and software are merely a starting point to match my vision for a given image: which admittedly can vary wildly. 😉 Exactly… if you leave the camera’s color… you will be one more. The point is to have your own color style because is part of your style. If you like Leica color is great, I like it too, but is not “my” color. And this is the problem with all leicas: if you want to work on it to have your own color, is a nightmare. Not just me says this, all professional colorist that I know says that and even more: some of them even charge more if have to work with a leica file. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RQ44 Posted March 22 Share #168 Posted March 22 If the new fuji was under 60mp, I bet this thread would not even exist. The fuji is f4 and no ibis. Just because it has a 100mp sensor, lemmings are jumping ship..............because it's better? These threads of comparisons are very pointless. People today seem to drop and look for the newest thing all the time. I was always taught to work hard for your possessions, learn to use them,use them well and enjoy them. This new generation of dumping when they can, and going for the new is poor. Possibly why there are so many less successful relationships today, they just can't learn to perfect what they already have out for not being satisfied. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted March 22 Share #169 Posted March 22 I'm puzzled by a statement that 'Leica colour science is bad'. I could understand it if it meant that Leica colours don't match what someone used to editing Canon/Nikon/Sony might want, and they would rather not have the faff of making Leica images match those of other brands. That would be irritating, but wouldn't make Leica colour science 'bad' - just different. What could be 'bad' about digital colour data recorded in a raw file that makes it more difficult to edit? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzajl Posted March 22 Share #170 Posted March 22 5 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said: I'm puzzled by a statement that 'Leica colour science is bad'. I could understand it if it meant that Leica colours don't match what someone used to editing Canon/Nikon/Sony might want, and they would rather not have the faff of making Leica images match those of other brands. That would be irritating, but wouldn't make Leica colour science 'bad' - just different. What could be 'bad' about digital colour data recorded in a raw file that makes it more difficult to edit? Poor might not be the most accurate choice of words, in the wider sense. The way Leica colours are engineered into the camera makes processing files to represent true to life colour more difficult. Because you can’t make global adjustments to colour temp, tint and hues. But on the flip side, if you’re not working commercially in colour critical environments, you get a camera that offers a gorgeous, artistic interpretation of the world that hopefully inspires great images. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted March 22 Share #171 Posted March 22 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Dazzajl said: The way Leica colours are engineered into the camera makes processing files to represent true to life colour more difficult. Because you can’t make global adjustments to colour temp, tint and hues. Still puzzled. You can make such global adjustments in post. Or do you mean you can't adjust temp/tint/hue in camera for JPGs? Otherwise we're still dealing with just raw files, so how are colours 'engineered into the camera'? Or rather: how are colours engineered into the camera in a way that makes the science bad - or the files more difficult to work with than others that might look similar? Is it something to do with the exact RGB colour hues in the Bayer array? Edited March 22 by LocalHero1953 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted March 22 Share #172 Posted March 22 If you don't like the colours, you can standardise them by using a Color Checker Passport colour swatch and then setting up a correction file in Lightroom to standard colours. I have Color Checker files for various lighting conditions and different lenses for my M10R and for the Q3/28. Wilson 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telemetric Posted March 22 Share #173 Posted March 22 1 hour ago, wlaidlaw said: If you don't like the colours, you can standardise them by using a Color Checker Passport colour swatch and then setting up a correction file in Lightroom to standard colours. I have Color Checker files for various lighting conditions and different lenses for my M10R and for the Q3/28. Wilson In my personal case, more than the accuracy of the colors is how hard is it to apply another color style. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FredInMA Posted March 22 Share #174 Posted March 22 As a Q2M owner (as well as A7cr), maybe I'm not fully qualified to comment on this. I disagree with another poster who said most people equate MP with IQ. I would rather buy a used Q3 over the 100RF for the same price any day of the week. I really question 100MP without any type of stabilization, especially with a 3.2 FF equivalent aperture. Maybe if you only shoot in well lit situations. I don't see the benefit of 100mp just for the sake of cropping down. No thanks. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted March 23 Share #175 Posted March 23 12 hours ago, Smogg said: It's funny, I have the opposite. Even though I don't like the Fuji colors (I have to mess around with it longer in post-processing), I really like the new camera based on the reviews. First of all, because of the compact lens and ergonomics. It all depends on the application. I rarely shoot with an aperture wider than f8 and slower than 1/125. If you get it you might want to try Iridient Software in order to give you a DNG file of your RAF files especially if you ever use C1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted March 23 Share #176 Posted March 23 2 hours ago, algrove said: If you get it you might want to try Iridient Software in order to give you a DNG file of your RAF files especially if you ever use C1. I used the C1 a long time ago and tried Iridient, but I ended up switching to Lightroom entirely for its cataloging capabilities and versatility. Also, the C1 doesn't support Hasselblad cameras, and I don't find it convenient to use multiple apps. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phatcat Posted March 23 Share #177 Posted March 23 I don’t know, it might sound like a small thing but the ability to change different aspect ratios and focal length on the fly for framing sounds very intriguing and could be the reason that people want to try this camera, for me at least. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted March 23 Share #178 Posted March 23 5 minutes ago, Phatcat said: I don’t know, it might sound like a small thing but the ability to change different aspect ratios and focal length on the fly for framing sounds very intriguing and could be the reason that people want to try this camera, for me at least. As a prime lens shooter I really like the ability to crop on the fly. I think all cameras should have the ability to crop to smaller formats. MF->FF->APS-C->M4/3. This somewhat replaces a bulky zoom lens. Leica offers a similar solution in some of its cameras, but it is only a partial solution (there is no darkening of the outer frames or full-screen zoom). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Besprosvet Posted March 23 Share #179 Posted March 23 17 hours ago, Dazzajl said: They might be regarded as such in marketing material and via web content but that’s not my experience in the real world. I don’t know any commercial snappers that use Hasselblad and that’s for a variety of reasons. It’s not a fully rounded and mature system, like you get from Canon, Nikon, Sony or Fuji. It’s a bespoke, niche, designer and boutique system. Which is very wonderful and offers something different to the main crowd. In much the way that Leica does too. I should be very clear that because the GFX kit is much better for my needs, that does not mean I consider it the best system there is. It’s a truly fabulous work tool and I appreciate it hugely. I never reach for it when I’m not at work though. My current love is a M246 which couldn’t be further from a fully rounded and capable camera. M246 is the most underrated digital M ever 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phatcat Posted March 23 Share #180 Posted March 23 56 minutes ago, Smogg said: As a prime lens shooter I really like the ability to crop on the fly. I think all cameras should have the ability to crop to smaller formats. MF->FF->APS-C->M4/3. This somewhat replaces a bulky zoom lens. Leica offers a similar solution in some of its cameras, but it is only a partial solution (there is no darkening of the outer frames or full-screen zoom). Not just crop, but aspect ratios, this will enable some creativity when framing. The biggest difference is having dedicated dials and knobs on the camera. On current GFX cameras you can change but it’s in the menu, so I think people don’t go through the hassle. But having physical buttons you can adjust on the fly couple with software assistance, will encourage people to experiment. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now