Seeing what the X-E2 + 18-55mm Could Do

While I am still mulling which of the longer Fuji X-Lenses I am going
to get, I tried some shots at a longer range with the 18-55mm
f/2.8-f/4.3 to see how well it retained detail after a crop.
In this shot (this is the unadjusted original) the real test is the
visibility of the kite lines in the adjusted cropped version.
Original
https://db.tt/z3cXdfAb
Adjusted & Cropped
https://db.tt/WAGJXuRJ

....and the next frame;
Original
https://db.tt/U2Srms4u
Adjusted & Cropped
https://db.tt/vUNZSRqU

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 29/05/2015 2:46 p.m., Savageduck wrote:
While I am still mulling which of the longer Fuji X-Lenses I am going to
get, I tried some shots at a longer range with the 18-55mm f/2.8-f/4.3
to see how well it retained detail after a crop.
In this shot (this is the unadjusted original) the real test is the
visibility of the kite lines in the adjusted cropped version.
Original
https://db.tt/z3cXdfAb
Adjusted & Cropped
https://db.tt/WAGJXuRJ

...and the next frame;
Original
https://db.tt/U2Srms4u
Adjusted & Cropped
https://db.tt/vUNZSRqU

Was this ex-camera jpeg or raw?
There seem to be very visible halos around edges - from too wide radius
USM, so in the end it's actually hard to see what detail is there.
It looks like sharpening is working on about 5 pixel radius. Try
turning it down to one.
Of course using 5 px radius sharpening is fine for small prints, but if
that's the point - there's no point worrying about fine detail.

On 2015-05-29 04:04:48 +0000, Me said:

On 29/05/2015 2:46 p.m., Savageduck wrote:
While I am still mulling which of the longer Fuji X-Lenses I am going to
get, I tried some shots at a longer range with the 18-55mm f/2.8-f/4.3
to see how well it retained detail after a crop.
In this shot (this is the unadjusted original) the real test is the
visibility of the kite lines in the adjusted cropped version.
Original
https://db.tt/z3cXdfAb
Adjusted & Cropped
https://db.tt/WAGJXuRJ

...and the next frame;
Original
https://db.tt/U2Srms4u
Adjusted & Cropped
https://db.tt/vUNZSRqU

Was this ex-camera jpeg or raw?

RAW

There seem to be very visible halos around edges - from too wide radius
USM, so in the end it's actually hard to see what detail is there.

I was concerning myself with the white kite lines.

I have provided resized JPEG images, and I have no idea of what degree
of pixel-peeping you have zoomed in on, 100%, 200%???

That said here is the Original 4896x3264 RAF:
https://db.tt/478BV2zR

....and the unresized crop 2670x1502 JPEG processed from the RAW, so
about a 46% crop:
https://db.tt/dZLr5y9e

It looks like sharpening is working on about 5 pixel radius.

All processing was done in LR CC and LR sharpening was applied with a
radius of 1.4.

Try turning it down to one.

No need.

Here is a 100% crop showing the kite lines and the handler.
https://db.tt/pvkzMeAv

Of course using 5 px radius sharpening is fine for small prints, but if
that's the point - there's no point worrying about fine detail.

That isn't the point, and these particular shots will probably never be
printed.
If I was going to print it as is, I would get an acceptable 7.42"x4.17" print.
Taking it into Photoshop CC and enlarging, I can get a very acceptable
16"x9" (5760x3240@360ppi) print.




--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2015-05-29 04:53:17 +0000, Savageduck said:

On 2015-05-29 04:04:48 +0000, Me said:

On 29/05/2015 2:46 p.m., Savageduck wrote:
While I am still mulling which of the longer Fuji X-Lenses I am going to
get, I tried some shots at a longer range with the 18-55mm f/2.8-f/4.3
to see how well it retained detail after a crop.
In this shot (this is the unadjusted original) the real test is the
visibility of the kite lines in the adjusted cropped version.
Original
https://db.tt/z3cXdfAb
Adjusted & Cropped
https://db.tt/WAGJXuRJ

...and the next frame;
Original
https://db.tt/U2Srms4u
Adjusted & Cropped
https://db.tt/vUNZSRqU

Was this ex-camera jpeg or raw?

