The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

G.K.Jnr. said:
Very nice Fujigraph Sir, well composed, with good exposure & colour.(y)

“Looks like you’re settling in with the new kit real good”

George.
Click to expand...

Thanks George (y)
Yeah slowly but surely I think :)
 
NickTB said:
Love this. So stark! Reminds me of something Gerry Anderson would have created (One for the teenagers there)
Click to expand...

Thanks Nick
Haha yeah a tad Marine Ville ;)

Mr Perceptive said:
Inside is even more bonkers!
Click to expand...

Oh I got a lot more from inside :D Didn`t get back till pretty late, so processing will be happening tonight ;)
 
Hey guys
Any tips on flash and triggers for the fuj? I did a little reading and the Godox seems pretty popular. Are there any other brands I should be looking at. Nothing over special, but I do like a bit of OCF at times, and HSS would be a bonus.
 
I have a few old m42 lenses and wondering if a lens turbo would be of much benefit. I’ve had a look around online but got myself a bit confused as to what I need. Some advise rather than getting m42 to Fuji, to get a canon eos one then use adapters for various lenses, not just m42. Getting confused - does that mean a Canon EOS to Fuji lens turbo, then say m42 to canon adapter? Grateful for any help.
 
I love the X-T2 for what I bought for last year ie a Travel camera/times that I do not want to carry my D850 etc.

At the moment I can't carry my D850 and all the lenses I usually do on my landscape adventures due to injuring my back. So I thought it would be an ideal time to try the X-T2 as my main camera.

Problem is I just don't like it for landscapes and can't put my finger on specific reasons why. I see videos on Youtube from people saying the can't see the difference between the X-T2 and a FF DSLRs but for me it just seems a big difference.

I know I'm not too keen on the on the EVF during difficult lighting such as sunrise/sunset and I certainly miss not having native ISO 64 (that alone is such a disadvantage). But I also don't find the focus as good in low light and dynamic range/shadow detail doesn't seem to be close and noise is worse. The out of camera images can look really good (shooting RAW) but again something that doesn't look right especially foliage.

I'm trying to decide whether I just need time more to adapt to it or that it really is unfair to compare the X-T2 to a full frame D850, from my experience the D850 is in a different league to the X-T2 but I didn't buy it as replacement, just find it strange that some people can say they are so close when imo they are certainly not.
 
Jase said:
I love the X-T2 for what I bought for last year ie a Travel camera/times that I do not want to carry my D850 etc.

At the moment I can't carry my D850 and all the lenses I usually do on my landscape adventures due to injuring my back. So I thought it would be an ideal time to try the X-T2 as my main camera.

Problem is I just don't like it for landscapes and can't put my finger on specific reasons why. I see videos on Youtube from people saying the can't see the difference between the X-T2 and a FF DSLRs but for me it just seems a big difference.

I know I'm not too keen on the on the EVF during difficult lighting such as sunrise/sunset and I certainly miss not having native ISO 64 (that alone is such a disadvantage). But I also don't find the focus as good in low light and dynamic range/shadow detail doesn't seem to be close and noise is worse. The out of camera images can look really good (shooting RAW) but again something that doesn't look right especially foliage.

I'm trying to decide whether I just need time more to adapt to it or that it really is unfair to compare the X-T2 to a full frame D850, from my experience the D850 is in a different league to the X-T2 but I didn't buy it as replacement, just find it strange that some people can say they are so close when imo they are certainly not.
Click to expand...

This is a difficult one, if you don't gel with the camera then its probably not for you!! The foliage 'issue' is one thats ha been discussed to death on the forum, and certain RAW processor seem to make the situation worse, taht said it appears to be once seen cannot unsee for some people. Personally I've not had an issue, but then I've not gone pixel peeping for a good look at it. I suggest you look back through this thread (I know its large) or look at other threads on TP and other Fuji forums to see the diverse views on this subject and the heated debates that ensue. X-Trans3 (in the X-T2) is particularly susceptible to over sharpening.

Regarding shadow recovery, the Fuji's do seem very particular on the exposure of the shot, if you regularly ETTR (but don't go over), then the shadow recovery can be very good, but I have found under exposed images do suffer from noise when dragging up the shadows. Religiously use the histogram and you should get good results, though I can't compare with a D850 as I've not owned one.

Also what lens do you use? (the 18-135 can be a little soft, but all the rest seem to be good/excellent)

Hope that helps, and one more video for you to look at:-

 
Mr Perceptive said:
This is a difficult one, if you don't gel with the camera then its probably not for you!! The foliage 'issue' is one thats ha been discussed to death on the forum, and certain RAW processor seem to make the situation worse, taht said it appears to be once seen cannot unsee for some people. Personally I've not had an issue, but then I've not gone pixel peeping for a good look at it. I suggest you look back through this thread (I know its large) or look at other threads on TP and other Fuji forums to see the diverse views on this subject and the heated debates that ensue. X-Trans3 (in the X-T2) is particularly susceptible to over sharpening.

Regarding shadow recovery, the Fuji's do seem very particular on the exposure of the shot, if you regularly ETTR (but don't go over), then the shadow recovery can be very good, but I have found under exposed images do suffer from noise when dragging up the shadows. Religiously use the histogram and you should get good results, though I can't compare with a D850 as I've not owned one.

Also what lens do you use? (the 18-135 can be a little soft, but all the rest seem to be good/excellent)

Hope that helps, and one more video for you to look at:
Click to expand...

Actually the video you have quoted is the last one that I watched and what probably prompted me to question it.

It's not that I don't gel with the camera, I like it a lot but I'm very surprised when I see a video like above which is far from reality imo (although he was comparing to the old D800 and not a D850). His example photo's are taken in less challenging lighting conditions (day/overcast days) and not around sunrise/sunset which is where I think it struggles most.

The lens I mainly use are 16-55 and 10-24 both of which are excellent imo.

Actually, the more I think about it when I bought the X-T2 I wasn't expecting it match the quality of the D850 and just because me circumstances have changed for a while I shouldn't expect it to now. Think I'll just live with it's limitations and enjoy it like I used to and just hope my back gets better soon :)
 
Jase said:
Actually the video you have quoted is the last one that I watched and what probably prompted me to question it.

It's not that I don't gel with the camera, I like it a lot but I'm very surprised when I see a video like above which is far from reality imo (although he was comparing to the old D800 and not a D850). His example photo's are taken in less challenging lighting conditions (day/overcast days) and not around sunrise/sunset which is where I think it struggles most.

The lens I mainly use are 16-55 and 10-24 both of which are excellent imo.

Actually, the more I think about it when I bought the X-T2 I wasn't expecting it match the quality of the D850 and just because me circumstances have changed for a while I shouldn't expect it to now. Think I'll just live with it's limitations and enjoy it like I used to and just hope my back gets better soon :)
Click to expand...

Two great lenses so no worries there. My best results in very dynamic lighting situations have come from bracketed exposures (9 shot bracketing is easy with the X-T2, but I don't always merge all 9 images, sometimes just a selection). I'm yet to play with the focus stacking of the latest firmware in the wild to see if that can further improve the image (not that I'm unhappy with what I get).

This is an example of a 9 bracketed image, shooting straight into the sun (not a foliage example!!)

pwEftFuh.jpg


Resultant Image


Dungeness-4 by David Yeoman, on Flickr


The 'modern way' of viewing images on a large monitor often shows up flaws/effects/etc that we wouldn't see if the image was printed and we looked at it from a reasonable viewing distance (I think that is what Nigel Danson is saying through his video)

I think your idea of just enjoying the camera is a good one, it may yet surprise you :) (hope your back gets better soon)
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Two great lenses so no worries there. My best results in very dynamic lighting situations have come from bracketed exposures (9 shot bracketing is easy with the X-T2, but I don't always merge all 9 images, sometimes just a selection). I'm yet to play with the focus stacking of the latest firmware in the wild to see if that can further improve the image (not that I'm unhappy with what I get).

This is an example of a 9 bracketed image, shooting straight into the sun (not a foliage example!!)

The 'modern way' of viewing images on a large monitor often shows up flaws/effects/etc that we wouldn't see if the image was printed and we looked at it from a reasonable viewing distance (I think that is what Nigel Danson is saying through his video)

I think your idea of just enjoying the camera is a good one, it may yet surprise you :) (hope your back gets better soon)
Click to expand...

Are you doing your processing in LR?

I just looked on your Flickr and there were a few shots from North Wales, one with the river running down to the lake. Looking at the date I was there about the same time, I spoke to someone when I was walking up (wasn't the best of light that day).

I'm off next week and was planning on going back there, that's why I'm a little cheesed off I can't carry all my camera gear. Think I'll give the X-T2 more time as I can carry that and it is a joy to use (most of the time) :)

Edit: I've just looked back over some photos that I've taken with the X-T2 and it does seem to be the ones in more challenging lighting that I'm not so happy with.
 
Last edited:
Jase said:
Actually the video you have quoted is the last one that I watched and what probably prompted me to question it.

It's not that I don't gel with the camera, I like it a lot but I'm very surprised when I see a video like above which is far from reality imo (although he was comparing to the old D800 and not a D850). His example photo's are taken in less challenging lighting conditions (day/overcast days) and not around sunrise/sunset which is where I think it struggles most.

The lens I mainly use are 16-55 and 10-24 both of which are excellent imo.

Actually, the more I think about it when I bought the X-T2 I wasn't expecting it match the quality of the D850 and just because me circumstances have changed for a while I shouldn't expect it to now. Think I'll just live with it's limitations and enjoy it like I used to and just hope my back gets better soon :)
Click to expand...

You still get the crop/FF difference, I know some sources say that Fuji crop is just like FF but I have never seen that either. There are just things that a larger sensor gives that a smaller sensor can't. Fuji delivers in other areas though, it is just if those are important enough to you... such as size and the mirrorless tech.
 
Jase said:
Are you doing your processing in LR?

I just looked on your Flickr and there were a few shots from North Wales, one with the river running down to the lake. Looking at the date I was there about the same time, I spoke to someone when I was walking up (wasn't the best of light that day).

I'm off next week and was planning on going back there, that's why I'm a little cheesed off I can't carry all my camera gear. Think I'll give the X-T2 more time as I can carry that and it is a joy to use (most of the time) :)

Edit: I've just looked back over some photos that I've taken with the X-T2 and it does seem to be the ones in more challenging lighting that I'm not so happy with.
Click to expand...

Yes process in LR, I don't use the Peter Bridgewood technique with X-Trans3, I don't add any additional sharpening, and often decrease what LR applies as default, I do nudge the clarity slider a little though.

(The Wales shot was a single exposure)
 
jj_glos said:
You still get the crop/FF difference, I know some sources say that Fuji crop is just like FF but I have never seen that either. There are just things that a larger sensor gives that a smaller sensor can't. Fuji delivers in other areas though, it is just if those are important enough to you... such as size and the mirrorless tech.
Click to expand...

I think you've probably nailed it there, I've been using FF for many years (Canon then Nikon) so I guess just got used it it, and yeah the Fuji delivers in all other aspects I think...
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Yes process in LR, I don't use the Peter Bridgewood technique with X-Trans3, I don't add any additional sharpening, and often decrease what LR applies as default, I do nudge the clarity slider a little though.

(The Wales shot was a single exposure)
Click to expand...
My approach also for the X-Trans3.
 
Jase said:
I love the X-T2 for what I bought for last year ie a Travel camera/times that I do not want to carry my D850 etc.

At the moment I can't carry my D850 and all the lenses I usually do on my landscape adventures due to injuring my back. So I thought it would be an ideal time to try the X-T2 as my main camera.

Problem is I just don't like it for landscapes and can't put my finger on specific reasons why. I see videos on Youtube from people saying the can't see the difference between the X-T2 and a FF DSLRs but for me it just seems a big difference.

I know I'm not too keen on the on the EVF during difficult lighting such as sunrise/sunset and I certainly miss not having native ISO 64 (that alone is such a disadvantage). But I also don't find the focus as good in low light and dynamic range/shadow detail doesn't seem to be close and noise is worse. The out of camera images can look really good (shooting RAW) but again something that doesn't look right especially foliage.

I'm trying to decide whether I just need time more to adapt to it or that it really is unfair to compare the X-T2 to a full frame D850, from my experience the D850 is in a different league to the X-T2 but I didn't buy it as replacement, just find it strange that some people can say they are so close when imo they are certainly not.
Click to expand...


@Jase, don't forget you are comparing a top of the range FF, 50MP camera, to the X-T2. I would expect the 850 to out perform the T2 just about everywhere (with the exception of size & weight!!).

This was shot on a sunny day in May, with the 10-24.

DSCF1415 by Steve Jelly, on Flickr

And this an "into the sun" shot, again T2 & 10-24.

DSCF0194-HDR by Steve Jelly, on Flickr

I have a 26 inch copy of the sunset framed and on my bedroom wall...
 
Jase said:
I love the X-T2 for what I bought for last year ie a Travel camera/times that I do not want to carry my D850 etc.

At the moment I can't carry my D850 and all the lenses I usually do on my landscape adventures due to injuring my back. So I thought it would be an ideal time to try the X-T2 as my main camera.

Problem is I just don't like it for landscapes and can't put my finger on specific reasons why. I see videos on Youtube from people saying the can't see the difference between the X-T2 and a FF DSLRs but for me it just seems a big difference.

I know I'm not too keen on the on the EVF during difficult lighting such as sunrise/sunset and I certainly miss not having native ISO 64 (that alone is such a disadvantage). But I also don't find the focus as good in low light and dynamic range/shadow detail doesn't seem to be close and noise is worse. The out of camera images can look really good (shooting RAW) but again something that doesn't look right especially foliage.

I'm trying to decide whether I just need time more to adapt to it or that it really is unfair to compare the X-T2 to a full frame D850, from my experience the D850 is in a different league to the X-T2 but I didn't buy it as replacement, just find it strange that some people can say they are so close when imo they are certainly not.
Click to expand...

After coming from a D810 I know exactly what you mean, I went through the same thoughts virtually to a tee as you. Made the switch to lighter my bag because at my age it wasn't going to get any easier lugging it about, I even picked up another D810 at one point but simply ended up with the same problem as before.
Eventually did what the chap did in the video but with some sunrise/sunset shots where I thought the X-T2 was not up to it when I was looking at 100% on my monitor and I struggled to notice the difference in the prints (A3 size), the D810 was marginally better but I struggled to notice the difference so I simply stopped pixel peeping. Of course if the larger you print the more your going to notice the difference.
 
I shot my last wedding with a Sony a7RII and Fuji X-T20. An odd choice, but I love both systems and have really struggled to pick one to jump into fully. My heart says Sony, the a7RII is as near to a perfect camera as I've ever owned, but financially and in terms of weight, building a more rounded Fuji system is many times more manageable. If Fuji had a flagship normal prime, maybe a 35mm f1.0 with a bunch of linear motors, it would be easy, but as it is the Zeiss 55mm 1.8 is just ridiculously good in a wedding environment.

Anyhow, I went through the full finished gallery this evening and there is genuinely not a single photo I could pick out as definitely being from one system or the other, so that gave me a big boost in favour of the Fuji, I really wasn't expecting it. Even processing them in LR was remarkably consistent with my own custom preset. I'm sure at 4K monitor in my face level the Sony would streak ahead, but I'm not and I'm certain my clients aren't either, in fact 95% of the traffic to the online galleries is on a mobile browser.
 
Last edited:
G.K.Jnr. said:
Really nice Fujigraph Sir, nicely composed, with a good mono presentation giving a full range of tones.(y)

George.
Click to expand...

Thanks George, always appreciated :)
 
Are there any companies that hire Fuji lenses?

I'm going away on the weekend/next week and could do with a couple of lenses I don't have on the Fuji system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top