The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

snerkler said:
I find the histogram much more useful as it shows you whether highlights are being blown and blacks being crushed. A light meter needle like on the OM1 SLR only shows whether it's over or underexposed, the light meter on modern cameras tells you this, but also tells you how much over/underexposed, which again for me is much better than a very vague needle. Of course YMMV
Click to expand...

Well, the needle on the Yashica Mat has got me 10 rolls out of 10 so far with no issues :ROFLMAO:

I just find the histogram in the OVF very difficult to read clearly.
 
LeeRatters said:
Well, the needle on the Yashica Mat has got me 10 rolls out of 10 so far with no issues :ROFLMAO:

I just find the histogram in the OVF very difficult to read clearly.
Click to expand...
Yeah it’s not great on the OVF to be fair, I rarely use it and use the light meter instead.

I do find the X100VI underexposes a touch too.
 
Went in to Castle Cameras (Salisbury) today and nearly bought the 150-600. Lucky, they didn't have it in stock..... But I am looking to pick up a new mini scope from them on Tuesday - maybe the big zoom will be back by then, who knows....
 
Last edited:
That's hands down the best lens I've ever used. It's so sharp it actually makes a the viewfinder seem like it's been upgraded just looking through it.

It's left me with quite a dilemma. It was a big stretch to buy it. It's sat on my credit car and I always had in the back of my mind that I would likely sell it on pretty quickly after this trip once I'd had my fun. I'd even checked MPB trade in price before buying to make sure I would be losing less than just hiring one would cost. But it's really tempting to keep it. I'd have to sell my 50-140, 100-400 and viltron 75mm and chuck another few hundred quid at it. Tough choice. It's not the most useful lens in the world being massive and a prime but the results are such a level up from what I'm used to using.

It's not perfect though. I found the hood is easy to knock off and the aperture ring is a little too easy to accidentally adjust too. Splitting hairs a little here though.
 
gad-westy said:
That's hands down the best lens I've ever used. It's so sharp it actually makes a the viewfinder seem like it's been upgraded just looking through it.

It's left me with quite a dilemma. It was a big stretch to buy it. It's sat on my credit car and I always had in the back of my mind that I would likely sell it on pretty quickly after this trip once I'd had my fun. I'd even checked MPB trade in price before buying to make sure I would be losing less than just hiring one would cost. But it's really tempting to keep it. I'd have to sell my 50-140, 100-400 and viltron 75mm and chuck another few hundred quid at it. Tough choice. It's not the most useful lens in the world being massive and a prime but the results are such a level up from what I'm used to using.

It's not perfect though. I found the hood is easy to knock off and the aperture ring is a little too easy to accidentally adjust too. Splitting hairs a little here though.
Click to expand...
I think for that sort of money you're entitled to split a few hairs!
 
gad-westy said:
That's hands down the best lens I've ever used. It's so sharp it actually makes a the viewfinder seem like it's been upgraded just looking through it.

It's left me with quite a dilemma. It was a big stretch to buy it. It's sat on my credit car and I always had in the back of my mind that I would likely sell it on pretty quickly after this trip once I'd had my fun. I'd even checked MPB trade in price before buying to make sure I would be losing less than just hiring one would cost. But it's really tempting to keep it. I'd have to sell my 50-140, 100-400 and viltron 75mm and chuck another few hundred quid at it. Tough choice. It's not the most useful lens in the world being massive and a prime but the results are such a level up from what I'm used to using.

It's not perfect though. I found the hood is easy to knock off and the aperture ring is a little too easy to accidentally adjust too. Splitting hairs a little here though.
Click to expand...

Excellent shots, I can see the sharpness (especially compared with your LM 24 shots on Flickr). Sharpness is very difficult to get past (IMO), once seen you crave for it all the time, its one of the reasons why I was happy to chop in a lot of my Fuji gear for the Leica Q3. A lot of motorsport sharpness coming from decent panning techinique, something which I often lack, I have short periods where I get in the zone and nail it, and other periods where quite frankly I'm hopeless. But nailing it witha sharp less makes the whole thing worth it :)

I only have the 50-140 and 100-400 and I could see myself losing the 100-400 for the XF200mm (+TC) but I couldn't get rid of the 50-140 as well, quite a lot of what I shoot is at close range (hillclimbs, infield at Oulton) and 200 would be too long. Then only selling the 100-400 doesn't put much of dent in an XF200mm price!!

