The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

snerkler said:
Sorry I'm only on my phone at the mo but the With the CZ at f2 there looks to be more background blur than the Fuji at F1.4, similarly with the CZ at f2.8 vs f2 on the Fuji, why is this? Does the adapter affect DOF?
Click to expand...


I think it's actually just softer, the detail certainly is in the crops. The 35 1.4 is very sharp even wide open though
 
People who have tested the focal reducers pretty much consistently report no effect (which given that astronomers use them, should be no huge surprise).

Thanks for the test shots, that's really kind of you. Comparing the Fuji at 1.4 vs the Planar at 2, there's no doubt that the Fuji is sharper. However, looking at the crops, this sharpness is not so nice when applied to the green bokeh blob, and something very odd is happening where the hat meets the blue light in the Fuji shot. Makes me wonder whether there isn't some sharpening happening in camera...
 
dave.hallett said:
People who have tested the focal reducers pretty much consistently report no effect (which given that astronomers use them, should be no huge surprise).

Thanks for the test shots, that's really kind of you. Comparing the Fuji at 1.4 vs the Planar at 2, there's no doubt that the Fuji is sharper. However, looking at the crops, this sharpness is not so nice when applied to the green bokeh blob, and something very odd is happening where the hat meets the blue light in the Fuji shot. Makes me wonder whether there isn't some sharpening happening in camera...
Click to expand...

Urrgh, I exported all images from Lightroom with "standard" sharpening enabled. This might explain it.
 
BacktotheFuji said:
OK, not a great test, but I guess we're all most likely to be using a wide aperture lens indoors in funny light at some point.

Firstly, the entire scene at 1024px:

Fuji 35/1.4 @F/1.4

View attachment 92477

Carl Zeiss Planar 50/1.4 MM with Lens Turbo II @f/2.8

View attachment 92478

Next the Fuji 35/1.4 @ f/2

View attachment 92479

Finally. the Planar 50/1.4 @ f/2.8 (its sweet spot IMO)

View attachment 92480
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. Personally I find the 50 to be a more pleasing image, but I expected that with it being a 35 v 50 test.
 
jj_glos said:
It's a little bit less than 50, but close enough.
Click to expand...
Well no. The focal reducer does actually shorten the focal length. So of course it's still a 50mm lens, but the combination of the two really is a 35mm lens. Or 37mm, or something like that.

I don't think that really invalidates your perception though. The same qualities are still present, so if you prefer a 50mm on FF vs 35mm on APS-C, it's entirely reasonable that you would also prefer the focally reduced 50mm FF.
 
dave.hallett said:
Well no. The focal reducer does actually shorten the focal length. So of course it's still a 50mm lens, but the combination of the two really is a 35mm lens. Or 37mm, or something like that.

I don't think that really invalidates your perception though. The same qualities are still present, so if you prefer a 50mm on FF vs 35mm on APS-C, it's entirely reasonable that you would also prefer the focally reduced 50mm FF.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I remembered, eventually :D
 
Fuguru said:
Fuji have confirmed that their new 80mm f2.8 OIS WR Macro (1:1) will also be compatible with this 1.4x TC.
That's one lens I'm looking forward to and most definitely going to buy.
There aren't many other lenses that my GAS is pushing me towards, perhaps the 100-400mm.
Click to expand...

That is definitely an interesting lens. They told me about a 50mm f2 as well, but as I'd been eyeing up the 90mm, this 80 could do the job!
 
BacktotheFuji said:
Urrgh, I exported all images from Lightroom with "standard" sharpening enabled. This might explain it.
Click to expand...
Hmm. Late last night I thought that might be the answer, but this morning I'm not so sure. That export sharpening is pretty mild, as I recall.
 
Fuguru said:
Very impressed, without deep crazy unrealistic pixel peeping I'm not finding the Fuji files lacking at all and some areas prefer them, the film simulations are great.
The colours seem better straight out of the camera so less post work the better and I'm even considering using more SOOC JPEGs.
The IQ/ISO/DR seems very similar to my old A7/A7II files which is great as I never needed more in reality.
Working with smaller files is also such a liberating experience as the 42.2mp Sony files were big!
I've not pushed the XT-2 and my lenses to their limits yet but I can already state that I'm not missing the A7RII with G Master lenses.
The Fuji is for me a cheaper, lighter and smaller system which is great.
Click to expand...


That's really good to hear Riz, sounds like a good result to me.(y)

George.
 
Stephen L said:
I like the clarity and "moment" of this shot. You can almost hear it!
Click to expand...


Many thanks for that Stephen, much appreciated.(y)

George.
 
