The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

dibbly dobbler said:
Right - just in case anybody is still awake/interested ;)

With Fuji native lenses and a Raynox 250 here's what you can get according to this site: http://extreme-macro.co.uk/raynox-adapter-techniques/

60mm + Raynox 250 gives 1.2x mag at around 8-12cm
90mm + Raynox 250 gives 1.06x mag at around 10-12cm
18-135mm + Raynox 250 gives 1.6x mag at around 10-12cm (assuming zoomed out to 135mm)

Interesting as the results are fairly similar for the 60 and the 90 - the 18-135 has more mag due mainly to to longer focal length.

I already have the 18-135 so maybe the answer is to try it for starters and see how I go :)

Thanks again all who commented!
Click to expand...

Hi All.

Well - not sure if anybody is interested in my witterings but a couple of updates:

1. According to Fuji rumours the 120mm macro has been dropped completely, not just delayed and Fuji are now considering a shorter 1:1 macro lens around the 80mm mark (not any time soon though I guess.

2. I had a go with a Raynox 150 mounted on my 18-135 and (perhaps unsurprisingly) the results were decent but not quite good enough. See below:


18-135 + Raynox 150 by Mike Smith, on Flickr

Not sure on next move yet... options are:
1. Use a different brand with a mount (eg Nikon 100mm) - fine for macro (eg manual focus) but I'd want to do other things with it which would need autofocus
2. Try a Fuji 60mm or maybe even a 90mm
3. Wait for the Fuji 80ish mm 1:1 macro

Hmm....
 
dibbly dobbler said:
Hi All.

Well - not sure if anybody is interested in my witterings but a couple of updates:

1. According to Fuji rumours the 120mm macro has been dropped completely, not just delayed and Fuji are now considering a shorter 1:1 macro lens around the 80mm mark (not any time soon though I guess.

2. I had a go with a Raynox 150 mounted on my 18-135 and (perhaps unsurprisingly) the results were decent but not quite good enough. See below:


18-135 + Raynox 150 by Mike Smith, on Flickr

Not sure on next move yet... options are:
1. Use a different brand with a mount (eg Nikon 100mm) - fine for macro (eg manual focus) but I'd want to do other things with it which would need autofocus
2. Try a Fuji 60mm or maybe even a 90mm
3. Wait for the Fuji 80ish mm 1:1 macro

Hmm....
Click to expand...

Really nice image. But what about the Fuji XF mount Zeiss Touit 50M 1:1 macro as an option ?
 
dibbly dobbler said:
Hi All.

Well - not sure if anybody is interested in my witterings but a couple of updates:

1. According to Fuji rumours the 120mm macro has been dropped completely, not just delayed and Fuji are now considering a shorter 1:1 macro lens around the 80mm mark (not any time soon though I guess.

2. I had a go with a Raynox 150 mounted on my 18-135 and (perhaps unsurprisingly) the results were decent but not quite good enough. See below:


18-135 + Raynox 150 by Mike Smith, on Flickr

Not sure on next move yet... options are:
1. Use a different brand with a mount (eg Nikon 100mm) - fine for macro (eg manual focus) but I'd want to do other things with it which would need autofocus
2. Try a Fuji 60mm or maybe even a 90mm
3. Wait for the Fuji 80ish mm 1:1 macro

Hmm....
Click to expand...
That's nice. Got me thinking about one for my 55-200mm. I'm not a massive macro shooter, but it's something I like to dabble with from time to time.
 
I've been lucky enough to have owned and still own a copy of every Higher end Nikon SLR film camera from a Nikon F onwards. But without a doubt the unit I've liked using most of all is a Motor Driven Nikon FE2 it just feels right.
Is it any wonder then why I like using a Fuji X-T1 so much, probably more than any other current digital camera. The similarity to my FE2 is uncanny and the handling is just as good. Just thought I'd do a shot of them together.:)

Nikon FE2 And Fuji X-T1-802863 by G.K.Jnr., on Flickr

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

George.
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
I've been lucky enough to have owned and still own a copy of every Higher end Nikon SLR film camera from a Nikon F onwards. But without a doubt the unit I've liked using most of all is a Motor Driven Nikon FE2 it just feels right.
Is it any wonder then why I like using a Fuji X-T1 so much, probably more than any other current digital camera. The similarity to my FE2 is uncanny and the handling is just as good. Just thought I'd do a shot of them together.:)

Nikon FE2 And Fuji X-T1-802863 by G.K.Jnr., on Flickr

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

George.
Click to expand...

And a very nice picture, too! I used to love my old FM2N.
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
I've been lucky enough to have owned and still own a copy of every Higher end Nikon SLR film camera from a Nikon F onwards. But without a doubt the unit I've liked using most of all is a Motor Driven Nikon FE2 it just feels right.
Is it any wonder then why I like using a Fuji X-T1 so much, probably more than any other current digital camera. The similarity to my FE2 is uncanny and the handling is just as good. Just thought I'd do a shot of them together.:)

Nikon FE2 And Fuji X-T1-802863 by G.K.Jnr., on Flickr

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

George.
Click to expand...

That is a good looking camera.
 
MPB were surprisingly generous in their estimations compared to what I paid on 2 out of 3 items. For now though, I've decided to stick with my D7100 and bought myself a Fuji X30 for when I can't be bothered lugging that about :)
 
I had an FM3a until 2012. That was my favourite of all time - it was beautifully made and was the reason I bought into Fuji X. There is nothing out there at the moment that compares with Fuji for quality, looks, handling and performance.
 
Well, following a fortuitous post on the local photography Facebook page, a local tog had the very bag I was after. As such I got myself an as new Hadley Digital for £45 and the kind fellow even delivered it to me as he lived just up the road.

I'm well chuffed. The Fuji gear I have thus far fits snugly and no, there's not much room for kit growth. But hey, one doesn't need to take all one's gear on every outing, eh?

ImageUploadedByTalk Photography Forums1461676447.979985.jpg

ImageUploadedByTalk Photography Forums1461676478.934227.jpg

ImageUploadedByTalk Photography Forums1461676492.990264.jpg
 
Mart61 said:
Well, following a fortuitous post on the local photography Facebook page, a local tog had the very bag I was after. As such I got myself an as new Hadley Digital for £45 and the kind fellow even delivered it to me as he lived just up the road.

I'm well chuffed. The Fuji gear I have thus far fits snugly and no, there's not much room for kit growth. But hey, one doesn't need to take all one's gear on every outing, eh?
Click to expand...

I've got one of those, its great for a body and a couple of lenses, but as you say no room for kit expansion, which is why I have larger Billingham bags too.......
 
Nice bag and nice price. I second the sentiment that you don't need to take all kit.
In my current rucksack (leftover from dslr days), I carry the x-t10 with 18-55 attached, 55-200, filters, stepup rings, rocket blower, big lens cloth which doubles as lens changing shroud, lens cleaning fluid, peak design strap, and a remote shutter release.

Although all that is nice to have, I often find myself leaving the house with tge camera around my neck and 55-200 in a jacket pocket.
With the weather changing, i'm looking for a satchel type bag to replace the jacket pocket. If it can fit my lunchbox too then bonus.
Looking at the thinktank retrospectives, but unsure on size at the moment.

Edit: forgot to add that with all that stuff, the rucksack is still 60% empty space!
 
Last edited:
L O again. Weekend guests have gone and I can now get the camera out.

I have one of these as my small bag
https://www.parkcameras.com/p/21108...ogleShopping&gclid=CM-Uoau6rMwCFYTGGwod1QQJMA

Easily takes X-T1 plus lens and two spare lenses (but not the big zoom)
That's about all it takes. A thin wallet and phone and it's full.

For longer days I have a Think Tank Retrospective 10.
That holds just about anything I need for a long day out - body 3 or 4 lenses, filters gorillapod and even a drinks bottle.

That's enough gear talk. I'm going stir crazy with having to be nice and polite all weekend. Anyone fancy a trip to Coniston Coppermines on Thursday? Maybe Kelly Hall Tarn as well.
 
mickledore said:
L O again. Weekend guests have gone and I can now get the camera out.

