The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

Nuzik said:
You decided not to buy a Fuji so why would you have any...
Click to expand...

What you implying? Was only commenting what a nice set up he got and lucky....
 
rookies said:
Nice stuff there. Lucky for some [emoji106]
Click to expand...

Well the 5D4 is on a credit card. So got a month or so to decide, then sell whatever I decide. Cheaper than renting.

Originally my 1Ds2 and 1D4 were just a bit big to take out on a whim. So I was going to get a 5D3 but tried out the X-E1 and liked it, which took me to the X-T1. Starting off I just had a couple of prints and the 18-55 which was great for taking anywhere. The kit just grew and grew though, and whilst the Canon kit is used less I haven't been able to bring myself to sell it. A lot of the time I actually take out the Fuji in a small bag with the 23 and 56 (and usually the 18-55 in the centre compartment). Realistically I could do that just as easily with a 5D sized body rather a 1D sized body. Yes it will be heavier, but I'm fine with that. I'll still keep the X-T1 with the 35,18-55 and 50-230 for a more compact kit.

Ultimately I'm not really feeling the love for the 50-140 in comparison to my 70-200 on full frame (as well as on my old 7D for sports). It's a nice lens but I haven't gelled with it.
 
Does anyone do any filming with an X-T2? Or even better use two of them and edit? I'm not talking about a bit of holiday filming, I'm interested in how you find them as a serious camcorder replacement.

I was looking at getting two Canon 5D III's but really I'd just be frustrated that the IV was there. The price is just that bit much, one is fine but for two, that's the best part of £5k just on the bodies before I've started on lenses.

The X-T2 has constantly interested me for photography, and I hadn't really considered it for filming. I was looking at several semi-pro camcorders, I'd never considered anything else for filming but my old man has convinced me that having one camera for filming and photography has a number of benefits. I'm sure it will never be as good for the job as a dedicated camcorder but I feel it will be good enough.

My challenge now is to work out if I can and should go with the Fuji's or if I need to spend more on the 5D IV.

I know there are other options, but I don't want to go with any other brand. My only other option would be going for something like two Canon XF300's and choosing whatever I prefer for photography, but thats a significantly more costly route.
 
Nuzik said:
Why was he lucky, I was implying he decided to buy a Fuji and bought kit. Unless he won it the he got lucky.
Click to expand...

Fair Enough

If I had money I would certainly buy a few kits to try out. But I aint I have to save very hard for my gadget and I mean really hard..
 
Last edited:
jj_glos said:
Well the 5D4 is on a credit card. So got a month or so to decide, then sell whatever I decide. Cheaper than renting.

Originally my 1Ds2 and 1D4 were just a bit big to take out on a whim. So I was going to get a 5D3 but tried out the X-E1 and liked it, which took me to the X-T1. Starting off I just had a couple of prints and the 18-55 which was great for taking anywhere. The kit just grew and grew though, and whilst the Canon kit is used less I haven't been able to bring myself to sell it. A lot of the time I actually take out the Fuji in a small bag with the 23 and 56 (and usually the 18-55 in the centre compartment). Realistically I could do that just as easily with a 5D sized body rather a 1D sized body. Yes it will be heavier, but I'm fine with that. I'll still keep the X-T1 with the 35,18-55 and 50-230 for a more compact kit.

Ultimately I'm not really feeling the love for the 50-140 in comparison to my 70-200 on full frame (as well as on my old 7D for sports). It's a nice lens but I haven't gelled with it.
Click to expand...
I'm currently looking at the 50-140mm what's wrong with it?
 
jj_glos said:
I'm at a crossroads with all my gear. Going to give the 5D4 a go (I do miss the full frame 35,50,85 and 70-200). Then a final decision, sell all the Canon gear or trim back the Fuji gear. I've got 8, 18-55, 23, 35, 56, 60, 90, 50-230, 50-140 and 100-400 lenses along with an X-E1, X-T1 and X-T2. Funny how all the gear creeps up on you...
Click to expand...

