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

Messages
445
Name
Kyle
Edit My Images
Yes
Thank you but there-in lies my problem. I have invested too much time learning photoshop now to give up on it, not to mention the initial outlay to buy it. I tried rawtherapee and also darktable and can't get on with the work flow.
I guess fuji just isn't for me then.
One thing to note is that I'm using CS6 which lacks the most up to date version of camera raw. It's possible that the newer versions of camera raw/lightroom don't have the same issues.

Best suggestion I have is to find and download some raw samples for the particular model you are looking at and process them and see how they look to you. @Cagey75 uses lightroom to process the raw files from his X-H1 and doesn't seem to have an issue.

EDIT: Just did a quick test having found an image I expected to behave poorly with ACR.

Here is the output from C1 (sharpening settings - amount: 140, radius 0.7, threshold: 0, halo suppression: 0 and on noise reduction)


and here is what I get out from ACR (Sharpening settings are amount: 20, radius: 0.5, detail: 40, masking: 0 and no noise reduction)


Here is the link to the original RAF file so you can have a play with it. It's pretty obvvious from the above why even with my 20 years of Photoshop experience went with C1 express for processing these raws. I have to use the dng converter anyway as the X-E3 isn't supported in ACR 9.1.1 so it's not the end of the world to export a tiff from c1 and finish it off in photoshop.
 
Last edited:
Messages
6,245
Name
Terry
Edit My Images
Yes
Thank you but there-in lies my problem. I have invested too much time learning photoshop now to give up on it, not to mention the initial outlay to buy it. I tried rawtherapee and also darktable and can't get on with the work flow.
I guess fuji just isn't for me then.
I would suspect a majority of us use Adobe with out any trouble at all. There is no need at all to make such extreme adjustments to provoke artifacts. The best practice with all raw processing is to use the minimum input sharpening. If you wish to add sharpening at the output stage from your tiffs or jpegs, you will not get worms what ever settings you use.
Artifacts of this sort can only be produced at the raw processing stage
 
Messages
13,487
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
One thing to note is that I'm using CS6 which lacks the most up to date version of camera raw. It's possible that the newer versions of camera raw/lightroom don't have the same issues.

Best suggestion I have is to find and download some raw samples for the particular model you are looking at and process them and see how they look to you. @Cagey75 uses lightroom to process the raw files from his X-H1 and doesn't seem to have an issue.

EDIT: Just did a quick test having found an image I expected to behave poorly with ACR.

Here is the output from C1 (sharpening settings - amount: 140, radius 0.7, threshold: 0, halo suppression: 0 and on noise reduction)


and here is what I get out from ACR (Sharpening settings are amount: 20, radius: 0.5, detail: 40, masking: 0 and no noise reduction)


Here is the link to the original RAF file so you can have a play with it. It's pretty obvvious from the above why even with my 20 years of Photoshop experience went with C1 express for processing these raws. I have to use the dng converter anyway as the X-E3 isn't supported in ACR 9.1.1 so it's not the end of the world to export a tiff from c1 and finish it off in photoshop.

This is more the old 'water-colour- effect than artifacts or 'worms' - Those only appear when you do over-sharpen. I've said it myself, for landscape, which I rarely ever do, I also have C1 [just the express version and only would use it for such images] I had a quick play just how I might do a quick process on this, it doesn't really show too well here as I only uploaded a crop from irfanview to Flickr and god knows what output settings I have in that program as I rarely use it now

XE3 RAF
by K G, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Messages
6,029
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
No
Many X-E3 shooters here..? Would love to hear your thoughts and experiences shooting this X body please...(?)

I'm kinda looking at a X-T2 body, but the X-E3 has caught my eye at the minute. I've a X-E1 body arriving tomorrow to start me off again on my Fuji X journeys....

Cheers;
Peter
 
Messages
445
Name
Kyle
Edit My Images
Yes
Many X-E3 shooters here..? Would love to hear your thoughts and experiences shooting this X body please...(?)