I have one of these as my small bag
https://www.parkcameras.com/p/21108...ogleShopping&gclid=CM-Uoau6rMwCFYTGGwod1QQJMA

Easily takes X-T1 plus lens and two spare lenses (but not the big zoom)
That's about all it takes. A thin wallet and phone and it's full.

For longer days I have a Think Tank Retrospective 10.
That holds just about anything I need for a long day out - body 3 or 4 lenses, filters gorillapod and even a drinks bottle.

That's enough gear talk. I'm going stir crazy with having to be nice and polite all weekend. Anyone fancy a trip to Coniston Coppermines on Thursday? Maybe Kelly Hall Tarn as well.
Click to expand...

Glad to see you're back in the game!!! Thursday is a possibility for me, but it's a fair old trek (I assume that we would meet somewhere near Preston, then take one car), and the weather looks better first thing (at the moment) so if I went I'd want to be there early (any maybe switch the two locations around). Will be able to confirm tomorrow.
 
jimmyjamjojo said:
Nice bag and nice price. I second the sentiment that you don't need to take all kit.
In my current rucksack (leftover from dslr days), I carry the x-t10 with 18-55 attached, 55-200, filters, stepup rings, rocket blower, big lens cloth which doubles as lens changing shroud, lens cleaning fluid, peak design strap, and a remote shutter release.

Although all that is nice to have, I often find myself leaving the house with tge camera around my neck and 55-200 in a jacket pocket.
With the weather changing, i'm looking for a satchel type bag to replace the jacket pocket. If it can fit my lunchbox too then bonus.
Looking at the thinktank retrospectives, but unsure on size at the moment.

Edit: forgot to add that with all that stuff, the rucksack is still 60% empty space!
Click to expand...

Plenty of truth in that. I use a Hadley Pro and it can easily fit 3 spare lenses plus a bunch of other kit but I'm trying more and more to only carry one spare lens and considering another smaller bag to make life a bit easier when out and about
 
Managed to get out of work at lunch yesterday and out into the fells. Here are my favourite 2 - one with Samyang 12mm and 10stop - second with Helios 44-2 58mm vintage lens :).

Oh I do love the Velvia setting :rolleyes:

Honister Bothy
26061413263_7c7e8d0287_b_d.jpg


Fleetwith Pike
26599815451_db15c23b77_b_d.jpg
 
I know how you feel. Every day this week the forecast has been bad but it has turned out fine. The intention was to go up to approx 2000' where weather will be different from sea level.
Will wait to see tonight's forecast. May not make a decision till I look out the window tomorrow morning.
 
Mat0tam said:
Managed to get out of work at lunch yesterday and out into the fells. Here are my favourite 2 - one with Samyang 12mm and 10stop - second with Helios 44-2 58mm vintage lens :).

Oh I do love the Velvia setting :rolleyes:

Honister Bothy
26061413263_7c7e8d0287_b_d.jpg


Fleetwith Pike
26599815451_db15c23b77_b_d.jpg
Click to expand...
May I be a little critical?
I don't normally shoot on Velvia and now I think I know why. Sorry, but they look over processed in some way. This may be a personal thing! They do look like film shots in days of yore so in that respect they work, but to my untutored eye they look "wrong" Can't quite put my finger on it though.
Your picture of the tarn in your other thread somehow looks underexposed. Presumably this was on Velvia too?
Not oversaturated, but too rich. Am I making sense?
I wonder if I've become too used to the clean look of digital images? I once took hundreds of similar shots from similar places and I know that bothy well; slept in it once.

Feel free to shoot me down if you don't agree.
 
mickledore said:
May I be a little critical?
I don't normally shoot on Velvia and now I think I know why. Sorry, but they look over processed in some way. This may be a personal thing! They do look like film shots in days of yore so in that respect they work, but to my untutored eye they look "wrong" Can't quite put my finger on it though.
Your picture of the tarn in your other thread somehow looks underexposed. Presumably this was on Velvia too?
Not oversaturated, but too rich. Am I making sense?
I wonder if I've become too used to the clean look of digital images? I once took hundreds of similar shots from similar places and I know that bothy well; slept in it once.

Feel free to shoot me down if you don't agree.
Click to expand...
I know what you mean. It's the high contrast mixed with high saturation that velvia gives. I think it works, as you say it gives the film look.

