Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro review
Below is the evolution of all of the Fujifilm FinePix series of CZK:
- Fujifilm FinePix S1 Pro - january 2000, based on the film Nikon F60 (aka Nikon N60), the first generation SuperCCD.
- Fujifilm FinePix S2 Pro - january 2002, based on the film Nikon F80 (aka Nikon N80), SuperCCD III (the matrix third generation).
- Fujifilm FinePix S3 Pro - february 2004, on the base Fujifilm FinePix S2 ProSuperCCD SR II matrix (second generation SR matrix)
- Fujifilm FinePix S3 Pro UVIR - August 2006, upgraded Fujifilm FinePix S3 Pro for shooting in IR (Infra Red) and UV (Ultra Violet) spectra.
- Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro - september 2006, on the base Nikon D200, slightly upgraded SuperCCD SR II matrix (similar to the one installed on Fujifilm FinePix S3 Pro).
- Fujifilm FinePix IS Pro - June 2007modernized Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro for shooting in IR (Infra Red) and UV (Ultra Violet) spectra.
The Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro is an amazing camera. You take it in your hands, and you understand what it is Nikon D200, only labeled 'Fujifilm Super CCD' and 'Nikon F mount'. Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro body completely copied from the camera Nikon D200... Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro uses Nikkor lenses compatible with Nikon F-mount (cameras have the same bayonet mount), as well as all other peripherals - flashes, butblocks, remote controls, and more.
The Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro has another modification called Fujifilm FinePix IS Pro, designed to work in the infrared and ultraviolet spectra. In the spring and summer of 2007, when the camera became available for orders and pre-orders, the price of the S5 Pro was $ 2.000, which somehow hints at its capabilities.
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro
Important: Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro is not a clone Nikon D200. Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro and Nikon D200 - completely different sensors (matrices) that create an image and a radically different menu. There are other minor differences as well.
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro
Main differences from Nikon D200
- Different batteries (not interchangeable).
- A completely different menu. Important: S5 Pro does not have Russian language.
- Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro Live View
- The Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro has the ability to view the number of frames taken by the camera for its entire life through the menu. Have Nikon D200 there is no such function, in order to see the number of frames captured by a camera in a lifetime, you need to use a special program and watch the frame counter in EXIF module of any photograph taken with Nikon D200. To see the mileage S5 Pro, just go to the menu 'SETUP->Maintenance->Maintenance Counter' where the camera mileage and even the number of shutter replacements will be indicated.
- The cameras are different frame buffer. About this is separately written below.
- Different maximum shooting speed (5 fps Nikon D200, versus 1.5-3 fps for the S5 Pro).
- Different ISO limit (3200 S5 Pro vs 1600 D200), although Nikon D200 reaches ISO 3200 in Hi1 mode.
- Different image quality.
- The S5 Pro has an image processing menu. The D200 is sorely lacking a post-processing menu.
- There is no Basic compression mode for JPEG.
Important about batteries:
- Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro battery can be used with cameras without problems Nikon D100, D70, D70s, D50. Camera data use battery Nikon EN-EL3which does not have a programmable chip.
- Accumulators Nikon EN-EL3e и Nikon EN-EL3 Cannot be used in Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro. That is, batteries from Nikon D200, D300, D300s, D700, D80, D90 (Nikon EN-EL3e) and Nikon D100, D70, D70s, D50 (Nikon EN-EL3) are not suitable for use with Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro.
- The Fujifilm NP-150 battery cannot be used with D200 cameras, D300, D300s, D700, D80, D90. Although outwardly these batteries are identical.
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro with lens Nikon ED AF Nikkor 80-200mm 1: 2.8D (MKII)
The most important
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro can use film simulation modes. In fact, it always shoots with certain settings for film simulation.
There are 6 simulation modes (Film Sumulation) available in the camera menu:
- STD is a standard mode suitable for a very wide variety of scenes, including portrait and landscape photography. Unlike all other simulation modes, it allows you to adjust not only the color (Color), contrast (Tone) and sharpness (Sharpness), but also the dynamic range (D-Range).
- F1 is a film simulation mode specially designed for studio portraits. Simulates working with professional negatives. Primarily suppresses flares and flares from studio flashes in the maximum brightness zone. Does not tint the image (that is, the essence of the simulation is in a good study of the highlights).
- F1a is the same mode as F1, but with slightly raised chroma.
- F1b - conveys skin tone (facial skin tone) with smooth transitions. Also, this mode captures vivid natural colors and is great for outdoor portraits.
- F1c is the same mode as F1, but sharpened.
- F2 is a high saturation mode similar to FUJI-CHROME slides. Great for landscapes or architecture.
Additionally, in almost every mode F1, F1a, F1b, F1c, F2, you can adjust the color, contrast and sharpness, but only in a certain range of values.
Below is a diagram with the evolution of Super CCD matrices:
The evolution of the first SuperCCD / SuperCCD SR matrices
Critical: only native utility works best with RAW files Fujifilm Hyper-Utility HS-V3. Third party converters have a number of limitations and do not fully understand the complex structure of the SuperCCD SR / SR II sensor. Of the third-party converters, in my experience, Adobe LightRoom works best.
S-pixels have the usual sensitivity of the classic pixels / subpixels CCD matrices. R-pixels are smaller and less sensitive to light than S-pixels and are designed to capture details in bright areas of the frame. During shooting, the camera's processor combines data from these two types of photodiodes to obtain a wide dynamic range. Also pay attention to the complex polygonal structure of the sensor (somewhat similar to the structure of a honeycomb). Actually - this picture is the 'essence' of the S5 Pro camera.
I am very pleased that the Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro pays a lot of attention to portraiture and skin tone. Perhaps, every camera should have such functions.
![Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro with Tamron SP AF Aspherical XR Di LD [IF] 28-75mm 1: 2.8 Macro A09 (Model A09N & Model A09N II)](https://radojuva.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/fujifilm-finepix-s5-pro-camera-review-1.jpg "Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro with Tamron SP AF Aspherical XR Di LD [IF] 28-75mm 1: 2.8 Macro A09 (Model A09N & Model A09N II)")
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro c Tamron SP AF Aspherical XR Di LD [IF] 28-75mm 1: 2.8 Macro A09 (Model A09N & Model A09N II)
live view
Live View (live view / screen) is present in the camera, but has a number of features:
- In Live View mode, the images themselves slow down when sighted, like video recording on older phones. It seems that the frequency of image display in Live View is about 10-15 frames per second.
- In Live View, two methods are available: black and white and color.
- Live View does not support auto focus. In general, in order to focus through Live View on a number of non-motorized lenses, you need to switch the camera to manual focusing “M”, and on lenses with a motor, switch to M or (M / A) mode.
- Live View only turns on for 30 seconds. When Live View is on, you see a timer that counts down from 30 seconds to one second, after which Live View automatically turns off. For thoughtful focusing personally, 30 seconds may not be enough for me.
- When Live View is on, the PC link indicator blinks. Typically this indicator on the Nikon D200 shows the actual computer-to-camera relationship.
- And the most annoying thing in Live View mode is that when you press the shutter button, the camera does not take a picture. You must first manually turn off Live View, or wait for it to turn off automatically after 30 seconds, and only after that - take a picture. When you focus with your left hand using the focus ring on the lens, and then move your hand to the Live View off button in order to take a picture, the focus is lost, it is very annoying.
Important: mode live view It turns on very quickly with just one button. To turn it on, just hold the bottom button for a couple of seconds in the vertical row of buttons to the left of the display (button with a magnifying glass and a man).
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro with lens Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.8G SWM Aspherical
My personal opinion is that the Live View limitation of 30 seconds is an imprint of the mechanics and electronics of the shutter from the D200, which 30 seconds is simply the longest manually set excerpt... The Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro most likely had to adjust to the mechanics and part of the electronics of the Nikon D200 itself. As a result, the Live View function is very poorly implemented and rather difficult to use. But for manual optics it is undoubtedly a godsend.
S5 Pro with lens Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 18-200mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII ED SWM VR IF Aspherical
The Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro camera is very easy to operate. Ergonomics are great, after you shoot with the D200 and then take the S5 Pro in your hands - you don't feel any difference, except in the image quality and at a slightly slower speed during continuous shooting.
S5 PRO with lens Tokina AT-X Pro SD 12-24 F4 (IF) DX II 124
The camera accepted from its parent all the basic properties:
- Shutter with minimum shutter speed 1 \ 8000 seconds (new Nikon D750 because it can’t!)
- Command mode flash control with Nikon CLS
- Fast flash sync Nikon FP
- The same focus module on 11 points (Multi-cam 1000)
- Same 1005-segment metering sensor
- Same built-in focus motor for working with optics type 'AF'-type
- Diaphragm rheostat for working with old manual optics
- Large monochrome display for quick setup of basic parameters
- Large and reliable memory cards CF
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro with lens Nikon AF DC-Nikkor 105mm 1: 2 D Defocus Image Control
What is special about the S5 Pro?
The main feature of the S5 Pro camera is high dynamic range and a colorful picture (this is my only review where I mention the phrase "colorful picture"). The dynamic range of the Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro is 200 stops higher than that of the Nikon D2 (4 times, 11.5EV vs 13.5EV).
The dynamic range of the Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro is even higher than Nikon's top cameras: D5, D4/D4s, D3/D3s, D2X/D2Xs, D2H/D2Hs and Canon: 1DX, 1Ds/1Ds Mark II/1Ds Mark III, 1D Mark II /1D Mark II N/1D Mark III/1D Mark IV etc. (by the way, interesting stuff about dynamic range data with photonstophotos and dxo is here).
Actually, after the comfortable ergonomics, the high dynamic range is one of the strongest points of the S5 Pro.
Compartment for batteries and memory cards S5 Pro
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro uses Fujifilm SuperCCD SR II sensor (second generation Fujifilm SuperCCD SR sensor, also sometimes called Fujifilm Super CCD SR PRO), which includes two types of pixels (diodes): S-pixels in the amount of 6.17 MP, and R-pixels in the amount of 6.17 MP. In addition, these pixels have a specific orientation and position on the sensor. Different pixels have different sensitivity to light and allow you to work well in shadows and highlights, thus achieving a large dynamic range. The principle of operation of SuperCCD SR II is described in another my review of S5 Pro here.
In fact, 12.1 (12.3) megapixels in JPEG mode are 'bloated' interpolation. But still, I am of the opinion that the S5 Pro still has 12 MP, albeit with some reservations.
S5 PRO with lens Industar-50-2 3,5 / 50
Speed and frame buffer
S5 PRO, unlike Nikon D200, can shoot at a maximum speed of 3 frames per second.
Attention: to get camera speed 3 fps, be sure to use STD Film Simulation and be sure to turn D-Range to 100% (STD). In this mode, only S-pixels of the matrix will work, and RAW files will weigh only 12 MB. And only in this mode the Seutp-> Shooting-> Shooting Speed: 2 fps function works correctly, which sets the shooting speed in CL mode.
Important: in all other film simulation modes, or in STD mode, but with a D-range of 130% or higher, the maximum burst speed will be 1.5 frames per second.
- 19 frames RAW at D-RANGE 100% STD (very, very good, more than Nikon D750!)
