The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

Riz_Guru said:
I am moving back to Sony, but this doesn't mean the Fuji system isn't capable of great images... I guess there are certain things/functions that I miss about the Sony which I originally thought I wouldn't ...... :)
Click to expand...

Gotcha..
 
Riz_Guru said:
I am moving back to Sony, but this doesn't mean the Fuji system isn't capable of great images... I guess there are certain things/functions that I miss about the Sony which I originally thought I wouldn't ...... :)
Click to expand...
As someone whos obviously tried out both systems properly what would you say were the pros and cons of both systems - not planning to swap myself, but came very close to going Sony when I was leaving DLSR.
 
Riz_Guru said:
I am moving back to Sony, but this doesn't mean the Fuji system isn't capable of great images... I guess there are certain things/functions that I miss about the Sony which I originally thought I wouldn't ...... :)
Click to expand...

You're not getting an a9 are you Riz? :D
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
"Excellent" work Sir, there's nothing more to be said.(y)

George.
Click to expand...

Bless you George, very kind of you to say so!

magicolor1 said:
Really lovely shot - love the colours. Am I right in thinking this is the south end of Skye taken from Eigg?
Click to expand...

And thank you too! But it's Rum - you have to get to the north end of Eigg before you can see Skye and it's not quite this close. The wide angle doesn't really show you what it's like - when you're there, Rum is absolutely massive!
 
JohnN said:
As someone whos obviously tried out both systems properly what would you say were the pros and cons of both systems - not planning to swap myself, but came very close to going Sony when I was leaving DLSR.
Click to expand...

In short the Fuji is a lighter/smaller system in most cases but has its limitations when it comes to light gathering capabilities, it's a great system overall.

Sony seem to be all about the sensor and everything seems to be built around it, not a bad thing really and it's clearly leading the pack.

Following the wedding I shot with Fuji XT-2 I came away clearly noticing the difference with the wedding I shot with the Sony in the past.
Eye-AF in AF-C is a useful too including higher ISO performance.

If I'm honest, both are not perfect.....

Give me a Fuji XT-2 body, build, firmware ethos with Sony internal tech any day of the week.
So basically a Sony XT-2 :D
 
I like the sound of that :)
I'd heard of eye-af, isn't that like the thing Fuji do where the left or right eye is recognised and set as the AF point?

I know what you mean about light capturing, moving from full frame was very hard for me, but in the end I wanted a lighter system and as no full frame system can have small lenses it the price that had to be paid.

Were it not for that I may well still have had the D750 (Sony sensor), still I'm glad I moved, I'd miss the feel of it now as I'm used to all those lovely dials.
 
JohnN said:
I like the sound of that :)
I'd heard of eye-af, isn't that like the thing Fuji do where the left or right eye is recognised and set as the AF point?

I know what you mean about light capturing, moving from full frame was very hard for me, but in the end I wanted a lighter system and as no full frame system can have small lenses it the price that had to be paid.

Were it not for that I may well still have had the D750 (Sony sensor), still I'm glad I moved, I'd miss the feel of it now as I'm used to all those lovely dials.
Click to expand...

Yes its like the Fuji Eye-AF but the Sony version is amazingly good and it also works in AF-C.
I agree that there is a trade-off between FF and APS-C, how much is down to the end user and if you can live with it.
Both are great systems and imo the very best in mirrorless technology, Fuji being ahead of Sony in some area's.
 
Aye, would be great if we could somehow cherry pick the best bits from each system :)

BTW eye tracking works in AF-C now on XT2 and 20
 
JohnN said:
Aye, would be great if we could somehow cherry pick the best bits from each system :)

BTW eye tracking works in AF-C now on XT2 and 20
Click to expand...

Yes your right, I believe Fuji should be able to improve this further in the future via firmware upgrades.
I will most definitely miss the awesome Fuji firmware upgrades......
 
OK I've just pressed some menu option that means the rear Lcd doesn't turn on, the menus and everything else can be seen in the viewfinder though. Anyone know what puts it back on the rear Lcd? Xt2.

Ahh found the button. Panic over.
 
Last edited:
Cycle through the VIEW / DISPLAY button on the back of the camera.

Oh, and RTFM ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nod
Well I've had my X-T2 for a little over a week and I have to say I'm very impressed. Coming from a Canon 6D the weight/size (a major factor in my switch) is great, and the AF is in a different league. Ultimate IQ is obviously not quite as good as the 6D ( although in good light it'll take some real pixel peeping to notice the difference), but the X-T2 is still very impressive and DR for shadow recovery seems to be several notches above the 6D.

I'd forgotten how lovely the Fuji files are to work with, and just how little time it takes to get them to where I like them. The video is also much improved VS the previous generations of Fujis.

