Six Months with the X-Pro2

In article , Ken Hart wrote:

Savageduck:
This is the work of Dutch photographer Piet Van den Eynde in the
six months he has used his X-Pro2. https://vimeo.com/169992597

Sandman:
Not sure what this shows, tough. I mean, what did the X-Pro2 bring
to these photos?

I mean, if someone made a video of shots they took in six months
with the Sony A7S II, you'd expect a series of crisp low-light
photos that are hard to take with any other camera.

But the shots in the above video could have been taken with any
camera, right?

My first thought after looking at this video was: did Holga start
making lenses for Fuji?

Discounting the fact that I am not impressed by ballerinas in a
derelict industrial setting, I'd like to see at least a couple sharp
photos.

Is this an artifact of Vimeo, or is it his "vision"?

This was sort of my point. None of the shots are SOOC, and all are heavily post
processed in Lightroom. I have no problem with that of course, and the end
result is aesthetically pleasing, but also quite possible using any modern
camera with enough dynamic range to give post processing tools data to work
with.

--
Sandman

On 2016-06-11 08:02:03 +0000, Sandman said:

In article 2016061015210360589-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote:

Sandman:
But the shots in the above video could have been taken with any
camera, right?

It is a video of LR processed stills (probably put together on LR.
However, as always it is not just the camera but the vision of the
photographer and his use of the tools he has at hand. Dare I say
that a crew of photographers loaded with a Sony A7S II and various
FF DSLR's, following along with him would be hard pressed to equal
his product.

Why? What did the X-Pro2 enable him to do that someone using another camera
could not do?

Not one damn thing. So what?

If you believe you could produce something similar with your Sony
A7S II, post it. Personally, I find his photographic skill something
that I would strive for, but I am a long way from attaining.

I have the Sony A7R II though

It was not my intention to start a dick waving, one camera is better
than another war, just that the camera he used was an X-Pro2, and that
was the point of his exercise.

And I'm not questioning his "photographic skill" at all, most of the shots were
really nice (a fair bit had the micro contrast turned up too much if you ask
me).

You are questioning something. With a touch of condescension added for effect.

I am not trying to degrade the X-Pro2 either, I'm sure it's a nice camera and
it's gotten som great reviews. I'm just curious why the tool was important to
mention when the images seemed possible with any tool.

It is important because Piet Van den Eynde has made a point of titling
the article in his blog and in the video "6 Months With The X-Pro2".
That was the purpose.
http://www.morethanwords.be/blog//6-months-x-pro-2

--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article 2016061101200526939-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck
wrote:

Sandman:
But the shots in the above video could have been
taken with any camera, right?

Savageduck:
It is a video of LR processed stills (probably put together on
LR. However, as always it is not just the camera but the vision
of the photographer and his use of the tools he has at hand.
Dare I say that a crew of photographers loaded with a Sony A7S
II and various FF DSLR's, following along with him would be hard
pressed to equal his product.

Sandman:
Why? What did the X-Pro2 enable him to do that someone using
another camera could not do?

Not one damn thing. So what?

What's with the teen attitude?

Savageduck:
If you believe you could produce something similar with your
Sony A7S II, post it. Personally, I find his photographic skill
something that I would strive for, but I am a long way from
attaining.

Sandman:
I have the Sony A7R II though

It was not my intention to start a dick waving, one camera is better
than another war, just that the camera he used was an X-Pro2, and
that was the point of his exercise.

You're taking this way too personally. And I am still curious in what way
this supposed "point" manifested itself. Is this a photographer that usually
use Hasselblad cameras and his point is that he can make what he consider
equally great images with something smaller and cheaper?

Sandman:
And I'm not questioning his "photographic skill" at all, most of
the shots were really nice (a fair bit had the micro contrast
turned up too much if you ask me).

You are questioning something. With a touch of condescension added
for effect.

It's all in your head. But that explains your attitude. I have been perfectly
polite and adult.

Sandman:
I am not trying to degrade the X-Pro2 either, I'm sure it's a nice
camera and it's gotten som great reviews. I'm just curious why the
tool was important to mention when the images seemed possible with
any tool.

It is important because Piet Van den Eynde has made a point of
titling the article in his blog and in the video "6 Months With The
X-Pro2". That was the purpose.
http://www.morethanwords.be/blog//6-months-x-pro-2

I mere "I don't know" would have sufficed, duck. Look, you seem to have way
too much pride invested in this in order to have a normal conversation about
it, so I'll leave it at that.

--
Sandman

On 6/10/2016 6:12 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jun 2016 14:55:55 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2016-06-10 21:50:18 +0000, Tony Cooper said:

On Fri, 10 Jun 2016 14:36:45 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

This is the work of Dutch photographer Piet Van den Eynde in the six
months he has used his X-Pro2.
https://vimeo.com/169992597


Everyone who thinks that these photographs are the result of switching
to an X-Pro2 raise your hand.

Naah! It's the head behind the X-Pro2.
The camera gives him the instrument/tool to make the capture (a pretty
good one), then as he says, all processing is done in Lightroom along
with his particular batch of presets. It is just an example of what can
be done with a camera in capable hands.

I'd rather have his pre-sets than a new camera. A pre-set can make
what I do come out better, but a new camera isn't going to help me all
that much. Except, that is, with low light where my Nikon D300 sucks.

Unless, of course, the new camera comes with a chip that produces a
voice saying "Look! Over there, dummy. There's your shot."



ha ha...that's what I need. lol

On 11/06/2016 20:03, Sandman wrote:
In article , Ken Hart wrote:

Savageduck:
This is the work of Dutch photographer Piet Van den Eynde in the
six months he has used his X-Pro2. https://vimeo.com/169992597

Sandman:
Not sure what this shows, tough. I mean, what did the X-Pro2 bring
to these photos?

I mean, if someone made a video of shots they took in six months
with the Sony A7S II, you'd expect a series of crisp low-light
photos that are hard to take with any other camera.

But the shots in the above video could have been taken with any
camera, right?

My first thought after looking at this video was: did Holga start
making lenses for Fuji?

Discounting the fact that I am not impressed by ballerinas in a
derelict industrial setting, I'd like to see at least a couple sharp
photos.

Is this an artifact of Vimeo, or is it his "vision"?

This was sort of my point. None of the shots are SOOC, and all are heavily post
processed in Lightroom. I have no problem with that of course, and the end
result is aesthetically pleasing, but also quite possible using any modern
camera with enough dynamic range to give post processing tools data to work
with.

There is one simple reason.
Some photographers get paid to blog about cameras - by camera companies.
IMO they should disclose this when posting their blogs. It's especially
silly when as you point out, there's nothing at all technically
remarkable about those photos - they're all achievable with a cheap
camera phone.

On 6/10/2016 10:36 PM, Savageduck wrote:
This is the work of Dutch photographer Piet Van den Eynde in the six
months he has used his X-Pro2.
https://vimeo.com/169992597

I preferred the portraits to the "modelling" type shots, but I enjoyed
the presentation. I particularly liked some of the shots with the 16 mm.

On 2016-06-11 09:51:16 +0000, Me said:

On 11/06/2016 20:03, Sandman wrote:
In article , Ken Hart wrote:

Savageduck:
This is the work of Dutch photographer Piet Van den Eynde in the
six months he has used his X-Pro2. https://vimeo.com/169992597

Sandman:
Not sure what this shows, tough. I mean, what did the X-Pro2 bring
to these photos?

I mean, if someone made a video of shots they took in six months
with the Sony A7S II, you'd expect a series of crisp low-light
photos that are hard to take with any other camera.

But the shots in the above video could have been taken with any
camera, right?

My first thought after looking at this video was: did Holga start
making lenses for Fuji?

Discounting the fact that I am not impressed by ballerinas in a
derelict industrial setting, I'd like to see at least a couple sharp
photos.

Is this an artifact of Vimeo, or is it his "vision"?

This was sort of my point. None of the shots are SOOC, and all are heavily post
processed in Lightroom. I have no problem with that of course, and the end
result is aesthetically pleasing, but also quite possible using any modern
camera with enough dynamic range to give post processing tools data to work
with.

There is one simple reason.
Some photographers get paid to blog about cameras - by camera companies.
IMO they should disclose this when posting their blogs. It's
especially silly when as you point out, there's nothing at all
technically remarkable about those photos - they're all achievable with
a cheap camera phone.

"They're all achievable with a cheap camera phone."
Perhaps you could demonstrate that for us. Especially since "there's
nothing at all technically remarkable about those photos".

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 06/10/2016 09:00 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-11 00:39:50 +0000, Ken Hart said:

On 06/10/2016 05:59 PM, Sandman wrote:
In article 2016061014364568872-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

This is the work of Dutch photographer Piet Van den Eynde in the six
months he has used his X-Pro2. https://vimeo.com/169992597

Not sure what this shows, tough. I mean, what did the X-Pro2 bring to
these
photos?

I mean, if someone made a video of shots they took in six months with
the Sony
A7S II, you'd expect a series of crisp low-light photos that are hard
to take
with any other camera.

But the shots in the above video could have been taken with any
camera, right?



My first thought after looking at this video was: did Holga start
making lenses for Fuji?

Discounting the fact that I am not impressed by ballerinas in a
derelict industrial setting, I'd like to see at least a couple sharp
photos.

I must admit that I don't get too many opportunities to shoot ballarinas
in derelict industrial settings. However if you actually got to his
Indian set there was much sharpness and clarity to be found. His
photography might not be of a style you and I might shoot, or even be
capable of shooting, but even if they are not to our taste, they do have
a particular quality.

Is this an artifact of Vimeo, or is it his "vision"?

It is probably an artifact of your expression of your particular taste
in images.



No, I have to disagree with that. In another post, there was a link to
the old Indian(?) gentleman holding a camera with the view screen toward
this photographer. That image was tack sharp on my monitor. Not like the
video- it seemed very soft. And an industrial setting should have plenty
of opportunity for sharp images.

I won't disparage the photographer's body of work, as I haven't seen it.
But IMHO, the _technical_quality_ of this video pales in comparison to
PeterN's "Liberty" or Tony Cooper's "Dock Pilings".

--
Ken Hart

On 2016-06-11 15:13:56 +0000, Ken Hart said:

On 06/10/2016 09:00 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-11 00:39:50 +0000, Ken Hart said:
On 06/10/2016 05:59 PM, Sandman wrote:
In article 2016061014364568872-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:
This is the work of Dutch photographer Piet Van den Eynde in the six
months he has used his X-Pro2. https://vimeo.com/169992597

Not sure what this shows, tough. I mean, what did the X-Pro2 bring to
these photos?

I mean, if someone made a video of shots they took in six months with
the Sony A7S II, you'd expect a series of crisp low-light photos that are hard
to take with any other camera.

But the shots in the above video could have been taken with any
camera, right?


My first thought after looking at this video was: did Holga start
making lenses for Fuji?

Discounting the fact that I am not impressed by ballerinas in a
derelict industrial setting, I'd like to see at least a couple sharp
photos.

I must admit that I don't get too many opportunities to shoot ballarinas
in derelict industrial settings. However if you actually got to his
Indian set there was much sharpness and clarity to be found. His
photography might not be of a style you and I might shoot, or even be
capable of shooting, but even if they are not to our taste, they do have
a particular quality.

Is this an artifact of Vimeo, or is it his "vision"?

It is probably an artifact of your expression of your particular taste
in images.


No, I have to disagree with that. In another post, there was a link to
the old Indian(?) gentleman holding a camera with the view screen
toward this photographer. That image was tack sharp on my monitor. Not
like the video- it seemed very soft. And an industrial setting should
have plenty of opportunity for sharp images.

I posted that shot to show that he had produced sharp images, there are
others. So there might be something in how vimeo is being rendered on
your display. Did you adjust the HD settings to 1040 by clicking on the
'HD' in the video window and then go view in full screen?

I won't disparage the photographer's body of work, as I haven't seen
it. But IMHO, the _technical_quality_ of this video pales in comparison
to PeterN's "Liberty" or Tony Cooper's "Dock Pilings".

As I said, opinion and/or taste.

I just appreciate that with his Indian shots, at least, he has captured
images that I probably will will never have the opportunity or skill to
capture, regardless of whatever photo equipment or post processing I
might use.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 11 Jun 2016 08:40:38 GMT, Sandman wrote:

You're taking this way too personally. And I am still curious in what way
this supposed "point" manifested itself. Is this a photographer that usually
use Hasselblad cameras and his point is that he can make what he consider
equally great images with something smaller and cheaper?

I believe that really *is* the point, and the exact reason Duck posted
this. It's a tough decision moving "down" from a DSLR to mirrorless,
so the point is that the Fuji's IQ is easily good enough for those who
are used to DSLR's, and are thinking of switching for the weight and
size benefits. No one is claiming that the IQ is better, or that the
output has some qualities that are missing in better cameras, or that
better overall photos will spew from a Fuji..

Oddly, I thought the photos at that link were unimpressive in every
way. And I think it was you who made some remark about ballerinas in
industrial settings. A good example of "trite", eh? The photos Duck
has posted have all been much better examples of the strengths of that
camera series.