Fuji X-E1/X-E2/X-E2S/X-E3 Owners Thread

Alastair said:
But not everyone appreciates the idiosyncrasies inherent when shooting Sigma Merrills, so Fuji is a very good compromise between IQ and usability.

Or were you planning on flying the Canikon flag in this thread? :D
Click to expand...

Oh, you mean like the RAW issues people face with Fuji files? Yes, DPMs have superb IQ but pretty much everything else about them sucks. I said in my previous post its a compromise and Fuji has a lot in its favour in other departments.

What is it with you and this thread :)
 
Last edited:
I've now been an X-E1 owner a couple of days - it's very strange downgrading from an XT1! Actually the XE1 is for Infra Red so the XT1 gets to stay, which is good because I couldn't live with the XE1 as a sole camera, too slow, EVF too small and controls in all the wrong places - but it does take a cracking picture. It's now on it's way to Protech for a 590nm infra red filter conversion.

DSCF2057.jpg

With the 35mm 1.4 and Velvia sim.
 
Love my X-E2 - bought as backup for the X-T1 but use it a lot when out walking etc.

Arnside pier on Sunday evening. With the 10-24mm.

 
Just snagged an X-E2 from the refurb site, after the discount code was applied it came to £269, not too bad at all
 
tijuana taxi said:
Just snagged an X-E2 from the refurb site, after the discount code was applied it came to £269, not too bad at all
Click to expand...
A silver one?

I had it in and out of my basket! I was dithering as I wanted a black one . :)
 
A silver one?

I had it in and out of my basket! I was dithering as I wanted a black one
Click to expand...

That's the one, I wanted Silver, the picture showed Black so I was pleased when the dropdown box said it was Silver

Sure a Black one will come up soon for you, reckon they go pretty quick being such a good price
 
Refurbished X-E2 arrived today, looks new to me, not complaining though, my original X-E1 was a refurb too, also like new.

All working fine, even updated it to the firmware that came out today, will give it a good field test tomorrow
 
XT1 or buy the cheaper XE2 for now until the XT2 comes out?

Swapping from D700 so your thoughts please.

Can I use all the lenses on the rangefinder camera ok?

Is the viewfinder ok compared to the XT1?

Terry.
 
There's very little functional/performance difference X-E2 or X-T1, some extra weather sealing, a few more dials/switches and a larger effective viewfinder on the -T1. A DPreview side-by-side comparison will detail the differences more fully.

The X-mount is standard across the range. All XF and XC lenses fit all ILC X-series cameras.
 
GreenNinja67 said:
XT1 or buy the cheaper XE2 for now until the XT2 comes out?

Swapping from D700 so your thoughts please.

Can I use all the lenses on the rangefinder camera ok?

Is the viewfinder ok compared to the XT1?

Terry.
Click to expand...

Bear in mind the X-E2 is *not* a rangefinder - it has an Electronic ViewFinder positioned where it would be on a rangefinder. So there's no issue with lens compatibility that you might have with a rangefinder.
 
Many thanks Simon and Alastair.

So, quality of finished product the same then? That's what I'm hinting at.

I'm left eyed so that may cause a problem.

I'll read the quoted review. It would be nice to save a lot of money and still get the images.

Thanks again,

Terry.
 
GreenNinja67 said:
Many thanks Simon and Alastair.

So, quality of finished product the same then? That's what I'm hinting at.

I'm left eyed so that may cause a problem.

I'll read the quoted review. It would be nice to save a lot of money and still get the images.

Thanks again,

Terry.
Click to expand...

Yes. Sensor is the same.
 
GreenNinja67 said:
Is the viewfinder ok compared to the XT1?

.
Click to expand...

In a word, No. The viewfinder is tiddly and has poor shading, plus where it's positioned makes it harder to shade with you hand. For awkward positioning, say low down, the tilting screen in a T1 is far better too. For reviewing images in EVF (which is nicer than trying to do so on the rear screen in sunlight) the button layout of the E series is beyond awkward, the scroll wheel arrangement of the T1 is much nicer.

I own E1 and T1. In terms of IQ and AF performance, there is no difference whatsoever between E2 and T1, but other handling considerations may impact you.

With all that being said, here's one of what I shot today with my E1

Ffin by Alan Jones, on Flickr
 
X-E2s kits and bodies now appearing in the Fuji refurb shop....
 
Just posted this in the General Forum (Black & White) but will post here as it was taken with my XE-2 and 18-55mm zoom

This is Spinnaker Tower in Old Pompey - note the man suspended half way up!!

Spinnaker_zpsnc5vlx11.jpg


Thanks for looking and any comments are always appreciated :)
 
Like the look of the last one, photo ain't bad either

Seriously now, nice set, really like the 2nd one, pleasing warm colours and conveys the strength of the sun very nicely
 
Last edited:
Morning. Just joined the X-E2 club (plus 18-55). I’ve borrowed a 35mm f2 off a colleague, and I’m comparing it against the 18-55. In my head I thought 18-55 for outdoor/general, 35mm for indoor/kids.

Although the 35mm is nice. I am slightly underwhelmed in terms of IQ. This could because I’ve just gone to Fuji and I’m still comparing against a 6D and a razor sharp 50mm Sigma.

I’ve done some random comparisons and in some the 18-55 is better, some the 35mm. Yes it has 1 ½ extra stops which helps with photos of the kids but in poor light still plenty of missed shots. Maybe sell the kids and buy slower ones?

Are my expectations unrealistic? Is this a normal adjusting period when people have gone from Full frame to Fuji !?

In many reviews the 35mm f2 seems to be almost as good as you get in terms of IQ/Resolution across the Fuji line-up. Will I find this with other lenses then?

Does the 18-55 spoil you in that when you spend and purchase lenses like 23mm, 35mm, they aren’t much of a step up as you imagine? So they are good but when your first lens is the 18-55 they aren’t as good as you maybe expect – the downside of producing an excellent “kit” lens :)

I concede that its smaller, aesthetically nice, AF is excellent, but in terms of IQ I can’t say I find it consistently better than the 18-55 like I thought I would. I’m curious whether in terms of IQ they are all similar and the extra you pay is for those extra stops (in the 35mm case 1.5 stops).

I should say, if the 35mm was the first lens I had I would be happy. Its just got me wondering about options now based around the 18-55 as that lens has confused me on what's an upgrade and what isn't, and whether I can justify £500-700 for a few stops in some cases :)
 
jonnybloo said:
Morning. Just joined the X-E2 club (plus 18-55). I’ve borrowed a 35mm f2 off a colleague, and I’m comparing it against the 18-55. In my head I thought 18-55 for outdoor/general, 35mm for indoor/kids.

Although the 35mm is nice. I am slightly underwhelmed in terms of IQ. This could because I’ve just gone to Fuji and I’m still comparing against a 6D and a razor sharp 50mm Sigma.

I’ve done some random comparisons and in some the 18-55 is better, some the 35mm. Yes it has 1 ½ extra stops which helps with photos of the kids but in poor light still plenty of missed shots. Maybe sell the kids and buy slower ones?

Are my expectations unrealistic? Is this a normal adjusting period when people have gone from Full frame to Fuji !?

In many reviews the 35mm f2 seems to be almost as good as you get in terms of IQ/Resolution across the Fuji line-up. Will I find this with other lenses then?

Does the 18-55 spoil you in that when you spend and purchase lenses like 23mm, 35mm, they aren’t much of a step up as you imagine? So they are good but when your first lens is the 18-55 they aren’t as good as you maybe expect – the downside of producing an excellent “kit” lens :)

I concede that its smaller, aesthetically nice, AF is excellent, but in terms of IQ I can’t say I find it consistently better than the 18-55 like I thought I would. I’m curious whether in terms of IQ they are all similar and the extra you pay is for those extra stops (in the 35mm case 1.5 stops).

I should say, if the 35mm was the first lens I had I would be happy. Its just got me wondering about options now based around the 18-55 as that lens has confused me on what's an upgrade and what isn't, and whether I can justify £500-700 for a few stops in some cases :)
Click to expand...

The 18-55 is very good, but it is certainly not as sharp as some of the Fuji primes. I have never had a 35mm f2, but lenses like the 14mm, 23mm, 56mm and 90mm are noticable sharper than the 18-55mm. The 23mm in particular IMO is stellar. YMMV
 
Just added an XE-1 to my camera bag to go with my XPRO2 as lugging an XPRO1 around as a spare seemed a little pointless. I must admit I am very happy with it! Its slightly slower than the XPRO1 and seems to be built to a lesser standard but its still superb and at £90+post from here was a bargain!
Images are not too different to the XPRO1 which is great as that's ideally what I needed from it and in moving out the XPO1 I can now throw the 27mm on to the XE-1 and essentially have a nice little X100(ish) camera alternative for just pulling out the bag for those quick spur of the moment photos without the need to mess about with getting a lens on to the XPRO2.
Is it me or is the colour a little more punchy on the XE-1 over the newer models?
 
Mr Perceptive said:
The 18-55 is very good, but it is certainly not as sharp as some of the Fuji primes. I have never had a 35mm f2, but lenses like the 14mm, 23mm, 56mm and 90mm are noticable sharper than the 18-55mm. The 23mm in particular IMO is stellar. YMMV
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback. Interesting to hear about the 23mm. When I started looking at the Fuji system this is the lens I want. I think its possibly what's prompted me to question the above. Going off reviews and MFT charts etc the 23mm doesn't (on paper) appear to be hugely better than 18-55. In fact the ones I've seen the 27mm and the 35mm f2 seem like some of the sharpest. That said, I take these reviews and charts with a pinch of salt and would prefer actual usage feedback. I was just worried that the other primes you mention would be less of a jump from the 18-55 as the 35mm appears to be.

