The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

Portraits and family outing
 
No I don't expect a perfect camera far from it. Just wondering how far off the sharpness are that all. I more likely having both system for a while till I decide if one can replace the other
 
rookies said:
Which
Click to expand...

Haven't a clue, don't care. Probably the 23, 56, 90.

I'm not really understanding your research into the Fuji system.
My process would be:
What do I shoot and at what focal length do I shoot?
Does the Fuji system offer lenses in the range I need?
Can I get all the lenses and body I want for the budget I am working to?

If at this point it is all looking good and critical sharpness is vital to me I'll be looking at actual shots (of subjects I'll be shooting) and not asking opinions. Better still try to find a way to shoot with the system and lenses you are interested in and judge yourself.
 
Barrysprout said:
Haven't a clue, don't care. Probably the 23, 56, 90.

I'm not really understanding your research into the Fuji system.
My process would be:
What do I shoot and at what focal length do I shoot?
Does the Fuji system offer lenses in the range I need?
Can I get all the lenses and body I want for the budget I am working to?

If at this point it is all looking good and critical sharpness is vital to me I'll be looking at actual shots (of subjects I'll be shooting) and not asking opinions. Better still try to find a way to shoot with the system and lenses you are interested in and judge yourself.
Click to expand...

Agree with this.

The entire Fuji X range is generally very good as crisp sharp images, lenses are *all* optically very good, though obviously you can always find a specific lens elsewhere that might be better than a single XF if you're desperate to play the numbers game), and camera handling (for me at least) is second to none, particularly stuff like the XT1's EVF. And, lens-depending, it's potentially WAY smaller and lighter than a DSLR.

The Fuji system is less good if you need super-mega-fast AF, extreme focal lengths for wildlife and all-day life from a single battery.

Best way to really assess if it's for you is to look at the flickr groups for the XT1 (or whatever) plus all the lens-specific groups and see what results others are getting for the kind of thing you want to shoot. Then if you like what you see, go to a shop and get your hands on a couple of cameras and see how you find them.
 
Thanks guys

Going try get a used one with a used lens that way I shouldn't lose much or anything.

What the DR like on these
 
rookies said:
No I don't expect a perfect camera far from it. Just wondering how far off the sharpness are that all. I more likely having both system for a while till I decide if one can replace the other
Click to expand...

Are you shooting with Arts at the moment?
 
twist said:
Are you shooting with Arts at the moment?
Click to expand...

I've had a art for a week borrowed it the 50mm loved it but not bough one yet as deciding where to
Settle
 
This is rookies, you'll get used to him eventually.

The key is not to expect him to listen to anything you say, he'll just do what he feels like anyway ;)
 
JYC said:
This is rookies, you'll get used to him eventually.

The key is not to expect him to listen to anything you say, he'll just do what he feels like anyway ;)
Click to expand...

Cheeky.

And have you a xt1 ?? :p
 
I think I'm actually in love with my X-T1.

With the 18-55mm
Coniston-Range1 by Andy, on Flickr

With the 50-230mm
Coniston-Range5 by Andy, on Flickr

50-230mm again
Wansfell2 by Andy, on Flickr

And the 18-55mm
Wansfell3 by Andy, on Flickr

All taken in the Lakes on Saturday on a lovely walk to Sallows and Sour Hows near Troutbeck.

Cheers

Andy
 
rookies said:
No I don't expect a perfect camera far from it. Just wondering how far off the sharpness are that all. I more likely having both system for a while till I decide if one can replace the other
Click to expand...

Isn't sharpness a teeny bit overrated... sometimes?

I can't help pixel peeping myself but I do try and tell myself that it's the final image that matters.

PS.
You used to have an A7 series camera, one of the best cameras (IQ wise) you can get for reasonable money and there are some very good lenses too. I don't personally see anything that a Fuji could do better (IQ wise) but maybe a specific Fuji and lens could be just a tad smaller but surely there can't be much in it bulk and weight wise so maybe it comes down to handling?

I can see advantages for you / some people in a DSLR (focus tracking etc...) so I do wonder what would suit you best... CSC or DSLR... Time for a good long think maybe?
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Isn't sharpness a teeny bit overrated... sometimes?

