The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

Cagey75 said:
I missed the XT1 more than any other camera I sold over the years. I loved it with the grip attached, I took some of my own personal fav images past decade using that and the 35 1.4. I'm raging I missed out on that XT2 this week, but will be keeping an eye on the used market. A T-2 is plenty enough for me but I would want the grip, and they are still too pricey for my liking [the grip that is]. I still have that niggle about the sensor type though, it was one of the reasons I switched instead of upgrading at the time. The T2 might be a little more prone to it than he T1 was [I never really had the issue, more going by what others showed on here and elsewhere] But I rarely do landscape when I think on it, which is why I didn't find the issue so much personally.

Also yes to the colour! They should do a Gun-Metal, it even sounds cooler.
Click to expand...

35 1.4 is a stunner, they need to upgrade that af motor but they'll be saving that for the 33 ;)
 
twist said:
35 1.4 is a stunner, they need to upgrade that af motor but they'll be saving that for the 33 ;)
Click to expand...

Certainly not the nippiest lens ever, but I found it just fine even on the T1. Apparently the older lenses like the 23 1.4, 35 1.4, 60 2.4 etc get a decent boost on the T3.

It does make me wonder at times though, are people being a little too fussy these days? I mean the average Joe enthusiast who's not in any real hurry. Do we need the lens to have focused before we even consider the shot? I've had lenses that would 'whizz, whirrr, hunt, whizz, stall, hunt again before finally focusing and managed to get good images with. Now I don't ever want a lens like that again [looking at you Nikon 50mm 1.8D] but so long as it snaps into focus within a second I'm usually good. Maybe I'm too casual? but speed seems to be such a major factor for people choosing gear nowadays.

Another thing that worries me on these ultra rapid firing cameras is that in a year or two's time, won't there be tonnes of these on the used market with ridiculously high shutter count?
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
Certainly not the nippiest lens ever, but I found it just fine even on the T1. Apparently the older lenses like the 23 1.4, 35 1.4, 60 2.4 etc get a decent boost on the T3.

It does make me wonder at times though, are people being a little too fussy these days? I mean the average Joe enthusiast who's not in any real hurry. Do we need the lens to have focused before we even consider the shot? I've had lenses that would 'whizz, whirrr, hunt, whizz, stall, hunt again before finally focusing and managed to get good images with. Now I don't ever want a lens like that again [looking at you Nikon 50mm 1.8D] but so long as it snaps into focus within a second I'm usually good. Maybe I'm too casual? but speed seems to be such a major factor for people choosing gear nowadays.

Another thing that worries me on these ultra rapid firing cameras is that in a year or two's time, won't there be tonnes of these on the used market with ridiculously high shutter count?
Click to expand...

The appeal of shooting at high frame per seconds wears off pretty quick when you keep having to delete 90% of them.
 
addicknchips said:
The appeal of shooting at high frame per seconds wears off pretty quick when you keep having to delete 90% of them.
Click to expand...
I do that when my shooting rate is 1fpw. :(
 
Dave70D said:
What a result in Jessops, they had a look at the X-T2 that I had with me today, just under £700 they quoted as its mint but all together the trade in will give me enough for X-T3 + XF 50mm f2 plus some money over :) So will own one camera and XF18-55mm XF 35mm XF90mm and the XF50mm will do for me, OH YES. Might go for the silver X-T3.
Click to expand...

Whaddya mean ‘might ‘

Surely you did the deal. ?
 
macvisual said:
Looking forward to viewing these new XT3 images from all yous new owners/shooters........!

:)
Click to expand...

Lets hope they show the improvement the camera is capable of tho for the most part at forum size... we’d have to shoot some relatively extreme situations to show anything much different to the T2 and arguably the T1.

I personally expect to see this in low light and also DR if at all in most situations. Of course in lieu of blowing up prints that is... now that would be fun.
 
db247 said:
Lets hope they show the improvement the camera is capable of tho for the most part at forum size... we’d have to shoot some relatively extreme situations to show anything much different to the T2 and arguably the T1.

I personally expect to see this in low light and also DR if at all in most situations. Of course in lieu of blowing up prints that is... now that would be fun.
Click to expand...

Will you be reviewing one soon, Damien?
 
trevorbray said:
Whaddya mean ‘might ‘

Surely you did the deal. ?
Click to expand...

The deal will be done 100%, once Jessops get more X-T3s in :) I have made my mind up though now, they can have the XF18-55mm as it gave me a bit more money to spend so I will just have three great Primes. XF35mm f2 XF50mm f2 XF90mm f2 :)
 
Dave70D said:
The deal will be done 100%, once Jessops get more X-T3s in :) I have made my mind up though now, they can have the XF18-55mm as it gave me a bit more money to spend so I will just have three great Primes. XF35mm f2 XF50mm f2 XF90mm f2 :)
Click to expand...

There's an X-T3s already!? :eek:

I'm starting a rumour thread on it :LOL:
 
Picking up mine tomorrow.

Swapping in my x-t2 & x-t1 + 18-55.

For me, it’s the AF on zippy things and low light ability which are worth it.
 
First raw file out, opened via silkypix (which apears on first glance to be freaking awful!) and converted into a tiff (couldn't for the life of me figure out how to convert to a dng), before working on in LR.


Will be waiting for adobe to pull their finger out rather than faff about with silky...
 
Last edited:
twist said:
Looks the same as the xt2.
Click to expand...