Like I say, the 35mm does seem very good, and if I didn't need the versatility (and OIS) of the 18-55 at the moment (going on holiday) I would probably go down the prime route instead - its just cost prohibitive to get the 23mm at the moment as no one appears to sell them on :)
 
The 35mm f/1.4 is sharper than the f/2. I'm not sure what reviews you're reading but there is so much correction required for the f/2's distortion that it suffers as soon as you get out of the centre, I don't understand why that lens is so raved about.
 
Cheers Frod, Some of the reviews I've read (ie lenstip) seem to back up the reasons he wanted it: lighter, WR, faster AF (he has kids too), and optically they are meant to be similar. I think they are cheaper too? Both look good lens, maybe I just expected more compared to the 18-55. Like I say it has its advantages in other areas and if it was the only lens I owned I would like it, its just that comparatively (and as the second lens I've ever tried in Fuji) it doesn't seem to be a massive leap in IQ. So is the 1.4 a significant step up from the 18-55?

I'm still tempted personally by the 27mm just to make the whole thing pocketable when required - again reviews (for what they are worth) rave about its sharpness. Its within my budget now I wont be buying a 35mm. Again though, is it better/similar to the 18-55 at that focal length. Reviews suggest so but they did for the 35mm f2 too.
 
I had both the 35's for a short time as I was considering changing to the f2. Here are a few test shots I took at the time (please forgive the fact that they weren't taken on an X-E1 or 2)
first up is the original f1.4 shot at f1.4
f1.4 at f1 (2).jpg

And again the original f1.4 this time shot at f2


f1.4 at f2 (2).jpg

And lastly the newer f2 shot at f2. Take a look at the top left corner where my TV is just peeking into shot, I don't own a curved screen TV as can be seen in the other two shots, that's just down to the lens trying to correct.

f2 at f2 (2).jpg
 
It's good to see both side by side like that with a real world image. The 1.4 at f2 is sharper than the f2 marginally but when you consider the price difference, Weather sealing and size of the f2 it does make the 1.4 a harder case to swallow. I wouldn't get an f2 if I had the 1.4 but I'd likely buy the f2 over the 1.4 now given the cost differences and advantages mentioned on the f2 lens.
 
I wouldn't have used the word marginally, it's simply sharper even at f1.4 and doesn't distort in the corners. Obviously the f2 isn't a bad lens and for some it has advantages. I prefer weather avoidance to weather resistance though and for my normal shooting there was hardly any difference in focus speed.
 
I agree that the 1.4 does look sharper even at 1.4 but that's just because of the content of the image. I know from past experience that the edges of the 1.4 at 1.4 are little softer than the f2 at f2 but the centre on the 1.4 even at 1.4 is simply an amazing bit of kit and the reduction in distortion against the f2 does have its advantages but ones that unless I'm taking images of very square and sharpe subjects (such as streets and buildings) I just simply don't notice. The 35mm f1.4 is one of my favourite lenses and if I'm honest for me is probably even a little sharper than the 56mm f1.2 and that lens is just gorgeous!
 
Thanks for the examples. I think a case could be argued for either given the advantages either way. For me it would be a portrait lens for rapid moving kids. It's why I had the sigma 50mm 1.4. So I guess the 35mm 1.4 is still an option if it's that sharp at 1.4.

Don't suppose you have that same scene at 35mm on the 18-55 do you! :)
 
I was just about to pull the trigger on a 35f2 when this question reared its head - now I'm not so sure. According to various reviews, the 35f2 was more compact, quicker, more accurate and there was little to lose in IQ - i.e. better all round except for the 1.4 aperture. You guys have stopped me in my tracks :)

I would be interested to hear from anyone else on this matter

Cheers
 
For what its worth (not much given ive had the camera a week so I have nothing to compare it against other than the kit lens!)

It focuses very fast and is pretty small and discreet. You get brand new for the price of 2nd hand. Images look good and if it was all I had I would love it, but.....trying different shots with that and the 18-55 it just didn't stand out enough for me. Yeah nicer at f2 as the 18-55 will start at 3.6. Some shots it had more definition for want of a better word, more highlights and depth, less flat than the 18-55 all of which I think could be fixed in processing.

Then in other situations I prefer the look of 18-55. For me on a limited budget I couldn't justify paying for the 1.5 stop advantage. I'm on a limited budget so want something different, faster, sharper. Without being able to test other lenses (only one my colleague has) though it could be a great lens and its me that has far too unrealistic expectations as I adjust to using a Fuji from my old kit.

Plus...to my untrained novice eye, I think the sample pics above look fine! Though interesting to see that at 1.4 how sharp the older one is.

What I'm trying to say (waffle) is I expected a big jump in IQ from the 18-55 to the 35mm (given reviews). I'm trying to ascertain whether the 18-55 is that good or whether other lenses do have that leap in IQ and you get what you pay for.
 
jonnybloo said:
For what its worth (not much given ive had the camera a week so I have nothing to compare it against other than the kit lens!)

It focuses very fast and is pretty small and discreet. You get brand new for the price of 2nd hand. Images look good and if it was all I had I would love it, but.....trying different shots with that and the 18-55 it just didn't stand out enough for me. Yeah nicer at f2 as the 18-55 will start at 3.6. Some shots it had more definition for want of a better word, more highlights and depth, less flat than the 18-55 all of which I think could be fixed in processing.

Then in other situations I prefer the look of 18-55. For me on a limited budget I couldn't justify paying for the 1.5 stop advantage. I'm on a limited budget so want something different, faster, sharper. Without being able to test other lenses (only one my colleague has) though it could be a great lens and its me that has far too unrealistic expectations as I adjust to using a Fuji from my old kit.

Plus...to my untrained novice eye, I think the sample pics above look fine! Though interesting to see that at 1.4 how sharp the older one is.

What I'm trying to say (waffle) is I expected a big jump in IQ from the 18-55 to the 35mm (given reviews). I'm trying to ascertain whether the 18-55 is that good or whether other lenses do have that leap in IQ and you get what you pay for.
Click to expand...


Like you, I have an 18-55 which came with my XE-2 and I like it a lot. The only issue I have is that it is big and heavy and I don't always want to be carting it around. I had an X100 and liked it but found it too restricting with its fixed lens. I am after a light weight compact lens to make my XE-2 more portable - I will use my XT-1 for more 'considered' work. Hence my interest in the 35 f2. I have looked at the 35 f1.4 but again felt that it was too bulky - also many people seem to consider the AF a bit too slow. The XF27 is an option that I am now examining. Honestly,I go round and round in circles with all this until I get so fed up with my obsessive behaviour that I say 'right, I'll stick with what I've got'
 
The 27 on an X-E* body makes a really small package and Having had all of the X100* series I thought that it would be a great package for me. However I hardly ever use it. It's not quite wide enough, it's not quite long enough, it's not quite fast enough. When I went to Spain a couple of weeks ago I wanted to travel light so I took the X-E2 along with the 18 & 35 but because it was a holiday rather than a photo trip I also took the 27mm. My thought was that I could pop the 27mm on and have a very small light set-up to carry everywhere. What really happened though was that I carried the camera with the 35mm mounted and the 18mm in a small pouch attached to a belt loop or vice versa.

It's a nice small lens that I've now owned 5 or 6 of. It's very sharp (much sharper than the 18mm) and well built. If you can be more disciplined than me and leave the house with just the 27 I'm sure it would give great results, something I've tried to do but always grab just one or two more lenses before going out the door!
 
Rosedale, sounds like we have similar requirements though I'm inpatient after a week of owning it. I've got a holiday coming up, a bit of a one off, I want pics of all the places we visit and of the kids too hence I thought get something quick to go with the 18-55.

I'm trying the Fuji for convenience compared to lugging around my 6D. So convenient, good results, light etc are all things I need. I think the Fuji will do that, and I was hoping the 35 or 27 would be a great alternative to the 18-55. I may actually get the 27mm because of the size convenience. I cant afford the 35mm 1.4 new and not many come up here. Reviews again say its pin sharp - whether it is or not I don't know. Its not as quick though, and I'm worried basically I'm going to end up with the same results the 18-55 can produce albeit with the advantage of its smaller!

Im used to the 40mm focal length as I have the canon 40mm pancake. Nothing spectacular but does a job and as discreet as you get with the canon. I would like something wider really and if I could pick a free lens then the 23mm would be the one I wanted.
 
I've had the Xt1 for 3 days. I won an eBay auction for the body, 18-135, 35 f1.4 and the EF-X20 flashgun.
My opinion?

Before the kit arrived I was planning on selling the 35 and putting the money towards a 10-24.
After using it there's no way it's going anywhere yet.
It's superb, and the focusing is not slow. Way quicker than my old Nikon 80-200 f2.8 and I never missed a shot with that.
Try manual focus, it's amazingly quick and easy to snap focus like I did in the 90's with my Canon T90.

Pentax K adapter came today and so now I can play with my mf Pentax lenses too.

Just my twopenny worth.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top