You clearly already have far more gear than you could possibly need to cope with any situation. You can not have even scratched the surface of the possibilities of the X-T2 yet. When you can honestly say that your needs surpass what the Fuji system can provide. Only then is it reasonable to look elsewhere. And then perhaps the answer might be the addition of Fuji medium format.

I would just unload any canon stuff.
 
Nuzik said:
I'm currently looking at the 50-140mm what's wrong with it?
Click to expand...

Nothing really. It's a nice size, quick AF, great OIS and works nicely with the X-T1/2. It just isn't quite up there with my 70-200 mkII IS, which is my favourite Canon lens. So I'm going for one last throw of the dice with Canon, then I'll make a decision, hopefully! It could just be the toss of coin :eek: :D


Jennie by Julian Jones, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
jj_glos said:
Nothing really. It's a nice size, quick AF, great OIS and works nicely with the X-T1/2. It just isn't quite up there with my 70-200 mkII IS, which is my favourite Canon lens. So I'm going for one last throw of the dice with Canon, then I'll make a decision, hopefully! It could just be the toss of coin :eek: :D
Click to expand...

I'd be interested to see a couple of images taken with each of these lenses/bodies to see what you mean with the quality difference?
 
jj_glos said:
Nothing really. It's a nice size, quick AF, great OIS and works nicely with the X-T1/2. It just isn't quite up there with my 70-200 mkII IS, which is my favourite Canon lens. So I'm going for one last throw of the dice with Canon, then I'll make a decision, hopefully! It could just be the toss of coin :eek: :D
Click to expand...
i maybe interested in buying the 50-140mm at the right price :P
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
You clearly already have far more gear than you could possibly need to cope with any situation. You can not have even scratched the surface of the possibilities of the X-T2 yet. When you can honestly say that your needs surpass what the Fuji system can provide. Only then is it reasonable to look elsewhere. And then perhaps the answer might be the addition of Fuji medium format.

I would just unload any canon stuff.
Click to expand...

You know my photography requirements how exactly? :eek: :D The only lens I could offload without thinking is the 60mm macro, but its hardly an expensive lens to keep. I have been underwhelmed with the X-T2, its not a massive improvement over the X-T1 and I have used it plenty. It's just a camera, doesn't take much to run it through the paces. My lightweight kit has grown to a full kit which speaks volumes of how highly I regard it, but I still don't like the EVF blackout at high fps when I'm shooting action and I'm really really struggling to let go of my 70-200. I spent 4 hours the other evening going through 70-200 vs 50-140 shots which is when I decided to try out a 5D sized body. I'll get there eventually, at least I'm just dealing with kit I have and not talking about moving to Nikon :D
 
Last edited:
jj_glos said:
To be honest I really shouldn't rule out the D750, I wish Canon had an equivalent. The grass isn't always greener though! :D
Click to expand...

It's not. I've shot Nikon for 25 years. I briefly shot an X-T1 and had no problem with it at all and liked the image quality and lenses. Nikon is just second nature to me now, though, so I eventually sneaked back there whilst these lot weren't looking. :exit:
 
WingTsun said:
It's not. I've shot Nikon for 25 years. I briefly shot an X-T1 and had no problem with it at all and liked the image quality and lenses. Nikon is just second nature to me now, though, so I eventually sneaked back there whilst these lot weren't looking. :exit:
Click to expand...

A lot of my hand wringing is because I have full frame and crop systems, so it's easy to compare and I admit I generally prefer the fullframe image. In isolation though, I am perfectly happy with the output from the crop system. I've stupidly ended up with two full systems and whilst I could keep both it's a bit daft so I've decided I must rationalise my gear. I could easily go either way.
 
I shot Nikon for almost 10 years, FX for the last 4. I was really surprised how easy the transition to Fuji was. I really thought I would miss many aspects of full frame. I don't. But everyone is different.
 
Nuzik said:
Then why have more than one of the same focal length??
Click to expand...
Wanted weather sealing for travel but really like the 18-55 and don't need the cash so decided to keep it until I do ;)

rookies said:
18-135 all in one [emoji106]
Click to expand...
Yep, it's a great alrounder. Just prefer the size of the 18-55.

Cagey75 said:
Is much going to go on in the distance? I think for situations like that the 18-55 would be better. You might appreciate that extra bit of light
Click to expand...
Dunno TBH, and that's the dilemma (it's not really a dilemma obviously). The reason that I bought the 18-135 is that on a recent holiday I needed more reach and weather sealing.

I think I may have over egged my original post now though, it wasn't meant to be taken too seriously :oops: :$

dave.hallett said:
Given that you're on a tripod, why not take two shots, the second at f/22, and blend in post? We don't care about diffraction in the blurry bits, right?

And this is not a rhetorical question :). I haven't done much work with ND filters yet, so I'm curious if there's some reason that wouldn't work.
Click to expand...

I don't see why you'd blend, if you're going to do that and aren't bothered about diffraction then you'd just shoot the one exposure at f22 ;)
 
Cagey75 said:
I shot Nikon for almost 10 years, FX for the last 4. I was really surprised how easy the transition to Fuji was. I really thought I would miss many aspects of full frame. I don't. But everyone is different.
Click to expand...

I found the transition fairly easy, too. That said, Fuji was always quite Nikon orientated so the menus were fairly intuitive for me.
 
snerkler said:
Dunno TBH, and that's the dilemma (it's not really a dilemma obviously). The reason that I bought the 18-135 is that on a recent holiday I needed more reach and weather sealing.
Click to expand...

Just think wide would be best for WW, and the bit of extra brightness if you're going in the evening

WingTsun said:
I found the transition fairly easy, too. That said, Fuji was always quite Nikon orientated so the menus were fairly intuitive for me.
Click to expand...

Yeah I found the menu system really easy to get along with from the off. But I did have an X10 and X100s while I had the D800. I also started out on a Fuji bridgecam years back, their menus haven't changed all that much since then really. Just more to it. It was ergonomics I was most worried about. A main cam half the size and weight as what I'd used for so long, and with the Nikon I rarely had to look at the buttons I pressed, it was so intuitive. I'm getting there with the Fuji.
 
Last edited:
WingTsun said:
I'd be interested to see a couple of images taken with each of these lenses/bodies to see what you mean with the quality difference?
Click to expand...

A lot of it is just full frame vs crop, with 200mm being nicer to me than 140mm on a crop (individually I like both). The 70-200 produces more detailed shots on full frame (on my old 7D there's not a lot in it, the Fuji beats it to be honest). I like though that I get a bit more reach with the 70-200 when I stick it on a crop, but that's a small thing.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
I shot Nikon for almost 10 years, FX for the last 4. I was really surprised how easy the transition to Fuji was. I really thought I would miss many aspects of full frame. I don't. But everyone is different.
Click to expand...
^^^^ this. And this is why there are so many conflicting statements, reviews and arguments (y)
 
I really don't understand the 'underwhelm' comments from some of the posters on this thread, the X-T2 has

A) noticeably faster AF
B) higher resolution sensor, meaning that more cropping options are available as well as 'the bigger picture'
C) much better and faster control of AF point with joystick
D) RAW images that offer better shadow/highlight recovery
E) much better at high ISO, 6400, 12,800
F) better battery life with lots if burst mode shooting
G) two card slots offering backup options
H) noticeably snappier when writing to card, shutter press sequence
I) better AF tracking

Now whether it is worth the cost of a decent X mount lens over an X-T1 is something only an individual can determine, yes the X-T2 is an expensive camera, But underwhelming it is not

Whenever I shoot with my X-E2 now it feels really pedestrian, something which the X-T1 never made it feel, and my X100....... You have to send it a postcard to get it to do anything!!! But neither of these are 'bad' cameras, the X-T2 just has moved the game on.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
I really don't understand the 'underwhelm' comments from some of the posters on this thread, the X-T2 has