My thoughts too, makes the XT2 look as strong as ever IMO. I know the T3 has some snazzy extras, but from what I've seen they would suit videographers mostly. For your stills shooter, nothing in it unless you're really nit picking.

jonneymendoza said:
Link?
Click to expand...

It's a little better at that range from what I've seen ... so long as you're checking at 400% ... seriously, I think some reviewers are try harding to make it look better. There is more detail held at that range, but I for one don't ever go anywhere near that, keep me under 3200 and I'm all good. There's zero difference to that point from what I've seen. And the X-T2 was already about the best of the APSC world up to that point. So, even if it's a bit behind, it still remains better than the likes of the A6500, 80D, all M43, D7*** whatever. It didn't suddenly get worse because of it's new big bro

Puzzles me why people who had no interest in the XT2 suddenly want a piece of this T3 .. there's really nothing in it outside of faster AF and better video features.

What attracts me now though, is the price drops on the good ol' XT2. If it continues to drop it's going to be a right steal.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
My thoughts too, makes the XT2 look as strong as ever IMO. I know the T3 has some snazzy extras, but from what I've seen they would suit videographers mostly. For your stills shooter, nothing in it unless you're really nit picking.



It's a little better at that range from what I've seen ... so long as you're checking at 400% ... seriously, I think some reviewers are try harding to make it look better. There is more detail held at that range, but I for one don't ever go anywhere near that, keep me under 3200 and I'm all good. There's zero difference to that point from what I've seen. And the X-T2 was already about the best of the APSC world up to that point. So, even if it's a bit behind, it still remains better than the likes of the A6500, 80D, all M43, D7*** whatever. It didn't suddenly get worse because of it's new big bro

Puzzles me why people who had no interest in the XT2 suddenly want a piece of this T3 .. there's really nothing in it outside of faster AF and better video features.

What attracts me now though, is the price drops on the good ol' XT2. If it continues to drop it's going to be a right steal.
Click to expand...

That’s far too sensible a post when a new camera has come out, me - I’ve just ordered an XT3[emoji849]
 
twist said:
Looks the same as the xt2.
Click to expand...


That’s exactly what I thought Sir, there probably is a tiny difference but I’ve yet too see it.(y)

George.
 
Cagey75 said:
And the X-T2 was already about the best of the APSC world up to that point. So, even if it's a bit behind, it still remains better than the likes of the A6500, 80D, all M43, D7*** whatever. It didn't suddenly get worse because of it's new big bro

Puzzles me why people who had no interest in the XT2 suddenly want a piece of this T3 .. there's really nothing in it outside of faster AF and better video features.
Click to expand...

I dont think Id agree with that, Fujis ISO isnt measured the same way as the rest. The A6500 is the same when you take that into account, the D500 is actually the best.

AF is a big thing and will tempt people, thats the difference between me buying a camera or not.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
AF is a big thing and will tempt people, thats the difference between me buying a camera or not.
Click to expand...
I agree, it's the improved AF and AF down to -3ev that has my wallet running scared.

I do quite a lot of people shots at conventions, indoors. I've never really been able to trust the Eye Detect, and on occasions I get a fair bit of hunting. Improved Eye Detect and -3ev would hopefully improve matters. I'll probably hold on for the post Xmas sales, as that 'may' drop the price a bit and hopefully any firmware bugs will have been sorted out by all the early adopters :)
 
twist said:
I dont think Id agree with that, Fujis ISO isnt measured the same way as the rest. The A6500 is the same when you take that into account, the D500 is actually the best.

AF is a big thing and will tempt people, thats the difference between me buying a camera or not.
Click to expand...

There are two standard ways of measuring ISO and both are "Correct" some manufacturers prefer to use one system, and others the other. there is no "Right way" any more than there is a "Correct" exposure. What is important is that you get what you expect to get, Consistently and throughout the range. and Fuji do that very well.
It would seem Fuji have made a step forward when it comes to AF. While previously Mirrorless cameras have lagged behind in AF speed, this is no longer the case. Mirrorless cameras have always been more "Accurate" when it comes to focus, and never need to be microadjusted to make up for the shortcomings of a secondary mirror system.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
There are two standard ways of measuring ISO and both are "Correct" some manufacturers prefer to use one system, and others the other. there is no "Right way" any more than there is a "Correct" exposure. What is important is that you get what you expect to get, Consistently and throughout the range. and Fuji do that very well.
It would seem Fuji have made a step forward when it comes to AF. While previously Mirrorless cameras have lagged behind in AF speed, this is no longer the case. Mirrorless cameras have always been more "Accurate" when it comes to focus, and never need to be microadjusted to make up for the shortcomings of a secondary mirror system.
Click to expand...

But to say that the sensor performs better is incorrect because you need to add 2/3 of a stop to the ISO to measure against other cameras, you cant just say the Fuji is cleaner at ISO6400 than the Sony at ISO6400.
 
twist said:
But to say that the sensor performs better is incorrect because you need to add 2/3 of a stop to the ISO to measure against other cameras, you cant just say the Fuji is cleaner at ISO6400 than the Sony at ISO6400.
Click to expand...

i do not compare with other cameras, that is a pointless exercise. some other cameras might be out 2/3 of a stop compared to Fuji, but others are the same as they use the same standard.
The problem for those who want to compare between them is that the differences produced by the two systems are not linear. so you get different results at different points on the scale.

What you can say is that one camera produces "better" and "cleaner" results in the same light conditions. ISO is a red herring.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top