The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

SsSsSsSsSnake said:
Ive found even the photos raw converter . Same as in aperture is very good on RAF files, i do like wat ive seen of iridient last night after a little play. Any guides to using it anywhere u know of?
Click to expand...

I've not looked for any, Chris but if I find any I'll shoot you a post.
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
I'm of a similar theory Frank, sort of if it aint broke then don't try and fix it. Strangely enough for my personal work I still use LR 4+, I convert everything to DNG either in LR or via the Adobe DNG converter, I then do my main tweaking in LR and if necessary finish off in CS6. Works for me.(y)

That doesn't in any way mean there's not another programme that can produce preferable results though, just that I'm quite happy with the workflow I have.

George.
Click to expand...

NOOB question here...why convert a RAF file to DNG?
 
quango2k said:
NOOB question here...why convert a RAF file to DNG?
Click to expand...

If you're using a version of PS that's earlier than CS6 then Adobe RAW Converter cannot deal with RAF files. As such, before you can import them into PS (in my case CS4) you need to first convert them into a format that PS can read. i.e. DNG (Adobe's own format) or TIFF etc..
 
quango2k said:
NOOB question here...why convert a RAF file to DNG?
Click to expand...
If the version of Lightroom or Photoshop you use doesn't support the raw files natively, you can use the free Adobe DNG converter to convert the raw file to a format which all versions support.

EDIT: Dunc beat me to it whilst I was typing!
 
Last edited:
XT10/XE2 owners, an easy question please:
When you are reviewing your photos on the camera screen, if you zoom in on the image can you then move between frames in the zoomed mode, or do you have to come out and re-zoom on the next image (a la X100)?
And when you do review images does the zoom function centre on the AF point chosen (a la X100)?

Many thanks in anticipation!
 
One the x-t10 you can cycle photos while zoomed using the front wheel. Not sure about the focus zone since I most often use wide/tracking, and while using that the quickzoom hits centre by default. I'l check it with a manually selected focus point later.
One thing I have noticed - you can zoom in further on a jpg than a raw.
 
jimmyjamjojo said:
One the x-t10 you can cycle photos while zoomed using the front wheel. Not sure about the focus zone since I most often use wide/tracking, and while using that the quickzoom hits centre by default. I'l check it with a manually selected focus point later.
One thing I have noticed - you can zoom in further on a jpg than a raw.
Click to expand...
You can also do that on the X-T1.
 
quango2k said:
NOOB question here...why convert a RAF file to DNG?
Click to expand...

I simple terms no real reason. It reduces the file size by stripping out extaneous matter, but with storage being cheap that's not really a problem these days. The important information is retained.

However...Windows doesn't recognise the RAF format. I like to look at thumbnails in windows so I convert to DNG for that. That's just my personal workflow. I could look at the RAW files in Lightroom, Fastsone or a host of other applications, but choose not to.
 
Cool, I've used lightroom for years and thought I was missing out on the next big thing for a minute :)
 
So on the trip home last night I had to detour to get a picture of the light on the fells... (Picture to come tonight after work).
I just didn't have the focal length to get what I wanted; (12mm, 27mm and XC16-50mm)... So I looked at the XF 55-200 and XC 50-230 on ebay.

At quick glance the XF is just under 3x more expensive (£110 / £290) - obviously build quality is lower but images look nice and sharp on XC.
Anyone got/tried both (or one) and can offer up their opinion on how they've found theirs... [Other option is 18-135 if I find some more funds].
 
I've got the 55-200. Not used it a lot, but it seems very well built. Focus nice and fast(or as fast as the body will allow) and images are sharp. Not overly heavy. Feels good in the hand.
 
I've owned the XC lens, which optically is excellent, but it just doesn't feel as well-built as the XF which I now own. Plus the XC depends on the camera's control wheel for aperture setting.
 
Mat0tam said:
So on the trip home last night I had to detour to get a picture of the light on the fells... (Picture to come tonight after work).
I just didn't have the focal length to get what I wanted; (12mm, 27mm and XC16-50mm)... So I looked at the XF 55-200 and XC 50-230 on ebay.

At quick glance the XF is just under 3x more expensive (£110 / £290) - obviously build quality is lower but images look nice and sharp on XC.
Anyone got/tried both (or one) and can offer up their opinion on how they've found theirs... [Other option is 18-135 if I find some more funds].
Click to expand...

I have the 18-135 and the 50-230, I'm not really to telephoto shooter, so went for the cheaper long range option. If I shot a lot in that range I'd probably go for the 55-200 as it is better built. The 50-230 does feel lightweight but the optics are good.

The 18-135 is an excellent general purpose lens, I'm using it more than I though I would, and currently its my 'goto' zoom (but I do prefer the primes)
 
I have the 55-200 and like the quality. I'd put it up there with my canon 70-200 f4l.
The weight is good, but JEEBUS CRIPES THAT ZOOM RING IS STIFF.
 
It's smooth, but wayyy stiffer than most (oooo errrr).
Seems to be a common complaint though. *shrug*
 
I have the 18-135 which is an excellent lens and WR if you are shooting with the XT1. Also have the 50-230 as I don't really shoot these distances. The pictures are good and obviously an extra 30mm reach but the build isn't as good as other fuji lenses but for the price you certainly can complain.
 
quango2k said:
NOOB question here...why convert a RAF file to DNG?
Click to expand...


Apart from the answer others have given with regards to RAF files not being supported by various earlier editions of LR/PS etc. I/we work with several different makes of camera all with differing raw file configurations, by converting all files to DNG means that all files then have the same extension which I/we prefer and fits in with my/our workflow.

There is also a reduction in file size without any loss of quality which is not terribly important but every bit helps, and there is no added side car file as all info is within one file which is nice for me/us and our clients. One other reason is that DNG files are supposedly more universal and should I agree to let a client have a direct copy of an original file (not vary often) there is more chance they will be able to read it with whatever software they use. "Works for me/us".(y)

I think that answers your question.,

George.
 
Mat0tam said:
So on the trip home last night I had to detour to get a picture of the light on the fells... (Picture to come tonight after work).
I just didn't have the focal length to get what I wanted; (12mm, 27mm and XC16-50mm)... So I looked at the XF 55-200 and XC 50-230 on ebay.

At quick glance the XF is just under 3x more expensive (£110 / £290) - obviously build quality is lower but images look nice and sharp on XC.
Anyone got/tried both (or one) and can offer up their opinion on how they've found theirs... [Other option is 18-135 if I find some more funds].
Click to expand...

I've got all 3. Favourite is the 18-135 since that covers 90% of my wants/needs in terms of focal length. Of the 2 teles, I much prefer the 55-200, mainly because it's just better! Marginal in terms of image quality but it feels much smoother, doesn't creep when tilted forwards and is faster at focussing. I bought the 50-230 as a lighter weight option with a little extra reach but only used it twice during the holiday it came on (for several shots each use but only fitted it twice.) Looking forward to the 100-400 which will cover me for all my wants/needs when combined with the 10-24 and 18-135 as well as the 1.4x telecon for the extra reach behind the tele.

mickledore said:
Really? Just checked mine and it's nice and smooth.
Click to expand...

So's mine.
 
That's twice today i've heard mention of laowa lenses... Never heard of them before!
 
jimmyjamjojo said:
That's twice today i've heard mention of laowa lenses... Never heard of them before!
Click to expand...

Go get one Jim before they become popular and triple in price. The 60mm UM is only $379 USD shipped, which is a steal. I wouldn't swap mine for a lens costing 3-4 times more.
 
Andysnap said:
Good grief, those are beautiful, like little jewelled broaches. Stunning quality, beautifully composed and just totally WOW.
Click to expand...

Thank you, Andy!! You're right, they're beautiful little creatures. The gold beetle is amazing, even life-size but when magnified you really see nature at it's finest. It's sitting on a round glass door handle that my little son broke not long ago. I knew I'd find a use for it eventually! :D
 
Hi All

I picked up an X-T1 and 18-135mm last week secondhand from Castle Cameras. So far I am very pleased with it. I do have one question.... I have noticed that the ISO shown on the LCD & in the viewfinder is not the same as the ISO set on the dial. For instance, if I set the dial to ISo 800, the LCD & Viewfinder shows ISO 1000. If i set the ISO dial to 200, the LCD & Viewfinder shows 250!
Is this a fault or a feature? I know you can fine tune the shutter speed by using the front dial, but cannot seem to make changes to the ISO.

Cheers
Russ
 
Just tried it on mine and they are the same. Even with exposure compensation dialled in.
 
Just a thought....I think auto ISO will change settings when shutter button is half pressed.
 
hmm, that is very odd because after spending a long time this afternoon, I still cannot get the LCD and ISO dial to show the same ISO. The other thing I have noticed is that I cannot select ISO100 in the menu, hence when I move the ISO dial to the L position, ISO200 is shown on the screen.:(

Any more ideas?
cheers:agree:
 
Russ G said:
hmm, that is very odd because after spending a long time this afternoon, I still cannot get the LCD and ISO dial to show the same ISO. The other thing I have noticed is that I cannot select ISO100 in the menu, hence when I move the ISO dial to the L position, ISO200 is shown on the screen.:(

Any more ideas?
cheers:agree:
Click to expand...

ISO 100 is only available when shooting in JPG mode I think.
 
Russ G said:
Hi All

I picked up an X-T1 and 18-135mm last week secondhand from Castle Cameras. So far I am very pleased with it. I do have one question.... I have noticed that the ISO shown on the LCD & in the viewfinder is not the same as the ISO set on the dial. For instance, if I set the dial to ISo 800, the LCD & Viewfinder shows ISO 1000. If i set the ISO dial to 200, the LCD & Viewfinder shows 250!
Is this a fault or a feature? I know you can fine tune the shutter speed by using the front dial, but cannot seem to make changes to the ISO.

Cheers
Russ
Click to expand...

Something weird is going on there, have you tried reseting all settings back to default?
 
I bet you've got auto ISO on. Make sure it's switched off in the first instance before turning the dial. If auto ISO is on it will override it.
 
Right, I have set it back to default, and no better. If I just move the dial a tiny bit (ie a lot less than a click) the IOS changes to the same as what the LCD shows. Its almost as though the dial has been fitted 'one spline out', I wonder if I could remove the dial and move it around one spline?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top