I'm tempted to get one for an event on the free 48hr hire offer (though there is a £2750 deposit to put down!!)

In your shoes its a very difficult shout, because I would also be considering X-T4 -> X-H2S, and realistically thats about a £1000 (at least) upgrade once you take into account a CF-Express Card. I have found the X-H2S a big step up from the X-T3 (from the blackout free, the fact that I can use ES all the time with no artefacts, and the AF speed) - of course mentioning that doesn't help you!!

Credit Card Blanace Transfer to another card with 0% or very low interest period might help..........
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Excellent shots, I can see the sharpness (especially compared with your LM 24 shots on Flickr). Sharpness is very difficult to get past (IMO), once seen you crave for it all the time, its one of the reasons why I was happy to chop in a lot of my Fuji gear for the Leica Q3. A lot of motorsport sharpness coming from decent panning techinique, something which I often lack, I have short periods where I get in the zone and nail it, and other periods where quite frankly I'm hopeless. But nailing it witha sharp less makes the whole thing worth it :)

I only have the 50-140 and 100-400 and I could see myself losing the 100-400 for the XF200mm (+TC) but I couldn't get rid of the 50-140 as well, quite a lot of what I shoot is at close range (hillclimbs, infield at Oulton) and 200 would be too long. Then only selling the 100-400 doesn't put much of dent in an XF200mm price!!

I'm tempted to get one for an event on the free 48hr hire offer (though there is a £2750 deposit to put down!!)

In your shoes its a very difficult shout, because I would also be considering X-T4 -> X-H2S, and realistically thats about a £1000 (at least) upgrade once you take into account a CF-Express Card. I have found the X-H2S a big step up from the X-T3 (from the blackout free, the fact that I can use ES all the time with no artefacts, and the AF speed) - of course mentioning that doesn't help you!!

Credit Card Blanace Transfer to another card with 0% or very low interest period might help..........
Click to expand...

Cheers. One interesting new challenge I had at Le Mans was heat shimmer. I thought the lens might have a problem. Then I switched to the 100-400 and that did the same and I started to think I had a camera problem until the penny dropped. There are actually whole hours worth of photos that I've binned off because they're mushy. Other than getting closer, it doesn't really seem like something that is easy to work around. Not normally a problem in the UK! Panning is always hit and miss and particularly tricky at LM finding space to do it and dealing with the shear speed and acceleration of the quicker cars. In rallying, I'll often pan down to 1/30s. At LM, at full race speed even 1/250 is hit and miss. The 2kg weight of the 200mm possibly helps with smoothness but I had to rest my arms a lot!

The 50-140 is a tricky one to get rid of. The other two not so much. I used the 100-400 a lot at LM but most of the time, it's not going to be needed. The 75mm is fantastic but I don't have many uses for it. The 50-140 is used a lot and as you say, sometimes you need less zoom but still some speed (I do have a 70-300 for general telephoto stuff). But then the 50-140 is replaceable with a little diligent saving. The 200mm f2, not so much!

Funny you mention the XH2S. It's not really on my radar at all. Motorsport doesn't make up that big a portion of what I like to shoot and I much prefer the X-T bodies. The cash I have had squirrelled away was likely going to go into an X-T6 though the X-T4 generally serves me okay for everything I do.

The actual CC balance doesn't bother me. That can be paid but my wife and I have our own frivolous spending accounts and I don't really want to use 'family' money for my follies. Got some thinking to do!
 
gad-westy said:
That's hands down the best lens I've ever used. It's so sharp it actually makes a the viewfinder seem like it's been upgraded just looking through it.

It's left me with quite a dilemma. It was a big stretch to buy it. It's sat on my credit car and I always had in the back of my mind that I would likely sell it on pretty quickly after this trip once I'd had my fun. I'd even checked MPB trade in price before buying to make sure I would be losing less than just hiring one would cost. But it's really tempting to keep it. I'd have to sell my 50-140, 100-400 and viltron 75mm and chuck another few hundred quid at it. Tough choice. It's not the most useful lens in the world being massive and a prime but the results are such a level up from what I'm used to using.