RAW

There seem to be very visible halos around edges - from too wide radius
USM, so in the end it's actually hard to see what detail is there.

I was concerning myself with the white kite lines.

I have provided resized JPEG images, and I have no idea of what degree
of pixel-peeping you have zoomed in on, 100%, 200%???

That said here is the Original 4896x3264 RAF:
https://db.tt/478BV2zR

...and the unresized crop 2670x1502 JPEG processed from the RAW, so
about a 46% crop:
https://db.tt/dZLr5y9e

It looks like sharpening is working on about 5 pixel radius.

All processing was done in LR CC and LR sharpening was applied with a
radius of 1.4.

Try turning it down to one.

No need.

Here is a 100% crop showing the kite lines and the handler.
https://db.tt/pvkzMeAv

Oops! Try this:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/FileChute/_DSF0507-3c.jpg

Of course using 5 px radius sharpening is fine for small prints, but if
that's the point - there's no point worrying about fine detail.

That isn't the point, and these particular shots will probably never be
printed.
If I was going to print it as is, I would get an acceptable 7.42"x4.17" print.
Taking it into Photoshop CC and enlarging, I can get a very acceptable
16"x9" (5760x3240@360ppi) print.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 5/28/2015 10:46 PM, Savageduck wrote:
While I am still mulling which of the longer Fuji X-Lenses I am going to
get, I tried some shots at a longer range with the 18-55mm f/2.8-f/4.3
to see how well it retained detail after a crop.
In this shot (this is the unadjusted original) the real test is the
visibility of the kite lines in the adjusted cropped version.
Original
https://db.tt/z3cXdfAb
Adjusted & Cropped
https://db.tt/WAGJXuRJ

...and the next frame;
Original
https://db.tt/U2Srms4u
Adjusted & Cropped
https://db.tt/vUNZSRqU


How does that compare with a similar lens on your D300s.

Yes, I know the pixel count, but I am talking about real life.


--
PeterN

On May 29, 2015, PeterN wrote
(in ):

On 5/28/2015 10:46 PM, Savageduck wrote:
While I am still mulling which of the longer Fuji X-Lenses I am going to
get, I tried some shots at a longer range with the 18-55mm f/2.8-f/4.3
to see how well it retained detail after a crop.
In this shot (this is the unadjusted original) the real test is the
visibility of the kite lines in the adjusted cropped version.
Original
https://db.tt/z3cXdfAb
Adjusted&Cropped
https://db.tt/WAGJXuRJ

...and the next frame;
Original
https://db.tt/U2Srms4u
Adjusted&Cropped
https://db.tt/vUNZSRqU

How does that compare with a similar lens on your D300s.

Yes, I know the pixel count, but I am talking about real life.

Two points to raise with regard to your question:
First, I didn’t have my D300S with me.
Then, While I might be able to get close with one or other of my Nikkor
lenses (18-75mm; 18-120mm; or 18-200mm) I would probably never have been at
55mm when shooting a scene such as the one shown.

My point was, I was actually pleasantly surprised that the individual kite
lines were resolvable, and the kite was nicely defined with that camera/lens
combo at that range.
It is what it is, it is certainly not a D7200 or a Nikon FF, but its IQ and
performance continue to surprise me.

There are a few things which I have not become accustomed to and where I
would favor a DSLR, but for the most part it is going to meet my idea that it
would be a great walk-around and travel camera which would bring the weight
way down. It is lighter and less obtrusive than my D300S + MB-D10 battery
grip. However, I am going to get myself a more versatile single walk-around
lens, and for that I am thinking of the 18-135mm which is a weather sealed
lens, has favorable reports and has some nice test results.

Then they have announced plans to release a 100-400mm early next year.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

On 2015-05-29 15:16:50 +0000, Savageduck said:

On May 29, 2015, PeterN wrote
(in ):
On 5/28/2015 10:46 PM, Savageduck wrote:
While I am still mulling which of the longer Fuji X-Lenses I am going to
get, I tried some shots at a longer range with the 18-55mm f/2.8-f/4.3
to see how well it retained detail after a crop.
In this shot (this is the unadjusted original) the real test is the
visibility of the kite lines in the adjusted cropped version.
Original
https://db.tt/z3cXdfAb
Adjusted&Cropped
https://db.tt/WAGJXuRJ

...and the next frame;
Original
https://db.tt/U2Srms4u
Adjusted&Cropped
https://db.tt/vUNZSRqU

How does that compare with a similar lens on your D300s.

Yes, I know the pixel count, but I am talking about real life.

Two points to raise with regard to your question:
First, I didn’t have my D300S with me.
Then, While I might be able to get close with one or other of my Nikkor
lenses (18-75mm; 18-120mm; or 18-200mm) I would probably never have been at
55mm when shooting a scene such as the one shown.

My point was, I was actually pleasantly surprised that the individual kite
lines were resolvable, and the kite was nicely defined with that camera/lens
combo at that range.

BTW: This might give you an idea of the range I was shooting at with 55mm.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_173.jpg

It is what it is, it is certainly not a D7200 or a Nikon FF, but its IQ and
performance continue to surprise me.

....and just to keep things photo related, another shot from my
Wednesday drive down to Pismo.
https://db.tt/E9g2gAdu

There are a few things which I have not become accustomed to and where I
would favor a DSLR, but for the most part it is going to meet my idea that it
would be a great walk-around and travel camera which would bring the weight
way down. It is lighter and less obtrusive than my D300S + MB-D10 battery
grip. However, I am going to get myself a more versatile single walk-around
lens, and for that I am thinking of the 18-135mm which is a weather sealed
lens, has favorable reports and has some nice test results.

Then they have announced plans to release a 100-400mm early next year.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 5/29/2015 12:11 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2015-05-29 15:16:50 +0000, Savageduck
said:

On May 29, 2015, PeterN wrote
(in ):
On 5/28/2015 10:46 PM, Savageduck wrote:
While I am still mulling which of the longer Fuji X-Lenses I am
going to
get, I tried some shots at a longer range with the 18-55mm f/2.8-f/4.3
to see how well it retained detail after a crop.
In this shot (this is the unadjusted original) the real test is the
visibility of the kite lines in the adjusted cropped version.
Original
https://db.tt/z3cXdfAb
Adjusted&Cropped
https://db.tt/WAGJXuRJ

...and the next frame;
Original
https://db.tt/U2Srms4u
Adjusted&Cropped
https://db.tt/vUNZSRqU

How does that compare with a similar lens on your D300s.

Yes, I know the pixel count, but I am talking about real life.

Two points to raise with regard to your question:
First, I didn’t have my D300S with me.
Then, While I might be able to get close with one or other of my Nikkor
lenses (18-75mm; 18-120mm; or 18-200mm) I would probably never have
been at
55mm when shooting a scene such as the one shown.

My point was, I was actually pleasantly surprised that the individual
kite
lines were resolvable, and the kite was nicely defined with that
camera/lens
combo at that range.

BTW: This might give you an idea of the range I was shooting at with 55mm.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_173.jpg

It is what it is, it is certainly not a D7200 or a Nikon FF, but its
IQ and
performance continue to surprise me.

...and just to keep things photo related, another shot from my Wednesday
drive down to Pismo.
https://db.tt/E9g2gAdu

There are a few things which I have not become accustomed to and where I
would favor a DSLR, but for the most part it is going to meet my idea
that it
would be a great walk-around and travel camera which would bring the
weight
way down. It is lighter and less obtrusive than my D300S + MB-D10 battery
grip. However, I am going to get myself a more versatile single
walk-around
lens, and for that I am thinking of the 18-135mm which is a weather
sealed
lens, has favorable reports and has some nice test results.

Then they have announced plans to release a 100-400mm early next year.



Nice shot. It looks more like a Tony Cooper, than a Duck. ;-)

My D300 decided to stop working. Turned out to be that the battery and
spare both went kaput at the same time. I had the charger tsted, and it
is fine. whatchagonnado. The 300 now works as advrtised.
Yesterday my dermatologist gave me a PDT treagtment. I will not be able
to shoot today because I have to stay away from any UV lighty for 48 hours.



--
PeterN