Cagey75 said:
You're kinds making me wish I held on to the 55-200 tbh. I know I'll make a lot more use of it come spring. I may keep watch out for a good value used on at some point. But, I do love the 35 1.4, and I wouldn't have that atm if I didn't trade the zoom. Can't have it all.
Click to expand...

It is a good lens and the OIS is excellent. I'm finding a combo of this and the x70 as a great setup, especially when out with the dog and not being able to mess about changing lenses.
 
Further to the "full frame" bit of Toby's article, I made some prints for a friend recently who wanted two monochrome images at what eventually turned out to be 35 by 23 inches for the actual image part. I agreed to this with slight unease, as I'd never tried printing an APS-C image that large, but I knew they would be hung quite high off the ground, so nobody would be looking at them too closely. Well I got the prints back today, and I have to say that while both are fine, the better of the two completely surprised me. It was shot handheld with the 18-55 kit, and you can put your nose as close to it as you like, all you find is more detail! A tribute to the quality of the Fuji system. So I'm rather wondering what size of billboard Brides magazine has in mind when they say you'd better make sure your tog has a full frame camera... :-) (Yes, I do know that in low light situations more sensor is always better, but still...)

But the instruction always to shoot the bride's mother with a cannon is invaluable :-)
 
Tiffani should have researched for more than 5 seconds maybe :D




Thunderbird010 said:
It is a good lens and the OIS is excellent. I'm finding a combo of this and the x70 as a great setup, especially when out with the dog and not being able to mess about changing lenses.
Click to expand...

I will soon have a second body, so re-buying the 55-200 makes sense for me. For now one will be used for MF and macro, the other will probably have the 35 perma-attached.
 
Last edited:
dave.hallett said:
Further to the "full frame" bit of Toby's article, I made some prints for a friend recently who wanted two monochrome images at what eventually turned out to be 35 by 23 inches for the actual image part. I agreed to this with slight unease, as I'd never tried printing an APS-C image that large, but I knew they would be hung quite high off the ground, so nobody would be looking at them too closely. Well I got the prints back today, and I have to say that while both are fine, the better of the two completely surprised me. It was shot handheld with the 18-55 kit, and you can put your nose as close to it as you like, all you find is more detail! A tribute to the quality of the Fuji system. So I'm rather wondering what size of billboard Brides magazine has in mind when they say you'd better make sure your tog has a full frame camera... :) (Yes, I do know that in low light situations more sensor is always better, but still...)

But the instruction always to shoot the bride's mother with a cannon is invaluable :)
Click to expand...
The article is baffling for sure, I've printed large (not as large as yours though) using a cropped image from a 16mp m4/3 which sits beside two uncropped 24mp FF and I can't see any difference.
 
Here's one from Wednesday morning. After the foggy start in Botley, I made it into town, where there was no fog at all! But Christchurch Meadow was sub-zero and gorgeously frosty. Dynamic range became more of an issue as the morning went on, but I took so many pictures it's going to take quite a while just to decide which ones to keep :-). There were even some swans, although they were a bit less than cooperative, being more interested in dragging weeds out of the bottom of the ditch than posing for pictures...


Frosty brambles by David Hallett, on Flickr
 
dave.hallett said:
Here's one from Wednesday morning. After the foggy start in Botley, I made it into town, where there was no fog at all! But Christchurch Meadow was sub-zero and gorgeously frosty. Dynamic range became more of an issue as the morning went on, but I took so many pictures it's going to take quite a while just to decide which ones to keep :). There were even some swans, although they were a bit less than cooperative, being more interested in dragging weeds out of the bottom of the ditch than posing for pictures...


Frosty brambles by David Hallett, on Flickr
Click to expand...

I have to say Dave, your photos never fail to impress me. Nice one.
 
trevjm said:
I have to say Dave, your photos never fail to impress me. Nice one.
Click to expand...
Aw, that's awfully kind, thank you. I'm improving, that's the best I would say for myself!

There are so many great pictures shared on these forums that I do feel a bit outclassed occasionally. But the way I look at it, either people will enjoy the shot and be encouraged by what you can get with quite basic gear, or else I'll get some useful feedback in what to do better, which may also help others. It's all a win!
 
@Thunderbird010

I don't have the 56mm Andy, but the 55-200mm is a cracker of a lens. Certainly one of my fav's.(y)

George.
 
abryx said:
Just bought an X-T10 with the pre-Xmas double cashback offer. Very nice camera. The fully-auto switch will be useful from time to time. Here's a test of it on the beach in fading light the other day
DSCF2950a by Abryx1, on Flickr
Click to expand...

There's a dog that likes the beach! Lovely pebbles too...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top