Fuji X-T3 and X-T4 discussion

[thebrothersthre3]

11 minutes ago, androidlad said:

A fair comparison would be internal JPEG vs. internal H.264/HEVC, with the same sharpening/NR settings.

which should yield pretty much the same result? 

[androidlad]

2 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

which should yield pretty much the same result? 

Well the H.264/HEVC will definitely be softer, due to downscaling (we don't know what algorithm Fuji uses to downscale 6K), 4:2:0 colour sampling (vs. JPEG 4:2:2) and higher compression ratio.

[thebrothersthre3]

21 minutes ago, androidlad said:

Well the H.264/HEVC will definitely be softer, due to downscaling (we don't know what algorithm Fuji uses to downscale 6K), 4:2:0 colour sampling (vs. JPEG 4:2:2) and higher compression ratio.

I guess the point of the test to me was to see if the RAW looked more natural to the naked eye. For me I can't really tell tbh, the difference is very slight. Zoomed in at 800% I could see the 4K video was softer, but thats extreme. I don't really see any artificial sharpening.

My conclusion is the 6k sensor from the fuji just putting out a very detailed image more so than the Pocket 4k at least. 

[androidlad]

22 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

I guess the point of the test to me was to see if the RAW looked more natural to the naked eye. For me I can't really tell tbh, the difference is very slight. Zoomed in at 800% I could see the 4K video was softer, but thats extreme. I don't really see any artificial sharpening.

My conclusion is the 6k sensor from the fuji just putting out a very detailed image more so than the Pocket 4k at least. 

Due to X-Trans, different editing tools yield different results, Lightroom has been criticised heavily for soft and mushy results demosaicing X-Trans files, hence many prefer Capture One.

[thebrothersthre3]

2 hours ago, androidlad said:

Due to X-Trans, different editing tools yield different results, Lightroom has been criticised heavily for soft and mushy results demosaicing X-Trans files, hence many prefer Capture One.

Yes I have heard that though people have said with the latest versions of lightroom its not an issue unless you apply sharpening. But regardless my test was to see if the H264 looks oversharpened and compared to the RAW it doesn't IMHO

[josdr]

Hi guys I am a bit confused regarding Davinci resolve, X-T3 F-log footage and the use of a Colour checker in the Color match process.

In the source Gamma portion of the Colour match process there is no option for f-log. should I use auto , rec 709 or something else?

As a side question , I usually apply the Fuji eterna lut in a different node and make whatever other changes I want from there. Should the colour matching be done at the f-log level or after the Lut is applied (which of course influences the footage). Sorry for the newb questions but colour "correction" is something new to me.

[Jay60p]

For the low budget videographers among us: a ZOOM LENS report.

On the X-T3 the Fuji zooms have problems with video shooting, including exposure stepping

and focus-by-wire jumpyness that is not a problem with stills.

So I thought I'd report on a recent Nikon zoom I found to work around these issues.
 

The Nikkor AF 28-85 f3.5-4.5 (1986-1999) is a great manual zoom/manual aperture ring

lens to use on the X-T3. It is extremely affordable, I picked up a clean one in a local camera

shop for $50, and mounted it with the $20 fotodiox adapter. It is a full frame SLR lens.

 

It is PARFOCAL, the focus does not stray as you zoom in & out.

I found the change in brightness as you zoom to be often unnoticeable unless you are watching

for it, this really surprised me. f3.5 to 4.5 is less than a stop of change, about 2/3rds of a stop?

 

And most important, the zoom ring is smooth. Often these Nikon zooms are slightly sticky,

especially when trying to turn the zoom ring very slowly for a cinematic shot.

The focus ring has a good amount of smooth travel for easy manual focus.

 

Finally, the sharpness of this lens is excellent, compares to the 18-55 fuji kit lens.

With some pixel peeping I can see a little CA color fringing at the edges, which you

would expect for a vintage lens without in-camera digital corrections.

There is a glowing review of this lens by Ken Rockwell online.

 

I have another Nikon zoom which is not usable (24-85mm F2.8-4) from 2001,

due to a sticky zoom ring, plus a manual focus ring which has a very short travel and is

difficult for fine focusing at distances nearing infinity.

Some zooms may have become sticky over years of continous use,

keep in mind when looking in ebay etc.

 

Vintage SLR zooms are often very parfocal, I also have two Canon FD zooms that

hold focus as well, 35-70 f4 and 70-210 f4. I used the 35-70 for 30 years on my SLR

and the zoom ring is still smooth.

 

So for $70 you can get an excellent Nikkor 3:1 full frame zoom, especially if you don't have

$3000-4000 for an excellent Fujinon 3:1 Cinema zoom.

I am posting here rather than in the LENS forum because the Sony & Panasonic camera zooms

may not have the same issues as Fuji.

[BrunoCH]

3 hours ago, Jay60p said:

For the low budget videographers among us: a ZOOM LENS report.

On the X-T3 the Fuji zooms have problems with video shooting, including exposure stepping

and focus-by-wire jumpyness that is not a problem with stills.

So I thought I'd report on a recent Nikon zoom I found to work around these issues.
 

