Fuji X Series

CGrieves · 7 Jul 2016 at 13:34

Richdog said:
I just, erm, accidentally bought a Fuji E-X2. A local store were doing one for a special sale price. I also ordered the 35mm f2.

With the new firmware it's basically up to X-T10 standards http://www.fujivsfuji.com/xt10-vs-xt1-vs-xe2/

Plan is to use it for a couple of months, get used to the system and processing, and then gift it to my dad as a little treat when the X-T2 is released as he has been looking for a new camera and I know he would love the Fuji system.

Commiserations, I hate it when cameras get bought accidentally....

With firmware 4.00 my X-E2 became essentially a new camera. When you get the X-T2, don't discount keeping the X-E2 as second body, especially if you go for primes. I bought a cheap X-E1 that I often carry around with a manual focus prime mounted.

Richdog · 7 Jul 2016 at 13:52

CGrieves said:
Commiserations, I hate it when cameras get bought accidentally....

With firmware 4.00 my X-E2 became essentially a new camera. When you get the X-T2S, don't discount keeping the X-E2 as second body, especially if you go for primes. I bought a cheap X-E1 that I often carry around with a manual focus prime mounted.

Yeah I heard the new firmware basically makes into the same camera as the X-E2 barring the button differences, so quite happy there. £360 new also isn't a bad price.

I was also thinking of the second body aspect, but then again my dad wants a new camera and I don't want him to buy a DSLR again and the Fuji JPEG's are so good which means less time spent faffing around for him. The things we do for family.

bam0 · 7 Jul 2016 at 19:29

I'm liking the look of the new 80mmF2.8 Macro with OIS, probably the next on my list. I like the look of the XT2 but the price is going to be way too much for me to justify over my XT1 atm, maybe in a year or two.

Nimzicki · 7 Jul 2016 at 21:19

I was chatting to a friend of mine at the weekend who works in marketing for Fujifilm, he told me that a lot of his customers are pro 'togs who have migrated from the Canon 5D mk3 to the XT-1and been very happy, citing weight and cost of lenses etc. Has anyone here made a similar change and care to share their thoughts?

I'm in the market for a new camera and he certainly made a compelling case for not going to the full frame dslr's.Apologies if this has been covered...

ethan · 9 Jul 2016 at 01:34

XT2 V Nikon D810. Amazingly it was the EVF and the 100-400mm XF lens that drew criticism:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNAJOyTuL1U

Richdog · 9 Jul 2016 at 05:05

ethan said:
XT2 V Nikon D810. Amazingly it was the EVF and the 100-400mm XF lens that drew criticism:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNAJOyTuL1U

It was a fun test but it's a shame they didn't use the boost grip as that would have made a good difference to the XT-2 refresh speed etc. Either way the AF seems massively improved vs the X-T1, especially considering the 100.400 is by no means a fast lens.

Would have been interesting to see how the 50-140 did.

Greebo · 9 Jul 2016 at 10:46

olv said:
I told a lie, that was ISO3200 and it was 30 seconds. I'm getting the feeling that 30 seconds is much too long for stars. Still lots to learn.

30 secs is pretty much the recommended time for star photography.

ethan · 9 Jul 2016 at 12:36

Richdog said:
It was a fun test but it's a shame they didn't use the boost grip as that would have made a good difference to the XT-2 refresh speed etc. Either way the AF seems massively improved vs the X-T1, especially considering the 100.400 is by no means a fast lens.

Would have been interesting to see how the 50-140 did.

Probably so. I'll await a more thorough test. The criticism directed at the lens was unfounded though; particularly when you saw the quality of the picture(s) taken with it on the link he gave: https://www.instagram.com/johnlehmann/

It is true that many of the improvements are unavailable without the battery grip and so in many respects they were conducting a review on a half complete camera containing firmware that was still in beta.

Richdog · 9 Jul 2016 at 21:34

Well I was out today with my X-E1 and I have to say... I had a lot of trouble with the focus. Yes it's new and yes I need to get used to and learn it, but not being able to nail a lot of shots my Nikon ate for breakfast is highly annoying. It's just very poor in comparison.

However when it nails it then you get a lovely photo... I shot in JPEG all day and never did my Nikon produce colours so pleasing. The 35mm F2 lens is also wickedly sharp. It's also amazing how much difference it makes in terms of weight, carrying such a lighter package around up very steep inclines.

A guy in my hiking group had an X-Pro 2 and it was a nice looking beast. I'm looking forward to the X-T2.

ethan · 9 Jul 2016 at 23:55

I usually get between 2 and 3 decent shots out of 5 on the 100-400mm but I have only used it for less than five days consistently over the two month period I purchased it. I'd expect the rate to improve the more I use it. Using an XT2 as opposed to the XT1 I would expect a 90% success/hit rate. I have not had an issue of any kind with my 35mm, 60mm, 18-55 and 55-230 though.

jaybee · 10 Jul 2016 at 00:52

Can't decide over the 35 f/1.4 or the 35 f/2 for my X-T10. Already have the kit 18-55 and super happy with it.