A) noticeably faster AF
B) higher resolution sensor, meaning that more cropping options are available as well as 'the bigger picture'
C) much better and faster control of AF point with joystick
D) RAW images that offer better shadow/highlight recovery
E) much better at high ISO, 6400, 12,800
F) better battery life with lots if burst mode shooting
G) two card slots offering backup options
H) noticeably snappier when writing to card, shutter press sequence
I) better AF tracking

Now whether it is worth the cost of a decent X mount lens over an X-T1 is something only an individual can determine, yes the X-T2 is an expensive camera, But underwhelming it is not

Whenever I shoot with my X-E2 now it feels really pedestrian, something which the X-T1 never made it feel, and my X100....... You have to send it a postcard to get it to do anything!!! But neither of these are 'bad' cameras, the X-T2 just has moved the game on.
Click to expand...
I think it was more to do with the end result rather than the performance. It's odd as I've seen a lot of people prefer the Xtrans I over the XTrans II, saying that the I was more film like and that the II looks plasticy and painterly. Now it seems some folk prefer the II over the III. If this is anything to go by then it sounds as though Fuji IQ is getting worse with every new generation. By the Xtrans IV we'll barely be getting Polaroid quality :lol:
 
snerkler said:
I don't see why you'd blend, if you're going to do that and aren't bothered about diffraction then you'd just shoot the one exposure at f22 ;)
Click to expand...

Not bothered about diffraction *in the blurry bits* (!). So take one shot at the sweet spot of the lens (f/8ish most likely) for the bits you want sharp, and one at f/22 for the bits you want blurry, then blend in post...
 
snerkler said:
I think it was more to do with the end result rather than the performance. It's odd as I've seen a lot of people prefer the Xtrans I over the XTrans II, saying that the I was more film like and that the II looks plasticy and painterly. Now it seems some folk prefer the II over the III. If this is anything to go by then it sounds as though Fuji IQ is getting worse with every new generation. By the Xtrans IV we'll barely be getting Polaroid quality :LOL:
Click to expand...

For me the III is better than the II, sharper images and better recovery options in post, and miles better at high ISO, although I've had a I (X-E1), I never shot with it long enough before moving to a II to make a judgement. The X100 of course has the Bayer filter, which is different, not better or worse just different!!
 
Mr Perceptive said:
I really don't understand the 'underwhelm' comments from some of the posters on this thread, the X-T2 has

A) noticeably faster AF
B) higher resolution sensor, meaning that more cropping options are available as well as 'the bigger picture'
C) much better and faster control of AF point with joystick
D) RAW images that offer better shadow/highlight recovery
E) much better at high ISO, 6400, 12,800
F) better battery life with lots if burst mode shooting
G) two card slots offering backup options
H) noticeably snappier when writing to card, shutter press sequence
I) better AF tracking

Now whether it is worth the cost of a decent X mount lens over an X-T1 is something only an individual can determine, yes the X-T2 is an expensive camera, But underwhelming it is not

Whenever I shoot with my X-E2 now it feels really pedestrian, something which the X-T1 never made it feel, and my X100....... You have to send it a postcard to get it to do anything!!! But neither of these are 'bad' cameras, the X-T2 just has moved the game on.
Click to expand...

In response:

A) It's not noticeable faster in my experience at all. In single AF I struggle to see any difference whatsoever (with the lenses I have and high performance\boost modes activated). C-AF is improved (you don't get that "breathing" for a start), and tracking is better. I never found the X-T1 to be rubbish in that regard though, but welcome the improvements.
B) This I would like at airshows, that's pretty much it though. I only dabble with wildlife and everything else I pretty much always frame in camera and rarely crop (apart from wonky shots!). Rarely print bigger than A3 which 16MP is great for (why I kept the 1Ds2 for so long!). Edit: Actually this will be useful for me at motorsports as well as airshows. Taking a wider shot with the option to go in tighter is good.
C) On the X-T1 I had all 4 dpad buttons for changing AF, so no different in this regard BUT I now have those 4 buttons back on the X-T2 for other things which is great.
D) Never been one for bringing up shadows too much. The highlights I haven't seen that much difference with, but it is a bit better I think.
E) Is it really much better, it's a bit better.
F) Not noticed any difference here, the better battery reporting is good though. I've shot over a 1000 on a single battery on the X-T1.
G) If I was shooting weddings still this would be an essential and much needed feature.
H) I don't find it noticeable shooting them side by side, not enough for me to go wow anyway.
I) Yep!