I'm kinda looking at a X-T2 body, but the X-E3 has caught my eye at the minute. I've a X-E1 body arriving tomorrow to start me off again on my Fuji X journeys....

Cheers;
Peter
An X-E3 is basically a cut down X-T2. It lacks dual card slots, the weather sealing, the eyepiece magnification, the tilting screen, the d-pad and direct access to some controls like drive and ISO. It makes up for this by being nearly 170g lighter. It pairs very nicely with the 27 pancake. (which as a combo is lighter than the X-T2 on it's own.)

The grip is pretty tiny so ergonomically, it is quite awkward with any big lenses if you are used to holding it by the camera body. i find that the AF-L and Q buttons get pushed inadvertently quite a lot by my thumb. I've never used an X-T model so can't comment on the differences in use.
 
Messages
6
Edit My Images
Yes
Had a great day at Lacock today with some great weather. As a complete novice, I like being able to shoot people from far away so they don't realise- it's rare to get a picture of my girlfriend without her pulling a face at me and I quite like this one!
DSCF6450
by Jonny Cooper, on Flickr
DSCF6449
by Jonny Cooper, on Flickr
DSCF6461
by Jonny Cooper, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Messages
6,029
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
No
I've got a X-E1 query if anyone can help please.....(?)

When I attach the XF27mm lens onto the X-E1 body, how then do I control the lenses aperture, and also change to 'A' priority mode does anyone know?

I've now worked it out, aperture setting in menu was set to automatic, changed it to 'manual aperture' and now both the XF27mm along with the Viltrox 85mm lenses work in aperture priority mode using the rear thumb wheel.......result.

Peter
 
Last edited:
Messages
6,245
Name
Terry
Edit My Images
Yes
Messages
6
Edit My Images
Yes
I've been playing around with the xc 16-50 on my xe3 and have started wondering if I should sell the lebs and pay a bit extra to get the 35mm f2 or f1.4.

Having the zoom is nice, but being an amateur, will the prime lens force me to think about the composition a bit more? Also, having f5 as the minimum aperture at 35mm on the 16-50 is a bit limiting in terms of low light and nice bokeh...
 
Messages
4,127
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
I've been playing around with the xc 16-50 on my xe3 and have started wondering if I should sell the lebs and pay a bit extra to get the 35mm f2 or f1.4.

Having the zoom is nice, but being an amateur, will the prime lens force me to think about the composition a bit more? Also, having f5 as the minimum aperture at 35mm on the 16-50 is a bit limiting in terms of low light and nice bokeh...
Good idea, but you realise you’re starting down the slippery slope to being a prime fiend! :D But you’re right, using just one focal length can teach you a lot about composition, and the wider maximum aperture will held you plan depth of field, or the lack of it. Unless you really know you want the f1.4, I would suggest the f2. It will balance perfectly on your XE, and the image quality is very good despite some tests. The only down side is that you probably won’t get much for your XC lens.
 
Messages
6
Edit My Images
Yes
Good idea, but you realise you’re starting down the slippery slope to being a prime fiend! :D But you’re right, using just one focal length can teach you a lot about composition, and the wider maximum aperture will held you plan depth of field, or the lack of it. Unless you really know you want the f1.4, I would suggest the f2. It will balance perfectly on your XE, and the image quality is very good despite some tests. The only down side is that you probably won’t get much for your XC lens.
Ha, I think I'm already sliding quite fast I think I'm going to keep an eye out for a used one and try and get one before my trip to southeast Asia in December! I'm not too worried about the price of the zoom lens, I got a good deal for it in the first place so as long as I don't lose a huge amount I'll be happy!

The image quality of the 35mm looks amazing!
 
Messages
1,485
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
Yes
This is Shore Road in Warsash Hampshire - it runs down to the River Hamble which in turn feeds into the Solent on the South Coast. It's difficult to imagine this sleepy village being at the centre of huge military manoeuvres just 75 years ago (give or take a few months). But this is where Allied Commando units left for the Normandy coast on 5th June 1944 to take part in the D Day invasion France - we owe them hugely.