The Nikkor AF 28-85 f3.5-4.5 (1986-1999) is a great manual zoom/manual aperture ring

lens to use on the X-T3. It is extremely affordable, I picked up a clean one in a local camera

shop for $50, and mounted it with the $20 fotodiox adapter. It is a full frame SLR lens.

 

It is PARFOCAL, the focus does not stray as you zoom in & out.

I found the change in brightness as you zoom to be often unnoticeable unless you are watching

for it, this really surprised me. f3.5 to 4.5 is less than a stop of change, about 2/3rds of a stop?

 

And most important, the zoom ring is smooth. Often these Nikon zooms are slightly sticky,

especially when trying to turn the zoom ring very slowly for a cinematic shot.

The focus ring has a good amount of smooth travel for easy manual focus.

 

Finally, the sharpness of this lens is excellent, compares to the 18-55 fuji kit lens.

With some pixel peeping I can see a little CA color fringing at the edges, which you

would expect for a vintage lens without in-camera digital corrections.

There is a glowing review of this lens by Ken Rockwell online.

 

I have another Nikon zoom which is not usable (24-85mm F2.8-4) from 2001,

due to a sticky zoom ring, plus a manual focus ring which has a very short travel and is

difficult for fine focusing at distances nearing infinity.

Some zooms may have become sticky over years of continous use,

keep in mind when looking in ebay etc.

 

Vintage SLR zooms are often very parfocal, I also have two Canon FD zooms that

hold focus as well, 35-70 f4 and 70-210 f4. I used the 35-70 for 30 years on my SLR

and the zoom ring is still smooth.

 

So for $70 you can get an excellent Nikkor 3:1 full frame zoom, especially if you don't have

$3000-4000 for an excellent Fujinon 3:1 Cinema zoom.

I am posting here rather than in the LENS forum because the Sony & Panasonic camera zooms

may not have the same issues as Fuji.

Thank you for sharing. But this 28-85 is centered on a basic focal at 50mm for 24x36mm (full frame). I don't have a zoom but only fixed focal lengths. On my shorts I think I use

35mm for 5/10 shots (basic focal length in APS-C)

24mm or 20mm for 4/10 shots

50mm for 1/10 shots

I could use an 18-55 instead of these three fixed focal lengths. But a 28-85 would be too off range for me.

[Jay60p]

1 hour ago, BrunoCH said:

...

I could use an 18-55 instead of these three fixed focal lengths. But a 28-85 would be too off range for me.

Yes, its the eternal search for the wide & long & cheap manual zoom.

Let us know if you find a wider APS-C zoom that can be used with a simple adapter on the Fuji (no by-wire focusing, and with aperture control).

And there is always the Mitakon Zhongyi Lens Turbo Adapter V2 for $150, a trade-off of some resolution loss for a wider angle and extra stop of exposure.

[BrunoCH]

1 hour ago, Jay60p said:

Let us know if you find a wider APS-C zoom that can be used with a simple adapter on the Fuji (no by-wire focusing, and with aperture control).

No hope on the side of old lenses all designed for the 24x36mm. Maybe a company like Meike (when I see the quality of their cine lenses) could release a cine zoom

18-55 mm

T 2.9 constant

parfocal

10 blades iris

a focus throw > 200 degrees

APS-C (mounts : M4 / 3, FujiX, SonyE)

Around 1500 dollars.

Or Sirui by an indigogo campaign.

Maybe we could suggest them. An email isn’t expensive. A daydream isn’t expensive too.

[Jay60p]

I consider this Nikkor a specialty lens - specifically for doing smooth cinematic zoom shots, on a tripod.

Since I'm not usually doing this type of shooting I usually use the Fuji 18-55 kit lens or the Fuji 10-24 as

"sets of primes" and don't do zooming during shots. Especially since the kit lens has excellent IOS

for smoothing hand held shots. So for now I am happy to have a smooth zoom in the "normal to telephoto"

range for special setups. It overlaps the coverage of the two Fujinon cinema lenses (18-55 & 50-135).

 

Back to Nikkors: there is a Fotodiox adapter which includes an aperture control ring for using with Nikkor

G type lenses. It is only $2 more. I just got one and I find it will open & close the apertures on the AF Nikkor as well.

But there are no markings, and the full movement from open to closed is only about a centimeter travel.

There are more expensive adapters with more Nikon functions for Fuji here:

https://fotodioxpro.com/collections/lens-mount-adapters/lens-mount_nikon-g+camera-mount_fujifilm-x

There are DX G lenses which are APS-C with wider zoom possibilities. I am not familiar with these modern nikkors,

but I suspect they will mostly be focus-by-wire. 

Anybody tried these?

 

[thebrothersthre3]

4 minutes ago, Jay60p said:

I consider this Nikkor a specialty lens - specifically for doing smooth cinematic zoom shots, on a tripod.

Since I'm not usually doing this type of shooting I usually use the Fuji 18-55 kit lens or the Fuji 10-24 as

"sets of primes" and don't do zooming during shots. Especially since the kit lens has excellent IOS

for smoothing hand held shots. So for now I am happy to have a smooth zoom in the "normal to telephoto"

range for special setups. It overlaps the coverage of the two Fujinon cinema lenses (18-55 & 50-135).

 

Back to Nikkors: there is a Fotodiox adapter which includes an aperture control ring for using with Nikkor

G type lenses. It is only $2 more. I just got one and I find it will open & close the apertures on the AF Nikkor as well.

But there are no markings, and the full movement from open to closed is only about a centimeter travel.

There are more expensive adapters with more Nikon functions for Fuji here:

https://fotodioxpro.com/collections/lens-mount-adapters/lens-mount_nikon-g+camera-mount_fujifilm-x

There are DX G lenses which are APS-C with wider zoom possibilities. I am not familiar with these modern nikkors,

but I suspect they will mostly be focus-by-wire. 

Anybody tried these?

 

Yeah I am not a fan of the modern focus by wire lenses. I have a 35mm 1.8 but its a bit of a nightmare to focus. I much prefer the older AI or AI-S lenses.

[heart0less]

If anyone besides me use HLG, here is a little normalization LUT I'm guilty of.
I didn't use any charts, so it may be slightly untruthful and inaccurate..
( :

No need to overexpose, it's designed to bring out as much DR as possible while still achieving black and white points.

 

 

[proteanstar]

Made this video yesterday, from photos that I have taken over the past few days, and the recording that I made of the birds singing when I was in Kauai in February. Recorded with Sony Linear PCM Recorder PCM-M10. 

I did edit the audio in post to take a Noise Print of the ocean sound and remove it, as well as boost the gain. Otherwise, no change to the original sound. Recorded at the highest quality in stereo, 24 bit, 48 kHz.

All photos SOOC, Straight Out of Camera, no post editing. L, 16:9, Fine/RAW.

Shot RAW and JPG, Film simulation Velvia for 1st 2 shots, Astia for remainder. Always set manual White Balance with ColorChecker Passport, Grey Card. Had to shoot through glass door and thick/dark screen door for Blue Jay shots. Didn't want them to be disturbed. 

Did not bother to change anything in post. 

XT-3, Fujinon XF90mmF2 R LM WR, left lens hood off, for sunflare!

https://player.vimeo.com/video/400799265 43 seconds

[proteanstar]

Correction: 96 kHz/24 bit .WAV audio recording. After importing it into Adobe Premiere Pro, and editing in Adobe Audition, down-sampled it to 24 bit/48 kHz in the export media process. Anyway, I love the sound of the two birds talking back and forth. Matched those two birds from Kauai to the Blue Jay couple in Oregon. Will have to make more stories with Nature as the focus. Yes, I know that the songs are not matched to the birds shown. Artistic license! Until someone notices. Then I will tell them.

 

[thebrothersthre3]

Little short I shot on the XT3. Was bored and also suffering heart break so I came up with this. Was just filming myself and edited it that same day. Nice to get some creativity out in this odd time. 

[Thomas Hill]

23 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Little short I shot on the XT3. Was bored and also suffering heart break so I came up with this. Was just filming myself and edited it that same day. Nice to get some creativity out in this odd time. 

Nice! I like that little Spotless Mind twist.

[Papiskokuji]

On 3/2/2020 at 9:03 AM, josdr said:

Hi guys I am a bit confused regarding Davinci resolve, X-T3 F-log footage and the use of a Colour checker in the Color match process.

In the source Gamma portion of the Colour match process there is no option for f-log. should I use auto , rec 709 or something else?

As a side question , I usually apply the Fuji eterna lut in a different node and make whatever other changes I want from there. Should the colour matching be done at the f-log level or after the Lut is applied (which of course influences the footage). Sorry for the newb questions but colour "correction" is something new to me.

Hi !

The eterna LUT is to use if you don’t have a color checker. You could actually use it before applying the color checker correction nod but there’s no point to it.

For the gamma question, I can’t remember what gamma there is in Resolve. You can try gamma input « slog2 » as it’s not far from flog gamma and I usually do a blackmagic 4k gamma output as rec709 crushes everything. But most of the time, I put the same gamma Space input and output so the color checker only corrects colors and put me back to some rec709 color Space, and I adjust the gamma curve myself in another nod, so I have more control.

But overall, if you don’t have to match your XT3 with other cameras, I’d suggest You apply the fuji WDR lut (the one which only affects colors, i can’t remember the exact name) so you’re back to a rec709 colorspace but with fuji’s touch. And then in another nod, you apply a custom curve. I have gorgeous results with this simple workflow.

and finally, another method is to use color transform and put « gamma input flog » « color Space input rec2020 » gamma output « blackmagic 4k (same as above) » « color Space output rec709 ».

There You go, 3 methods to normalize your flog image. I encourage you to use the second one if you wanna keep fuji colors.

 

[heart0less]

I'm with Spenser on that.

Having gone through majority of the systems, I can admit that it's Fuji that really made me enjoy the process of creating. It's simply a big pleasure to use.

 

 

[androidlad]

Fujifilm just released F-log to Bleach Bypass LUT, it's only included in X-T4 folder but it can be used on all F-log capable Fujifilm cameras:

https://dl.fujifilm-x.com/support/lut/F-Log_LUT_E_Ver.1.16.zip