The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

LC2 said:
It's the 23 & 33mm f/1.4 Viltrox lenses that interest me more than the 85 (I can adapt my 85 f/1.8 EF lens) especially if they do hit the $250 mark that has been mentioned.
Click to expand...

Same here, atm I have the Fuji 50F2, and i's a little belter of a lens but I don't find I use it enough. I'm really interested to see how good this Viltrox trio will be, they have a 56mm 1.4 along with the 23 and 33 also. The 33 and 56 interest me more so, as I have the Fuji 16mm 1.4 so 23 is too close to that for me. But if the 33 1.4 turns out to be decent it could be the one for me. They don't look too big either and will be pretty light going on the specs [250g, 270g, 290g in order]

6-1.jpg


Just posting the 33mm, all 3 look pretty much alike

https://www.fujirumors.com/new-imag...d-56mm-f-1-4-autofocus-lenses-for-fujifilm-x/
 
Last edited:
I find that my 35 f/2 is glued to my X-T3 and that I almost never use the 50 f/2 (Oddly my lensbaby 50mm does get used quite a bit and lives on my X-T2) I am really tempted by a 23mm to be able to go wider, as for the 33, well who could resist another stop of light for less than the second hand price of the native one - assuming it's any good of course...
 
LC2 said:
I find that my 35 f/2 is glued to my X-T3 and that I almost never use the 50 f/2 (Oddly my lensbaby 50mm does get used quite a bit and lives on my X-T2) I am really tempted by a 23mm to be able to go wider, as for the 33, well who could resist another stop of light for less than the second hand price of the native one - assuming it's any good of course...
Click to expand...

I had the 35F2 - nice little lens, but I didn't like how it hunted a bit before achieving AF [only a split second but it irritated me] - the 50F2 doesn't do this, and I do find it better for portraits. It's perfect for this actually, I just don't happen to shoot very many. I've thought about trading it for my old fav, the Fuji 35mm 1.4, but I'm tying to hold out to see how these Viltrox offerings turn out. Hopefully we should see some early previews in November, they're due for realease early December afaik. If they are decent, then I would sell the 50 and give the 33 a try, and well ... the 56 1.4 could be a nice Christmas pressie from me to me :giggle:
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
I had the 35F2 - nice little lens, but I didn't like how it hunted a bit before achieving AF [only a split second but it irritated me] - the 50F2 doesn't do this, and I do find it better for portraits. It's perfect for this actually, I just don't happen to shoot very many. I've thought about trading it for my old fav, the Fuji 35mm 1.4, but I'm tying to hold out to see how these Viltrox offerings turn out. Hopefully we should see some early previews in November, they're due for realease early December afaik. If they are decent, then I would sell the 50 and give the 33 a try, and well ... the 56 1.4 could be a nice Christmas pressie from me to me :giggle:
Click to expand...
Hmm, I've never really noticed hunting and I do a lot of low light portrait shots, conditions like this...

Sally - Jack Skellington - Nightmare Before Christmas by Tim White, on Flickr

I find that the 35 is short enough to allow me to get full body shots in busy places, but doesn't distort features, even when going for headshots.

Distortion might be the issue with a 23mm, especially close up, but we'll have to see. I guess.
 
Last edited:
LC2 said:
Hmm, I've never really noticed hunting and I do a lot of low light portrait shots, conditions like this...
Sally - Jack Skellington - Nightmare Before Christmas by Tim White, on Flickr
I find that the 35 is short enough to allow me to get full body shots in busy places, but doesn't distort features, even when going for headshots.

Distortion might be the issue with a 23mm, especially close up, but we'll have to see. I guess.
Click to expand...

Hunting was the wrong word, it's more a quick pulsing it does when you AF, it doesn't affect the shot of course, it's just a minor irritation to me.

I didn't have it for long, I sold it after buying the 16-55 2.8, but there is no denying it's a very sharp lens. This was at F2:

Rusted by K G, on Flickr
 
Cagey75 said:
Same here, atm I have the Fuji 50F2, and i's a little belter of a lens but I don't find I use it enough. I'm really interested to see how good this Viltrox trio will be, they have a 56mm 1.4 along with the 23 and 33 also. The 33 and 56 interest me more so, as I have the Fuji 16mm 1.4 so 23 is too close to that for me. But if the 33 1.4 turns out to be decent it could be the one for me. They don't look too big either and will be pretty light going on the specs [250g, 270g, 290g in order]

6-1.jpg


Just posting the 33mm, all 3 look pretty much alike

https://www.fujirumors.com/new-imag...d-56mm-f-1-4-autofocus-lenses-for-fujifilm-x/
Click to expand...

+1 might have a play if the viltrox are quick enough.
 
twist said:
+1 might have a play if the viltrox are quick enough.
Click to expand...

