The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

frod said:
I'd just get a Nissin i40 and use the 18-55.
Click to expand...

I have got a Nikon SB24 which I believe will work with the X-T1, I may give that a go.

stupar said:
Lenses for hire rent out fuji lenses so you will be able to get some fast zooms or some faster primes.

£89 (not including courier) will get you the 16-55 f2.8 and the 50-140 f2.8 for 3 days hire
That would give you a good focal range coverage.
Click to expand...

That sounds reasonable, I'll have a look.
 
mickledore said:
I might be prepared to loan you my Nissin i40, subject to the usual terms etc.
Click to expand...

How very kind. I'll see how well the Nikon works but I may well take you up on your very kind offer. (y)

I've had a look at the lenses for hire site and I'm thinking that as the venue is going to be a bit cramped, dark and busy, the 16mm f1.4 might be a good addition, just gives me a bit of leeway in the darker areas if I don't want to blind everyone with flash and a bit of a wider viewpoint.
 
Andysnap said:
How very kind. I'll see how well the Nikon works but I may well take you up on your very kind offer. (y)

I've had a look at the lenses for hire site and I'm thinking that as the venue is going to be a bit cramped, dark and busy, the 16mm f1.4 might be a good addition, just gives me a bit of leeway in the darker areas if I don't want to blind everyone with flash and a bit of a wider viewpoint.
Click to expand...

The 16mm f1.4 will be great. It was the lens I was really missing at the last wedding I photographed. I bought it about two months ago and I love it.
 
I've been playing around with the new Fuji 35mm F2 lens on apro. It's a FL (50ish equive) that I've always been happy with so I'm kinda thinkin' that I might invest in one. Either this new F2 version or the more established F1.4 version. I'm not really sure about this one as it doesn't seem to be as sharp as I was expecting. As I've never tried the F1.4 version I have nothing to compare it with, only the 18-55mm zoom.

So here's a few "Test Type" shots that I'd be interested to know your thoughts on the results, not so much on my "Amazing Photography" (only joking):D but more on the performance of the lens.

X-T1, 35mm F2 Lens, 1/200th @ F5.6, ISO-200, Handheld but supported.
Swing (1)-101130 by G.K.Jnr., on Flickr

X-T1, 35mm F2 Lens, 1/180th @ F8, ISO-200, Handheld but supported.
Jungle Jim-101137 by G.K.Jnr., on Flickr

X-T1, 35mm F2 Lens, 1/180th @ F5.6, ISO-200, Handheld but supported.
Swing (2)-101142 by G.K.Jnr., on Flickr

X-T1, 35mm F2 Lens, 1/350th @ F5.6, ISO-200, Handheld but supported.
Park Bench-101155 by G.K.Jnr., on Flickr

:ty: for looking and any comments welcome.,(y)

George.
 
George, good morning.
I have the 35mm 1.4. I quite like it and it is fast becoming my "standard" lens.To my untutored eye it looks nice and sharp, though I'm not a pixel peeper so others may disagree. I won't post any shots on here because the compression needed to fit on either here or Flickr takes the edge off things.
The only slight drawback for some is that it isn't lightning fast at hitting focus. That doesn't matter to me for my style of photography, but for some a half second delay is equivalent to a lifetime! I've heard it said that it's not brilliant at taking shots of kids/grandkids running around, but as I don't have either of those I sleep easy!
 
mickledore said:
George, good morning.
I have the 35mm 1.4. I quite like it and it is fast becoming my "standard" lens.To my untutored eye it looks nice and sharp, though I'm not a pixel peeper so others may disagree. I won't post any shots on here because the compression needed to fit on either here or Flickr takes the edge off things.
The only slight drawback for some is that it isn't lightning fast at hitting focus. That doesn't matter to me for my style of photography, but for some a half second delay is equivalent to a lifetime! I've heard it said that it's not brilliant at taking shots of kids/grandkids running around, but as I don't have either of those I sleep easy!
Click to expand...


Thanks for that Frank, appreciate your comments matey.(y)

With regards to the slower auto focus of the F1.4, that would not be an issue with me either as my normal way of working is manual everything. I'm much more interested in the ability of the optics to record good sharp detail at each stop. I'm hoping to have both of them on lone pretty soon so I'll do a more controlled side by side test with flash etc. The extra stop of the F1.4 would be useful to have but it's certainly not a decision maker for me.

George.
 
Went to the SWPP show today and had a play with the 100-400, no images, but it focused quickly and wasn't as heavy as I expected it to be

Its obviously rather large and did dwarf the X-T1 it was on, focus limiter worked well too, can see it being very popular

Should add it felt and looked very well made of quality materials, zoom ring has to turn a long way round to obtain maximum distance
 
Last edited:
tijuana taxi said:
Went to the SWPP show today and had a play with the 100-400, no images, but it focused quickly and wasn't as heavy as I expected it to be

Its obviously rather large and did dwarf the X-T1 it was on, focus limiter worked well too, can see it being very popular
Click to expand...

Info like that just makes me want one even more :D
Might rent one from LFH when Stewart gets them in.....kinda try before you buy.
 
tijuana taxi said:
Went to the SWPP show today and had a play with the 100-400, no images, but it focused quickly and wasn't as heavy as I expected it to be

Its obviously rather large and did dwarf the X-T1 it was on, focus limiter worked well too, can see it being very popular

Should add it felt and looked very well made of quality materials, zoom ring has to turn a long way round to obtain maximum distance
Click to expand...

Is this good? or did you think it was acceptable? Thanks
 
Is this good? or did you think it was acceptable? Thanks
Click to expand...

I'm no fan of very large lenses on these smaller cameras, defeats the object to me and might as well have stuck with my FF Canon.

Saying that it didn't feel overly heavy, felt no worse than the 50-140mm to me, but it still is a big old lump and dwarfs the little camera.

If you need that sort of focal length, I can think of more appropriate combos for this type of lens.

So no, not good, but that's just my somewhat biased opinion
 
Last edited:
24520209406_1cf2d478f7_c.jpg


One from the back doorstep, lovely light on this tree, taken with X-T10 and 56mm. Getting really pee'd off with Flickr lately, on my screen this image is as sharp as a sharp thing...

Adam
 
Went out with Mardybum and Posiview of this parish. Train was schedulded to be pulled by the rejuvenated Flying Scotsman, but braking problems on the tender put paid to that.

Instead, and perhaps a better spectacle we were treated to two Black 5s working nicely together. Absolutely no light at all. Dull as dirty dishwater but worth it to see these two doing what they were built to do.


Two Black 5s by Frank Yates2010, on Flickr
 
fabs said:
Dumb question alert!

Switched the X-T1 on earlier and accidentally pushed the shutter button and it triggered.

Thing is, the lens cap was on. I thought it would only trigger when focus was achieved (autofocus).

Had a look in the menus and couldn't see anything that would change this.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you have"shoot without lens" switched on, which is needed when using legacy glass.
 
Yes. It's in the menu. Simple to disable. You need it if using lenses such as Samyang which are not recognised by the software.
 
Just tried this. With it set to off and manual focus nothing happens. With auto focus set it hunts but doesn't fire. I'd expect it to hunt with cap on which it does but doesn't fire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top