The only thing about the camera that I find a bit annoying is that the dials for mode/metering are a little fiddly, but I'm sure I'll get used to them.

How is Camera RAW/LR with Fuji these days? I've seen Irident X Transformer, is it worth the £25 or have Adobe caught up?
 
I
EspressoJunkie said:
Well I've had my X-T2 for a little over a week and I have to say I'm very impressed. Coming from a Canon 6D the weight/size (a major factor in my switch) is great, and the AF is in a different league. Ultimate IQ is obviously not quite as good as the 6D ( although in good light it'll take some real pixel peeping to notice the difference), but the X-T2 is still very impressive and DR for shadow recovery seems to be several notches above the 6D.

I'd forgotten how lovely the Fuji files are to work with, and just how little time it takes to get them to where I like them. The video is also much improved VS the previous generations of Fujis.

The only thing about the camera that I find a bit annoying is that the dials for mode/metering are a little fiddly, but I'm sure I'll get used to them.

How is Camera RAW/LR with Fuji these days? I've seen Irident X Transformer, is it worth the £25 or have Adobe caught up?
Click to expand...
I prefer Lightroom as I'm used to it. I have Iridient, but honestly wish I'd never wasted my money as it rarely improves on LR for my files.
 
I was wondering what auto ISO settings do you all use? If you do use it?

The first trip I took with my XT10 I was setting my minimum shutter speed to 1/60 -- I was only using the 35/f2 and 14/f2.8 so my theory was that followed the rule of 1/focal length for safety. However a few of my shots came out not quite blurry, but not quite as 'crisp' as I'd have hoped. What do you all use as your minimum shutter speeds when using auto ISO? Do you think the following settings might be a bit better? I'm setting them as Quick settings so in order would have Quick settings for bright light, medium light and not-much-light

AUTO 1: ISO base 200 + ISO limit 400 + Min shutter 1/160

AUTO 2: ISO base 200 + ISO limit 3200 + Min shutter 1/100

AUTO 3: ISO base 400 + ISO limit 6400 + Min shutter 1/80

Again, I'll be using the 14mm and 35mm primes, most likely with polarisers in the sunshine too. Am I being too conservative with the ISO limit in AUTO 1? The XT10 is pretty decent up to 3200 isn't it? Somebody on another forum has already said a max of iso 400 is a bit of a waste of time?

Cheers.
 
Last edited:
@Scam please don't use the colour tags, the forum defaults to black, or white if using the night theme.
by setting the "colour" to black, it remains black in all themes making it almost impossible to read, when using the night theme.
Ta.
 
Sorry I had copied/pasted that text. Looked ok to me but I think I removed formatting now.

badboy1984 said:
I set mine at 200-6400 and shutter 1/125. I mainly use 18mm and 35mm
Click to expand...
Is that for general usage, do you have any other profiles -- maybe for darker scenes?
 
Scam said:
Sorry I had copied/pasted that text. Looked ok to me but I think I removed formatting now.

Is that for general usage, do you have any other profiles -- maybe for darker scenes?
Click to expand...

I use it for general use and the system picks a good setting most of the time. If the scene is dark, most likely it will be wide open and high iso ......
 
Scam said:
Looked ok to me but I think I removed formatting now.
Click to expand...
Actually it was removed by a fellow mod, after Mick hit the RTM button :)
 
Scam said:
The first trip I took with my XT10 I was setting my minimum shutter speed to 1/60 -- I was only using the 35/f2 and 14/f2.8 so my theory was that followed the rule of 1/focal length for safety.
Click to expand...

worth bearing in mind that you need to account for the crop factor in 1/FL which puts you very close at 1/60 with the 35mm.

Also, if you're not using the vf it goes out of the window completely. You need to be resting some part of the camera/viewfinder on your face for it to be effective.
 
Stephen L said:
I

I prefer Lightroom as I'm used to it. I have Iridient, but honestly wish I'd never wasted my money as it rarely improves on LR for my files.
Click to expand...
Everyone's experience will be different, and it greatly depends what kind of pics you take. But just for balance, I find that for landscape work, the Iridient plug-in (which I use after LR and before PS) is invaluable. Without it, the infamous "worms" issue appears when you try to sharpen foliage (or in my case seaweed!) and the texture of rock also gets something odd about it, even if it's harder to identify. Having processed the LR output through X-Transformer, I find these problems are, if not completely removed, diminished to the point where they don't bother me anyone. But if you shoot mainly portraits, and have no interest in printing landscapes at 20"x30", I wouldn't bother. I certainly don't use it on every shot.
 