I do believe they are releasing them for Sony E mount and EOS M also. I really do hope they're decent, Fuji need a bit of competition - the other mounts have Sigma, Tamron and other third party decent offerings, Fuji have a bit of a Monopoly going with their system. Only really Samyang's MF lenses have upset that trend to date. So Kudos to Viltrox for even trying
 
Cagey75 said:
I do believe they are releasing them for Sony E mount and EOS M also. I really do hope they're decent, Fuji need a bit of competition - the other mounts have Sigma, Tamron and other third party decent offerings, Fuji have a bit of a Monopoly going with their system. So Kudos to Viltrox for even trying
Click to expand...

Fuji need to stop their proprietary BS and release protocols tbh. Canon m6ii looks pretty good also. Shame they crippled rp video as that’s really cheap, they’re turning up the heat.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
Fuji need to stop their proprietary BS and release protocols tbh. Canon m6ii looks pretty good also. Shanme they crippled rp video as that’s really cheap.
Click to expand...

As a budget photographer I completely agree and wish they would. I'd love to see Sigma or Tamron come in on the action but they just don't want the hassle
 
Cagey75 said:
As a budget photographer I completely agree and wish they would. I'd love to see Sigma or Tamron come in on the action but they just don't want the hassle
Click to expand...
Yup, sucks, sigmas little apsc art primes would be pretty amazing. Let’s see what viltrox does, can’t be any worse than 1st gen Fuji primes for AF.
 
twist said:
Yup, sucks, sigmas little apsc art primes would be pretty amazing. Let’s see what viltrox does, can’t be any worse than 1st gen Fuji primes for AF.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling their new trio will be pretty good, they've been watching and they know what Fuji have to offer - They are braisenly going for the jugular with FL to directly compete with much loved Fuji classics. It would be silly of them to put out three so-so lenses that would just get ignored. I have high hopes! Their 85mm has already proven to be very decent, with sites like Lenstips stating it's better in some ways than Sony's 85 1.8 [better bokeh, sharper in the centre] , and it's even better for APSC [Fuji only atm, I believe?] - seems to have been produced more with APSC in mind though is also a FF lens. The 23, 33, 56 lot are APSC only.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
I have a feeling their new trio will be pretty good, they've been watching and they know what Fuji have to offer - They are braisenly going for the jugular with FL to directly compete with much loved Fuji classics. It would be silly of them to put out three so-so lenses that would just get ignored. I have high hopes! Their 85mm has already proven to be very decent, with sites like Lenstips stating it's better in some ways than Sony's 85 1.8 [better bokeh, sharper in the centre] , and it's even better for APSC [Fuji only atm, I believe?] - seems to have been produced more with APSC in mind though is also a FF lens. The 23, 33, 56 lot are APSC only.
Click to expand...
I’ve been very impressed with the Sony 85 1.8, it’s a rapid, cheap lens. MUCH better than canikons dslr offerings.
 
twist said:
I’ve been very impressed with the Sony 85 1.8, it’s a rapid, cheap lens. MUCH better than canikons dslr offerings.
Click to expand...

The only 85mm I've tried besides the old reliable Nikon 85 1.8G, was adapting the Canon 85 1.8 USM to both the G80 and then X-H1. Serious purple fringing until stopped down to 2.8 but otherwise a very nice, for the price lens. I mean, you can get them used for £200 in great condition. I paid only £180 for one during a Camera Jungle 20% off sale [as in it was 180 before the discount] the fringer pro adapter I had cost more! That could be the best value I ever got in an AF lens, it was 'minty' even though they had it marked as 'well used' [hence the price] but that fringing was just a bit too much for my liking. I know the Viltrox 85mm 1.8 has some of it too, but not near as bad even wide open
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
As a budget photographer I completely agree and wish they would. I'd love to see Sigma or Tamron come in on the action but they just don't want the hassle
Click to expand...

Maybe I am missing something, but why? I have only used Sigma/Tamron on DSLRs when I wanted a lens but couldnt afford Nikon. Things like the Tam 150-600 for example. Good lens, but I thought the 200-500 was better. The Sigma 10-20 was fine on DX but the Nikon 16-35 on FF was better.

I have heard good things about the Sigma ART range but are they really any better than Nikons 1.4 lenses? Are they much cheaper? The other thing is that Fuji lenses are pretty cheap (2nd hand anyway) - with something around £300 or less for the 23/35/50 primes, and even the 1.2 for around 500,
 
cambsno said:
Maybe I am missing something, but why? I have only used Sigma/Tamron on DSLRs when I wanted a lens but couldnt afford Nikon. Things like the Tam 150-600 for example. Good lens, but I thought the 200-500 was better. The Sigma 10-20 was fine on DX but the Nikon 16-35 on FF was better.

I have heard good things about the Sigma ART range but are they really any better than Nikons 1.4 lenses? Are they much cheaper? The other thing is that Fuji lenses are pretty cheap (2nd hand anyway) - with something around £300 or less for the 23/35/50 primes, and even the 1.2 for around 500,
Click to expand...