- 16 frames in RAW + JPEG or JPEG format with any quality setting at D-RANGE 100% STD
- 9 frames RAW at w2 (8 at IMAGE DISPLAY-> ON)
- 8 frames in RAW + JPEG or JPEG format with any quality setting at w2 (7 with IMAGE DISPLAY-> ON)
- about 1 RAW files can be obtained in 30 minute of shooting (at w2, ISO <= 640, IMAGE DISPLAY-> OFF)
- for 1 minute of shooting, you can get about 70 JPEG L FINE files (at w2, ISO <= 640, IMAGE DISPLAY-> OFF)
- about 1 RAW files can be obtained in 25 minute of shooting (at w2, ISO <= 640, IMAGE DISPLAY-> 2 sec)
- for 1 minute of shooting, you can get about 30 JPEG files (at w2, ISO <= 640, IMAGE DISPLAY-> 2 sec)
- in 1 minute of shooting, you can get about 18 RAW + JPEG L FINE files (at w2, ISO 1000, IMAGE DISPLAY-> 2 sec)
UPDATE: critical... Function 'SETUP-> DISPLAY-> IMAGE DISPLAY-> OFF' adds 1 frame RAW or JPEG with extended D-Range to the buffer.
Critical... If the 'SETUP -> DISPLAY -> IMAGE DISPLAY' function is set to 'CONTINUOS', or '4 SEC, or' 2 SEC ', then the camera very slowly writes the footage to the memory card. The recording speed does not depend on the memory card bandwidth. Even if you use the fastest CF memory card, the data recording speed will not change. Most likely the problem is that after recording each frame, the camera spends time reading it again and displaying it on the display, which significantly increases the time it takes to record the remaining frames from the frame buffer queue. Once the frame buffer is full, one picture is recorded for 2.5 secondseven if it is a small size 'S' JPEG with medium quality 'NORM'. This function can be disabled and the duration of the frame sequence can be significantly increased. If you use this recommendation, then in 1 minute of shooting, the S5 Pro can take about 70 JPEG L FINE pictures (at w2 and ISO <= 640)... Details here.
Please note that changing the size of the recorded JPEG file (L, M, S) or its quality (Fine, Norm), as well as changing the settings of the noise reduction function does not affect the number of frames in the buffer. After the buffer is full, the camera stops shooting and waits for data to be written to the memory card.... During this time, you cannot view the footage or adjust the menu. The next frame can be taken immediately after recording at least one file from the frame buffer to the memory card. You can view the filmed material or enter the menu only after the buffer has been completely cleared.
Camera RAW files with D-range 130% and higher at ISO 100-1000 use 14-bit color depth, are recorded without compression and weigh 25 MB (!). The same Nikon D200 could only afford 12 bit color depth. Perhaps this is the reason for the low speed of the camera. Nikon only switched to 14-bit color depth in 2007 with the release of the Nikon D3 / D300.
UPDATE: Critical (updated 04.02.2022/XNUMX/XNUMX). When using ISO 1250 and above, at a D-range value of 130-400%, only S-pixels (only half of the sensor) will still work, and the maximum burst speed will increase to 3 fps. Due to the fact that R-pixels will not work, there will be no significant increase in dynamic range at D-range 130-400% and ISO 1250-3200. In this case, the RAW file size at ISO 1250-3200 will be half the size of the RAW file at ISO 100-1250 when using D-range 130-400% . This situation is discussed, for example, here. The instructions for this say like this. To summarize, large D-ragne values of 130-400% have a physical justification only at ISO 100-1250 values.
UPDATE: critical... When using ISO 800 and higher, additional forced noise reduction is enabled, which results in slower recording of pictures to the memory card (pictures undergo additional noise reduction processing before recording). This results in shorter burst times at ISO <= 640 and at ISO> = 800.
Rumor has it that due to the fact that the Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro shutter is taken from the Nikon D200, which is designed to work at a speed of 5 fps, shooting at a speed of 1.5 fps, the Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro shutter lasts much longer than on Nikon D200.
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro with a lens Nikon AF Nikkor 35-70mm 1: 3.3-4.5 (MKII)
Sample photos on Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro (different lenses)
Below are sample photos on the Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro, shot with different lenses.
Fujifilm S5 Pro + Sigma 135 / 1.8 Art = Dream Team!
Shown below are images with Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro and lens Sigma 135mm 1: 1.8 DG A [for Nikon F mount]. JPEG from camera, no processing. Everything was filmed at F / 1.8 - only hardcore and positive emotions.
Original photos in JPEG format ('.jpg') can be at this link (164 photos, 800 MB). These photos were prepared for notes on NikonRumors.
Sample photos on Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro + Tokina 12-24 / 4 and Nikon 50 / 1.8G
In 2021, I was on vacation, shot a little with Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro paired with good lenses Tokina AT-X 124 Pro SD 12-24 F4 (IF) DX II Aspherical и Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.8G SWM Aspherical, some photos were taken using a polarizing filter CITIWIDE CPL 77 mm (for Tokina) and Hoya 58mm PL-CIR... (for Nikon). JPEG everywhere straight from the camera, but some photos were cleaned of 'spots' due to a dirty sensor.
Original photos in JPEG format ('.jpg') can be view / download from this link (gallery on GOOGLE DRIVE, 50+ photos).
Original photos in format RAW ('.RAF') can view / download from this link (gallery on GOOGLE DRIVE, 40+ photos). The same photos can be found here, here и here.
Many examples of photos with RAW source files can be found in the following reviews.
- Sigma 135mm 1: 1.8 DG A (ART) [there is a working link to the original JPEGs in the review]
- SIGMA ZOOM 18-50mm 1: 2.8-4.5 DC OS HSM Optical Stabilizer [there is a working link to the original JPEGs in the review]
- YONGNUO 35mm 1: 2 (YN35mm F2N) [there is a working link to the original JPEGs in the review]
- Tamron SP AF LD 70-210mm 1: 2.8 67DN [there is a working link to the original JPEGs in the review]
- Nippon Kogaku Japan Nikkor-S Auto 1: 1.2 f = 55mm [there is a working link to the original JPEGs in the review]
- Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 12-24mm 1: 4G ED SWM IF Aspherical [in this and all reviews below, original RAW / JPEGs are lost, but RAW files can be found here]
- Tokina AT-X PRO SD 50-135 F2.8 DX N / AIS
- Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 16-85mm 1: 3.5-5.6G ED VR SWM IF Aspherical
- Sigma EX 85mm 1: 1.4 DG HSM
- Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 18-200mm 1: 3.5-5.6G ED SWM VR IF Aspherical
- Nikon AF Nikkor 28-85mm 1: 3.5-4.5 (MKII)
- Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 4G ED SWM VR IF Nano Crystal Coat
- Samyang 8mm 1: 3.5 UMC FISH-EYE CS II Aspherical NI
- Nikon ED AF Nikkor 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6D
- Voigtlander APO-Lanthar 90mm F3.5 SL N / AI-S
- Nikon ED AF VR-Nikkor 80-400mm 1: 4.5-5.6D Vibration Reduction
- Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 10-24mm 1: 3.5-4.5G ED SWM IF Aspherical
- Tokina AT-X PRO 80-200mm 1: 2.8
- Sigma 50-500mm 1: 4-6.3D HSM EX APO
- Nikon AF Nikkor 28mm 1: 2.8 (MKII)
- Quantaray AF LD 55-200mm 1: 4-5.6 Macro
- Nikon AF Nikkor 20mm 1: 2.8D
- A small interesting video on the topic here
- And an interview with me about Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro here
You can also find my photos with Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro at the links:
- 29/06/2021 (Tokina 12-24 / 4 II, Nikon 50 / 1.8G, landscapes), they are on FB и VK
- 30/06/2021 (Tokina 12-24 / 4 II, Nikon 50 / 1.8G, landscapes), they are on FB и VK
- 02-07-2021 (Tokina 12-24 / 4 II, Nikon 50 / 1.8G, portraits), they are on FB и VK
- 04-07-2021 (Sigma 135 / 1.8 Art, miscellaneous)
- 06-07-2021 (Tamron 70-210 / 2.8, summer warm sketches), they are on FB и VK
- 07-07-2021 (Nikon 50 / 1.8G, summer sketches with polaric), they are on FB и VK
- 08-07-2021 (summer sketches), they are on FB, VK, inst
- 13-07-2021 (summer sketches, Nikon 50 / 1.8G + macro rings), they are on FB и VK and inst
- 14-07-2021 (note about Nikon D40 + S5 Pro)
- 16-07-2021 (summer sketches, highlights), they are in inst
- 24-07-2021 (flowers on Meike 85mm 1: 1.8 AF)
- 14-08-2021 (portraits at Nippon Kogaku Japan Nikkor-S Auto 1: 1.2 f = 55mm), FB, VK, inst
- My gallery at 500PX
Personal experience:
The Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro is my soul camera and has the nicest color I've ever shot. And I shot with almost all Nikon and Canon cameras and many others. The Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro can only compete in color reproduction pleasantness Fujifilm FinePix S3 Pro.
No matter how much I shoot, I still come to the conclusion that the number of particularly successful shots in color with the Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro is the highest. But do not think that the Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro immediately makes masterpieces. The Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro is a rather capricious and difficult camera to understand. Its potential is only available to advanced users.
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro - this is exactly the conversation about the sensor Fujifilm SuperCCD SR PRO / Fujifilm SuperCCD SR II, with all the pros and cons.
A worthy Fujifilm SuperCCD SR II sensor
- Sufficiently high dynamic range (due to the combination of R and S pixels).
- Good / excellent / peculiar color rendition inherent in many cameras based on CCD sensors
- Fairly flexible RAW (.'RAF '), especially for' pulling highlights'. 14-bit color depth (rare for APS-C CCD sensors) + data storage without compression and loss
Disadvantages of Fujifilm SuperCCD SR II sensor
- Small detail due to interpolation. At best, we can talk about 'honest' 6-8-10 MP, but not about 12 MP
- Detailing is lame due to thick anti-moor filter (need 'sharp lenses' to maximize sensor capabilities)
- High noise level at high ISO
- Wide dynamic range is only available at ISO values of 100 to 1000 (at ISO 1250, R-subpixels are automatically disabled)
- Diagonal 'ladder' pixelization due to different rendering of details in the vertical/horizontal and diagonal directions, associated with a special arrangement of subpixels and interpolation (treated by shooting in 6 MP mode)
- Due to the unusual structure and arrangement of photosensitive diodes in the form of a polygonal structure, vaguely similar to silver halides in photographic film, the resulting image has its own 'character'
- Difficulty developing RAW files with third-party converters (due to the complex structure of the sensor)
- Image posterization when shooting in JPEG (treated by shooting in RAW with further conversion to TIFF)
- Pixel/subpixel burn-in over time (a common affliction in CCD sensors). Over time, the number of 'dead, broken, burnt' pixels increases significantly
- The sensor is afraid of gamma radiation, frequent flights are not recommended for the Fujifilm Super CCD SR II sensor
- Loose 'bumpy' picture with strong 'shadow pulling' from RAW or JPEG
- Noise reduction can not be turned off (even at ISO 100, even in the native converter and even when shooting in RAW)
- Yet totally a problem CCD Blooming (CCD blooming) not solved
- High power consumption of the sensor
- Rapid sensor heating when working in Live View mode. Live View works for a maximum of 30 seconds
- There is no way to easily and simply implement video shooting on this type of sensor
- High complexity and high cost of manufacturing such sensors
RAW / RAF Conversion, HYPER UTILITY HS-V3
Render original RAW files (with '.RAF' resolution) is best done with the old original utility Fuji Hyper-Utility HS-V3... For the best quality, you should configure the converter like this... This converter may not work on modern operating systems, or it will require a lot of cleaning tools to install it. The repackaged version (all unnecessary is cut out), optimized for working with Windows 7/8/10, can be download from this link... Your use of the Fujifilm Hyper Utility HS-V3 remains entirely at your own risk.
Also Adobe Lightroom and Adobe Camera Raw (a built-in plug-in in Adobe Photoshop) allow you to work well with Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro RAW files. In my opinion, if you want to use third-party RAW converters, then the best way to use Fuji Hyper-Utility HS-V3 is to convert the original RAW files (with '.RAF' resolution) to TIFF format with 16-bit color depth ( the output should be files of 70 megabytes each), and later TIFF files should be processed by third-party converters, such as, for example, Capture One, Lightroom and any others. The TIFF format allows you to preserve the correct color rendition (which third-party converters cannot provide), 12 MP resolution and a margin of data for easy manipulation of sources.
UPDATED: A new version of the original (count 'native') FUJIFILM RAW FILE CONVERTER EX 3.0 (powered by SILKYPIX) now digests RAW files from Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro. You can download on the official website... But it makes it noticeably worse than the original old FujiFilm Hyper-Utility HS-V3, the situation disassembled by me here.
More information about Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro
- Review by Sergei Merkulov (2024)
- Review by Sasha Akimov (late 2022)
- Review of Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro, 2021, Vadim Om + comments
- Stream about Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro, 2021, Vadim Om + comments
- Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro 2021 Full Frame Review
- Interview about Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro, 2021, Olegasphoto + Radozhiva
- Text review Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro, 2021, Olegasphoto
- A detailed review of the capabilities of the Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro sensor, 2022, Dmitry Evtifeev
- An interesting feature UPGRADE Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro
- Another review of Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro on andrew-lazarev.com
S5 Pro with lens Nikon AF DC-Nikkor 105mm 1: 2 D Defocus Image Control
All Fujifilm X APS-C Interchangeable Lens Digital Mirrorless Cameras
- X-Pro1, X-Pro2, X-Pro3
- X-T1, X-T2, X-T3, X-T4, X-T5
- X-T10, X-T20, X-T30, X-T30II
- X-S10, X-S20
- X-T100, X-T200
- X-E1, X-E2, X-E2s, X-E3, X-E4
- X-M1
- X-A1, X-A2, X-A3, X-A5, X-A7
- X-A20
- X-H1, X-H2S, X-H2
Results
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro - camera with excellent professional ergonomics (controls like Nikon D200). The strength of the S5 Pro is sufficiently high dynamic range and pleasant color rendering... A serious drawback of the camera is the low burst speed when using a wide dynamic range - the shooting speed is only 1.5 fps. In many things the camera very much outdated.
Personally, I find the Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro one of the best 'for the soul' cameras (another one is Fujifilm FinePix S3 Pro). Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro - it's a legend.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
And one more from the same glass.
AWB Minimum processing, only light and shadow floor steps.
In your example, nothing that other cameras can not.
Look what people know how to squeeze out of these fujas.
https://wowcamera.info/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=65
Good day to all!
Such a question, I bought an 8 GB CF memory card from my hands. The PC sees the card the camera does not see. I understand that the card was formatted by "cut" and some kind of root information was removed from the flash drive. How to restore that the camera could see it, thanks.
formatted by the camera everything works
This is one of the first recommendations in the instructions for the camera.
Glasses on m42 thread from the zenith how they behave on this unit.
1. infinity focus
2. and in general, how is a picture painted no overexposure?
3. Is there any adjustment for lenses?
I VERY LIKE Fujik's CCD matrix, there is a set of lenses from the zenith, it’s very interesting whether they stand up without alterations to the camera, with Nikon, the problem is focus.
Glasses on m42 thread from the zenith how they behave on this unit.
1. infinity focus
2. and in general, how is a picture painted no overexposure?
3. Is there any adjustment for lenses?
I VERY LIKE Fujik's CCD matrix, there is a set of lenses from the zenith, it’s very interesting whether they stand up without alterations to the camera, with Nikon, the problem is focus.
They will rise through the adapter, but without the possibility of focusing on infinity. Perhaps if for the soul there is no other optics then look at the pentax (Pentax K-30 for example) everything is there with infinity without alteration of the Soviet ortic. With manual optics with a bang and there is a stabilizer in the carcass.
Good day! Who can tell where you can buy a battery for this camera in Kiev?
Hello Vladimir!
Write me on kolodiazniy@ukr.net
Arkady, good afternoon! What happened to the RAF links you give in the sample photos. They are all "broken" ...
What kind of RAF are you talking about? If you are talking about files, then this is RAW, from the English word raw - raw, raw.
We are about Fuji RAF
Well, yes, and about Nikon NEW.
Actually NEF, from nikon electronic format, the same is about RAF :)
Then, I'll flatter you a little and say that RAF is the Radojuva Format.
Noble curtsy)
no, it's just that “Radojuva Format” is an outdated revision, manufacturers are already abandoning it in favor of Radojuva Advanced Format, which is exactly the RAF
Denis, thanks for the clarification.
You freaks!
Arkady, link where “S5 tears the D800 like a tuzik for a heating pad” - broken (((
Arkady, ay!
Fixed
This review is 8 years old. During this time, the linked site has ceased to exist.
Well then you please
delete all my unnecessary messages.
And about cranks too)
Excuse me for messing up here.
Tried to find Fujifilm FinePix IS Pro - failed. It would be interesting.
Did I understand you correctly that having a D7000 on hand does not make sense to buy s5 pro? I'm just planning to go full frame, there is a good S5 on sale and I have my eyes on it. Does such a purchase make sense? Repeating the previously asked question of another user (to which there was no answer) I did not quite understand, on the carcass screen the frame counter shows a number: 807oo -? That means 80 frames, right?
c5 pro - a camera for the soul and creativity. For something larger, d7000 is much better.
Yes, that's 80.700.
You don’t need old stuff, you’ll go to the flea market again) The run is huge, besides.
hmm ... The point is that photographers rarely use the full potential of their cameras. And the dynamic range of the same 550d (well, I'm a kenonist, though not religious) With understanding and skill, it can amaze. Just try to figure out what you already have - be surprised!)))
Does it have auto iso function?
Yes there is
Where to find? I have not found.
It's better not to look for Auto-ISO on older cameras.
Not because you won't find it, but because it makes no sense in most cases.
The heel tells (p. 72 instructions) when the photo will be underexposed or overexposed.
In 2020, it is better to shoot in DD400% mode right away (and forget about the other forever).
The nuance is that when ISO800 is used for shooting roughly - half a matrix, only S-pixels.
And already at ISO320-400 the color starts to be lost. This is neither good nor bad, this is a feature.
It is better to shoot on so-called “color” cameras (Kodak DCS SLR / n, Canon 1Ds mk2-mk3, Sigma on Foveon, Fuji S3Pro, Fuji S5Pro sensors) at low ISO and adjust it yourself.
For example, on the SD-1 Merrill and SD-Quattro on the foveon, everything is quite simple - there is a basic ISO100 and all the others, which are essentially undesirable, because the color on ISO200 is already degrading to semitones.
maybe someone is interested, I sell my heap: https://www.olx.ua/obyavlenie/fotoapparat-fujifilm-s5-pro-body-IDJcDhX.html
Good afternoon, Arkady! I tried the DSTE NP-150 battery with Nikon D70s. Everything works. You have an article about battery compatibility that says “The NP-150 battery cannot be used with Nikon D70s cameras”. Please comment.
The topic was wrong.
Fixed. Older cameras do not read the chip.
Clarify plz: who is what and how shows her RAF`s? I think the answer to this question will dot everything =)
For it seems to me that not everyone is ready to keep a virtual machine with win98 for the sake of a native converter :)
Hyper-Utility Software HS-V3 Version 1.1b
The program works fine on Windows 8.1 x64 and fine on 10 Enterprise LTSC x64.
No emulation required.
hyper utility works on both wines7 and wines10, you can also develop Lightroom, it understands its rules well
Arkady, on Lightroom - I'm on photo_ru (with a different nickname) in the Fuji S3Pro thread, and there were discussions about RAF development with S3Pro / S5Pro. So the old-timers assured that lightroom gives a different color than the native developer (and there were even examples).
If possible, it is better to use a native developer and distill RAF into a 16-bit TIFF, which you can edit further in another program (or better not edit).
it goes without saying that third parties give a different color. If you do not edit further, then there is no point in TIFE, JPEG is enough.
How to correct the exposure in this hiper-utility?
It takes years of training in Tibetan temples to experience all the delights of the Fujifilm Hyper-Utility HS-V3.
In the lower right corner of the button “CONVERT USING RAW FILE CONVERTER” then we look for the drop-down menu on the top right of “Conversion Conditions” and change it to “CUSTOM SETTING” (at first there may be a value of “CAMERA SETTING”), after which the lower side bar with settings. We are looking for the “Sensitization” field (with the icon of the histogram / TIBETAN RANGE, where I received this secret knowledge) and put the required “+ -“. By the way, I can even predict your next comment regarding the step of the amendment.
"Sensitization"
To be honest, I rarely used this option, because I rarely make mistakes with the exposure.
Have noticed “strange” shutter speeds of s5 like 1/28, 1/114, 1/225, 1/230, 1/285, 1/350, 1/450, 1/570, 1/900, 1/1140, 1 / 1500, 1/1800, 1/2250, 1/3000, 1/3500, 1/4500, 1/6000, 1/6400, 1/7000, which are not found on other similar cameras?
we hit 111 sell. shot 42700 objective 18-105 zap. dear battery. post office khmeros77@gmail.com
What do you sell, s5 with this lens or just the Lens ??)
I understood it myself)), because the shot is indicated))
In general, now I am struggling with the choice between this S5 and Pervopyatak .... so I realized that there is a gain in color, a loss in serial shooting ... and how would that be?) ...
Yes, the cameras are different, but both are legends ... both for a thoughtful photo, I understand ...
But the opinion is interesting who worked and can compare both cameras at least to a glance)
Different devices, at least the size of the sensor))
The color of both is good, the impregnation has a noticeably higher DD, the penny has a better picture in general and the working ISO.
Well, the lenses are different, think about that too.
They are both not very expensive, but finding in good condition with little real mileage is hard.
Har fått tak i ett S5 Pro, men menyen er på Japansk, hvordan får jeg gjort den til norsk
För mánga många år sen hade jag en Sony köpt speciellt i Japan med en japansk meny. Jag fikc till slut byta språket till engelska, mem klickade bara på allt tills jag hittade pá den menypunkten som bytte spráket till engelska, alltsá, av en slump. Men nu i 2021 skulle jag har använt Google Translate där du får ta en bild med din moniltelefon (en bild av en sida i menu i kameran) och översätta texten pá den med Google automatiskt. Du får gora samma sak. Hoppas det ska hjälpa dig.
Hello,
Selling Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro. Mileage is about 23 thousand. Good condition.
The reason for the sale is that I have two such cameras. Maybe I'll leave one, maybe not. There is something to shoot).
Includes two batteries. I can also sell it with a Nikon D200 batblock.
All success
Write your email.
there was a review of 2021 on it https://youtu.be/JT1Aaa19X38
Test shots - aginh! Barracks, barracks, khamyrs, nine-story buildings, cats in the night. All as the medium formatters love.
What is “khamyri”? :-)
A kind of f ... her.
Who is this reviewer?
The first time I come across this person on youtube.
Horror, apparently something was considered incorrectly in the review
"C5 pro is not about color rendering, it's about the fact that Radozhiva has zombified you)))"
41.50. No, I did not watch the whole video, I scrolled to the end and accidentally got to this moment))))
He was noted as a disom, the person absolutely does not know how to shoot, but tries to draw some conclusions. Hypit, in a word.
This video was announced a long time ago, I was waiting for it to come out. I'm shocked. There was no limit to my surprise. If I saw this video, I would never have bought Fujika. Damn, I recently had this camera for about two months and my impressions are completely different. Once again I was convinced - trust, but verify. The pictures in the video are really dumb. I watched and leafed through my photos from this camera ...
People specially cut such a video so that people would watch, spit, and pass by, as a result, he will get all the best copies)))
Well, damn it, an old camera that has only one advantage - color rendition. This means taking close-up portraits, preferably with interesting makeup and flowers. Well, maybe there are more animals in the zoo, butterflies there, fruits, tropics. With studio light or normal natural light at minimum ISO. What does the reviewer do? He's filming his ragged balcony in low light. Your sleeping area at dusk. High-rise buildings and broken roads, after which the VVH must hang from shame on a belt made of the mayor's skin. From flowers he takes tulips with a vigorous red color, knocking out the red channel into the solid. There, at least some details appear, only if the exposure is lowered by one or two stops, only extremely saturated yellow is worse. I understand that the import of pink or purple tulips from damned Geyropa is prohibited, so we can only shoot native ones, but even wildflowers would be better. On the straight horizon, apparently, sanctions are also imposed - I can not evaluate the colors of the landscape when I feel sick.
This is exactly what Pokémon and Victor argued about all day yesterday. What is the point of buying photographic equipment and taking photographs if they shoot THIS with it. Similar views cover the old phone with a resolution of 640x480, no more.
“What is the point in buying photographic equipment and taking photographs if they shoot THIS. "
Although I do not consider myself a photographer, I don’t want to open my own channel on youtube, I understand that it’s not kosher to shoot this, and even more so to someone trying to prove something with such pictures.
“Although I don’t consider myself a photographer, I don’t want to open my own channel on youtube”
The logical connection is lost)) It can be calculated, based on the construction of the phrase, that anyone who does NOT consider himself a photographer, in theory, should open his own channel on youtube :-)
Review of course shnyaga. Looked at a few more pieces. Absolutely incorrect conclusions on the camera (although I won't buy one for myself today - it's too old, and bothering with repairs / shutters - well, nafig it)
"The logical connection is lost))"
I have 37.3C now, so my thoughts don't line up a bit.
The point is that now every dog (I'm not talking about this particular case) can open a channel on YouTube and produce garbage content. I am against this. If I understand that I do not have a certain level of knowledge of something, there is neither practical nor theoretical, the required level, I will not go to “treat” people and broadcast someone's or my delirium.
Too many people are trying to get out on YouTube, try to get promoted there and make money.
It is not kosher to shoot this, and even more so for someone to try to prove something with similar pictures on YouTube, and also beg for donations or a subscription.
I have nothing against Vadim, I am glad that information about the C5 pro is spreading on the Internet. At one time, I also learned to understand and look for color. Everything comes with time
Well, in fairness, the author makes duplicate pictures with other cameras, the same fucks, cats, summer cottages, sunsets, and shows that the miracle did not happen with the sinking. Purple sky, and emerald green grass, noise in the shadows at ISO100, blooming, embossed red. And overexposures do not stretch, I specifically looked on YouTube, suddenly the author does it with the wrong converter or his hands are not there, but everywhere the result of pulling out the lights on the heel is the same: the shadows are still somehow, the sky is either white, or gray / brown / crimson without details : klippig, you know ..
So, he practically convinced me not to bother, otherwise I wanted to take some flowers to play with fuji.
Its converter does not see the second pair of pixels, and therefore does not stretch. Stretches only to relatives or adob: ACR or LR. All sorts of d800 rip the lights out. And so the person did not understand nifiga and ran into the game. Looked at the comments under the video, so it's generally off the beaten path.
The photographer is distinguished by the ability to find worthy subjects for shooting in the most depressing situations. For this there is an angle and perspective, highlighting details. After all, there are a hundred standard footage that you shoot when there is NOTHING to shoot AT ALL. I do not have the skill of evaluating photographic equipment from barracks, balconies and bookshelves, where details and color must be chosen out of context. It's like judging the skill of an artist by brushstroke.
The miracle of permeation lies in the fact that even on normal subjects and normal light, with which a normal photographer works, it behaves no worse than many modern cameras. And only in the sunset sky without wires, stubs of foliage and a gray nose of a drunk from a neighboring balcony can we already talk about the nuances of color rendition. When you don't have to pull (why?) These endless stops of overexposures.
This is an amazing skill - poorly filming a squalid reality. It is like a carpet on the wall, like a glossy lemon-colored stretch ceiling in Khrushchev, framed by spotlights, half of which are off.
Take a native developer, take a photo with DD400%, and opening it in one developer move the sliders by 200 and 100%. The difference is visible in highlights and shadows right away, even before development.
Here is the DD400% in RAF:
I asked Vadim for a ravka, there is one suspicion :)
There is not even a suspicion, but a fact - Vadim is trying to pull in the converter, which does not see additional perforating pixels. Naturally he gets what he gets.
I tried in acr, everything stretches fine there.
Here is dd100% of the same photo, the same RAF.
The developer shows the embossed spots in red.
If you shoot something like this on a bright sunny day, say, a car on the street or a person, then at DD100% there will be a knocked out part of the skin (where the sun was backlit), and on the body of the car those places where the sun fell.
DD400% allows you to get more out of RAF, but also when shooting in jpg.
The actual RAF of Fuji S3Pro / S5Pro does not differ much from jpg. Better, of course, and you can fix something. But again, the native developer for these old models processes more accurately and correctly than any third-party new one.
And the difference between DD100% and DD400% is very tangible.
Of course, 100 and 400 are marketing. BUT, there are probably 200% honest ones, because God doesn't want to shoot at DD100% when there is a "boost mode" in the form of DD400%.
This is especially true of Protroyka, there is only WIDE and nothing else, maybe DD Protroyka is ALREADY than Proyatki.
It is not clear what this function is doing in the config. Is it stupidly nailing the lights?
Arkady explains this better in the review of Protroyka and Propyatka.
As I understand myself, on ISO 100-400 (at 800 it is cut down), with the DD100% preset, only S pixels of the matrix work. DD is very narrow and this is noticeable.
When the extended DD is turned on (up to 400%), R pixels are also working, in the ISO100-400 range.
For example, if I shoot with DD100%, then I cannot set 400% in the converter, as far as I remember. If the photo was taken with the DD400% preset, then the corresponding slider can be moved both by 100 and 200, making the picture worse by eye.
As I understand it, with the DD400 more information about light and shadow is recorded and thus you can get more freedom.
DD is cut down at ISO 1250, at ISO 1000 it still works. The principle of operation is described in my C5 Pro review on Photo Zen
Interestingly, there is not a word about S / R pixels in the instructions for Protroyka, in contrast to the screen with instructions from Proyatka.
Interestingly, when you set WIDE / DD400%, the picture does not turn gray (this is not an analogue of FLAT), and the knocked-out places taken with the DD100% and DD400% presets differ from each other in details. Those. the camera somehow pulls out problem areas without spoiling the color and everything else.
As far as I understood:
When the d-range is set to more than 100%, additional pixels of the matrix are connected, the setting must be set initially in the camera, otherwise the converter will not fix anything. In this case, the weight of the file is increased. At the same time, the adobe converter works adequately with files, and exposure corrections (including highlights / shadows) can achieve the same effect as the native utility gives.
In the new Fuji cameras (bzk), the same d-range has nothing to do with the heel, because there is nothing to "connect" - the camera, when the d-range is increased, simply underexposes the image and stretches further shadows, pursuing the preservation of highlights. This setting affects only the jpeg.
Yes, with D-RAGNE more than 100 R pixels are connected (the size of the RAW file doubles). Also with any of the F1 simulation presets (except F2), the default is W2 400%.
ACR does not make 12 MP, only 6 MP (in fact, it's not full functionality). But the LR does 12 MP.
"In the new Fuji cells (bzk), the same d-range has nothing to do with the heel."
Victor, yes it is.
"DD is cut off at ISO 1250, at ISO 1000 it still works."
Arkady, here for what I bought, and for that I sell. On the forum, photo_ru wrote several times that additional pixels do not work on ISO800. Frankly, above ISO400 on my older cameras I try not to bully, because for higher ISO I have D4. Therefore, I have not tried such ISO, because already on ISO 320-400 the picture does not look the same as on ISO 100-200.
It goes without saying that all the juice at ISO 100
By the way, an interesting observation, from which I once went nuts. Once I installed an auto-iso with a threshold of 1600 and filmed a children's matinee for myself. And at one point the camera started to shoot quickly! 3 fps. I went into the settings - checked - it costs DD400 and 12 MP. She can't shoot 3 fps. I shoot further - the camera is slow, then fast. I was already glad that there is a secret, to make it do 3 fps at 12 MP and DD400. But everything turned out to be banal and simple - when the ISO went beyond the threshold of 1000 units, the R-pixels were automatically turned off and the camera shot without them as it should be 3 fps.
Another interesting RAF converter is Silkypix. But according to other owners of Propyatok, different versions of this converter interpret RAF from Fuji in their own way.
I tried one of the versions, the resolution is not the same as in HU V3 it turns out (either a little more, or a little less than in the original converter and why so xs) and the color is different, similar, but a little warmer in temperature. Of course, you can twist more with color in Silkypix, and sometimes something will turn out better, sometimes worse than in the original. I deleted this program, decided not to produce converters, tk. and there were so many of them at that time on the computer. I will not scold Silkypix, because it seemed to me that this is a good program.
“ACR doesn't do 12 MP, only 6 MP”
True, it doesn't, but 6MP is absolutely honest. More than once I saw a very noticeable "ladder" on inclined lines on 12-megapixel images, for example.
The ladder is an artifact, it is, it is indicated in the review. But there is one more thing - but, nevertheless, the presence of R-pixels and pixel shapes add opportunities and details. In the general stream, we can assume that the S5 pro gives "honest" not 6, but 8 MP. Previously, there was a study on this topic, if you do not take into account artifacts (a ladder, for example), then they came to the conclusion that the S5 Pro has a resolution of 8 to 10 MP, when comparing similar 8-10 MP cameras of the past. Having played a lot with jipegs, I came to the conclusion that there is still more data with 12 megapixels and the pictures look a little better, especially if you later downsize them to 6 megapixels. Of course, the difference is small, more psychological, but it is there.
“But everything turned out to be trivially simple - when the ISO went beyond the threshold of 1000 units, the R-pixels were automatically turned off and the camera shot without them as it should be 3 fps.”
Got it, thanks, I'll take it into account.
ISO1000 is probably software and is based on ISO800, so the pixels are still working second. And ISO 1250 is “based” on ISO1600, where R-pixels don't work.
“Having played a lot with jeepgs, I came to the conclusion that there is more data with 12 megapixels and the pictures look a little better, especially if you later downsize them to 6 megapixels. Of course, the difference is small, more psychological, but it is there. "
“The ladder is an artifact, it is, it is indicated in the review. But there is one more thing - but the presence of R-pixels and the shape of the pixels add opportunity and detail. "
Therefore, the sharper the lens is used on Impregnation / Protroyka, the better :)
especially for s5 pro. By the way, I removed more than 50.000 for different heaps, and I constantly open something new (as in the case of the buffer, or ISO 1000, or f1b +2 0 +2, etc.)
"That video was announced a long time ago, I was waiting for it to come out."
But why?
1:43 A man says that on any day of the week he will prefer a film camera instead of any old camera due to (ta-dam) correct color rendering, dd.
I immediately have a question, what is meant in the opinion of the author at the expense of film color rendition.
It depends both on the type of film itself, and on the lens and the wound filter. If roughly, then the correct color rendition, especially the film does not exist. It can be anything, but it is not always correct. Different film models give their own, let's say, color distortion.
About DD on film, this is also a very risky statement, because cheap films like Kodak Gold 200 actually do not have a very wide DD. And at the same time, Ektachrom or Velvia also do not differ in the width of DD ...
4:20 Again whining about heavy cameras (I would like everyone who says this ... to do some sports for a change or to shoot during the day in the summer on a telephoto lens and a unit (or D4 / D5).
Then, based on the statements of a muddy sold with Avito, he tries to draw out 4 stops of exposure. It is good that the sold one did not recommend to everyone who bought a jump from the 9th floor.
Then he makes fun of the sellers with Avito.
24:48 He tries to argue that DD400% does not stretch in the converter, but only in jpg, it is not. It is enough to open the proprietary developer (it works in 10) - Hyper-Utility Software HS-V3 Version 1.1b and move the DD 100-200-400%. I did it myself - and everything is noticeable in the highlights / shadows. There is a difference, but only in that old developer and it is clear. RAF is normally / correctly supported by this particular developer.
Examples of frames of course PPC, okay I'm not a photographer, I won't say anything.
This is not a review.
Full feeling that I took a ride with the Gopniks on the train.
Gopniks on the train is normal, not a normal surveyor who examines an object (any, even a fountain pen) like a gopnik.
It's a pity to look at the camera - the cover of the battery handle is broken, the rubber bands are peeled off.
And the 18-105 kit lens, which does not suit her at all.
Well, then this is a comparison with the d3200 and the Z5.
In short, I went into a village toilet.
I will not say anything about photographs and everything else. Each camera has its own time. You can also kick off Kodak DCS SLR and Units and Sigma on Foveon.
So he doesn't need a camera in his hands, but a sweatshirt and a purse. Even in Togliatti, there is a direct coincidence)))
What's wrong with this review? Everything is as it is. Yes, there are not entirely tactful statements, but everything is fair. At the time of release, s5 was cool, but that was 15 years ago, and today it can be a “camera for the soul”, it can have some collectible value, and so on. , but it cannot compete with modern cameras (even with the old d7000). About this and a review.
There are many critical / catastrophic childhood mistakes, starting with this one. https://radojuva.com/2021/06/fujifilm-finepix-s5-pro-agaim/ and ending with this one https://radojuva.com/2021/09/zagadochnaya-fujifilm-finepix-s5-pro-2/
These errors also have nuances. Putting a separate program and re-studying it just for the sake of one camera is so-so pleasure. It will be interesting only to fans of this model, the average man in the street will bother with this.
Regarding DD, dxomark shows 13,5, which I tend to trust. As a result, even displaying frames in the proprietary program, you get DD of the level, or even lower, relative to modern amateur cameras. And to write, as some people say, that the s5 is doing the nikon d800 ... Well, where is the adequacy?
Personally, I understood from this video the following:
1. The camera has excellent ergonomics
2. DD at the level of amateur cameras 2010+, the resulting images will be approximately similar.
3. Noisy matrix.
3. For the money that it is sold, it is better to buy, for example, d7000.
PS Regarding flowers…. There are many Sony a7xx hats here, but for me Sony has the best colors, at least for today.
it's funny, actually. The man undertook to review a specific camera and adjusted it. What justification can there be? The point is not that the C5 is a bad or good camera, but the point is that it needs to be shown correctly, and not just taken from the ceiling and covered with mud without understanding what is happening. That's the trouble. A camera's old age shouldn't be an automatic shortcut - bad because it's old.
Here I completely agree with you. But, there is one but. If this review is viewed from the point of view of an ordinary amateur photographer, for example, like me (I do not do commercial photography, only amateur), I would also develop the photo out of habit in Lightroom, and the effect would be the same. Although seeing the developed photo in the proprietary program, I see absolutely nothing supernatural. The picture is very similar to other ccd matrices, for me there is no WOW effect, as, for example, I had when switching from sony a65 to nikon d700, then yes, the picture was several times different. I still think the d700 is suitable for certain tasks, but it is impossible to compare it from the picture with the same a7r2, there is simply an abyss. I think, with this review, Vadim wanted to dispel the myth about the “miracle of the picture”. That is why fans of s5 do not write that the maximum working iso 400? Now imagine a newbie who, after reading laudatory odes about the super picture s5, will buy it and will be very surprised that his smartphone takes pictures in the evening as well, or even better than s5, that in order to get good photos you need to put a special program that is only for this camera? The value of this review lies in the fact that, like a cold shower, it forces you to more deeply analyze the need to buy this camera. Not to reproach you, but you like the ccd matrix and you always respond warmly to the same d40. But you write it from the point of view of a professional, realizing that you can use it only for certain purposes, in almost ideal conditions and having certain skills.
PS I am writing this because once I had the stupidity to buy a Sony a65 and be very disappointed in photography until I tried nikon).
Well, if a person does not see the difference in the picture between c5 pro and (for example) the aforementioned d7000, then he really does not need c5pro)) And the difference there is huge.
Well, the DD in the highlights is really better than that of the D800.
I just see the difference, but it is not in favor of s5, but here it is not for everybody, there are those who like photos from a ccd matrix, some do not like them. Dxomark says something completely different about the comparison with the d800. At the time of its release, the d800 had a record DD, and it came out much later. And to compare a top-end full-frame camera with a pro-Pro-Crop, which is 5 years older ... And I repeat my statement, I have not seen a single Wow photo with an s5, not a single one! I am not saying that the s5 is a bad camera, it is ordinary, even a good camera for its time, it can be compared, for example, with the d90, but even the d7000 is superior in almost everything. I can argue my statement with dxomark data.
and what, wow-photo is somehow connected with photographic equipment?
"And to write, like some, that s5 makes nikon d800 ... Well, where is the adequacy?" In overexposure it is. Where the S5Pro can recover the image, the D800 has a loss of information. A scene with a large DD on the D800 needs to be underexposed and shadows brought up, while in the S5Pro you shoot without corrections and restore both shadows and overexposures normally. In general, the DD is higher for the D800, but there are some nuances. And on the topic of newbies and ISO - my first camera was Nikon D3200, then I bought an old one. I shot in parallel with both cameras and presented it with the D3200, and left the S5Pro, then I bought the D800, but left the S5Pro, did not sell.
And, well, since d7000 is even better, so much the more)))
Ok, only numbers say otherwise
You see, Anatoly, what is the matter. There are, of course, numbers (dry) that show the unconditional superiority of the new cameras over the old ones.
But there are still eyes that also see what a particular camera gives out, and here the situation changes almost to the opposite))) You are not evaluating photographs with a ruler in your hands, and you are not measuring them with a digital caliper, but evaluating the picture as a whole, right?
But there is still such a moment that people have their own taste, and sometimes lack of it))) So any opinion has the right to life.
Ok, finally show at least 1 beautiful photo from s5, at least one !!! I honestly can't tell the difference between a photo with d80, d200 s5, but the same d70, wherever there is a ccd matrix, its colors are not for everybody! I'll use Sony as an example. For some reason, the owners, or rather fans of the Sony a850 / 900 beat themselves in the chest and claim that only these models have real colors, and the a7xx is all marketing bullshit ... Yes, it's all nonsense, a850 = nikon d700 = 5dmk2 between them you can compare and search who turns yellow, who turns green, and so on. But if you compare what I had (d700) and the current a7r2, it’s like comparing a barrow with a Boeing! There is simply an abyss in everything !!! although I remember the d700 very fondly, I will say even more, for reporting it will be better, but the final picture is for Sony.
PS I know a person who switched from s5 to Canon 70d and is happy) progress is moving, and almost everything is new, better than the previous one. S5 can be compared with d200 or d80, but already d300 or d90 it will most likely be similar, and possibly worse. d7000 is a further development of d90. How can it be worse? What are the parameters? Iso, the autofocus speed is clearly beyond the d7000. Picture? I very much doubt that the d7000 image is worse for processing.
Well, I will answer with the example of your articles. Take for example d700, you have a lot of beautiful photos from this camera in your article, they are pleasant to look at, they are voluminous, beautiful bokeh, etc. And if a beginner photographer switches from a crop level d7000, 5100, etc. to d700, he will immediately receive an increase in the quality of the picture, get a very fast autofocus, higher iso, etc. In the article about s5, I did not see a single beautiful photo ... Not a single one! They are all ordinary, I did not see any miracle of colors, the usual colors / shades inherent in the ccd matrix, but they differ from cmos, but here they are not for everybody. Will a novice amateur photographer get the transition from d5100, d7000, etc. the same increase (if at all) in quality as in the transition to d700? And if we compare your photos with the d700 and the photos with the s5, for me personally, the d700 has a clear advantage. Correct if I'm wrong about something.
Well, you yourself wrote - "here for an amateur"
And apparently, you probably missed my statements for the hundredth time that c5 is clearly not suitable for a simple amateur photographer.
With the fact that the taste and color of all markers are different, I agree with you!
Anatoly, you can do it easier, give a couple of examples of a good color (a person, for example), which in your opinion can be considered good. It will be immediately clear whether we are talking about one thing or about different things)))
Ok, I'll throw off in raw jpeg what I can find with d7000, with a7, with a7r2. I expect from you raw jpegs from s5.
https://cloud.mail.ru/public/zehq/K6dgiqaUT
D7000
https://cloud.mail.ru/public/KU4s/naKUbbdKU
The color in examples with a7 is nightmarish, with d7000 - just "so-so", where the girl is the best of the bad))) From such raw photos, even winding up does not give anything tasty, the maximum is to make it acceptable or fashionably toned)))
Yes, this is generally a tin, there is still ADOBE SRGB with Sonek, which mere mortals cannot see at all without light dances with a tambourine :)
The Sony a7r2 has rgb. You are the first one to have problems opening files.