Does anyone know when the new 23mm f/2 is coming out and likely price point?

EDIT: 23mm is apparently likely to be revieled at photokina in September. Also see that the new 50mm f/2 WR is on the roadmap for 2017 release. That's THE lens for me as I love this focal length for portraits and can't afford the very costly 56mm. Can't wait!

Richdog · 10 Jul 2016 at 07:50

I'm going to Portugal for 9 days and can't decide which lens I want to buy for landscapes... thinking maybe the 16th, but then again a zoom is so versatile...

xaldub · 10 Jul 2016 at 08:37

Richdog said:
I'm going to Portugal for 9 days and can't decide which lens I want to buy for landscapes... thinking maybe the 16th, but then again a zoom is so versatile...

Have a look at other landscape photographs you've taken and see if there is a focal length that you commonly use. Personally, I prefer good quality zooms to a multitude of primes ; I seldom go less than 24mm on full frame ( 16mm on APS-C ) so for me my 16-55mm f2.8 does fine, but I'd maybe consider picking up the 14mm if I wanted something a bit wider and equally fast. I decided against picking up the 10-24mm because it wasn't weather resistant and it would be redundant for anything above 16mm.

Richdog · 10 Jul 2016 at 09:23

xaldub said:
Have a look at other landscape photographs you've taken and see if there is a focal length that you commonly use. Personally, I prefer good quality zooms to a multitude of primes ; I seldom go less than 24mm on full frame ( 16mm on APS-C ) so for me my 16-55mm f2.8 does fine, but I'd maybe consider picking up the 14mm if I wanted something a bit wider and equally fast. I decided against picking up the 10-24mm because it wasn't weather resistant and it would be redundant for anything above 16mm.

I like the 24mm focal length, I could use it for a lot of stuff. It's really ideal for a lot of things both landscape and indoor.

The problem with the 16-55 is that I live in hope an OIS version is coming in 2017... I'd rather get the 18-55 when I get the X-T2 and then wait for a while.

I'm tempted to pick up the XC16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OIS II as a temporary solution...

xaldub · 10 Jul 2016 at 11:16

Richdog said:
I like the 24mm focal length, I could use it for a lot of stuff. It's really ideal for a lot of things both landscape and indoor.

The problem with the 16-55 is that I live in hope an OIS version is coming in 2017... I'd rather get the 18-55 when I get the X-T2 and then wait for a while.

I'm tempted to pick up the XC16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OIS II as a temporary solution...

The absence of OIS isn't really an issue on the 16-55mm zoom. Plus, if you intend to use it at 16mm for landscapes chances as you're going to be using a tripod.

Richdog · 10 Jul 2016 at 12:46

xaldub said:
The absence of OIS isn't really an issue on the 16-55mm zoom. Plus, if you intend to use it at 16mm for landscapes chances as you're going to be using a tripod.

It is an issue, hence why all modern lenses if this range now have OIS. I think that by 2016 people have seen enough stabilised lenses to make their own minds up.

chrismscotland · 10 Jul 2016 at 13:39

People have survived for years without OIS in lenses, especially on those non-IS bodied systems like Nikon and Canon. Personally I've never had an issue with the OIS-less 16-55 its a tremendous lens.

Richdog · 10 Jul 2016 at 18:52

chrismscotland said:
People have survived for years without OIS in lenses, especially on those non-IS bodied systems like Nikon and Canon. Personally I've never had an issue with the OIS-less 16-55 its a tremendous lens.

By that logic we survived without a lot of things that didn't exist before they were invented. Technology moves on.

I know it's a great lens, but if I bought one only to see an OIS version next year I would be gutted. It's a useful feature for anyone who needs to hand hold in low light. End of story.

bam0 · 10 Jul 2016 at 18:55

chrismscotland said:
People have survived for years without OIS in lenses, especially on those non-IS bodied systems like Nikon and Canon. Personally I've never had an issue with the OIS-less 16-55 its a tremendous lens.

I've got the 16-55 as well and I don't think I've once thought "if only I had OIS", maybe that's just down to when/where I tend to use it but it's a great lens.

Nimzicki · 10 Jul 2016 at 19:30

Pretty much sold on moving to an X-Series from my tired D60. Now just need to decide whether it's worth waiting and saving the extra for an X-T2 or just going for the X-T1 (possibly used?) since the price is so much lower and still seems a big improvement over the D60.