I am underwhelmed with it, but that's just me. It's a great camera, but so is the X-T1. If I had to keep only one (and only had Fuji) it would be the X-T2. It's a nice improvement in usability for sure, just not the massive step up that reviews make it out to be. Not for me anyway, if it was I wouldn't be revisiting keeping my Canon kit :(
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
I think it was more to do with the end result rather than the performance. It's odd as I've seen a lot of people prefer the Xtrans I over the XTrans II, saying that the I was more film like and that the II looks plasticy and painterly. Now it seems some folk prefer the II over the III. If this is anything to go by then it sounds as though Fuji IQ is getting worse with every new generation. By the Xtrans IV we'll barely be getting Polaroid quality :LOL:
Click to expand...
Xtran IV will hopefully be the organic sensor which will be the most film like and the dogs b*****ks :)
 
jj_glos said:
I'm at a crossroads with all my gear. Going to give the 5D4 a go (I do miss the full frame 35,50,85 and 70-200). Then a final decision, sell all the Canon gear or trim back the Fuji gear. I've got 8, 18-55, 23, 35, 56, 60, 90, 50-230, 50-140 and 100-400 lenses along with an X-E1, X-T1 and X-T2. Funny how all the gear creeps up on you...
Click to expand...

I am also at a crossroads, slightly different to you though.
I recently got a D5, I also have a D810 and D750. I have trimmed down my lenses and the cream of (my) crop is a Sigma Art 50, a Tamron 85mm VC and a Nikon 200mm ƒ2. I decided on holiday last week that I have been holding off from Fuji or Sony for too long now. I decided on the Sony through gritted teeth, only to be sent some files from an X-T2 today and that was the straw that broke the camels back! I don't have a problem owning 2 systems although deep down, I know that ultimately one of them always wins! I'd put money on Fuji. Anyway, I am soon to be in the market for the X-T2 :-)
 
rjbell said:
Xtran IV will hopefully be the organic sensor which will be the most film like and the dogs b*****ks :)
Click to expand...

That's what I heard, apparently it'll be a one use organic sensor that you have to do some manual processing before you can even preview it. You can apparently plug in different sensors depending on the circumstances, so one for high speed (has an amazing film like grain apparently) and another for low speed etc. They're on about releasing them in 24 or 36 sensor packs apparently. Apparently I may have been drinking tonight... :D
 
jj_glos said:
In response:

A) It's not noticeable faster in my experience at all. In single AF I struggle to see any difference whatsoever (with the lenses I have and high performance\boost modes activated). C-AF is improved (you don't get that "breathing" for a start), and tracking is better. I never found the X-T1 to be rubbish in that regard though, but welcome the improvements.
B) This I would like at airshows, that's pretty much it though. I only dabble with wildlife and everything else I pretty much always frame in camera and rarely crop (apart from wonky shots!). Rarely print bigger than A3 which 16MP is great for (why I kept the 1Ds2 for so long!). Edit: Actually this will be useful for me at motorsports as well as airshows. Taking a wider shot with the option to go in tighter is good.
C) On the X-T1 I had all 4 dpad buttons for changing AF, so no different in this regard BUT I now have those 4 buttons back on the X-T2 for other things which is great.
D) Never been one for bringing up shadows too much. The highlights I haven't seen that much difference with, but it is a bit better I think.
E) Is it really much better, it's a bit better.
F) Not noticed any difference here, the better battery reporting is good though. I've shot over a 1000 on a single battery on the X-T1.
G) If I was shooting weddings still this would be an essential and much needed feature.
H) I don't find it noticeable shooting them side by side, not enough for me to go wow anyway.
I) Yep!