What's the nightmare? Is it that they are as close to reality as possible and have a huge number of shades? The fact that the shades fully convey the structure of the skin, clothing, etc.? Compare the red yolk of the girl in the photo of Sonya with the photo of Arkady, where the woman is in a red dress. In Sonya, the shades show every bend, from the photo you can understand what kind of fabric, you can mentally imagine what it feels like. shades give the picture depth and immersion. They fully convey the structure of the facial skin. The leaf is not just green, but with smooth, realistic transitions. Now look at the photo of a woman in a red dress. It is just red, without shades, the skin also has a minimum of shades, the number of shades is minimal, it does not transmit “tactile” information about the picture. Is it just bright is it cool? twisted brightness, contrast and? So, what is next? on sony you get the maximum information about the subject of shooting, what to do with it then, this is the second question, you can unscrew any brightness, colors and shades allow. What's on your fuji? I do not see on it even half of the information that the Sony picture has. Each photo from Sony, in addition to the realistic colors and shades, also carries tactile information. Fuji doesn't have that. So what kind of a miracle picture are you talking about ??? Sonya has it close to reality, your fuji, due to low resolution, fewer shades do not have this information, just bright colors that are never realistic !!!
>> Sony a7r2 has rgb
In a7p2 (as in many others) there is originally ARGB, a space that browsers misinterpret, showing completely horror-horror.
>> What's the nightmare? Is it that they are as close to reality as possible and have a huge number of shades? The fact that the shades fully convey the structure of the skin, clothing, etc.?
I will repeat the question once again - do you have a processed version of the photo data? Can you not these, but those that you think are beautiful? But treated as it should to see a beautiful, HEALTHY skin tone? So far, only some zombies are visible in the photo. But if you do not see it yourself, it will be rather difficult to explain in words.
Compare, for example, your girl (and this despite the fact that she still looks relatively good against the rest) for example with this boy:
https://radojuva.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/s5-pro-samples-e-1-best-32.jpg
And if in the sun? There the difference would have increased even more.
>> Mikhail: I now have two fujiks in stock, one of them I sell)))
Well, yes, yes, and Ken Rockwell is my uncle))) Dear Mikhail, until I saw not a single picture of you here, not only here, but also on the photo, the links to which you persistently cite))) So you are not in the best position here than me))
Other nonsense about (for example) “close DD for c5 and 5d” is even difficult to comment on, in general, even with theorizing, you are very so-so))
However, you have already shown your unnecessary tediousness in knowing the laws of Ukraine in the topic about Lightroom, it is very difficult to communicate adequately with this type of citizens)) If you show something from YOUR shots, there will be a conversation, and I can somehow look through Rockwell myself ( but of course I will not do this)
> answer to Anatoly and others.
To add a little humor. Once again, Anatoly talks about color, but he himself throws his own examples in Adobe RGB, which is normally displayed only by rare views. Here's an example - browser display and display in original / native Sony Viewer 1.4. What in general can you talk about with a person about color now? I have already pointed this out a couple of times, but it has passed on deaf ears. This is a basic mistake of beginners who, well, do not understand anything at all, primarily in color.
So srgb or rgb? That you contradict yourself)
Ahaha, it's not about srgb / rgb, it's about ADOBE :)
And your mistake with the link to the wedding selection once again dotted the i's. Unfortunately, there is no point in talking about color further. It is a pity that such photographers are taken to unambiguously and irrevocably judge the color, for example, of the same C5, while this is a complete subjectivity.
I am very loyal to any users and usually do not point out their mistakes, but here it is just an egregious case.
2Anatoly:
>> Compare the red hat of the girl in the photo of Sonya with the photo of Arkady, where the woman is in a red dress. Sonya's shades show every bend
The photos were taken in different conditions, it is normal that a bright red dress in the sun has few shades, because oddly enough, this is how people will see it in reality at such a distance: it will be a bright spectacular spot.
>> on sony you get the maximum information about the subject of shooting, what to do with it then, this is the second question
Okay, so let's say you're aiming for a thorough finish with meticulous color grading, do you have any examples of such shots? Because like some of the other participants in this conversation, the people in your photos looked like zombies with an earthy complexion to me. Thanks to Arkady for the screen, it's certainly not that bad, but it's strange that you don't care about how people see your photos.
And I sincerely believe that the work of the photographer has little overlap with the utilitarian collection of data about the subject, unless it is a reportage. You maximize the importance of the abstract data from the camera, and IMHO forget that a portrait is also a transfer of a feeling from a moment, from a person.
Ok, weren't the conditions right? so show me the pictures in “those” conditions. The colors are true, and I love it, I love that the cameras convey information as much as possible. The superfluous can always be removed, but if something is not there, it will not appear) well,
I am throwing you a link with the processing of this photo. https://cloud.mail.ru/public/6kP3/NJBiWeLs3
Oops wrong https://cloud.mail.ru/public/kjmu/BqYPdPnKD
some other participants *
> Anatoly
"The colors are true." I attached one of the multiverse realities :)
Well, humor aside, the color in the wedding collection is bad. It's not there at all.
And another classic mistake is processing in multiple keys. The reason is that the photographer does not know what is best and leaves the choice to the client. Then it is extremely difficult to edit the same photobook in different tones. It is good style to have the same preset for a series of shots. A rare exception is an additional pair of photos in bw.
Another newbie mistake is the different aspect ratios of 16/9 and 2/3 frames. When submitting to the same seal it will be ah how painful.
Do not think that someone is criticizing you. It's just that if you started talking about color with a rather big fervor, then I should note for the hundredth time, this is a complex topic, and not everyone understands about “color”. About 4 years and 300.000 I have already mentioned more than once :)
As asked, I did so) they were familiar, I took photos in 9 different presets. They wanted it and got it. I accidentally threw off one of the options.
and cut with any proportions, too, probably asked :)
I repeat once again, they needed more shooting, do you have any more questions?
And again, I don’t take pictures for money, this is a hobby, they asked me to do it as asked, or rather, I was already reworking it. I never take money for a photo, and it was a request to do it in such colors! Want to argue about the photo? let's throw off 3 photos in processing and look. Let's just go with a link to the cloud.
We realized that even if we call you not a photographer, but a photographer, it still doesn’t change the matter.
What video format do you shoot? Also 3: 2? I repeat once again, I threw the link by accident, and what the story of that wedding is does not concern you. Photo in the link, in all possible rbg, although I do not see the difference. https://cloud.mail.ru/public/aqXB/KBivs7knn
The color on a man with a camera (which for some reason you didn't want to make it sharp) and a woman with red hair is just hell.
The second woman is still tolerant, although far from beautiful.
In general, some anti-examples, excuse me.
Mikhailova, of course, has a photo of wow, but in color there are both more or less natural and with solid toning. Where tinting is found, it is not customary to talk about a natural beautiful color.
Of course, in a browser, for example, you won't see the difference (or almost won't), because browsers don't understand these spaces (like many basic viewers, like a Windows image viewer). Take a look, for example, in a native utility from Sony (here is an example of two of your shots).
I have it displayed as the top picture. The lower one (with a yellow tint) I have never seen anywhere.
Someday you still have to deal with this
Perhaps, but most likely I will forget about it in the morning, you are the first who pointed this out to me and I still don’t understand how you managed to open it in this color. If you already take development by photo, I will most likely look for time and take photoshop courses like Elena Mikhailova).
By the way, I also want to make a small remark to you, in your review on the sony a7m3 you are not using the native yongnuo lens, but it most likely significantly degrades the picture. Why do I say so, I have a tamron 17-35 a05 + mc-11, and with it the sharpness drops at times, and the picture starts to warm up very much. It really is worse. If a review was made on any sigma Art, or the same Sonnar 55, or even fe 85 1.8, the picture would have come out much better. If you want, I can, for example, take similar pictures on a 35mm tamron and a 45mm samyang on Saturday afternoon and send it raw in the evening. I think they will be very surprised.
Well, there are wonderful samples there:
Sigma 40mm 1: 1.4 DG A for Sony E
Sigma 14mm 1: 1.8 DG A for Sony E
7Artisans 50mm 1: 1.05 APO for Sony E
Not exactly what I wanted to convey to you. Here it is better to make specific comparisons on people and watch paired pictures. Anyway.
2Anatoly: ok, I understand (judging by your treatment of the girl and the wedding) that you like zombie people, but in full size and rgb & ntcc (or whatever), and don't like the healthy skin color of people, judging by the comment above. You have the right to say what))) In light of this, c5pro is really contraindicated for you.
Yes, we have already written this many times here that Anatoly does not need c5. In general, it's strange that Anatoly got into the C5 thread.
I got in because of your comment from Vadim. Became interesting.
oh, Vadim is another “expert” in color. Now it's clear why you have such a reaction to C5. By the way, Vadim erased my detailed commentary on the second video on his stream about C5 pro, where he examines the graphs from photons-to-photos by DD, blindly believing this site (details here and here by the first video).
It is not very beautiful, to get personal and discuss a person behind your back (about Vadim). If we take you with him H to H, personally I like his photos more. discussing photos that don't apply to you is also low. Believe me, good studio photographers, when it comes to joyfulness, are not very flattering about you, even with a smirk. And it is not pleasant for me to listen to it and I made a remark.
You asked what is a wow photo? Look at a photo of Elena Mikhailova, for example, wow, all wow, just space.
And we are not discussing Vadim, but his professional capabilities. He may be the best person in the world, but he does not understand the topic of the question about C5 about him. What's wrong with that?
As for Vadim's photographs (mind you, photographs, not his personality), I have commented more than once. He does not see and does not own color, as evidenced by him Instagram as the only source of his work.
You too, throw off 3 of your photos. Let's see.
Blah Blah Blah, but in fact you don't have any of your photos)))
>> Blah Blah Blah, but in fact you don't have any of your photos)))
Who are you talking about?)) About me ??)) So look above, if for some reason you missed a photo with a d200 with a healthy color (as opposed to)
About Arcadia?)) Here the whole site is almost entirely his photo))
About his colleague - "the owner of a couple of heaps that I sell"?))) Well, everything can be here, his photos really have not been met here)))
Well, we ourselves wanted to analyze your photo after the fact, I describe the sides in relation to the picture:
1 On the right side of the cheek, closer to the ear, a bruise or something?
2. Do you have lipstick on your lower lip?
3. What's with the forehead above the eyebrows, on the left eyebrow a depression, above the right bump
4. What about the nose, in particular the left nostril?
And I still do not touch the chin, eyes, neck, etc. Do you want me to continue?
But there are also pluses, a little sharpness appeared, the color of the eyes and pupils became visible, the texture of the clothes appeared)
Are these real defects or is it still a bit too much DD with a depth of shades? Photography should make a person more beautiful, not disfigure.
Anatoly, you have beguiled something, I did not ask for the analysis of this photo, especially from you)))
I dropped the photo as an example of what I consider normal in color, as opposed to your anti-examples, you asked - I dropped it, that's all))
If you REALLY think the way you write, there is simply nothing to talk with you further about))) You are far from the only one, alas)))
Open the photo on a normal monitor and see for yourself)
Wow, normal monitors are already connected))) The next question will be how long have I calibrated the monitor and what kind of calibrator)))
And tell me, Anatoly, what should a normal monitor look like in order to make a bad color out of a normal color, and a good and juicy out of a frankly weak color?)) I'll try to ask around like this)))
24-27 ″, ips, better matte, min fhd resolution, better 4k. The iMacs are very good, but it's more difficult with to, maybe, from win, I like the Asus aio V2xx. Excellent monoblocks, at a price of 15% cheaper than imac, even 82 gb files in lr very rarely slow down in capacity. And you won't need to callibrate anything.
And again, in a post earlier you wrote that your photo, now not yours, then you have s5, then d200. My colors are terrible, but everyone else likes it. I also do not consider them the best in the world, they are just pop, they correspond to modern trends in colors, everything is excellent in sharpness, there is no software, bokeh? Want watercolor - 85mm, want to minimize - 45mm. You see, the difference between us is that my time allows me to shoot a maximum of 2-3 times a month, and if I already agree on shooting, everything is meticulous, from posing and ending with color correction and retouching. You may not like the colors, but people love them.
You, forgive me, either do not know how to read, or are simply extremely inattentive)))
Where did I write that the photo is not mine? Where did I write about the presence of c5pro on my hands? (yes, just connect the logic, if we are in the c5pro topic, why shouldn't I, if there is one, drop the photo from it?)
Are the colors awful?) Well, yes, it's good that at least you yourself admit)))
And people can be delighted with anything, especially if:
- they have not seen anything better.
- it's free.
:-D
You can see some photos from me, for example portraits, bikes, I have a lot of galleries there.
Arkady, yes, what are there d7000s, take an example of at least OlAf'a with a club photo, a person who knows a lot about color, who has access to both colorful plots and a bunch of cameras in the upper segment (1dx, 5dsr), along with the indicated canons, he already uses for many years it has been a heap, and I understand why. It's just that if a person does not see the color, does not see the difference between d7k and c5pro in favor of c5pro, it makes no sense to prove something here))))
Yes, and this is the hardest part to explain. And the color, in principle, is not seen by the overwhelming majority of amateur photographers, because this requires long-term work with color / eye training :)
So, you most likely missed something from my posts, so I'll explain:
1. I am not the owner of d7000, I once had it and I absolutely do not consider it to be some kind of supernatural, ordinary advanced crop. The D7000 is taken for comparison with the s5, since they have a similar cost for resale.
There are paired comparisons of photos from these cameras on the network, there is a comparison of s5 with d90 that something like that wow is not visible, for that the soapiness of the photo from s5 is striking and there is a lot of writing / talking about it.
2. A post about someone shooting on 1dx, 5dsr and s5 sounds like “and my brother is a boxer”))) And someone with a hasel can keep the old zenith at home and shoot with it a couple of times a year. That from this zenith became better?
3. The whole dispute over the video is reduced by you only to the "widest DD" which no one can confirm in any way, but in fact there is only a dxo estimate of 13,5 tbsp. In 2006 it was probably very cool, today it is below average. And for some reason, you are silent about other parameters: sharpness, autofocus operation, iso, usability of the camera as a whole. How is the s5 doing?
Not really, really, Arkady is not silent about it. He says that the camera is very specific for the soul.
Questions not to Arkady's article, everything is in order, but to Vadim's video.
https://cloud.mail.ru/public/KU4s/naKUbbdKU
Well, it was worth starting with this. It’s a pity that this is how it ended. This is necessary, such talk about color with almost complete invisibility of this very color. By the way, there is also Adobe SRGB included and it is not so easy to view it through a browser. In general, I think that Adobe SRGB unnecessarily is one of the key mistakes of beginners who do not understand anything about color :). And there were conversations :) Thank you
The d7000? I had it for less than a month, they let me shoot.
Above are other photos from sony
Yes, this is already all meaningless, we have already seen everything. Thanks.
Just in case, I repeat that good color vision comes after about 4 years of constant photography. For two years a person learns to see light and another 2 years for color. It's like driving a car, 2 years of practice is vital to drive without problems. I don’t want to offend you, you don’t have to worry, very many (really - very many) amateur photographers really do not understand and do not see the color. I can say that I myself am not a great specialist in this area, but nevertheless, over the years I have learned and found something :). Just the main controversy occurs on all there "c5 pro" due to the lack of some skills in the vision of color. Consider that this is a sect to which you will not prove anything until you yourself enter there, so psychologically it is much easier to understand people on the other side.
I'm not offended), photography is a hobby for me, so I am very calm about criticism. But nevertheless, I did not see a single beautiful photo from the s5. What I mean by beautiful, the picture should be sharp, there should be halftones that convey realism, structure, etc. I can't see any of this here! Both the d7000 and the s5 plus or minus are the same in colors and tones, only the d7000 is sharper and more convenient to use at the same price. Now compare with a photo from Sony (raw for camera jpeg, neutral profile is worth, pp off), for me personally there is a gap between them. If you want to argue, I repeat, let's compare the photos, if I need to send you raves.
Yes, after what we saw, there is nothing to argue about :) we have already seen everything. The main thing is that you should like
>> there is a comparison of s5 with d90, which is not visible wow
This was mentioned above))) Not visible - alas.
>> And someone with a Hasel can keep the old zenith at home and shoot with it a couple of times a year. That from this zenith became better?
Well, if the zenith gives out photos in good light that are NOT LESS tasty than the hassel, therefore, the zenith is not so bad?)))
Sharpness, ISO - all these parameters of the camera are sufficient for an amateur, overall convenience is at the level of nikon d200 (if you worked with such cameras, you should understand what I mean)
All information about DD is on the Internet - see examples.
I expect from you jpeg, raw, whatever, I sent mine. Send, make a comparison and close the dispute.
2Anatoly:
Look, the examples are not mine, the above-named author, feel, as they say, the difference:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/43506647@N06/35213727262/in/album-72157629853044927/
Others
https://www.flickr.com/photos/43506647@N06/17287685312/in/album-72157629853044927/
Well, there is a lot like that.
Here I see a bold beautiful color, while quite natural. It seems to me that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to obtain such a color from your sources.
Again. You are throwing off a link to someone else's already processed photos. Throw off your own, with default settings and compare your miracle of color. If you have already started such a dispute, do not hide behind the works of other people.
>> photo from Sony (raw on camera jpeg, neutral profile is worth <
Intuitively, this profile may seem to be designed to produce as natural a picture as possible, but in reality it just has a very flat tonal curve to protect channels from clipping. In fact, this is a raw material for processing for those who for some reason do not want to shoot in raw, such photos cannot be left as they are.
I fell into the same trap when I bought my first DSLR and didn't read the instructions :)
This profile brings jpeg colors as close as possible to raw, it is convenient to see a real picture on the screen. You can, of course, set up another profile for jpeg, set up pp2 and theoretically get a very nice picture ... But in theory, while I use 3 lenses and each one gives completely different colors. Therefore, it is easier to throw everything off by default and correct the colors in the editor. Perhaps you can set up a pp2 profile and get already acceptable colors in raw, but I'm too lazy to be honest with this, there are too many nuances, when buying a new lens, you may have to make adjustments.
God, what did I just read?
Study))) https://sony-club.ru/forum/threads/profili-izobrazhenija-na-sony-a7iii-i-drugix-alfax.73106/
Okay, I'll chew you how it works. You shoot a person, send him a photo in jpeg through nfc, and he already says what he would like to correct and in which photos. And the neutral style conveys natural colors as accurately as possible, the correction can depend on the sigma lens a little gray, samyang a little pale yellow, tamron is very warm. Watch the video Vadim om, I completely agree with him, leave jpeg in default or in a style that is as similar as possible to raw.
If you want to get good photos right away, ok, you can get confused, connect the camera to the screen / monitor / TV and set up the preset in pp2. (about pp2 I threw the link above)), only there are many but.
Anatoly, S5 gives out a very good color. Often it even turns out very well and with little or no processing.
Fujik has several problems.
1. The same color is given by almost any camera with an SSD of that time.
2. Fujik is basically inferior in all respects - color, detail - Canon 5D. At the same time, they have approximately the same DD, but Kenon is also a full frame, and the price is now much cheaper.
3. Canon 5D produces great color, better fujika, what amateurs call BOLD and DELICIOUS. At the same time, the processing of canon RAVs is many times easier.
4. Fujik have unrecoverable problems with the sensor - it simply crumbles.
5. Fujik has problems with detailing - payment for super SSD - only 6MP responsible for resolution. Add a thick AA filter and the soap is provided.
Therefore, it is easier for all fans of the old old-school lamp color to buy a Canon 5D and get all Fuji's buns without its drawbacks, and buy a lens for the saved amount)
100% agree with you.
I shot sooooo much on 5d and c5 - and dd was a cut above c5 :)
2Anatoly, what the camera gives out by default (and even with a flat profile) is generally clear.
But you somehow processed these photos after shooting? Show something processed by you (maybe with good light) on a7, which could be considered an example of a good color?
I haven't seen a single photo of you yet, throw it off. Although I'm almost sure you will send other people's photos again)
No problem, I can send my own, but already processed and not with c5pro (this topic is about her, after all), just what will it change?
Why do I need default photos, or do you not process your cards after shooting? Again, the whole question is still in the intensity of the twist, for example, I never spent more than a minute on a photo from ssd cameras. I cannot say the same about the photos presented from the Sony above.
>> ”S5 ... Canon 5D. Moreover, they have approximately the same DD…. and the price is now much cheaper "
Thank you, Mikhail, laughed))) Burn ischo.
Victor, you are somehow vyalenko trolling today.
here's to you for a snack, rockwell took paired photos
https://www.kenrockwell.com/fuji/s5/color.htm
your fujik stories are unfortunately not suitable even for die-hard fans.
I now have two fujiks in stock, one of them I sell)))
do you need it? ))) maybe at least once try to discuss then what you really tried? )
you are a sofa theorist, you have no cameras, no special knowledge)))
no more real experience and pictures ... so, some fantasies on the topic ..
Anatoly, well, a local person named Victor will not send you his staff. Due to their absence, as well as cameras.
He has no camera or pictures. This person is from the variety of sofa theorists with a scanty understanding of what he is saying.
Look at his other comments, he does not understand at all what profiles and profiling are, he is one of those who are looking for an endless "BOLD" and most importantly "NATURAL" color from the "BOX".
Regarding your examples with d7000 - you are absolutely right, here a few years ago paired “blind” photos without exif d5100 and Fujika were laid out, so people unanimously chose pictures d5100 for a special BOLD color and special tones of super SSD! )))
I already figured it out).
2Anatoly: Here, for example, a kid in the shade, greenery all around, you twist the same HEALTHY complexion on your frame with Sonya, for example, where is the young woman? Well, do not twist it, the tin will come out in the same place))) And by default (where there are a lot of shades, as you say) a woman may have health problems (because zombies do not exist, they do not exist, right?)
Post a link to an uncompressed picture, so far I see only terrible caustic colors, there are no halftones at all! It seems that the child was made up with cosmetics))
Although, where did you get the source))) photo in similar conditions, with processing https://cloud.mail.ru/public/ooVV/wHyihQ4NG
Anatoly, what does your “where did I get the source from” mean?))) Why do you need the source?
I will repeat once again - when I saw what you get with processing, there is no point in talking about a tasty color in the future, although this was still clear from the initial statements about soaking)))
I saw that the iPhone 12 shoots better than your miracle camera. Did you want to compare photos of a girl and a boy? What color is the boy's eyes? What is the pupil size? Why is the neck orange on the right and green on the left? Where did the eyebrows go? Do you really think this is the top of the photo industry ?? Take off your rose-colored glasses and watch renowned photographers take pictures. And Mikhail is also right, you are an ordinary sofa balabol, who has nothing)
Zheest))) A person who, even with processing, receives zombie people from a full-frame camera of a thousand for three euros will talk about the fact that the kid's neck is orange-green, he has makeup, his eyes are not the same, and in general the opponent has nothing))) Comparing with its color trash above)))) It all looks funny, frankly, it is difficult to tell something to such people, it is better to remain silent)))
Talk to Mikhail about color spaces, discuss the graphics there or something else)))))) I already pass.
Show 100m other people your photo and mine. 90+ in my favor will be, and not a hundred just because some dense pensioners can get caught.
Ahahah)) Well, here just no comment))
This happens when a person has already realized that he is in a puddle, but is still trying to fight, he has no arguments left, but he wants to answer with something, and a very hellish game begins, some pensioners, 90% of people, all the cases )))
Continue, I will not bother you)))
Of course, I am far from a good photographer, and, in principle, I am not very eager to go there, but at least I do not cripple people (read the analysis of your photo above) like you do in your photography. Or again the conditions were not the same)))
Now, on the basis of a really not very successful photograph of Victor, will you tell everyone about the color of C5?
Arkady, this person claims that this is a great photo, honestly not my words, I try to convince him otherwise, I lay out everything point by point, but he does not see the facts point-blank. Look at the points of everything that I have indicated, if you do not agree with something, write.
And again, I did not write that the camera is bad, I wrote that the camera was relevant for its era, and that with the money that costs s5 today for an ordinary user, it is better to buy a d7000, which is better in all respects and has the same DD ... The S5 is more for the collection and fans. And then Victor appeared screaming everything except s5 sucks with zombie flowers. He offered to upload a photo in pairs, I posted it, he ran into the bushes, began to hide behind other people's photos. Then he threw off 1 photo, though I still didn’t understand whether his photo was or not, it was right away, it’s not his, at the end it’s like it became) and I took it apart on the basis of what I saw, then we talked about monitors, while it’s like did not answer, probably studying.
What kind of game have I just read))) Sometimes I think that some gravatographers would not hurt to introduce a dose of adequacy instead of coronavirus vaccination)) Now point by point))
>> I lay out everything point by point, but he does not see the facts point-blank.
All this "analysis" comes down to TWO things - the presence of REFLEXES and SHADOWS in natural lighting conditions. I was asked to pile a bunch of Photoshop in a reportage shot or run around to expose studio light in each individual case?))) The light is natural, the lighting features are also natural, the boy's face does not cause a desire to bring him back to life (unlike Anatoly's pictures) I do not see absolutely nothing here problems other than the desire to get to the bottom of something)))
>> better buy d7000
It may be better if the person on the bark has eaten the dog and has a lot of time for each frame. Otherwise, such photos will appear as in Anatoly's examples - with vomit flowers, and in the sun - sprinkled with powder)))
>> screaming everything except s5 sucks with zombie flowers
We talked about zombie flowers just after laying out your "examples", which they, in essence, are)))
>> I offered to upload photos in pairs
I suggested? If memory serves, I suggested posting a photo that you consider to be a sample by color, for some reason you posted a photo with a default flat profile (??), with a dormouse (????), and even in argb (?? ??), after which I honestly noticed that the photo sucks by color)))
>> ran into the bushes, began to hide behind other people's photos
Well, he did not “run into the bushes” and “began to hide behind”, but laid out examples so that the blind Anatoly (who, I note, stated that he did not see a single wow by the color of a photo from the heap on the website of Joy), other people's examples, oh than honestly and wrote. Why strangers? Yes, because I don’t have a penny on my hands, and I didn’t have all the conclusions from other people's photos. This is also quite obvious to the last hedgehog (but not Anatoly, apparently)
>> the truth is, I still did not understand, the photo of him or not, there was immediately him, then it was not him, in the end it seemed like it became)
Again, this game out of the blue. Once again (in black and white), please indicate the place where I claimed that the photo was not mine? I won’t see it, I’ll think it out? Facepalm is simple)))
>> until it seems like he has not answered, probably studying.
Interestingly, this citizen can not think that at a time close to midnight (or rather, two nights) a person can just go to sleep? Or, to understand this elementary thing, he needs to separately communicate this important information? Secondary facepalm.
As for the information on "monitors" - this is generally five)))) I do not understand, instead of a monitor, it is proposed to buy a candy bar?))))
Just in case, I'll let you know that my monitor is normal, you can not worry about it))))) PC too)))
Did you understand what you wrote? Mikhail, an ordinary sofa troll, wrote everything correctly. About reflexes and shadows in general wow, again the conditions are not the same?) There are no shadows, the camera could not correctly display the shades and transmit data about the structure of the face. And most likely this is your mistake, not the camera. So, I’m like an amateur, and you are positioning yourself as an obscene pro, but I don’t make such mistakes)))
about monitors ... The type of matrix and the desired resolution are clearly indicated, the models are presented based on personal use and preferences) I realized that you have an excellent lamp monitor with unrivaled colors, and what for these ips / amoled matrices, and 4k is generally from the crafty one. Don't argue about them, I spend 70% of the time behind the screen and understand them better.
And about vaccination in general, mortality) yes, I was vaccinated and I think it is vitally necessary for everyone to do it.
Do you know what the difference is between us, you blindly believe in something that has been gone for a long time and live in the past (tell the truth, do you believe that Lenin is alive?))), But I don't care about the brand of the camera, my brand, the one that I like today ) today I like Sony, and tomorrow I may switch to Canon, especially since Arkady also praises it. You don't like my colors, are they like zombies? You just haven't seen corpses without makeup, but I saw they are completely different. Color is a subjective parameter, it changes without problems in the editor, but what will you do with the lack of sharpness, low detail, limited shades? This is already dancing with a tambourine. Try to work with raw from more or less new cameras, especially in high resolution, you will immediately feel the difference.
But criticism of Elena Mikhailova for unnatural tones ... So she has a fabulous style and that's the beauty of it. She is one of the best photographers in the Russian Federation, and is in the top list all over the world. She is admired by millions of people and are ready to pay up to 200 rubles for a photo shoot! And you with your healthy orange color)) funny
PS Vadim very clearly laid out everything on the shelves https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GXZsy791E4o
Yeah)))
You know, I just won't waste more time on you, this is a completely empty exercise, as for me)))
Make zombie people and further for God's sake, I will not bother you)))
But soaking is contraindicated for you for obvious reasons, I don't know what you are doing here)))
Yes, let's stop.
Unfortunately, Vadim made a number of mistakes again. Critical, again showing that he has no idea about the C5. I already gave you parsing link the second video. But, apparently, you also do not understand what is at stake :)
If Vadim is an authority for you, then you should get a couple more vaccinations, otherwise learn from him to clean the sensor at a long exposure and do an analysis of cameras based on reviews on Avito
Personally, this video is not interesting to me, everything is done in the service. but the video carries informational value, it may be useful to someone.
Well, don't forget that there was also some talk about your photos with multiple color errors. And it was said that you are not able to assess the capabilities of C5, since you do not know the concept of a good color, making such mistakes.
But none of this matters. Everyone will remain unconvinced, and only time will judge.
I completely agree with you.
Read above))) I am not bothering you, continue to maim people with zombie color, considering it correct)))
2Anatoly:
>> This profile brings jpeg colors as close as possible to raw
RAW is just a bunch of numbers, no tone curve, no WB, etc. To see raw, you need to interpret it somehow, and for this, some kind of profile is superimposed, so it's not very clear what you take as a starting point, saying this.
You did not understand me, I mean that by color Adobe color = ntrl, Adobe standard = stnd, etc. Color is the default, so I use ntrl. Something like this.
You need to add this to the Runet quote book :)
I waited because this person is adequate - it was interesting to hear his opinion about the camera. And then I saw this ...
I asked Vadim for a review, promised to drop it, I'm waiting. There is a feeling that either his Capture ONE is not right (although it pulls s5 well for me), or w2 / f1 was not turned on.
The S5 Pro is a tricky camera and needs to be approached. It's not always possible to take it in such a way :). Actually, that's why it's easier with d40
I just have a different opinion of adequacy there)) Such game to smack)
And why, in principle, pull four stops of exposure even on an advanced camera? To get b-naughty HDR? Or fix the jams of the exposure? Even with retouching, this is a maximum of one or two stops during correction.
Such disgusting and R5 / D850 will not stand.
“Why, in principle, pull four stops of exposure even on an advanced camera?”
Because the unfortunate surveyor read it in an ad at a flea market (avito).
If the soldier offered him to jump off the roof, I suspect he would check it out.
A contemporary opinion from another amateur on this camera https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JT1Aaa19X38
Slightly higher yesterday's thread of hundreds of comments on the discussion of this ... mmm ... review.
An interesting term is “amateur photographer”. For Vadim - too much, for Arkady - too little.
Well, I have been a FOP for a long time, I have been working as a photographer / photography services for a long time, because officially this is my profession. Vadim provided me with Rava from the review, I understand it (I haven't downloaded it yet)
Photographer. A professional photographer is a person who provides photography services. A photographer is a person who is fond of photography. Moreover, it is PHOTOGRAPHY, not PHOTOTECHNICS. Otherwise, it is a surveyor or collector of photographic equipment. The difference is not always obvious, because you can fall into several categories at once, but personally, I prefer reviews from professional photographers who take real photos, rather than worlds, scales, vignettes, and so on.
So the explanation about Vadim's video arrived. https://radojuva.com/2021/06/fujifilm-finepix-s5-pro-agaim/
I decided to duplicate information that will be useful for (possibly future) owners of Propyatok:
When Hyper-Utility V3 starts, you need to configure it as in this screenshot.
Not everyone thinks about it, and the program itself will never tell you about it.
But of course the camera manufacturer, etc., etc., will be to blame
Since the program is as old as a dinosaur, then it also had settings that make it work faster at the expense of quality. At that time, there were complaints about its performance, so from some version it came with the default settings “for speed”, and not for “quality”.
And more:
there is a fad Noise Reduction in the lower right corner of the screen.
The camera has two noise reduction modes - STD, ORG.
STD - Standard (Noise Reduction), default.
ORG - a more sparing noise reduction, about which on page 116 of the instructions it is written as
“This mode is less effective than STD and is suitable for capturing the night sky.
There is no OFF item in the menu.
Thank you. There still a sequel came out https://youtu.be/GXZsy791E4o
You could not post this disgrace, but forget it once and for all :)
And he not only made a stupid review, but also insulted Radozhiva (and the readers in fact) and, most importantly, the c5 pro itself (wrote in the schmideo that it was Pujikl or something like that). Apparently Arkady did not forgive this anymore
This is not the main problem. In my opinion, there are more serious things
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXZsy791E4o&ab_channel=VadimOm I looked. Literally two seconds - and everything becomes clear with this h-m. Friends, this is just some kind of muck. In everything. And thanks to Arkady for the reviews, site and work.