The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

owenb said:
Anyone tried any Nikon add lenses on there Fuji bodies ????? If I do get one as my fun camera didn't know if it was a viable alternative
Click to expand...
I haven't actually used Nikon lenses. But I've used Pentax, Olympus, Tokina, Tamron, Konica and M42 lenses :-). Nikon F should be fine with any simple adapter. Nikon G, you need to make sure your adapter has a control for changing the aperture, and you won't be able to tell directly what f stop you have (although you can work it out by using auto mode and seeing how the shutter speed changes). Obviously you have to focus manually, but the Fuji focus aids are good.

Most SLR lenses can be adapted. The main problems are lenses that need electronic aperture control, which you can only shoot wide open. There's a kind of work around for Canon EOS, but it's very cumbersome and too much bother for most people.
 
dave.hallett said:
I haven't actually used Nikon lenses. But I've used Pentax, Olympus, Tokina, Tamron, Konica and M42 lenses :). Nikon F should be fine with any simple adapter. Nikon G, you need to make sure your adapter has a control for changing the aperture, and you won't be able to tell directly what f stop you have (although you can work it out by using auto mode and seeing how the shutter speed changes). Obviously you have to focus manually, but the Fuji focus aids are good.

Most SLR lenses can be adapted. The main problems are lenses that need electronic aperture control, which you can only shoot wide open. There's a kind of work around for Canon EOS, but it's very cumbersome and too much bother for most people.
Click to expand...


Cheers I have a few sigma art lenses I could try out..... only testing the water ATM lol
 
Cagey75 said:
I'm still using light stands and brackets and brollies I got off Amazon 5-6 years back. pretty cheap set I built up over time. Only the one speedlight atm, sold off 2x sb900 a while ago. Planning to get another yongnuo.
Click to expand...
i have 3 Nikon Yongnuo's any idea if they will fire off the canon triggers?
 
Nuzik said:
i have 3 Nikon Yongnuo's any idea if they will fire off the canon triggers?
Click to expand...

The old 560 I have was bought for my Nikon, it's firing just fine from the XT-1 with cheap old no-name triggers/receivers without issue. I like the look of the YN-560 TX controller for the newer YN-560 III + IV though, the ability to control the power from the camera is pretty cool. Not sure about canon, but someone said to get the Canon specific ones for fuji for some reason
 
owenb said:
Cheers I have a few sigma art lenses I could try out..... only testing the water ATM lol
Click to expand...
Hmm. Don't know that I've seen anyone try that specifically. It's definitely easier to use lenses with an aperture ring, but from what I hear it should be possible. May be worth a bit of Googling in case anyone has tried it and found an expected problem.
 
Cagey75 said:
The old 560 I have was bought for my Nikon, it's firing just fine from the XT-1 with cheap old no-name triggers/receivers without issue. I like the look of the YN-560 TX controller for the newer YN-560 III + IV though, the ability to control the power from the camera is pretty cool. Not sure about canon, but someone said to get the Canon specific ones for fuji for some reason
Click to expand...
You need the canon controller as it has legacy mode which is needed, and the canon trigger wont send to the nikon ones, so hoping that the canon trigger and receivers work in manual mode for the flashes.
 
dave.hallett said:
Time for a picture. I posted one recently that was popular with narrowboat fans...so here's one for the trainspotters :) No tripod, just ISO1000, which got me to 1/30 - short enough to handhold quite easily with OIS, but long enough to blur the moving train a bit.


Sunset Express by David Hallett, on Flickr
Click to expand...

This one's a stunner too! Love the colours.It has a sort of steely presence.
 
dave.hallett said:
Time for a picture. I posted one recently that was popular with narrowboat fans...so here's one for the trainspotters :) No tripod, just ISO1000, which got me to 1/30 - short enough to handhold quite easily with OIS, but long enough to blur the moving train a bit.


Sunset Express by David Hallett, on Flickr
Click to expand...


"Excellent" shot Dave, nuff said.(y)

George.
 
I'll tell you what guys, its getting b****y difficult to keep up with this thread now it moves so fast. Just noticed its the most popular (by post count) specific equipment thread on the forum. "Great Stuff" :)

George.
 
Don't know if anyone else has seen it but there's an encouraging user report about the X-T2 plus Battery Pack and 100-400mm lens in this weeks AP.(y)

George.
 
Weighing up the primes

56mm I like the focal length but is AF slow on it?
35mm f2 be nice as it be near 55mm FF focal length and won't break bank
27mm

I believe some primes are slow at AF some are fast
 
rookies said:
Weighing up the primes

56mm I like the focal length but is AF slow on it?
35mm f2 be nice as it be near 55mm FF focal length and won't break bank
27mm

I believe some primes are slow at AF some are fast
Click to expand...
To be honest its not as fast as the Nikon at AF, but it's pretty good. Now if I could get used to it even better.
 
rookies said:
Weighing up the primes

56mm I like the focal length but is AF slow on it?
35mm f2 be nice as it be near 55mm FF focal length and won't break bank
27mm

I believe some primes are slow at AF some are fast
Click to expand...
There's variation in all lenses from all brands and I think it's important to try them for yourself as people's opinions on speed varies. Some lenses get slated and in reality they're not that bad.
 
dave.hallett said:
True dat. To further complicate the issue, I have the issue that Chrome isn't using the ICC profile for my Spyder. It may be using the one for my monitor, not sure. The upshot is that whenever I upload a pic to any website (or indeed just open the image file in Chrome directly) it's notably darker than the same file in Photoshop, Lightroom, Irfanview, whatever. Viewing the same website in MS Edge it looks OK. On Googling this seems to be a known Chrome bug, one that Google can't be bothered to fix because it only affects graphics professionals and keen amateur togs. Sigh...
Click to expand...
Just to follow up on my moaning, in case anyone finds this by Googling, it turns out that the problem in this case is me, rather than Chrome :-). Or more precisely, the fact that I run Chrome in a sandbox (those of you who know what this means will probably think this is absurdly paranoid, but no matter :-)) Anyway, when I run it outside the sandbox everything looks fine, so what I need to do is to find a way to modify the sandbox settings appropriately. Alas, simply giving it Read-Only access to the folder where the ICC profiles live doesn't seem to do it :-(. But at least I know what the problem is now...
 
dave.hallett said:
Just to follow up on my moaning, in case anyone finds this by Googling, it turns out that the problem in this case is me, rather than Chrome :-). Or more precisely, the fact that I run Chrome in a sandbox (those of you who know what this means will probably think this is absurdly paranoid, but no matter :-)) Anyway, when I run it outside the sandbox everything looks fine, so what I need to do is to find a way to modify the sandbox settings appropriately. Alas, simply giving it Read-Only access to the folder where the ICC profiles live doesn't seem to do it :-(. But at least I know what the problem is now...
Click to expand...
Why are you running chrome in a sandbox?
 
Nuzik said:
Why are you running chrome in a sandbox?
Click to expand...
Ha. I knew someone would ask. Well technically it's not necessary. Chrome is supposed to have its own internal sandbox. But it's an extra layer of protection and closes off quite a few exploits. Sandboxing is most useful for dealing with downloaded programs that you aren't 100% sure about. But once you have Sandboxie installed, you may as well take advantage. I have it set up to sandbox Chrome automatically when it runs so it's no bother. It's just that occasionally it has unwanted side effects. :)
 
dave.hallett said:
Ha. I knew someone would ask. Well technically it's not necessary. Chrome is supposed to have its own internal sandbox. But it's an extra layer of protection and closes off quite a few exploits. Sandboxing is most useful for dealing with downloaded programs that you aren't 100% sure about. But once you have Sandboxie installed, you may as well take advantage. I have it set up to sandbox Chrome automatically when it runs so it's no bother. It's just that occasionally it has unwanted side effects. :)
Click to expand...
I'm not really sure what protection you need for the big wide world these days but I just run the risk these days. Take what you can from me I have nothing!
 
Nuzik said:
I'm not really sure what protection you need for the big wide world these days but I just run the risk these days. Take what you can from me I have nothing!
Click to expand...
Well apart from not fancying becoming part of anyone's bot net, I think the main threat to worry about is ransomware. That's a pretty big one for photographers, particularly as it may not need admin permissions to encrypt your data drives. I take other steps to have a backup plan but multiple layers is good. But commonsense will take you a long way. Just bear in mind that the most dangerous sites are things like Wordpress installs that haven't been kept up to date and have been hacked by some automated process.
 
border_all said:
And if anyone knows about GAS it's Riz :D
Click to expand...
Ooooh yeeees (nodding head like the Churchill dog) :D lol
I am getting a grip of it though....... giving up the Sony system to a 45-50% cheaper system that is still capable. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top