Andrew CD wrote:
The colours you’re getting with that camera are incredible (as they are in some of the other X2D images in this thread). It’s a pleasure to view them.
May I ask, do you find it necessary to do much post-processing in order to get these end results?
Hi Andrew,
Great question! I will have to say, in most cases the post process tweaking is considerably less than my other cameras. Generally, I might need to recover the highlights in a white aircraft or something, but I don't do much to the Hasselblad files. One of the additional beautiful things about the camera is, if you do need to do anything, there is so much information and dynamic range in the camera it's no problem.
Andrew CD wrote:
The colours you’re getting with that camera are incredible (as they are in some of the other X2D images in this thread). It’s a pleasure to view them.
May I ask, do you find it necessary to do much post-processing in order to get these end results?
The amount of post processing varies by image and conditions however, there are many that require little in the way of post processing especially for the colors. While dynamic range is awesome, there are still situations that require a bit of work . . . but in those cases other cameras I've worked with would have been much more difficult.
Long time no post, some random photos I took using GFX100II and Fringer smart adapter and EVF angle adapter. This might be my favorite system of all time, bar none.
I used mostly either 1X1 or 16x9 format. I won't say this is due to coverage of FF glasses (as most of my medium format glasses cover Fuji with room to spare) but really I just enjoy the format more. With 50mm Planar, angle adapter and 1X1, I got myself a Hasselblad 500 80mm system. I even love the hefty of the system in hand. For shooting experience, I don't think I ever get this much of pleasure out of any system I used. The only requirement I have for glasses are real focus ring. This brought a lot of joy to my busy mid-aged life.
rji2goleez wrote:
The amount of post processing varies by image and conditions however, there are many that require little in the way of post processing especially for the colors. While dynamic range is awesome, there are still situations that require a bit of work . . . but in those cases other cameras I've worked with would have been much more difficult.
————————
JWilsonphoto wrote:
Hi Andrew,
Great question! I will have to say, in most cases the post process tweaking is considerably less than my other cameras. Generally, I might need to recover the highlights in a white aircraft or something, but I don't do much to the Hasselblad files. One of the additional beautiful things about the camera is, if you do need to do anything, there is so much information and dynamic range in the camera it's no problem.
Belated thanks to both of you for the considered replies. You are doing nothing to help me resist the temptation of an X2D ….
(Actually, if I do succumb, the principal reasons will be low light performance, dynamic range and colour consistency, not resolution per se, although greater ability to crop and the pleasure of using are added bonuses.)
Been so busy with some full frame projects that my X2D II and 35-100 haven't seen the light of the sun much. Love all the subtle little texture details they pick up.
A quick capture of the sky over the airport yesterday.................X2DII dynamic range is really on display in these types of images.
“Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return.”