It's not perfect though. I found the hood is easy to knock off and the aperture ring is a little too easy to accidentally adjust too. Splitting hairs a little here though.
Click to expand...
For motorsport I always find that technique is far more important than the outright quality of the lens. I've sometimes considered selling my Sony 70-200mm f2.8 GM II and 100-400mm GM to buy the 300mm f2.8 but I'm pretty sure I'd miss the flexibility. The 300mm f2.8 is only 1470g though, I'm not sure I'd want to lug around the Fuji 200mm f2 at 2265g on a regular basis. I got rid of my Tamron 150-600mm for that reason, and that was 'only' 1951g.

Lovely pics by the way.
 
When I’m at home later I’ll see if I kept any. If not the memory card will still have them on. Shows up as general softness. You’d think out of focus except nothing in the image is sharp even at 1/8000s. Played around with OIS on/off just in case but no difference. Track temperature itself got well over 50c which is not something I’ve had to deal with before.
 
snerkler said:
For motorsport I always find that technique is far more important than the outright quality of the lens. I've sometimes considered selling my Sony 70-200mm f2.8 GM II and 100-400mm GM to buy the 300mm f2.8 but I'm pretty sure I'd miss the flexibility. The 300mm f2.8 is only 1470g though, I'm not sure I'd want to lug around the Fuji 200mm f2 at 2265g on a regular basis. I got rid of my Tamron 150-600mm for that reason, and that was 'only' 1951g.

Lovely pics by the way.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I’d generally agree with you about the lens vs skill thing and I’m living proof that a bad image can be taken with a good lens but in low light or indeed in the dark that extra stop (or three stops vs 100-400) makes a huge difference. Just makes some shots possible that wouldn’t be otherwise. I shoot a bit of UK rallying and I could see it being great for that. But yeah, you pay the price with weight! And not just in terms of holding it but even just fitting it to the camera etc is an effort. The 100-400 feels incredibly light next to it. I always had that down as a chonky beast!
 
Last edited:
gad-westy said:
When I’m at home later I’ll see if I kept any. If not the memory card will still have them on. Shows up as general softness. You’d think out of focus except nothing in the image is sharp even at 1/8000s. Played around with OIS on/off just in case but no difference. Track temperature itself got well over 50c which is not something I’ve had to deal with before.
Click to expand...
I had a similar issue at silverstone with the heat haze, also at times it looked liked it had just not focussed at all as everything was out of focus. I thought I had a lens issue but I read that heat haze can cause havoc with the AF system
 
Jelster said:
Went in to Castle Cameras (Salisbury) today and nearly bought the 150-600. Lucky, they didn't have it in stock..... But I am looking to pick up a new mini scope from them on Tuesday - maybe the big zoom will be back by then, who knows....
Click to expand...
I hope no one minds that this is effectively a double post of one I made a while ago. I bought my 150-600, ex demonstarion, from a LCE branch at a reduced price last year . Long story short. I took it with me on a cruise to get ship photos but I only got a few worth having as the visibility in the Med was hazy most of the time.

I did manage to get a couple of a cargo ship crossing the Bay of Biscay, unfortunarely I can't find them now. When I first looked at them enlarged on my computer screen, I could read the the name of the ship we were passing, she was at least 2 to 3 miles away.
 
Last edited:
gad-westy said:
View attachment 485451

That one is on 100-400mm f/5.6, ISO 2000 1/8000. I could have shot at lower ISO but I was experimenting with shutter speed at that point to see why I wasn't getting sharp shots. Don't know how clear it is on this but there is nothing at all sharp in that image.
Click to expand...
Thanks. Interesting to see the results.
 
gad-westy said:
View attachment 485451

That one is on 100-400mm f/5.6, ISO 2000 1/8000. I could have shot at lower ISO but I was experimenting with shutter speed at that point to see why I wasn't getting sharp shots. Don't know how clear it is on this but there is nothing at all sharp in that image.
Click to expand...
trevorbray said:
Thanks. Interesting to see the results.
Click to expand...

I’m it sure happens with other colours but maybe to a lesser extent but often camera AF systems struggle with bright (shiny) red subjects - I’ve noticed this with the X-H2S in that it finds it more of a challenge to lock onto a red vehicle. So a red subject won’t help here
 
Mr Perceptive said:
I’m it sure happens with other colours but maybe to a lesser extent but often camera AF systems struggle with bright (shiny) red subjects - I’ve noticed this with the X-H2S in that it finds it more of a challenge to lock onto a red vehicle. So a red subject won’t help here
Click to expand...
Interesting, I've not found that with Sony, which is a good job considering I'm a Ferrari and Ducati fan ;)

At shows AF systems struggle if I try to focus on a shiny body panel, but I'd expect this as not only is it a refective surface there's also no/little contrast.
 
snerkler said:
Interesting, I've not found that with Sony, which is a good job considering I'm a Ferrari and Ducati fan ;)

At shows AF systems struggle if I try to focus on a shiny body panel, but I'd expect this as not only is it a refective surface there's also no/little contrast.
Click to expand...
The longer wavelength of red light which can cause issues as many phase detection AF systems are biased towards the shorter wavelengths (blue/green). A red reflected light from a red surface has a long wavelength with comparatively low energy.