Because times have moved on significantly and both Sigma and Tamron now produce excellent budget friendly lenses. I know way back they were seen as "council house" offerings but they are producing some really solid stuff now, particularly for APSC/M43. Their 56mm 1.4 is right up there with the sharpest APSC lenses ever made and can be had for about £380. Now, saying that, there's no chance I'd trade my Fuji 16 1.4 for the Sigma 16mm 1.4, but thats a special case. I would however snap up their 30mm 1.4 if they made it for Fuji as it goes for about £250 new and is a very good lens.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
The only 85mm I've tried besides the old reliable Nikon 85 1.8G, was adapting the Canon 85 1.8 USM to both the G80 and then X-H1. Serious purple fringing until stopped down to 2.8 but otherwise a very nice, for the price lens. I mean, you can get them used for £200 in great condition. I paid only £180 for one during a Camera Jungle 20% off sale [as in it was 180 before the discount] the fringer pro adapter I had cost more! That could be the best value I ever got in an AF lens, it was 'minty' even though they had it marked as 'well used' [hence the price] but that fringing was just a bit too much for my liking. I know the Viltrox 85mm 1.8 has some of it too, but not near as bad even wide open
Click to expand...
Yup, same for me, lovely cheap lens otherwise but that purple CA was horrible and ruined it.
 
cambsno said:
Maybe I am missing something, but why? I have only used Sigma/Tamron on DSLRs when I wanted a lens but couldnt afford Nikon. Things like the Tam 150-600 for example. Good lens, but I thought the 200-500 was better. The Sigma 10-20 was fine on DX but the Nikon 16-35 on FF was better.

I have heard good things about the Sigma ART range but are they really any better than Nikons 1.4 lenses? Are they much cheaper? The other thing is that Fuji lenses are pretty cheap (2nd hand anyway) - with something around £300 or less for the 23/35/50 primes, and even the 1.2 for around 500,
Click to expand...

Nikons 1.4 G lenses can’t keep up with Sigmas arts, the arts are also much cheaper (ff). The Nikon 35 is 1600 and the sigma 600, could pretty much get 24/35/50 1.4 arts for the price of a 35 Nikkor, no brainer.

the DX lenses from sigma have always been top performers and the newer arts even better with the wider apertures.
 
Last edited:
When I bought the Sigma 35 1.4, not too long after it was first released, I paid £790 I think. The Nikon 35 1.4G at the time was something like £1800. That Sigma Art 35 is still very much used and loved today by many because it can be had for £450 used at times.

Also good luck finding a Fuji 56 1.2 for 500 in very good nick. Last one I seen that price had a nick on the front element. £600 sure.

The 23, 35, 50 F2 lenses can indeed be had for £300, but then look to Nikon, you can get a 35 1.8 for less than £150 and a 50mm 1.8 for about £110

I will pay for Fuji glass when I need, because you know it's going to be good. I mean I've owned both of their 35mm variants and have the 50F2 right now. But I know I'm paying more than i would on other systems for much the same. OK, not a fair comparison between the Fuji 50F2 say and Nikon's 50 1.8G because the Nikon isn't weather resistant and isn't near as fast or quiet or well built, but the end results [on APSC] are not going to differ all that much. Some could argue a 50mm doesn't really require WR, and the Nikon is a tad faster aperture-wise for low light not forgetting it can be had for 1/3rd the money
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
macvisual said:
Anyone shoot with the Samyang 8mm MkII f/2.8 fisheye lens for Fuji..? Maybe a lens you wouldn't use a lot, for specific shoots/styles I know. They seem cheap enough to purchase.


Some image samples here along with personal opinions;
https://www.juzaphoto.com/recensione.php?l=en&t=samyang_8fisheye_f2-8_ii


Peter
Click to expand...

The 8mm is a lot of fun to use.

Week 3 Scenic by barrysprout, on Flickr

Fisheye on the beach by barrysprout, on Flickr

Of course you have to be careful not to have your fingers or feet in frame.

Fisheye on the beach by barrysprout, on Flickr
 
macvisual said:
wOw a splendid capture this Jamie..!! That would look well professionally printed/enlarged etc... Which camera body/lens were used for this capture..?

Regards;
Peter
Click to expand...
Thanks Peter, it’s the 10-24 (at 10) on an X-T3
 
Last edited:
rick448 said:
Great shots there Dave, I'm envious of the great subject matter you have there. Loving number 1 the most, what did you use to process number 2?
Click to expand...

Thanks Rick I`m going to print up the image of Martin to give him. The shot that I edited was done in Nik Collection Silver Effects pro 2, as really like some of the settings.
 
Dave70D said:
Thanks Rick I`m going to print up the image of Martin to give him. The shot that I edited was done in Nik Collection Silver Effects pro 2, as really like some of the settings.
Click to expand...
I agree, lovely effects in that one. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top