I am underwhelmed with it, but that's just me. It's a great camera, but so is the X-T1. If I had to keep only one (and only had Fuji) it would be the X-T2. It's a nice improvement in usability for sure, just not the massive step up that reviews make it out to be. Not for me anyway, if it was I wouldn't be revisiting keeping my Canon kit :(
Click to expand...

Same here really, Take away the AF for moving subjects, which very few people actually NEED, then there is very little improvement when viewed in direct comparison. The only things I actually miss on the T2 are the joystick (but not its position) and the crisper EVF display when manually focusing (but not its activation!).
 
WingTsun said:
I found the transition fairly easy, too. That said, Fuji was always quite Nikon orientated so the menus were fairly intuitive for me.
Click to expand...
Mr Perceptive said:
I really don't understand the 'underwhelm' comments from some of the posters on this thread, the X-T2 has

A) noticeably faster AF
B) higher resolution sensor, meaning that more cropping options are available as well as 'the bigger picture'
C) much better and faster control of AF point with joystick
D) RAW images that offer better shadow/highlight recovery
E) much better at high ISO, 6400, 12,800
F) better battery life with lots if burst mode shooting
G) two card slots offering backup options
H) noticeably snappier when writing to card, shutter press sequence
I) better AF tracking

Now whether it is worth the cost of a decent X mount lens over an X-T1 is something only an individual can determine, yes the X-T2 is an expensive camera, But underwhelming it is not

Whenever I shoot with my X-E2 now it feels really pedestrian, something which the X-T1 never made it feel, and my X100....... You have to send it a postcard to get it to do anything!!! But neither of these are 'bad' cameras, the X-T2 just has moved the game on.
Click to expand...


It's very simple, the XT-1 was more than good enough when it was top dawg. The 2 had to be better or it was pointless, but many don't think it's 3 times better, so won't pay 3 times the price [used XT-1 can be got for 1/3 the money and many in tip top condition] Also, a lot of the pros you offer up there don't mean a lot to some. I never shoot above 3200 ISO, no matter the camera, I don't need 2 slots [had that on the D800, never needed to make use of it, just had a card in anyway] snappier writing to card? well, maybe it is, but the XT-1 does it quick enough for my needs.

If you're a pro, you have to have the 2 really, ANY improvements are welcome. But if you're a hobbyist or enthusiast, you don't 'need' many of these improvements.
 
Cagey75 said:
It's very simple, the XT-1 was more than good enough when it was top dawg. The 2 had to be better or it was pointless, but many don't think it's 3 times better, so won't pay 3 times the price [used XT-1 can be got for 1/3 the money and many in tip top condition] Also, a lot of the pros you offer up there don't mean a lot to some. I never shoot above 3200 ISO, no matter the camera, I don't need 2 slots [had that on the D800, never needed to make use of it, just had a card in anyway] snappier writing to card? well, maybe it is, but the XT-1 does it quick enough for my needs.

If you're a pro, you have to have the 2 really, ANY improvements are welcome. But if you're a hobbyist or enthusiast, you don't 'need' many of these improvements.
Click to expand...
I needed them all
 
Nuzik said:
I needed them all
Click to expand...

Did you though? If the XT-1 was still the flagship, it would do the job. It did up until last year for many, inc pros. I need money more than the improvements :D I will maybe buy an XT-2 next year, used, once prices fall, and they will.
 
Cagey75 said:
Did you though? If the XT-1 was still the flagship, it would do the job. It did up until last year for many, inc pros. I need money more than the improvements :D I will maybe buy an XT-2 next year, used, once prices fall, and they will.
Click to expand...
I need everything I can get. If it says faster AF I need it. More MP I need it to help crop. It's all there for fail safes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top