Also red light scatters easily and red pigments in the paint absorb other wavelengths more easily making it harder for AF systems to find an edge - hence your panels at car shows
 
Mr Perceptive said:
The longer wavelength of red light which can cause issues as many phase detection AF systems are biased towards the shorter wavelengths (blue/green). A red reflected light from a red surface has a long wavelength with comparatively low energy.

Also red light scatters easily and red pigments in the paint absorb other wavelengths more easily making it harder for AF systems to find an edge - hence your panels at car shows
Click to expand...
Sorry I didn’t mean it was red panels, it’s all colours but black is worst, which I’d expect.

Interesting about the wavelengths (y)
 
I had similar problems with haze when I shot the Trooping of the Colour flypast last week. Because I wasn’t actually on the flightpath, I had to shoot everything at 400mm, and although they looked alright on the back of my camera, when I got home I had the same issue that Graham’s mentioned above: nothing in the shot was quite in focus. I wondered if the lens was playing up, but then decided it must be the haze, it was a hot day.
 
Question guys,

I’m thinking of purchasing the XF 50-140mm f2.8, but I have heard and read that there is a lot of play when mounted to a Fuji body and that the autofocus is noisy.

Is this the case on both counts, would you still advise on purchasing one today ?
 
Gandalf said:
Question guys,

I’m thinking of purchasing the XF 50-140mm f2.8, but I have heard and read that there is a lot of play when mounted to a Fuji body and that the autofocus is noisy.

Is this the case on both counts, would you still advise on purchasing one today ?
Click to expand...

I have to say I have never seen either of those things. Hadn’t heard that. Great lens.
 
Gandalf said:
Question guys,

I’m thinking of purchasing the XF 50-140mm f2.8, but I have heard and read that there is a lot of play when mounted to a Fuji body and that the autofocus is noisy.

Is this the case on both counts, would you still advise on purchasing one today ?
Click to expand...
I’m not that au fait with Fuji lenses but my understanding is that it’s the early lenses that suffered this and it’s not been a problem for a while.
 
Gandalf said:
Question guys,

I’m thinking of purchasing the XF 50-140mm f2.8, but I have heard and read that there is a lot of play when mounted to a Fuji body and that the autofocus is noisy.

Is this the case on both counts, would you still advise on purchasing one today ?
Click to expand...
Not a problem with mine ( this is the second one I’ve owned and the first one bought and sold a few years ago didn’t have these issues either)
 
Sold a few bits on Ebay recently and the money was burning a hole in my pocket... so I have an 18mm F/2 pancake on the way. Anyone got any experience of this lens? I've read a lot of conflicting reviews, but it sounds like it might be good for a super-lightweight setup for holiday snaps etc.
 
skullfunkerry said:
Sold a few bits on Ebay recently and the money was burning a hole in my pocket... so I have an 18mm F/2 pancake on the way. Anyone got any experience of this lens? I've read a lot of conflicting reviews, but it sounds like it might be good for a super-lightweight setup for holiday snaps etc.
Click to expand...
It’s nice, has a bit of character being one of the early lenses, can be a little soft (wide open) at times, not sure how it will stack up on a 40MP sensor, but it will be fun!!
 
skullfunkerry said:
Sold a few bits on Ebay recently and the money was burning a hole in my pocket... so I have an 18mm F/2 pancake on the way. Anyone got any experience of this lens? I've read a lot of conflicting reviews, but it sounds like it might be good for a super-lightweight setup for holiday snaps etc.
Click to expand...
Quite a few of this album were with the 18/2.

You will have to check the info on each one to be sure

www.flickr.com

Alberobello

Explore this photo album by Leaky5 on Flickr!
www.flickr.com www.flickr.com
 
To increase my motivation of getting out with my camera, I've been picking just one lens to take with me on my trips out. My 18-55mm kit lens has a lot of flexibility but I often feel as if I need to have brought the 10-24mm and the 55-200mm with me too to give that bit extra which would mean I wasn't travelling light.