Shore Road_1600px.jpg

Now, it's a haven for the sailing/boating fraternity (and for people like me walking their dogs!)
Fuji X-E1 & XF50 f2…
 
Messages
6
Edit My Images
Yes
I just received my 35mm f2 lens and I'm very happy with it, it's obviously world's apart form my xc kit lens...

I am however seeing something in photos that I am unsure about and was hoping someone might be able to help.

With close up photos of a small object, placed on a table, if the aperture is wide open at f2, the depth of field is not gradual in the foreground. The background around the object is blurred as expected, but a couple of cm of the table in front is in focus (I think I understand depth of field so get why a bit in front is in focus) with a very sudden and sharp change in focus as the table gets closer to the lens. I thought it was meant to be gradual?
 
Messages
6,245
Name
Terry
Edit My Images
Yes
I just received my 35mm f2 lens and I'm very happy with it, it's obviously world's apart form my xc kit lens...

I am however seeing something in photos that I am unsure about and was hoping someone might be able to help.

With close up photos of a small object, placed on a table, if the aperture is wide open at f2, the depth of field is not gradual in the foreground. The background around the object is blurred as expected, but a couple of cm of the table in front is in focus (I think I understand depth of field so get why a bit in front is in focus) with a very sudden and sharp change in focus as the table gets closer to the lens. I thought it was meant to be gradual?
If you do the maths you will find. The fall off is far steeper in front of the focus point than away to it. This changes with both distance and aperture.
 
Messages
4,572
Name
matt
Edit My Images
Yes
Spent a lovely day in Dorset yesterday - just one camera and one lens (X-E3 & XF35/1.4) - it's the way I like to travel:-

Kingston Lacy
Kingston Lacy, Dorset
by Andrew R, on Flickr

Shepherds hut in the meadow
Shepherds' Hut, Kingston Lacy, Dorset
by Andrew R, on Flickr

Poppies on the allotments
Poppies on the Allotment
by Andrew R, on Flickr

And at the end of the day - welcome refreshment at Wareham Quay
Wareham Quay
by Andrew R, on Flickr

The X-E3 and XF35/1.4 is a great combo
Had my honeymoon at the Old Granary in 1978
 
Messages
4,572
Name
matt
Edit My Images
Yes
My x-t10 went back to Wex for repair so not wishing to be without Fuji, 2 lens sitting in a draw doing nothing I ordered a X-e2 (£150) from Wex which turned up yesterday and is in really good nick (as was the x-t10). First impressions are favourable but I think I refer the SLR type as opposed to rangefinder body but I bought it thinking my wife could use it if I don't get on with it. Looking forward to having a play soon.
 
OP
OP
TCR4x4

TCR4x4

Wishes he had a couple more Inches
Messages
8,063
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
Yes
Well how about that. September 2012 I started this thread before the launch of the x-e1, a while later I bought one. Skip to now, many, many Fuji cameras later, and I’m back to an X-e1... well, it’s arriving tomorrow hopefully.. can’t wait. Some of my all time favourite shots I’ve taken were with the X-e1.
 
Messages
4,572
Name
matt
Edit My Images
Yes
Good cameras don't become bad cameras because of the passage of time. They just get superseded by more functionality.
 
Messages
1,485
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
Yes
The point I'm making is that when I started out in photography, all I had in the way of adjustments was focus, aperture and shutter speed - the ISO was set by the film used.

I've had:
X100 (three)
X100S
X100F (two)
X-E1 (two - one of them current)
X-E2
X-E3
X-T1 (two)
XT10 (current)
X-T2
X-Pro1 (current)
X-Pro2 (two)

I've now given up and gone back to X-Trans 1 & 2. Why? Because I like the output and simplicity and I'm fed up with losing shedloads of £ when these camera bodies get superceded. Each to their own I suppose but at least I'm happy with what I've got and pleased with the results.
 
Top