When I use velvia I often turn down the colour a notch or two. Some people say that defeats the purpose, to them I say - there is much more to velvia than saturation.
 
mickledore said:
May I be a little critical?
I don't normally shoot on Velvia and now I think I know why. Sorry, but they look over processed in some way. This may be a personal thing! They do look like film shots in days of yore so in that respect they work, but to my untutored eye they look "wrong" Can't quite put my finger on it though.
Your picture of the tarn in your other thread somehow looks underexposed. Presumably this was on Velvia too?
Not oversaturated, but too rich. Am I making sense?
I wonder if I've become too used to the clean look of digital images? I once took hundreds of similar shots from similar places and I know that bothy well; slept in it once.
Feel free to shoot me down if you don't agree.
Click to expand...

No shooting down will occur. Appreciate the pointers!

I would say that i'm possibly more of a fan of slight over saturation than most... and I think this combined with the velvia colours has maybe moved it a little to far that way?
If I was at home id probably load it up and have a look at some comparisons with different styles. The bookcase comparison in this FujivsFuji link does make it a little clearer how much different velvia is - will explore tonight.

As for the location, its a perfect summer stop off! The waterfall pools below would be nice and enticing in summer...
 
jimmyjamjojo said:
I know what you mean. It's the high contrast mixed with high saturation that velvia gives. I think it works, as you say it gives the film look.
When I use velvia I often turn down the colour a notch or two. Some people say that defeats the purpose, to them I say - there is much more to velvia than saturation.
Click to expand...

Might try turning it down a little - or check out the Provia simulation.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
I think Image #1 is suffering from a colour cast from the filter, I'm not really sure if the 10 stopper made much difference to the image though. @Mat0tam do you have that shot without the 10 stopper
Click to expand...

I do - which I can post up tonight.
#1 is more processed than the none ND one but il either match the settings of just post the natural ones.
The filter does sap some of greens out of the image (in my opinion) and can see a bit of a magenta cast in the sky.
 
Last edited:
Hope you don't mind but I've just had a play at converting to mono. Only had the JPEG to work on so it's far from the best. Think I prefer this to the colour version, but then I'm biased!


2 by mickledore on Talk Photography
 
I think the darker sky gives this a much more balanced feel. looking at this and then my original its clear that the sky and horizon is alittle off.

I like your conversation... I may try something similar tonight ha.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Going to give this one a miss, I'm a bit tight on time tomorrow, its a long way (2+ hours) and the weather looks pants, if you do go, I hope that the forecast is wrong and you have a good day :)
Click to expand...

Just been looking at the weather. Saturday looks reasonable. Even high in the quarries it should be acceptable. Think I'll postpone till then. Park at top of Walna Scar road then 1 mile walk in. Might go to the dressing floors by the YHA after though that's another mile walk in. Kelly Hall Tarn on the way home.

Saturday any use to you?
 
Last edited:
@Mat0tam @mickledore

I think that another factor that comes into play here is the colour rendition through the glass. This certainly varies from lens to lens, and I have always found the Fuji lenses to be more punchy than other brands with respect to Velvia. There is a difference with the Fuji Glass as well with the colour rendition of the 56/90 being notable different from say the 18/55

mickledore said:
Saturday any use to you?
Click to expand...

Will let you know
 
It looks like Mrs Stupar and family are going to treat me to a 90mm f2 for my portrait work so the Jupiter 11a 135mm M42 lens and adaptor that i bought for similar use will be no longer be required and to be honest the 90mm will be a better focal length as well as having the benefit of AF.

Keep your eyes peeled in the for sale section for more details if any of you fuji users are interested :thumbs:
 
stupar said:
It looks like Mrs Stupar and family are going to treat me to a 90mm f2 for my portrait work so the Jupiter 11a 135mm M42 lens and adaptor that i bought for similar use will be no longer be required and to be honest the 90mm will be a better focal length as well as having the benefit of AF.

Keep your eyes peeled in the for sale section for more details if any of you fuji users are interested (y)
Click to expand...

Snapped up by @mickledore
That man is fast!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top