Riz_Guru said:
Yes your right, I believe Fuji should be able to improve this further in the future via firmware upgrades.
I will most definitely miss the awesome Fuji firmware upgrades......
Click to expand...
who are you talking to Riz,i didn't see a question to your answer lol
 
Scam said:
I was wondering what auto ISO settings do you all use? If you do use it?

The first trip I took with my XT10 I was setting my minimum shutter speed to 1/60 -- I was only using the 35/f2 and 14/f2.8 so my theory was that followed the rule of 1/focal length for safety. However a few of my shots came out not quite blurry, but not quite as 'crisp' as I'd have hoped. What do you all use as your minimum shutter speeds when using auto ISO? Do you think the following settings might be a bit better? I'm setting them as Quick settings so in order would have Quick settings for bright light, medium light and not-much-light

AUTO 1: ISO base 200 + ISO limit 400 + Min shutter 1/160

AUTO 2: ISO base 200 + ISO limit 3200 + Min shutter 1/100

AUTO 3: ISO base 400 + ISO limit 6400 + Min shutter 1/80

Again, I'll be using the 14mm and 35mm primes, most likely with polarisers in the sunshine too. Am I being too conservative with the ISO limit in AUTO 1? The XT10 is pretty decent up to 3200 isn't it? Somebody on another forum has already said a max of iso 400 is a bit of a waste of time?

Cheers.
Click to expand...
I don't use Auto ISO, but on the X-T10 I've been able to make decent 30"ish prints at ISO800. Above that, I get less confident but I have certainly seen some good results at 3200 so long as they're well exposed. Underexposure at 3200 will get you noticeably grainy results, but as ever with grain, even that may not be such a bad thing, depending on the desired outcome :)
 
Riz_Guru said:
Give me a Fuji XT-2 body, build, firmware ethos with Sony internal tech any day of the week.
So basically a Sony XT-2 :D
Click to expand...

I'd pretty much agree with that. The good news on the Fuji side is that they will continue to improve their internals, but I don't think Sony will ever change their fundamental approach to updates/firmware.

I'd also add Live Comp/Live Time from Olympus and get Fuji to make an all out best-they-can-do prime (say, 33mm f1.0) and I'd be living the dream.
 
ukaskew said:
I'd pretty much agree with that. The good news on the Fuji side is that they will continue to improve their internals, but I don't think Sony will ever change their fundamental approach to updates/firmware.

I'd also add Live Comp/Live Time from Olympus and get Fuji to make an all out best-they-can-do prime (say, 33mm f1.0) and I'd be living the dream.
Click to expand...
I agree :)
 
Having taken the X-T2 on holiday with me down to Brixham it had only had one outing so I thought I best make some use of it on the last day. This chap was having a wander about on the beach. taken from a fair distance with the 55-200 at full reach.

He looked vaguely familiar and when he passed us shortly after I could here him talking to someone about maybe traveling further along to the Jurassic coast, he was explaining that he had this wonderful idea for an interactive theme park??

Breakwater gazing by barrysprout, on Flickr
 
Barrysprout said:
Having taken the X-T2 on holiday with me down to Brixham it had only had one outing so I thought I best make some use of it on the last day. This chap was having a wander about on the beach. taken from a fair distance with the 55-200 at full reach.

He looked vaguely familiar and when he passed us shortly after I could here him talking to someone about maybe traveling further along to the Jurassic coast, he was explaining that he had this wonderful idea for an interactive theme park??

Breakwater gazing by barrysprout, on Flickr
Click to expand...


"after careful consideration I've decided not to endorse your park"
 
Well they were shooting JW2 in the UK recently :eek::p

dave.hallett said:
I don't use Auto ISO, but on the X-T10 I've been able to make decent 30"ish prints at ISO800. Above that, I get less confident but I have certainly seen some good results at 3200 so long as they're well exposed. Underexposure at 3200 will get you noticeably grainy results, but as ever with grain, even that may not be such a bad thing, depending on the desired outcome :)
Click to expand...
Thanks. I don't mind noise/grain at all. Probably comes from my (motion picture) film background, I was well used to seeing 16mm and 35mm straight out of the cameras.

I was playing with the auto ISO settings on my XT10 last night and getting thoroughly confused. Where is the 'proper' place in the menu to set your autoISO settings? Are 'AUTO 1, 2, 3' global across all custom settings? I was trying to set CUSTOM 1 to use AUTO 1 for example, CUSTOM 2 to use AUTO 2 but going back to the other CUSTOM settings seemed to confused the autoISO settings I had literally just set? :confused:

Also with the ISO option on the Q menu if you scroll, it seems you scroll through all autoISO settings regardless if they're set the same? If you set them all to max 6400 for example, you'd see 6400auto 3 times? :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top