You can quickly check the integrity of the patched firmware file by dragging and dropping it here to make sure the patch was applied correctly: No other changes to the firmware file occurred) (I confirmed afterwards with a hex editor that the only change between the original 3.23 and the patched "3.24" version was a single byte near the beginning of the file (23 became 24). Go back to the top and click "Download patched firmware" Make sure the only option selected is "Increment version by 1"Ĭlick "Compile patched firmware" button down the bottom I used the brilliant FujiHack firmware patcher to increment the version number by 1 so that the 3.23 firmware would appear to the camera as 3.24, and thus allow it to re-install over the faulty 3.24 firmware.Ĭlick "Choose file" and select the 3.23 firmware downloaded from the Wayback Machine So the above 3.23 version above is useless as the camera will refuse to downgrade to a lower version. If it's the same or higher than the current lens version it will install, if it's lower it won't install it. When the camera loads the firmware from the SD card, it looks at the file header for the version number. I had looked at a few posts about the firmware before updating but somehow missed all of the posts regarding the issues people were having! It doesn't seem to be super widespread but I've personally seen posts from at least 20 people affected by this issue.īy sheer luck, a single copy of the previous 3.23 firmware was archived on the Wayback Machine so I could compare it to the current 3.24 firmware I had downloaded and installed. I updated my XF 18-55 (made in Japan) a few days ago and it started doing the horrible squealy noise when zoomed between 35-55mm. Well, Since you seem to have all the answers, then no one needs to answer. But this is a discussion for another day. Expect to pay $1500-2500 for ones in excellent condition. At ISO 6400 they are superior to our Fujis at ISO 800. Want lowest noise and highest IQ, pick up a Nikon D3S or the almost as good D4/D4S. The highest IQ sensors from Canon, Nikon, Panasonic and Sony are all their lowest resolution models. The problem is that the camera companies listen to the pixel peepers (overwhelming majority) and not photographers. In Lightroom, 0-10 for highly detailed photos, perhaps 20-30 with smooth areas like the sky, especially a dark sky. With my X-T1 (admittedly less noisy than the X-T2 which is less noisy than the X-T3 though not by much), up to ISO 3200 only modest noise reduction was needed. Some colors will be noisier with Bayer and others noisier on X-Trans. Because of the arrangement of the color filters on the pixels, color (not luminance) noise is affected. Noise is inherent in the sensor technology and not Bayer vs X-Trans. There is no magic here, Capture One vs Lightroom is just a matter of your choice of settings and adjustments. View at 100% on a 4k monitor, up close, and the noise will be visible. When someone doesn't see noise until above ISO 6400, they are just looking at very small images from a distance, perhaps on a low resolution monitor. If one looks close enough, all sensors have noise at all ISOs regardless of the comments by the fan boys. Although the truth is, good capture and correct exposure during capture will reduce noise or worms the best. I find this system solves all the worm issues. Usually that ends up less than 50 even if the ISO was 6400 or above. If I still see noise or worms after masking, then I increase Luminance until the noise or worms are gone. If I see noise or worms before I have done any sharpening, then I set the Sharpening to "1" to enable masking. I will increase it as much as possible without creating noise or worms. Once I have processed my image I then look at the image and access sharpness. I have started importing to LR with preset setting to "0" sharpening & "0" Luminance. I tried importing in LR with a C1 Fuji preset (14/50) and surprise LR & C1 appear pretty much equal for IQ! Also I find setting both software to "0" sharpening & "0" Luminance produces equal images. Thus once again, the C1 for Fuji has defaults set for the Fuji sensor while LR is set for Canon/Nikon. Note: the C1 settings I am using come from Version 20 for Fuji.Īlso the Luminance settings in C1 are set at 50 while LR is set to 0. Thus LR is defaulted for Canon/Nikon, while C1 is suited better for X-trans. X-trans sensors deliver a MUCH sharper image than the Bayer sensor from Canon/Nikon. C1 uses a 0-1000 scale and is set to 140 - this would be a 14 equivalent in the LR 0-100 scale. Sharpening in LR is set to 40 by default. The problem is in the default settings of the software.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |