1. NickTB

    NickTB

    Messages:
    2,229
    Name:
    Nick
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Just a heads up, I've posted a wanted ad for a 23mm f1.4 in Classifieds
     
  2. ianmarsh

    ianmarsh

    Messages:
    4,872
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    A quick one from last night. Lovely sunset, just lacking some clouds. Five shot pano, XT2 and 16-50mm

    [​IMG]Towers by Ian, on Flickr
     
  3. G.K.Jnr.

    G.K.Jnr.

    Messages:
    12,060
    Name:
    George.
    Edit My Images:
    No

    Thank you kindly Sir, I sure do appreciate you takin’ the time to reply.(y)

    George.
     
  4. Ian W

    Ian W

    Messages:
    3,111
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Lovely pano that, Ian. You're making me feel bad not having been out for a while with mine!
     
    ianmarsh likes this.
  5. ianmarsh

    ianmarsh

    Messages:
    4,872
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    That's why I went out last night - I hadn't done any shooting for too long.
     
  6. Iiyama

    Iiyama

    Messages:
    1,545
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Very nice photograph. I really like the processing.
     
    ianmarsh likes this.
  7. Manxmaid

    Manxmaid

    Messages:
    3,842
    Name:
    Andrea
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Lovely reflections and contrast between the red hull and the blues of the sea and sky. Reminds me that that better weather is on the way!
     
    G.K.Jnr. likes this.
  8. Jelster

    Jelster

    Messages:
    5,002
    Name:
    Steve
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I like that Ian, nice looking image.
     
    ianmarsh likes this.
  9. ianmarsh

    ianmarsh

    Messages:
    4,872
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Not a lot of processing here to be honest. Most of the work was done my picking the velvia emulation in Lr and then getting the white balance right. I think the rather odd lighting conditions made it. The sun is hitting the far bank of the Thames including the Tower of London and the distant houses but not the bridge. The light there seems to be being reflected from buildings in the City so there are strange highlights. Tonnes of spot removal though - my sensor is filthy and I need to clean it.
     
    dave.hallett likes this.
  10. G.K.Jnr.

    G.K.Jnr.

    Messages:
    12,060
    Name:
    George.
    Edit My Images:
    No

    Thank you kindly Ma'am, I sure do appreciate you takin' the time to reply & comment.(y)

    George.
     
    Manxmaid likes this.
  11. G.K.Jnr.

    G.K.Jnr.

    Messages:
    12,060
    Name:
    George.
    Edit My Images:
    No

    That's a very nice Fujigraph Sir, good positioning of the bridge in the frame, nice light & colour, and good detail.(y)

    "Maybe just getting a tad tight with the top of the south tower to the top of the frame, but nothing to distract from a very nice image"

    George.
     
    addicknchips and ianmarsh like this.
  12. ianmarsh

    ianmarsh

    Messages:
    4,872
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    My thoughts too. I made a mistake and included lots of water that i've cropped out but not enough sky. I could probably extend the canvas a little and fill with sky in photoshop if I decide to print big.
     
  13. NickTB

    NickTB

    Messages:
    2,229
    Name:
    Nick
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Can anyone comment on the 16-55? I'm torn between the 23 1.4 and the 16-55. I only have the budget for one or the other. Im thinking more lens for my buck in the 16-55? or is that flawed thinking? I had the 23 before and loved it (Till I sold it when I thought I was switching systems) Now I'm firmly Fuji I need more glass. I have the 56 f1.2 already and want to add to that. Main shooting is portraits and animals plus some interior architectural stuff.
     
  14. Ian W

    Ian W

    Messages:
    3,111
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Am thinking the same, however it involves selling my 35mm 1.4 to go towards it. Torn, I am.
     
  15. gad-westy

    gad-westy

    Messages:
    5,830
    Name:
    Graham
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I have both. 16-55 I bought really because I was getting a bit frustrated with switching between primes when out shooting landscapes. Went for the 16-55 as I didn't want to sacrifice much on the quality side of things though I do sometimes wonder how much better it actually is over an 18-55. I wanted the weather resistance though. Anyway I'm very happy with it for my usage. It's really sharp and beautifully made but paired with my XT2, it's not necessarily a great combination for general handheld shooting. Might be better with a grip but it's a big lens for a small camera, never feels 100% comfortable to me.

    I love the 23mm. Try to use it whenever I can but it is generally less useful than the zoom. I use it for people, kids, lifestyle type stuff. Would sometimes use it or my 18mm as a walkabout too.

    So as ever, it comes down to your usage I'm afraid. One thing I would say though, if you don't need constant 2.8 or the weather resistance, the 18-55 might be a more sensible purchase and save you a few £'s. you might even be close to being able to get a used 18-55 and 23mm for the price of the 16-55....
     
    Phiggys, Harlequin565 and NickTB like this.
  16. Harlequin565

    Harlequin565

    Messages:
    2,904
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I didn't get on with the 23 1.4. I found it's focus to be iffy (slow and innacurate at times) and the lens itself is weighty and cumbersome. So is the 16-55 (weighty - not iffy)... but ... it's 16-55.... I have the 23 2.8 & it's just perfect for a street/walkabout lens. Small, compact and fab with lightning IQ. The 16-55 satisfies *most* of my general needs (anything serious & non-portrait) and is a fab overall lens. I find the quality superior to the 18-55 although I agree with @gad-westy that it's a tad oversized for the body. I think if I was financially constrained, the 18-55 would be good enough for me.

    Edit to add: @Ian W : I'd rather lose my arm than my 35 1.4 I *love* that lens despite all its shortcomings.
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2018
    Ian W and NickTB like this.
  17. yamahatdm900

    yamahatdm900

    Messages:
    5,004
    Name:
    Graham
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I like my 16-55 personally find the handling ok, unless time shooting portraits I don't use the grip, found the extra 2mm at the wide end over the 18-55 for me very handy, I would imagine it would be handy for interior architectural stuff as well.
     
    NickTB and Harlequin565 like this.
  18. NickTB

    NickTB

    Messages:
    2,229
    Name:
    Nick
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    So the general consensus is the 16-55 isn't suited for portraits? Indoors? As I said I have the 56 which I love but sometimes the space is restrictive. I have a horrible feeling I'll be chucking some money around soon!
     
  19. Harlequin565

    Harlequin565

    Messages:
    2,904
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I use the 56 & the 55-200 for portraits. That 56 is sublime. In a pinch I'd use the 35 1.4 if your arm was up my back. I wouldn't use another lens (18-55, 16-55) because I've got something better. It's not that the 16-55 is bad (as far as I'm concerned) it's just that I've got 'more appropriate'.
     
  20. yamahatdm900

    yamahatdm900

    Messages:
    5,004
    Name:
    Graham
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I find it ok for portraits to be honest, its not as good as the 56mm but that goes for most lenses, I think it depends what portraits you are doing if you dont need the af speed the 35mm f1.4 is for me very nice if the 56mm is to long. But if you want shooting children and you need something shorter than 56mm personally dont think you could do a lot better then the 16-55 plus you got the versatility of the zoom.
     
    NickTB likes this.
  21. NickTB

    NickTB

    Messages:
    2,229
    Name:
    Nick
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Yeah I have three kids under 7 and along with they’re assorted mates I’m doing a LOT of kids stuff. Parents are always asking me to supply images for them. Hence my original question. I’m thinking spring/summer a 55-140 will be added for long candid stuff. Ideally I cover all possibilities from right studios to woodland/meadow stuff
     
  22. jj_glos

    jj_glos

    Messages:
    1,479
    Name:
    Julian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I fully expected to pick up a 16-55 when I got into the Fuji system a few years back, but it still hasn't happened. I do have the 18-55 but it is rarely used. The 23mm f1.4 and 56mm f1.2 I really enjoy using as a combo, and that's what I take out the majority of the time. When I want to take a single lens it's usually a toss up between the 23mm f1.4 and 35mm f1.4.
     
    addicknchips, NickTB and Ian W like this.
  23. Ian W

    Ian W

    Messages:
    3,111
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    You guys are saving me a wad of cash. Keep going
     
  24. yamahatdm900

    yamahatdm900

    Messages:
    5,004
    Name:
    Graham
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    The 16-55 would make sense, its not as good as the 23 and 35mm f1.4 but its not that much worse and I've always found the AF to be faster plus you got a very good wa angle option at 16mm and a good 55mm f2.8.
    If you ever Oxford way your welcome to try mine Nick.
     
