The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

macvisual said:
Anyone shoot the XF27mm f2.8 lens..? I've one arriving tomorrow. I think the focal length and size is pretty cool.

Anyone else want to share their XF27mm experience's and images...?
Click to expand...

I have one and I must confess it does not get a lot of use BUT I use it on an XT-1 without the grip as a walkabout set up basically to take snaps

These are not very good ( understatement) taken on a day out in York ( she who must be obeyed wanted to do some shopping) they are RAWS converted to jpg with no pp

p808369676-5.jpg



p832390827-4.jpg
 
chrism_scotland said:
Right.... 100-400 or 50-140?.....
Click to expand...
I'm having the same dilemma, I'm leaning towards the 50-140 with the 2x teleconvertor. If I'm not mistaken that would give the equivalent of 100-280 F4 ? A bit shorter than the 100-400 but more versatile.
 
Just been doing my nightly shufty at the Fuji refurb store and it seems to be broken ! Last time this happened was before the X Pro 2 launch. What does this mean, is there something new afoot. o_O
 
Duh, wasn't thinking straight. Thought 2.8, 3.5. 4
 
chrism_scotland said:
Right.... 100-400 or 50-140?.....
Click to expand...
I intensely dislike zooms which telescope externally, so it's the 50-140 for me. (OK, I have the 18-55, but nothing's perfect).
 
jimgallaher said:
Just been doing my nightly shufty at the Fuji refurb store and it seems to be broken ! Last time this happened was before the X Pro 2 launch. What does this mean, is there something new afoot. o_O
Click to expand...

any idea how long it usually stays down for? had an item or two in the basket earlier but didn't get a chance to go through with the purchase.
 
chrism_scotland said:
Right.... 100-400 or 50-140?.....
Click to expand...

really different lenses in terms of use. i had the longer lens and found it to be exceptional. iOS is off the chart imo. if you shoot long its a no brainer.

kept the shorter one as its a workhorse for weddings and i also have to 1.4 tc for a little more reach.
 
Last edited:
addicknchips said:
any idea how long it usually stays down for? had an item or two in the basket earlier but didn't get a chance to go through with the purchase.
Click to expand...
To be honest, no. Last time it was down for ages.
 
Stephen L said:
I intensely dislike zooms which telescope externally, so it's the 50-140 for me. (OK, I have the 18-55, but nothing's perfect).
Click to expand...

I've always preferred fixed length telephoto's myself

addicknchips said:
really different lenses in terms of use. i had the longer lens and found it to be exceptional. iOS is off the chart imo. if you shoot long its a no brainer.

kept the shorter one as its a workhorse for weddings and i also have to 1.4 tc for a little more reach.
Click to expand...

I do think the 50-140 & 1.4x combo would be more versatile and with the combo of the 16-55 would cover off almost everything.
The 100-400 intrigues me as I feel it could be good for some different landscape shots with the extra length but do feel the 50-140 is a more "handy" length!
 
I went for the 100-400 because I enjoy wildlife photography. Apart from that I would have gone with the 50-140. It is more versatile in my opinion
 
Alan Clogwyn said:
I already have an X-E1 for IR, I don't like it - viewfinder is far too small, buttons are all in the wrong place and the autofocus is pathetic. It's currently for sale.

On another note, I'm glad I woke up early this morning:

Pure Gold by Alan Jones, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Well done! lovely picture really.
Adam Wortman said:
Anyone been using the San Disk 95mb UHS-I cards with the XT2? If so, do they perform ok or do you need to splash out for the UHS-II cards?

Thanks
Click to expand...

I have the same questions :P

I am currently using in the first slot a san disk 80mb read and on the 2nd slot a san disk 40mb (just for jpegs) but I find it quite slow to be honest, I need a 1st slot memory card faster than the one I have. Im definetly going for a UHS 1 cause its a lot cheaper than the UHS 2
 
I bit the bullet yesterday evening and ordered a 50-140mm with 1.4TC from Wex, it's out of stock at the moment. I'm already wondering if it will be long enough o_O I'll see how I get on with it and maybe go for the 2X TC at some point. Expect to se my 55-200mm on the classified in the near future.
 
Well, apart from my X-E2, I'm solely X-T2 now as my Pro2 took the trip to MPB yesterday for what I consider to be a very fair price, considering I'd owned it for 6 months. And that X-E2 might also be going in favour of an X70.
 
Don't know if this is old news but Wex are offering £420 trade in for the XT1 against the XT2 making body only just £830 sounds a good deal to me..
 
I'm resisting the XT2 for now, though you lot aren't helping much.

Grabbed these with the 35/f2 on a trip home a couple of weeks ago. Meet my new nieces, Amber and Faith. I'm not really a "portrait person" but I'm very happy with these :)

I'm liking the 35/f2 so far. I think it's probably not quite as "special" feeling as the f1.4, but it's still a bloody good lens. I'm off to Japan next week so it'll get a really good amount of use, particularly if the weather is as rainy as forecast!


Amber by stickyfiddle, on Flickr


Quizzical by stickyfiddle, on Flickr


Amber with Grandad by stickyfiddle, on Flickr

And one of the cats, making himself extremely comfortable...


Monty and Big Ted by stickyfiddle, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Stephen L said:
Well, apart from my X-E2, I'm solely X-T2 now as my Pro2 took the trip to MPB yesterday for what I consider to be a very fair price, considering I'd owned it for 6 months. And that X-E2 might also be going in favour of an X70.
Click to expand...
I've never owned/used an X-E2 but I can thoroughly recommend the X70, fantastic little camera, easily pocketable. It took me a while to get used to the lack of viewfinder, but the tilting screen makes up for that. I do find the exposure comp dial moves too easily, especially when it's in and out of a pocket. On a recent trip to Barcelona I missed some good shots because they were way underexposed, I was shooting jpeg only so LR could only recover so much.
 
Toxic said:
Don't know if this is old news but Wex are offering £420 trade in for the XT1 against the XT2 making body only just £830 sounds a good deal to me..
Click to expand...

Was that on examination of the T1 or an estimate based on the description, I described mine as best as I could, no marks scratches, they classed it as "little use" and was offered £400 which I still think is ok but £420 would be better :)
 
jimgallaher said:
I bit the bullet yesterday evening and ordered a 50-140mm with 1.4TC from Wex, it's out of stock at the moment. I'm already wondering if it will be long enough o_O I'll see how I get on with it and maybe go for the 2X TC at some point. Expect to se my 55-200mm on the classified in the near future.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking of doing something similar in the future once I'm all finished buying stuff for the new pad, the 55-200 is OK (better on the XT2 of course) but that f2.8 is calling me! ANybody done any side to side comparisons with the 50-140 on a converter and the 55-200?
 
Had my xt2 for a week or so now but not had a chance to properly use it. Heading for Skye tomorrow morning (weather sealing will come in useful!) so having a look through the menus now. What is the best setting for dynamic range? I will probably be doing mostly landscape and if by some miracle there's a clear night maybe some stars. Anyone changed any other settings?
 
I thought long and hard and decided to cancel my order for the 50-140mm, I've realised I only use my 55-200mm a half dozen times a year, so the 50-140mm would probably be used similarly. It's a lot of money to be sitting doing nothing.
 
Alan Clogwyn said:
I'm thinking of doing something similar in the future once I'm all finished buying stuff for the new pad, the 55-200 is OK (better on the XT2 of course) but that f2.8 is calling me! ANybody done any side to side comparisons with the 50-140 on a converter and the 55-200?
Click to expand...
No. Not done any comparisons, but I was using the 55-200 at Oulton Park and at my level of skill and ability it handled everything I threw at it. Don't know about 2.8 but doubt I'd use that on a long telephoto.
 
The 50-140 + TC is approx twice the weight of the 55-200 For me that's the limiting factor. From everything I've seen though, the 50-140 is a great lens, super sharp.

Its a shame that the TCs don't work on all the lenses, adding one to my bag for a bit of extra reach on the 90mm would be a useful accessory.
 
Great images etc - but this is an evil thread - it seems I now "need" an X-T2, sadly I also need a shed load of cash to buy one - not a great combo ;)
 
Mr Perceptive said:
The 50-140 + TC is approx twice the weight of the 55-200 For me that's the limiting factor. From everything I've seen though, the 50-140 is a great lens, super sharp.

Its a shame that the TCs don't work on all the lenses, adding one to my bag for a bit of extra reach on the 90mm would be a useful accessory.
Click to expand...
It is a delightfully lovely lens, but I know and agree with what you're saying. I only got mine because it was a used one at a stupidly low price.
 
As usual I do things arse about face. After I ordered the 50-140 I started reading reviews. As with anything there are mixed opinions. One thing surprised me, on the photozone.de site comparing the mtf charts between it and the 55-200 there wasn't a huge difference right across all FL's certainly not enough to justify the extremely high price. The constant F2.8 would be great, but at a cost.
 
Stephen L said:
It is a delightfully lovely lens, but I know and agree with what you're saying. I only got mine because it was a used one at a stupidly low price.
Click to expand...

It really depends on the type of photography that you do, if portraits were my preferred genre then I'd have one, but I don't shoot people (often!), in fact in most of my shots I try to remove them, and have waited, sometimes for a long time, for someone to get out of my shot!
 
jimgallaher said:
As usual I do things arse about face. After I ordered the 50-140 I started reading reviews. As with anything there are mixed opinions. One thing surprised me, on the photozone.de site comparing the mtf charts between it and the 55-200 there wasn't a huge difference right across all FL's certainly not enough to justify the extremely high price. The constant F2.8 would be great, but at a cost.
Click to expand...

I may have had a poor 55-200 I was never very impressed with the quality it gave me on the XP2 whereas the 50-140 is one of the best zooms I've used on any system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top