The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

ukaskew said:
There is no way the X-T1 only goes down to 2.5 EV at the moment, having shot with the D750 (-3 EV) in similar dark first wedding dance conditions there isn't that much difference in accuracy in darkness, only speed. I'm guessing the quoted figures refer to PDAF, with CDAF going quite a bit lower.
Click to expand...

minnnt said:
Phase detect and contrast detect auto focus. The centre 9 points are PDAF and are more sensitive.
Click to expand...
Yes, the 0.5EV sensitivity is for the PDAF pixels

They aren't more sensitive than the CDAF squares though. Rather, when something is OOF they know the direction that it's out of focus, so instead of hunting, the lens can drive directly to the correct focus. However, they can have a small error on what the value of "correct" is - the contrast method should be more accurate and will also work in lower light at the moment (improving the PDAF to be as sensitive as the CDAF is unlikely to be a further firmware update - I'd imagine they are getting close to the current hardware sensitivity limit for the sensor)
 
ukaskew said:
There is no way the X-T1 only goes down to 2.5 EV at the moment, having shot with the D750 (-3 EV) in similar dark first wedding dance conditions there isn't that much difference in accuracy in darkness, only speed. I'm guessing the quoted figures refer to PDAF, with CDAF going quite a bit lower.
Click to expand...

Possibly a reliability factor calculated in, as with the aforementioned OM4 meter which was capable of much, much longer than the specs.
 
minnnt said:
Ahh right, thanks Brian. (y)

Here's the 90mm.... Bloomin heck. Do i really need it though considering i have yhe 50-140 f2.8? It would only ever be for a shallower depth of field for me and is f2 that different to f2.8? Twice the light i guess... Hmmmm.

http://www.fujirumors.com/first-picture-of-the-new-fuji-xf-90mm-f2-0-r-lm-wr-lens/
Click to expand...

Assuming the 100-400 is a belter (I'm sure it will be) I'm thinking I will re-position my kit a bit like this...

23mm 1.4
56mm 1.2
90mm f2
100-400mm

So ditching the 50-140, as 90mm would be plenty long enough to replace the 50-140 for weddings (and I love a prime) and given the 'LM' designation, should be the quickest focusing prime.
 
Last edited:
Apparently the telephoto is 140-400? Well, the demo at Photokina was according to the pics.

Would you use all three lenses needing a third body or would you just swap the 56 for it at certain times? Speeches, ceremony etc...

Also, any pointers for shooting time trialling? Did i read you're now using af-c all the time for your racing?
 
Can anyone help me out with a question on the X-T1 continuous shooting?

I've got a Sony A6000 at the moment which I really like, but when shooting photos of the children in continuous mode I tend to fire a burst, wait, then fire another burst whilst panning with them (they love riding their bikes fast!). The problem I've got is that the moment I stop shooting the first burst the viewfinder blacks for a couple of moments, by the time it comes back I've usually lost framing. Hope that makes sense.

Does the X-T1do the same? I'm wondering if this is common with all CSC's or does the X-T1 keep a continuous image in the viewfinder whilst shooting short bursts?
 
its the same with the E-m1 too
 
minnnt said:
Apparently the telephoto is 140-400? Well, the demo at Photokina was according to the pics.

Would you use all three lenses needing a third body or would you just swap the 56 for it at certain times? Speeches, ceremony etc...

Also, any pointers for shooting time trialling? Did i read you're now using af-c all the time for your racing?
Click to expand...

Yep two bodies three lens, the 56/90 would be interchangeable.

AF-C all the way I would say, I find it quite a bit more reliable.
 
minnnt said:
Apparently the telephoto is 140-400? Well, the demo at Photokina was according to the pics.
Click to expand...

I dont know if they have changed things, but the initial rumoured tele was to be 120-400mm. Where does the 140mm WE come from? is it to tie in with the 50-140mm?

Mirrorless rumours, this link says 140mm but the roadmap says 120mm ?? > http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/fuji-to-launch-the-impressive-16mm-f-1-4-and-140-400mm-lenses

Fuji rumours >http://www.fujirumors.com/xf-120-400mm-is-this-the-super-telephoto-zoom-lens-in-fujis-roadmap/

20mm isn't much of a difference I'm just wondering what is the latest. As the rumours I have linked are old now. Have Fuji quoted anything? Have you a link to the Photokina?
 
ukaskew said:
The official Fuji roadmap is now 100-400...

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/xf_lens/roadmap/

It was updated when the latest mock-up was revealed in February (Photokina?)
Click to expand...

minnnt said:
Thanks Chris.

Fujifilm-140-400mm-f4-5.6-R-LM-OIS-WR-lens.jpg


It would tie in with the 50-140 nicely.
Click to expand...

Thanks both, I hadn't seen the newer roadmap.

Looking at the roadmap, it would seem that the 100-400mm is going to be released in July 2016, if using the page squares / blocks as a month to month calendar?? I think on previous roadmaps the squares represented each month Jan > Dec, if my memory serves me right.
 
Last edited:
Swanseajack said:
Thanks both, I hadn't seen the newer roadmap.

Looking at the roadmap, it would seem that the 100-400mm is going to be released in July 2016, if using the page squares / blocks as a month to month calendar?? I think on previous roadmaps the squares represented each month Jan > Dec, if my memory serves me right.
Click to expand...

The position on the roadmap indicates focal length, not time of year. I understood it would be very early 2016, but as it's 'slipped' already it's anyone's guess.
 
I wonder what the hold up is. It was planned for the last quarter 2014, then they announced it would be delayed by 12 months.
 
Probably falling out about the wide end of it. :D

If the road map is focal length, where does the TC come into it? The diagram looks like it stretches from 160-380? Or does it not work for that?
 
Just had a look back and it does seem the blocks / squares are dates / months of the year. Perhaps they have changed with new roadmap?? With the older roadmaps they seemd to be in quarters regarding the dates, winter, spring etc............looking at the new one it's possibly over the 12 months of the year.

Fuji > http://www.fujifilm.com/news/n140106_08.html
http://www.fujifilm.com/news/n130417_01.html

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=fuji+x+pro1+roadmap&tbm=isch&imgil=MrA18FbeDIdcGM%3A%3BxHgIdfPNFuAoIM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.engadget.com%252F2012%252F06%252F25%252Ffujifilm-outlines-x-pro1-lens-roadmap%252F&source=iu&pf=m&fir=MrA18FbeDIdcGM%3A%2CxHgIdfPNFuAoIM%2C_&usg=__K0L_OzL6QWHbwlAx-D93imesJmQ=&biw=1536&bih=829&ved=0CEUQyjc&ei=1-NRVcfPGYGsUdb8gLgD#imgrc=pNDOQzHcoVz7EM%3A;gVB1ibbQknfRfM;http%3A%2F%2Fi1266.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fjj524%2Fpicrumors%2Fpicrumors001%2Ffuji-roadmap-01-14-v2_zpsadf525b0.jpg;http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mirrorlessrumors.com%2Ffuji-x-t1-announced;800;502
 
Last edited:
minnnt said:
Probably falling out about the wide end of it. :D

If the road map is focal length, where does the TC come into it? The diagram looks like it stretches from 160-380? Or does it not work for that?
Click to expand...

I was wondering this when I noticed it was by focal length (Simon is correct, it used to be broken up into quarters), I'm guessing it's as simple as them just finding somewhere to plonk it on the road map, as it's boxed out, not displayed as a line or dot to denote focal length.

Technically it would extend from 70-560mm if shown as a line (as compatible with the 50-140, 120 and 100-400), although I'm still very intrigued how it will work with the 100-400, as no DSLR TC is designed or officially approved to work with what must presumably be a variable f4-5.6 (ish) zoom.
 
just tried it on the 56 as well.

Without
View attachment 37140

With
View attachment 37141

And this is using 1:1 on a manual macro just to compare

View attachment 37142

I think on the 35 it's a handy thing to have in the bag for the odd close up. But i'm not sure if I would give up on my macro lens yet.

Also tried it on the 8mm fisheye! :eek:

I think the monkeys would have to be behind the camera before it was close enough to focus.
 
Last edited:
Barrysprout said:
just tried it on the 56 as well.

Without
View attachment 37140

With
View attachment 37141

And this is using 1:1 on a manual macro just to compare

View attachment 37142

I think on the 35 it's a handy thing to have in the bag for the odd close up. But i'm not sure if I would give up on my macro lens yet.

Also tried it on the 8mm fisheye! :eek:

I think the monkeys would have to be behind the camera before it was close enough to focus.
Click to expand...

Excellent! Glad it was the actual Fuji one and not a knock off. Mine is out for delivery today, so not got it just yet.

Looking forward to a play now!
 
Cuchulainn said:
Excellent! Glad it was the actual Fuji one and not a knock off. Mine is out for delivery today, so not got it just yet.

Looking forward to a play now!
Click to expand...

I must have been having the same thoughts as you. Firstly I thought it was just a wrong price and I would get a cancellation email, then when it was dispatched I thought it may be a third party effort listed incorrectly.
Glad I ordered though, just wish I bought the others to list on ebay :oops: :$
 
What wrong being ginger??
 
A bit of advice please :-)

Like a numbskull, I left my camera bag on the edge of a table. Inside was my XT-1 with the XC 50-230 on it. This got knocked off the table by either my kid or dog (i'm still not speaking to either of them....) and the plastic mount on the XC broke and came away from the camera. Luckily its only the lens mount that was damaged, and the XT (as well as the 18-55 and Samyang 12mm in the bag) is all fine with no marks at all - the camera bag is a well padded affair and it was just the angle it landed at caused the break.

Anyway - I know need to buy a new zoom. I've been tempted with the 55-200 for some time but always resisted because the XC is a good lens. Now I need to buy one, is the 55-200 that much better? I'm sure the build quality is fantastic as with all Fuji XF lenses, but is the IQ better? The 50-140 is tempting but being just an enthusuast photographer, its an expensive purchase.

What do I photograph? I currently live and work in the Falkland Islands as im in the military. There is an abundance of wildlife down here including different types of penguins, sea lions, elephant seals etc. The zoom would be used to photograph them. They do let you get up very close (especially the penguins), but some of the elephant seals are huge and sometimes give the odd chase!!!

So, 55-200 - is it worth the extra dosh?

Shame Fuji's cashback deals have stopped :-(
 
Jimbo_468 said:
A bit of advice please :)

Like a numbskull, I left my camera bag on the edge of a table. Inside was my XT-1 with the XC 50-230 on it. This got knocked off the table by either my kid or dog (i'm still not speaking to either of them....) and the plastic mount on the XC broke and came away from the camera. Luckily its only the lens mount that was damaged, and the XT (as well as the 18-55 and Samyang 12mm in the bag) is all fine with no marks at all - the camera bag is a well padded affair and it was just the angle it landed at caused the break.

Anyway - I know need to buy a new zoom. I've been tempted with the 55-200 for some time but always resisted because the XC is a good lens. Now I need to buy one, is the 55-200 that much better? I'm sure the build quality is fantastic as with all Fuji XF lenses, but is the IQ better? The 50-140 is tempting but being just an enthusuast photographer, its an expensive purchase.

What do I photograph? I currently live and work in the Falkland Islands as im in the military. There is an abundance of wildlife down here including different types of penguins, sea lions, elephant seals etc. The zoom would be used to photograph them. They do let you get up very close (especially the penguins), but some of the elephant seals are huge and sometimes give the odd chase!!!

So, 55-200 - is it worth the extra dosh?

Shame Fuji's cashback deals have stopped :-(
Click to expand...

Can't speak for the long XC lens, but the 16-50 is every bit as good as the 18-55, it's just the build quality and feel that lets it down (along with lack of aperture ring or manual OIS switch).
 
Jimbo_468 said:
A bit of advice please :)

Like a numbskull, I left my camera bag on the edge of a table. Inside was my XT-1 with the XC 50-230 on it. This got knocked off the table by either my kid or dog (i'm still not speaking to either of them....) and the plastic mount on the XC broke and came away from the camera. Luckily its only the lens mount that was damaged, and the XT (as well as the 18-55 and Samyang 12mm in the bag) is all fine with no marks at all - the camera bag is a well padded affair and it was just the angle it landed at caused the break.

Anyway - I know need to buy a new zoom. I've been tempted with the 55-200 for some time but always resisted because the XC is a good lens. Now I need to buy one, is the 55-200 that much better? I'm sure the build quality is fantastic as with all Fuji XF lenses, but is the IQ better? The 50-140 is tempting but being just an enthusuast photographer, its an expensive purchase.

What do I photograph? I currently live and work in the Falkland Islands as im in the military. There is an abundance of wildlife down here including different types of penguins, sea lions, elephant seals etc. The zoom would be used to photograph them. They do let you get up very close (especially the penguins), but some of the elephant seals are huge and sometimes give the odd chase!!!

So, 55-200 - is it worth the extra dosh?

Shame Fuji's cashback deals have stopped :-(
Click to expand...

I've owned both lenses at the same time. Image quality alone to me doesn't justify the price difference. Hence I sold the 55-200 and kept the 50-230. If I hadn't needed the money to go towards a 23mm I would have loved to have kept the XF as it just feels/looks better and as Alan has said it gives a switch for IS and an aperture ring. I've invested most of my money in shorter primes, 14,23,35 & 56 as these are the focal lengths that I use most. If I used the longer lengths most I would have the 50-200 or 50-140.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top