I can't help pixel peeping myself but I do try and tell myself that it's the final image that matters.
Click to expand...
I'd imagine if you're gonna compare a full frame DSLR to a Fuji X-T1, you'll need to understand that you're just not gonna get the same level of detail down to a pixel for pixel comparison.
 
Andysnap said:
I think I'm actually in love with my X-T1.

With the 18-55mm
Coniston-Range1 by Andy, on Flickr

With the 50-230mm
Coniston-Range5 by Andy, on Flickr

50-230mm again
Wansfell2 by Andy, on Flickr

And the 18-55mm
Wansfell3 by Andy, on Flickr

All taken in the Lakes on Saturday on a lovely walk to Sallows and Sour Hows near Troutbeck.

Cheers

Andy
Click to expand...

Andy, lovely images but in one and two the processing has caused some problems in the clouds on both on my screen.
 
woof woof said:
Isn't sharpness a teeny bit overrated... sometimes?

I can't help pixel peeping myself but I do try and tell myself that it's the final image that matters.

PS.
You used to have an A7 series camera, one of the best cameras (IQ wise) you can get for reasonable money and there are some very good lenses too. I don't personally see anything that a Fuji could do better (IQ wise) but maybe a specific Fuji and lens could be just a tad smaller but surely there can't be much in it bulk and weight wise so maybe it comes down to handling?

I can see advantages for you / some people in a DSLR (focus tracking etc...) so I do wonder what would suit you best... CSC or DSLR... Time for a good long think maybe?
Click to expand...

I know what you mean but at the end of the day, unless you're blowing up the images to serious proportions then a 20 year old D1X will produce stunning and detailed images.
 
Ian W said:
I'd imagine if you're gonna compare a full frame DSLR to a Fuji X-T1, you'll need to understand that you're just not gonna get the same level of detail down to a pixel for pixel comparison.
Click to expand...

My point is a bit more general than FF v APS-C as Rookies seems to be flitting a bit and that's fine if finances allow... but I can't help but think that pixel peeping flitting isn't the way to continued happiness :D especially for someone who has used FF cameras and dropped the system so quickly.
 
WingTsun said:
I know what you mean but at the end of the day, unless you're blowing up the images to serious proportions then a 20 year old D1X will produce stunning and detailed images.
Click to expand...

I have a first generation MFT Panasonic G1 and with a nice lens and at low to mid ISO's it gives stunning results, have to watch the highlights though... and of course as with everything the final image, how it is to be viewed and the quality required should decide the gear and the settings.

I just worry a bit when I see folk flitting... dunno why :D I can see plus points for the various systems but sharpness at 100% on screen is something that I'd try to put a bit further back in my mind :D
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I have a first generation MFT Panasonic G1 and with a nice lens and at low to mid ISO's it gives stunning results, have to watch the highlights though... and of course as with everything the final image, how it is to be viewed and the quality required should decide the gear and the settings.

I just worry a bit when I see folk flitting... dunno why :D I can see plus points for the various systems but sharpness at 100% on screen is something that I'd try to put a bit further back in my mind :D
Click to expand...

Agreed! :D
 
woof woof said:
My point is a bit more general than FF v APS-C as Rookies seems to be flitting a bit and that's fine if finances allow... but I can't help but think that pixel peeping flitting isn't the way to continued happiness :D especially for someone who has used FF cameras and dropped the system so quickly.
Click to expand...
Agreed ;)
 
How many on here ever print out larger than A3 size?
How many on here print out as large as A3 size?
Most images are viewed on phones, tablets, laptops or desktops and just about any camera will produce good sharp images.
Just think how much you have to shrink you're images to post on the gallery on here. And if you put full size images on Flickr or any other website you are asking for them to be ripped off.

There's a large element of willy waving going on with the purchase of ever more expensive and upto date gear that offers marginal improvement over existing stuff but the gear freaks just have to have it. Looks good down the pub or (heaven forbid) the camera club, but there is only a minute fraction of viewers of the finished product who can tell, or cares about, the different results from different gear.
 
mickledore said:
How many on here ever print out larger than A3 size?
How many on here print out as large as A3 size?
Most images are viewed on phones, tablets, laptops or desktops and just about any camera will produce good sharp images.
Just think how much you have to shrink you're images to post on the gallery on here. And if you put full size images on Flickr or any other website you are asking for them to be ripped off.