    NickTB likes this.
  25. yamahatdm900

    yamahatdm900

    Messages:
    5,004
    Name:
    Graham
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Been going a bit stir crazy with the lack of time to go out the last few months, this is one from one of the few times I managed to get out.

    [​IMG]Lonely Bush by Graham Norton, on Flickr
     
  26. addicknchips

    addicknchips

    Messages:
    6,016
    Name:
    Jonathan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Kids are tricky because they move quickly and unpredictably. The 16-55 is faster to focus and the zoom is more useful than the fixed 23mm. You’ll probably get more keepers with the zoom. Personally though I’d go with the 23mm. the 23mm and 56mm are an excellent duo. Don’t rule out the 90mm too if you need something that is faster to focus.
     
    NickTB likes this.
  27. G.K.Jnr.

    G.K.Jnr.

    Messages:
    12,060
    Name:
    George.
    Edit My Images:
    No

    That’s one very nice Fujigraph Sir, with a well balanced composition, nice sky and interest in the foreground, and a good full range of mono tones.(y)

    George.
     
    Last edited: Mar 10, 2018
  28. architectfadi

    architectfadi

    Messages:
    3,369
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Really like this. Lovely B&W, foreground subject and sky
     
  29. jimmyjamjojo

    jimmyjamjojo

    Messages:
    1,125
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    That's a super composition. The diagonal makes it. The separation of tones in each segment makes each stand out and they balance out dark/light well.
    Nicely processed too. Looks like really nice light, despite being overcast you still got some directional light from a low sun, love it when that happens.
     
  30. gad-westy

    gad-westy

    Messages:
    5,830
    Name:
    Graham
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Phiggys, dave.hallett, mulch and 6 others like this.
  31. NickTB

    NickTB

    Messages:
    2,229
    Name:
    Nick
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    VERY nice gad-westy. Lovely tones and colours. It really is a nice lens by the looks of it
     
    gad-westy likes this.
  32. jimmyjamjojo

    jimmyjamjojo

    Messages:
    1,125
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Are those numbers just the aspect ratio or are they stitched panos of 20x9 etc?
     
  33. gad-westy

    gad-westy

    Messages:
    5,830
    Name:
    Graham
    Edit My Images:
    No
    First one is cropped 20:9 from single image.

    Second is 32:9 stitched from 5 images. I sometimes use 32:9 for wallpaper on dual monitor pc at work.
     
  34. ianmarsh

    ianmarsh

    Messages:
    4,872
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I managed to add a slice of sky to give headroom above Tower Bridge - big improvement, and my son has ordered a print for his bedroom (payment = him cleaning his bedroom). So extra thanks from both of us for the comment.
     
    dave.hallett and G.K.Jnr. like this.
  35. G.K.Jnr.

    G.K.Jnr.

    Messages:
    12,060
    Name:
    George.
    Edit My Images:
    No
    That sounds good Sir, well done. In no way was it crit’ etc, just an observational comment.(y)

    George.
     
    ianmarsh likes this.
  36. macvisual

    macvisual

    Messages:
    5,298
    Name:
    Peter
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Is there a dedicated Fuji GFX thread here me wonders ?

    Totally loving images I've seen but the cost is quite expensive.
     
  37. macvisual

    macvisual

    Messages:
    5,298
    Name:
    Peter
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Phiggys likes this.
  38. trevorbray

    trevorbray

    Messages:
    4,624
    Name:
    Trevor
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    There isn’t Pete. But I’m sure @G.K.Jnr. has one.
     
    macvisual likes this.
  39. ashtennisguru

    ashtennisguru

    Messages:
    1,036
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Some guy in a Facebook photo group I'm a member of keeps posting images taken with the XF56 - they are rendered beautifully and now I want one :(
     
    Phiggys likes this.
  40. Ian W

    Ian W

    Messages:
    3,111
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Look lovely don't they?! An absolute extravagance for me though and I've convinced myself that it's too long for 99% of my portraits anyway
     
    Phiggys likes this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice