The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

I paid £1100 used on eBay, was missing a few bits no idea what as I haven't looked in the box... But it was in mint condition when I got it with 11 months warranty.
 
snerkler said:
I think you missed my point TBH. But yes the XT2 will be better at high ISO.

My point is that, high ISO aside you're going to struggle to see any discernible difference in the end result unless pixel peeping, and unless you're one of the few people that shoot high ISO all the time then the XT2 isn't worth considering as an upgrade if the only consideration is IQ,.... IMO. YMMV.

As already mentioned the XT2 is a major improvement when you consider the whole package, the better AF, better controls (nipple, better buttons and dials), more responsive EVF, dual card slot (biggie for me), improved resolution, and of course better ISO handling.
Click to expand...

Yeah if I framed a shot just right and didn't need to crop I found the xt1 files wonderful.

@rookies the last time you tried an xt1 you said you couldn't get on with it. You might want to remind yourself of that before making a switch over to the t2. It's a fine camera, but in many ways still very similar to the t1.
 
addicknchips said:
Yeah if I framed a shot just right and didn't need to crop I found the xt1 files wonderful.

@rookies the last time you tried an xt1 you said you couldn't get on with it. You might want to remind yourself of that before making a switch over to the t2. It's a fine camera, but in many ways still very similar to the t1.
Click to expand...

Too much Pixel Peeping that what the problem was as came from a DSLR but I am got over that now well not as fussy like i use to be
 
rookies said:
Too much Pixel Peeping that what the problem was as came from a DSLR but I am got over that now well not as fussy like i use to be
Click to expand...

Well best of luck with whichever way you decide to go. Both systems are great.
 
Nuzik said:
I paid £1100 used on eBay, was missing a few bits no idea what as I haven't looked in the box... But it was in mint condition when I got it with 11 months warranty.
Click to expand...
But it doesn't focus properly :whistle:
 
ukaskew said:
The upgrades from the 1 to 2 are certainly worth considering for working pros, the dual card slots alone will be a massive bonus for wedding togs (a fair few Fuji shooters about now), add in the potential for 3 batteries, the joystick etc.

Personally I'm not overly interested in the extra MPs, the improved AF and lowlight performance, the X-T1/10 have always been ok in that respect for me, but the usability improvements will make long days with the camera a fair bit easier.
Click to expand...
Jelster said:
So, I know I need to learn a lot more about Landscape, but here's a couple taken in the lakes on Friday:

DSCF1452 by Steve Jelly, on Flickr

DSCF1467 by Steve Jelly, on Flickr

Both taken on the X-T2, with the 16mm f1.4.

The sky was poor yesterday, even with ND grads I was struggling with definition between the snow and the clouds. One day when a blue sky would of actually improved the picture.
Click to expand...

Nice images, you actually have a few on your Flickr i prefer more :) Like this one: https://www.flickr.com/photos/stevejelly/31116310085/in/photostream/


Just a suggestion: why not drop the ISO, up the aperture and try some longer exposures? On the water you might get a 'silkier' effect. of course, that's just personal taste, but give it a go next time you're up there. Lovely countryside.
 
Jason Lanier turned me right off Sony for life! :D

I actually owned a Sony dslr, was one of my first in fact after using bridge cameras for a long time. It was the original A200, it was alright, I used some nice old minolta lenses with it. Then i moved to a nikon D200 and was Nikon all the way from then till just recently. I thought Sony cameras were a bit fugly in general, still do. But that's just a personal taste thing
 
Cagey75 said:
Jason Lanier turned me right off Sony for life! :D

I actually owned a Sony dslr, was one of my first in fact after using bridge cameras for a long time. It was the original A200, it was alright, I used some nice old minolta lenses with it. Then i moved to a nikon D200 and was Nikon all the way from then till just recently. I thought Sony cameras were a bit fugly in general, still do. But that's just a personal taste thing
Click to expand...
I owned the A77 and A77-II, great cameras (y)
 
Cagey75 said:
Jason Lanier turned me right off Sony for life! :D

I actually owned a Sony dslr, was one of my first in fact after using bridge cameras for a long time. It was the original A200, it was alright, I used some nice old minolta lenses with it. Then i moved to a nikon D200 and was Nikon all the way from then till just recently. I thought Sony cameras were a bit fugly in general, still do. But that's just a personal taste thing
Click to expand...

I started with an a200 too. Got an amazing deal on a new kit with the 18-70mm, they were almost giving them away! I coupled it with a used a100 and was really happy until I tried a Canon. I then went 30D->40D->5D->6D.

In between I tried a bunch of Sony cameras and couldn't get on with any of them. Nothing matched that a200 for enjoyment and shooting experience. Perhaps it's just nostalgia.
 
snerkler said:
I owned the A77 and A77-II, great cameras (y)
Click to expand...

I'm sure they perform just fine, I just hate the look of them. I know that's not really importrant, but it kind of it if you're using it a lot. I like to , well, like the look of what I use :D

manualfocus-g said:
I started with an a200 too. Got an amazing deal on a new kit with the 18-70mm, they were almost giving them away! I coupled it with a used a100 and was really happy until I tried a Canon. I then went 30D->40D->5D->6D.

In between I tried a bunch of Sony cameras and couldn't get on with any of them. Nothing matched that a200 for enjoyment and shooting experience. Perhaps it's just nostalgia.
Click to expand...

The A200 was cool, it was simple, and I think that's what I loved about it. I did ponder on following up their line at the time, but what followed was just meh for a long time. Only recently I think did Sony really get serious.

Actually just checking Flickr, one of my more commented on pics on there was shot with the A200 and an old Minolta 50 f/1.7 - https://www.flickr.com/photos/cagey75/4543304583/in/photolist-7VtCaD-8cgFEt-7U2Ceq/
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
I'm sure they perform just fine, I just hate the look of them. I know that's not really importrant, but it kind of it if you're using it a lot. I like to , well, like the look of what I use :D



The A200 was cool, it was simple, and I think that's what I loved about it. I did ponder on following up their line at the time, but what followed was just meh for a long time. Only recently I think did Sony really get serious.

Actually just checking Flickr, one of my more commented on pics on there was shot with the A200 and an old Minolta 50 f/1.7 - https://www.flickr.com/photos/cagey75/4543304583/in/photolist-7VtCaD-8cgFEt-7U2Ceq/
Click to expand...
I actually like the look of the A77, ergonomically brilliant too for me.
 
Sorry another as these are helping with deciding factors.

When we using CAF and hi speed shutter on the XT2 while shooting does the focus spot stays while tracking\???
 
rookies said:
Sorry another as these are helping with deciding factors.

When we using CAF and hi speed shutter on the XT2 while shooting does the focus spot stays while tracking\???
Click to expand...
What do you mean, does the focus spot stay where?
 
I think he means does it cling to the subject as it moves? like a face detection. Zone focusing continuous is as close as you'll get
 
I wouldn't bother using any fancy tracking modes for stuff like planes and cars, just stick it in CAF with single point (zone at a push) and take the hardest part of the job away from the camera.

I've used some amazing tracking systems...always for about 20 minutes before reverting to good old fashioned single point.

Rookies - Have you watched YouTube videos etc? Seem to have a lot of fundamental questions for somebody who has spent so long trying to choose a camera.
 
ukaskew said:
I wouldn't bother using any fancy tracking modes for stuff like planes and cars, just stick it in CAF with single point (zone at a push) and take the hardest part of the job away from the camera.

I've used some amazing tracking systems...always for about 20 minutes before reverting to good old fashioned single point.

Rookies - Have you watched YouTube videos etc? Seem to have a lot of fundamental questions for somebody who has spent so long trying to choose a camera.
Click to expand...

I'm a single point man too. I rarely fiddle with other options. I will switch CAF on now and then, but I honestly get just as good results with single point, and re-fcus as I follow, just suits me more. Everyone's different though, which is why all those options are there i guess.
 
Cagey75 said:
I think he means does it cling to the subject as it moves? like a face detection. Zone focusing continuous is as close as you'll get
Click to expand...
So like Nikon's 3D tracking then? I don't use it, I'm like those above, AF-C single point and track myself. Experimented with all different AF modes and this is still the most reliable for me.
 
snerkler said:
So like Nikon's 3D tracking then? I don't use it, I'm like those above, AF-C single point and track myself. Experimented with all different AF modes and this is still the most reliable for me.
Click to expand...


Pretty much the same as that yeah. I think i used 3D tracking once on the Nikon :D I always revert back to SP focusing, no matter the camera. But then, I don't shoot sports, or flying birds much.
 
Cagey75 said:
Pretty much the same as that yeah. I think i used 3D tracking once on the Nikon :D I always revert back to SP focusing, no matter the camera. But then, I don't shoot sports, or flying birds much.
Click to expand...
I do shoot sports and wildlife, but only occasionally BIF for which I could decide if single point or group was better.

The most demanding situation I shoot is the London Marathon where I have to pick specific people out of the crowd and they might only be visible for literally a split second. Single point is still the most reliable for me.
 
snerkler said:
I do shoot sports and wildlife, but only occasionally BIF for which I could decide if single point or group was better.

The most demanding situation I shoot is the London Marathon where I have to pick specific people out of the crowd and they might only be visible for literally a split second. Single point is still the most reliable for me.
Click to expand...


Totally for that situation, I shot a mini marathon for our daughter's fund raiser a few years back. Was p***ing down with rain, of course, but I remember how tough it was trying to pluck out our runners from the crowd. If I'd used any kind of zone focusing it would jump to the person behind or beside them as I shot.
 
Went to Dovestones Resevoir this morning with the dog which started off grey, then peed it down, then when I left was sunny blue skies. Will have to go again with the tripod and 10 stopper.

Dovestones Resevoir Classic camera (1 of 1) by Andrew Duxbury, on Flickr

Dovestones 1 (1 of 1) by Andrew Duxbury, on Flickr

Dovestones landscape cc (1 of 1) by Andrew Duxbury, on Flickr

Dovestones HDR (1 of 1) by Andrew Duxbury, on Flickr


Dovestones Resevoir Plughole cc (1 of 1) by Andrew Duxbury, on Flickr
 
When I see landscapes like this i really wish i lived somewhere a bit more interesting!, great shots
 
Cagey75 said:
I'm a single point man too. I rarely fiddle with other options. I will switch CAF on now and then, but I honestly get just as good results with single point, and re-fcus as I follow, just suits me more. Everyone's different though, which is why all those options are there i guess.
Click to expand...
See Snerks I'm not the only one
 
Nuzik said:
I paid £1100 used on eBay, was missing a few bits no idea what as I haven't looked in the box... But it was in mint condition when I got it with 11 months warranty.
Click to expand...
More than I paid for new, and mine seems to focus [emoji14]
 
Cagey75 said:
Nice images, you actually have a few on your Flickr i prefer more :) Like this one: https://www.flickr.com/photos/stevejelly/31116310085/in/photostream/


Just a suggestion: why not drop the ISO, up the aperture and try some longer exposures? On the water you might get a 'silkier' effect. of course, that's just personal taste, but give it a go next time you're up there. Lovely countryside.
Click to expand...

Ah, there you have sussed my schoolboy error. I also took my Canon gear on this trip, but decided to leave it at the hotel on this particular day, and that's when I realised that I left my spare quick release plate in my other rucksack [emoji85]. The new 6 stop filter I bought for this trip was rendered useless by my rush to get out and not double check everything !!!
 
Jelster said:
Ah, there you have sussed my schoolboy error. I also took my Canon gear on this trip, but decided to leave it at the hotel on this particular day, and that's when I realised that I left my spare quick release plate in my other rucksack [emoji85]. The new 6 stop filter I bought for this trip was rendered useless by my rush to get out and not double check everything !!!
Click to expand...

Aha!! I was going to add "I assume you had a tripod?" :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top