There's a large element of willy waving going on with the purchase of ever more expensive and upto date gear that offers marginal improvement over existing stuff but the gear freaks just have to have it. Looks good down the pub or (heaven forbid) the camera club, but there is only a minute fraction of viewers of the finished product who can tell, or cares about, the different results from different gear.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. I seem to upgrade about once every 4-5 years. Most of my stuff is never printed above A4 and I doubt whether I'd see much difference with the results of my older D1X and those of the X-T1 if we're talking IQ alone. And.. the X-T1 has begun to show me that the same can be said for lenses. I'm using lenses that are 30-40 years old and cost 10-15 times less than many of my lenses have cost in the past and they're giving me just as good results. Maybe it's just my images suck but I like 'em so I careth not a farthing! :D
 
mickledore said:
How many on here ever print out larger than A3 size?
How many on here print out as large as A3 size?
Most images are viewed on phones, tablets, laptops or desktops and just about any camera will produce good sharp images.
Just think how much you have to shrink you're images to post on the gallery on here. And if you put full size images on Flickr or any other website you are asking for them to be ripped off.

There's a large element of willy waving going on with the purchase of ever more expensive and upto date gear that offers marginal improvement over existing stuff but the gear freaks just have to have it. Looks good down the pub or (heaven forbid) the camera club, but there is only a minute fraction of viewers of the finished product who can tell, or cares about, the different results from different gear.
Click to expand...

I have quite a few A3 prints (and have done A3 test prints too) I have to say that my digital ones all beat my 35mm film ones no matter what the digital chip size.

I also have an A4 (enlarged and cropped to fill the sheet) print from a Medion compact which is possibly the 2nd worst camera I've owned (the worst was a digital keyring camera) and it looks good.

These days I rarely print and most of the time I just look at pictures on my pc's and share them electronically often at 2000 pixels wide. I've seen pictures I've shared at 2000 pixels printed and framed on peoples walls :D and viewed normally they still look good :D
 
Last edited:
mickledore said:
Have you got that the right way round?
Click to expand...
haha :D

I like using old lenses and in the centre of the frame once stopped down a bit they give excellent results. It's wide open and away from the centre that they obviously and significantly lose out to good modern lenses. IMO.
 
woof woof said:
Isn't sharpness a teeny bit overrated... sometimes?
Click to expand...

I'm with you on this one. Whilst I do like a nice sharp picture, it's not the be all and end all.

I and many more like me I'm sure never print our work. Never view it in full size. Only ever post our work on a web site or forum that limits the image size.

Even if viewing "full size" how many of us have the pixels on our monitors to view it as it was shot?

Just my two cents.

I'll get my coat...

:)
 
woof woof said:
haha :D

I like using old lenses and in the centre of the frame once stopped down a bit they give excellent results. It's wide open and away from the centre that they obviously and significantly lose out to good modern lenses. IMO.
Click to expand...

Definitely. If I'm thinking about my Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar MC f/3.5 135mm Electric, it produces that silky, buttery, Leica-like feel to images that I really didn't expect from a lens this old and this cheap. And somehow, it feels that bit more satisfying to produce images with a lens like this than it does to do the same with the latest £1500 all singing, all dancing. Here's one taken with this lens and it's exactly this kind of smooth, lovely rendition that I personally love! Plenty of detail, tack sharp but that overall ambience that only some lenses manage to produce, at least to my eyes.



http://thirtyfivemill.com/blossom-2/
 
WingTsun said:
Andy, lovely images but in one and two the processing has caused some problems in the clouds on both on my screen.
Click to expand...

Yep, see what you mean Dunc, I'll have another look at them. I think some of the issues may be flickr related as they don't look so bad on my originals.

mickledore said:
Very nice.
A walk up the Garburn Pass?
Bagging Wainwrights?
See many bikers?
Click to expand...

Yep, yep and a few but not as many as I was expecting. I'm up to 46 now so only another 168 to go.... :eek::D
 
Andysnap said:
Yep, yep and a few but not as many as I was expecting. I'm up to 46 now so only another 168 to go.... :eek::D
Click to expand...

46? They will be the easy ones. Wait till you have to go to Grike, Little Mell Fell or Binsey. Then you'll question your sanity!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top