I wondered if anyone else had done this and would value your comments on any lenses you preferred?
 
PhilipN said:
To increase my motivation of getting out with my camera, I've been picking just one lens to take with me on my trips out. My 18-55mm kit lens has a lot of flexibility but I often feel as if I need to have brought the 10-24mm and the 55-200mm with me too to give that bit extra which would mean I wasn't travelling light.

I wondered if anyone else had done this and would value your comments on any lenses you preferred?
Click to expand...
I've always preferred zooms and taking out a wide range of focal lengths to ensure that I had the right lens for the shot that I wanted, however I started getting tired of carting a lot of heavy equipment around. I started going out with just one zoom lens, either a 16-35mm or 20-70mm (On my Sony FF), however over the last 10 months I've been using a fixed lens compact (Sony RX1R II now replaced by the X100VI) and I couldn't be happier.

It's been liberating, no more questioning which focal length to use and it's made me look for different shots as I can't always take my 'usual shot'. It's made me really enjoy photography again.

The only time I will revert back to carrying zooms around again for trips is next year as I have two bucket list holidays lined up and I want to ensure I can get a wide variety of shots. For the most part I'm going to shoot at 35mm though.
 
PhilipN said:
To increase my motivation of getting out with my camera, I've been picking just one lens to take with me on my trips out. My 18-55mm kit lens has a lot of flexibility but I often feel as if I need to have brought the 10-24mm and the 55-200mm with me too to give that bit extra which would mean I wasn't travelling light.

I wondered if anyone else had done this and would value your comments on any lenses you preferred?
Click to expand...

Classic FOMO - either carry a bucket of lenses, moan about the weight and continual lens swapping, be parallysed by which lens to use, or do as @snerkler says (something I've been banging on about for years, but its taken him several years to come round to it :D )

We've all been there :) but the quicker you see the light the more you will enjoy your photography. I now have 3 fixed lens cameras and one ILC (for which I only have two lenses and thats to meet a particular requirement), usually I just take out one fixed lens camera and work with it.
 
I stopped agonising about it a long time ago, now I just ask myself what I feel like shooting with. You'll drive yourself nuts looking at the moon rising over a city and thinking "Oh if only I had my 800mm and 2 x TC, I could get an epic shot of that building silhouetted against the moon" or whatever.

Ultimately, you'll get good photos with what you have. The shots that you can't get with your current kit aren't missed, they simply don't exist.

Edit: My god that last sentence sounds like AI. :puke:
 
Last edited:
PhilipN said:
To increase my motivation of getting out with my camera, I've been picking just one lens to take with me on my trips out. My 18-55mm kit lens has a lot of flexibility but I often feel as if I need to have brought the 10-24mm and the 55-200mm with me too to give that bit extra which would mean I wasn't travelling light.

I wondered if anyone else had done this and would value your comments on any lenses you preferred?
Click to expand...

Seeing as this is the Fuji thread, I normally take the 23/2 that's attached to the X100f :ROFLMAO:

We're off to Cornwall soon, X100f and Canonet QL17 for the daytime and beach etc, Sony A7Riii with the 35GM and 70-180mm for sunrise/ sunsets. That is more than enough tbh. As had been said, you just need to learn that you can't get everything and be happy about that.
 
Great responses, thank you. Funny, but somehow my mind was telling me to reframe this. I'm on London for a few days of work this week and will just pack the 35mm.
 
This morning's walk. The built in ND filter came in handy, as did the IBIS as I didn't have a tripod with me.

Edit: They're looking particularly soft on here today for some reason, I think they look OK on flickr though.

1.

X1003259 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

2.

X1003268 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

3.

X1003278 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

4.

X1003327 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

5.

X1003352 Mono by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

6.

X1003395-Edit by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

7.

X1003406 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

8.

X1003410 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
This morning's walk. The built in ND filter came in handy, as did the IBIS as I didn't have a tripod with me.

Edit: They're looking particularly soft on here today for some reason, I think they look OK on flickr though.

1.

X1003259 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

2.

X1003268 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

3.

X1003278 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

4.

X1003327 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

5.

X1003352 Mono by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

6.

X1003395-Edit by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

7.

X1003406 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

8.

X1003410 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Great set Toby. (y)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top