The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

I think it's just for balance, stability and protection. Not used it personally, just going on how it looks.

I use the battery grip and like it a lot. It doesn't add any extra grip horizontally, but it's great for vertical shots, and I love having that extra battery in there.

I have made an offer on the Takumar 200mm F4, meeting the seller tomorrow to view it.
 
Last edited:
c22w1 said:
I am looking to get a grip for my new, yet to be delivered X-T1 but what s the bit on the side for, is it just to protect the camera body or is there a more useful purpose for it?
View attachment 94696
Click to expand...
It's for mounting vertically on a tripod.
 
woof woof said:
I don't know anything about these lenses but I have spotted that the name keeps cropping up :D

Do you have any idea how the primes compare to the mass market SLR primes including Canon FD, Olympus Zuiko and Minolta Rokkor? I have FD, Zuiko and Rokkor lenses and of these the Rokkors seem the best but I'm just a bit bored and suffering a little gas :D so I wonder if Tukumars would be better/interesting/whatever but I don't know anything about them.

I'd be looking mostly at 24, 28, 35, 50, 85 and 135mm.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I've not noticed much between the big brand primes of the 70s, but the Takumars were replaced by the Pentax SMC line in the mid 70s, so I suspect the later nFD and Rokkors are probably a bit better, along with the Pentax-SMC line.

The Takumar-zooms were surprisingly good, particularly the 85-210/4.5. There was a lot interest in Takumars a few years back, when a lot people were adapting them to SLRs and could only adapt M42 lenses. Takumars were a good choice as they were built well, performed well and generally still functioned 50 years later, unlike the Pentacons and Zeiss Jena lenses of that era.

The 85/1.8 is very good, sharper than the 85/1.9, and the 35 and 28 always worked well. The 50/1.4 is a classic, but the 55/1.8 (and 55/2, same lens but with a shim to reduce max aperture) is not far behind, and much cheaper. There is also a 105/2.8 which I found a bit meh. These lenses are so cheap to buy, you might as well buy a few anyway and do some comparisons for us ;)
 
Cagey75 said:
The Jena is a lovely little lens, is there a difference between this and the Sonnar? It says Jena on the front of mine.
Click to expand...

Actually none of them had sonnar written on the ring, but they were indeed all Sonnars. They were labelled 'Carl Zeiss Jena S' 'Jena S' and 'Aus Jena S', depending on the market they were exported to and the whatever the legal status was at the time, with the West German Carl Zeiss company.
 
c22w1 said:
Ah thanks. I see now but it's still a bit useless, my tripod has a ball head so it's not needed.
Click to expand...

Mounting in portrait mode makes lining up panoramic shots a bit neater. Also balances the weight better on the tripod so less chance of toppling.

ETA: also might be worth waiting until your camera arrives to decide whether you need a grip.
 
Last edited:
Alan Clogwyn said:
I wanted 10mm in non fisheye form and the 10-24 is currently the only way to do that. I like the sound of the 8-16mm f2.8 though!
Click to expand...
Thanks. Yep a 8-16mm sounds awesome!

Alan, did you ever use a CPL on the 14mm? Anyone else? Wondering how well they perform, I've never used one on such a wide angle lens. Cheers.
 
c22w1 said:
Ah thanks. I see now but it's still a bit useless, my tripod has a ball head so it's not needed.
Click to expand...

Also make sit a lot easier to frame the same shot in Landscape and Portrait format has the position of the camera dosent move. Only drawback is
you can't use a cable release in the Portrait format with the L bracket on although there are work rounds for this.
 
Scam said:
Thanks. Yep a 8-16mm sounds awesome!

Alan, did you ever use a CPL on the 14mm? Anyone else? Wondering how well they perform, I've never used one on such a wide angle lens. Cheers.
Click to expand...

As always the drawback is uneven blue skies due to the effect of the CPL you just have to keep an eye open for it. You don't have to use the CPL to its maximum effect.
For me the on a wide angle lens the great use of the CPL is to cut back reflections on waterfalls and water in general.
 
yamahatdm900 said:
Also make sit a lot easier to frame the same shot in Landscape and Portrait format has the position of the camera dosent move. Only drawback is
you can't use a cable release in the Portrait format with the L bracket on although there are work rounds for this.
Click to expand...
Can't really see how my tripod plate would fit to this but I suppose it will become apparent when it arrives.
 
c22w1 said:
Can't really see how my tripod plate would fit to this but I suppose it will become apparent when it arrives.
Click to expand...

Its a swiss acra fitting so thats probably why, wait till the tripod arrives and see if you think you need it, although the grip helps holding a XT-1 for me personally.
 
c22w1 said:
Can't really see how my tripod plate would fit to this but I suppose it will become apparent when it arrives.
Click to expand...
You need a tripod head with an Arca-Swiss type mount.
 
c22w1 said:
Can't really see how my tripod plate would fit to this but I suppose it will become apparent when it arrives.
Click to expand...
It doesn't. It's for the Arca system.
You need an Arca compatible head to go with it.
It's a completely different system.
Once you've used it (properly) you'll never go back.
Until you've used it (properly) you'll just think it's a waste of time and money.
Using that with an ordinary tripod plate is like having a bath with your socks on.
 
BacktotheFuji said:
Honestly, I've not noticed much between the big brand primes of the 70s, but the Takumars were replaced by the Pentax SMC line in the mid 70s, so I suspect the later nFD and Rokkors are probably a bit better, along with the Pentax-SMC line.

The Takumar-zooms were surprisingly good, particularly the 85-210/4.5. There was a lot interest in Takumars a few years back, when a lot people were adapting them to SLRs and could only adapt M42 lenses. Takumars were a good choice as they were built well, performed well and generally still functioned 50 years later, unlike the Pentacons and Zeiss Jena lenses of that era.

The 85/1.8 is very good, sharper than the 85/1.9, and the 35 and 28 always worked well. The 50/1.4 is a classic, but the 55/1.8 (and 55/2, same lens but with a shim to reduce max aperture) is not far behind, and much cheaper. There is also a 105/2.8 which I found a bit meh. These lenses are so cheap to buy, you might as well buy a few anyway and do some comparisons for us ;)
Click to expand...

Thanks.

I read somewhere that the earlier lenses are very well regarded and up there with the best German lenses and only lacking in the name and German tag. If that really is the case I'd expect them to be better than the mass market fodder I have.

I had a quick look on evil bay and the prices of the primes I'd be interested in look reasonable but there do seem to be some tatty examples about but I realise that being cosmetically tatty may not affect the optical quality.

I just thought they might be worth looking at but something would have to go as I have multiple manual lenses at the same focal lengths.

PS.
Just on the comparison thing. To be honest I do like playing with the gear and comparing stuff but time is so tight these days that if I bought a lens or two to compare to my FD, Zuiko and Rokkor lenses I'd never get time to do it.
 
Last edited:
First trip out today with the new X-T2 + my new 16-55 and I'm really liking the handling coming from the X-T10. Love the handiness of the ISO dial and the little nubbin is fantastic (although having been used to the X-T10 and my Nikon D800 I frequently tried to shift the focus point using the directional arrow buttons). In camera processing of long exposures seems to take forever compared with my Nikon but I gather it's normal. Also handy for me was the fact that my 77mm Lee filter adapter fits the 16-55mm lens.

Errigal by Brian M, on Flickr
 
2017_0128_14585700-01.jpeg

A quick mobile edit today. I shot a wedding at monkey world a coupke of years back. One of the gifts for the couple was the adoption of a monkey. While there today I was able to snap this, transfer to snapseed and send it to them in under 5mins. :)
 
psybear said:
First trip out today with the new X-T2 + my new 16-55 and I'm really liking the handling coming from the X-T10. Love the handiness of the ISO dial and the little nubbin is fantastic (although having been used to the X-T10 and my Nikon D800 I frequently tried to shift the focus point using the directional arrow buttons). In camera processing of long exposures seems to take forever compared with my Nikon but I gather it's normal. Also handy for me was the fact that my 77mm Lee filter adapter fits the 16-55mm lens.

Errigal by Brian M, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Holy wow!!
 
can anyone get on to the refurb shop? i was going to get one of those x-t2's but the site isnt loading for me now! :(
 
jimmyjamjojo said:
Very nicely done. Candlelight is tough and you nailed it.
Click to expand...

I took a few at F1.4 and F2, but the girls were a little fuzzy as I focused on the candles, 2.8 worked out best :) I take these twice a year of course for a record. On this one I just messed about with PP, trying a more de-saturated look. I like the result :) Cheers.
 
psybear said:
First trip out today with the new X-T2 + my new 16-55 and I'm really liking the handling coming from the X-T10. Love the handiness of the ISO dial and the little nubbin is fantastic (although having been used to the X-T10 and my Nikon D800 I frequently tried to shift the focus point using the directional arrow buttons). In camera processing of long exposures seems to take forever compared with my Nikon but I gather it's normal. Also handy for me was the fact that my 77mm Lee filter adapter fits the 16-55mm lens.

Errigal by Brian M, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Simply stunning. So much to look at. Excellent.
 
Andrew Moore said:
The 16-55 is great but silly money. No OIS but fast with great IQ. Auto focus is fast!
The 18-55 is also great, is barely any worse for IQ than the 16-55 but has OIS and is a little slower at the big end.auto focus again is fast!
The 18-135 is slower again than the 18-55 but the OIS is next level, noticeably better and with the focal range makes for a great all purpose lens. AF is from experience quicker than the 18-55 so if your not a bokeh whore it's the best of the bunch. If you want bokeh and the highest IQ, get some primes to go along with it.
Click to expand...
Thanks Andrew, much appreciated. I like the 18_135 on my canon, it's a great range, but not the best of focus accuracy when photographing my children moving, hopefully getting to the photography show to do a bit of comparing.
 
psybear said:
First trip out today with the new X-T2 + my new 16-55 and I'm really liking the handling coming from the X-T10. Love the handiness of the ISO dial and the little nubbin is fantastic (although having been used to the X-T10 and my Nikon D800 I frequently tried to shift the focus point using the directional arrow buttons). In camera processing of long exposures seems to take forever compared with my Nikon but I gather it's normal. Also handy for me was the fact that my 77mm Lee filter adapter fits the 16-55mm lens.

Errigal by Brian M, on Flickr
Click to expand...


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

George.
 
Cagey75 said:
Our Kayley turned into a 'terrible teen' today, the obligatory cake'n'candle shot added to the collection of similar ones over the years.

The 3 main ladies in my life: XT-1, 35mm 1.4 @F2.8, ambient light, RAW processed in LR

My 3 ladies by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr
Click to expand...


That's nice Sir.(y)

George.
 
A bit more evidence that the difficulties of the X-Trans sensor with foliage may be exaggerated :D. It's actually a stitch, but only because I wanted the width and couldn't be arsed with changing to the 12mm Samyang...

Not saying it's perfect, mind you - the camera was balanced on some railings over my head, and would probably do even better on a tripod. But I think it's pretty reasonable. If anyone wants to see a 100% crop, I'm happy to oblige.


Oxford Botanic Gardens, frosty morning by David Hallett, on Flickr
 
Cagey75 said:
Any of you MF lens users know of the 'Super Multi coated Takumar F4 Asahi 200mm'? Thinking it might be good for my garden birds

Looks a big b****r, wondering how it might handle on the XT-1

NzJmYWQwM2VkMTdiN2I0NWQ5MWZjYjg2YjdhYTkyODUpHztRHzSZCLgSw3CzOdfLaHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmFkc2ltZy5jb20vZmYxYjAwY2FiMzZiNjJhNzFkMjZkODI5ZDE5ZmJhYjBhZTYwZGZlZGI0MWE1MDg0NWM4ODI0NzkzZmQ2Mjk4Yi5qcGd8fHx8fHw3MDB4Mzk0fGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuYWR2ZXJ0cy5pZS9zdGF0aWMvaS93YXRlcm1hcmsucG5nfHx8.jpg



This exact one here ^ - looks a decent copy, the guy is looking for €75, seems good value
Click to expand...

See the reviews on PentaxForum, average 8.97 which is pretty good. I reckon any lens with multiple reviews averaging around 9 or more is worth buying. Mind you, I've only used Pentax lenses on film bodies, not Fujis...
 
ChrisR said:
See the reviews on PentaxForum, average 8.97 which is pretty good. I reckon any lens with multiple reviews averaging around 9 or more is worth buying. Mind you, I've only used Pentax lenses on film bodies, not Fujis...
Click to expand...

Yeah, found it on that very site last night. The first reviewer is also using the Fuji XT-1. Looks like people only drop points for it's bokeh, which isn't what I need it for tbh :D

I went ahead and bought it after inspection today, lovely copy, well looked after.
ohSnxG9.jpg


Just managed to grab a few tester shots out the window this eve. It was raining here all day and a bit dark and dank, but it was easy to use, not too heavy, lovely focus ring. Big and chunky, and simple to fine tune focusing with. Unlike my Helios 58mm, which is a bit erratic. This one focuses smoother than my Carl Zeiss jena even, very pleased with that.

'Oo's been knocking down the feeders? by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr

Blue tit#2 by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr
 
psybear said:
First trip out today with the new X-T2 + my new 16-55 and I'm really liking the handling coming from the X-T10. Love the handiness of the ISO dial and the little nubbin is fantastic (although having been used to the X-T10 and my Nikon D800 I frequently tried to shift the focus point using the directional arrow buttons). In camera processing of long exposures seems to take forever compared with my Nikon but I gather it's normal. Also handy for me was the fact that my 77mm Lee filter adapter fits the 16-55mm lens.

Errigal by Brian M, on Flickr
Click to expand...


Thats a stunner Brian.

Cagey75 said:
Our Kayley turned into a 'terrible teen' today, the obligatory cake'n'candle shot added to the collection of similar ones over the years.

The 3 main ladies in my life: XT-1, 35mm 1.4 @F2.8, ambient light, RAW processed in LR

My 3 ladies by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Very well shot Keith a spot on exposure

Mr Perceptive said:
The standard of the photos in this thread is amazing especially @psybear 's which is a corker. Two from me this morning, playing with 13 and 16 stoppers!! (proving yet again, we have some great weather in the North West!!)


170129 West Kirby Marina 2 by Mr Perceptive X100, on Flickr


170129 West Kirby Marina 1 by Mr Perceptive X100, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Some lovely long exposures David.

dave.hallett said:
A bit more evidence that the difficulties of the X-Trans sensor with foliage may be exaggerated :D. It's actually a stitch, but only because I wanted the width and couldn't be arsed with changing to the 12mm Samyang...

Not saying it's perfect, mind you - the camera was balanced on some railings over my head, and would probably do even better on a tripod. But I think it's pretty reasonable. If anyone wants to see a 100% crop, I'm happy to oblige.


Oxford Botanic Gardens, frosty morning by David Hallett, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Looks good Dave, did you use Iridient to process this?
 
BacktotheFuji said:
Holy wow!!
Click to expand...

Iiyama said:
Simply stunning. So much to look at. Excellent.
Click to expand...

G.K.Jnr. said:
"Excellent" shot Sir, nuff said.(y)

George.
Click to expand...

Mr Perceptive said:
The standard of the photos in this thread is amazing especially @psybear 's which is a corker.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the very kind comments folks!

Another one from yesterday, same combo of X-T2 and 16-55mm. Posting a 500px link as when I upload it to Flickr it becomes horribly noisy...

https://500px.com/photo/195738577/-bád-eddie-eddie-s-boat-by-brian-maguire?ctx_page=1&from=user&user_id=120592

Edit: can't work out how to embed 500px images into this forum... I'll try a direct upload!

_DSF0119-Edit-Edit.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top