The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

33L said:
Do you have any example shots you could share in terms of its sharpness and also a perspective of FOV ?
Click to expand...
This is uncropped at f5.6. Sorry, I don't have the 16mm to show equivalent FOV.
The Jack Pond by Stephen Lee, on Flickr
 
33L said:
Do you have any example shots you could share in terms of its sharpness and also a perspective of FOV ?
Click to expand...

I've got a couple of shots with the 14mm on the linked thread. Click through to the Flickr version and then click on it to get the bigger size and you'll get a better idea of the photo.

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/abandoned-cottage-b-w-shots-added.591806/

And while I'm doing lens things, here are a couple from the 50-230 I got from eBay last week. They are handheld at 230mm, f10 and are centre and edge of the same frame.

Fuji 50-230 frame by Northsnapper, on Flickr

Fuji 50-230 edge by Northsnapper, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Rupek said:
Do many people use the 18-135? Not heard much about this lens
Click to expand...

I got one at the weekend with my shiny new X-T1, I mainly got it because it is the only Fuji Zoom that works properly with IR, and I have an IR modified X-E1, but the fact that it is weather-sealed, is a bonus especially in our lovely summer weather. It is quite big, but seems to handle well on the X-T1.

I intend to take it on holiday later this year with just the 14mm, a two lens solution.
 
33L said:
guys, im firmly set on the xt1 (when funds allow) and already have the 23mm to replace my 35 mm on FF, i will be marrying this with a 56mm at some stage. My question is wide prime or 10-24mm? if i go down the wide prime which one, for what i can see there is 14mm, 16mm & 18mm.

The 18mm is not that far off the 23mm to warrant a new lens. so leaves the 14mm & 16mm, Im not really worried about wide open apertures at this focal length due to it mainly being for landscape photography.

I think my question is; which lens performs the best for landscape work?
Click to expand...

The 10-24 is more versatile than any of the primes and goes that extra bit wider - without going fisheye, I'm not sure there's a wider option available! Like all the Fuji range of lenses, it's hard to fault it on IQ grounds, although it ain't cheap!

rodd1000 said:
Loving the 18-55, really is a cracker (y) Anyone notice any difference between the fine and normal quality ?
Last Gull Standing by karl roddis, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Never used normal - I always shoot fine JPEGs at the largest available size. Using JPEG is enough of a compromise so giving away any more than necessary would be silly IMO! (I use JPEG since I don't like doing much [if any!] PP and often print SOOC.)

Rupek said:
Do many people use the 18-135? Not heard much about this lens
Click to expand...

All but welded to my X-T1, especially on holiday. Covers almost every eventuality, even a splash (or more) of rain should I get caught out in it. Reduces lens changes hugely, especially if the X-T1 is paired with an X-Pro1 with a 10-24 for landscape duties. TBH, once the 100-400 hits the shelves, the 55-200 will probably be redundant and get traded in for the longer lens. The only potential downside to the 18-135 is the relative slowness in terms of maximum aperture but since I'm not a fan of ultra shallow DoF, it doesn't really matter to me - if it did, I'd go for fast primes on an FF body anyway!
 
I agree on the 18-135, but don't you find it a wee bit unwieldy ? Worst thing I ever did was to buy the x100t after using it the xt1 with the 18-135 combo is like going back to canon ff.
 
Coming from a D750 with a 24-120 f/4, not in the slightest! Compared to an X100, it probably is but it's also a lot more versatile, especially if you start playing with the supplementary lenses needed to give the X100 a little more versatility.
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
That's a very nice shot Karl, great sky and really like the way the light catches the rippled sand.(y)

George.
Click to expand...

Thanks George, I'd accidentally left the camera on normal after fiddling around with it the day before. I normally shoot Raw only but I'm surprised how good the quality is.
 
Nod said:
The 10-24 is more versatile than any of the primes and goes that extra bit wider - without going fisheye, I'm not sure there's a wider option available! Like all the Fuji range of lenses, it's hard to fault it on IQ grounds, although it ain't cheap!
Click to expand...

Samyang do sell a 10mm non-fish eye, and of course the 8mm fish-eye. 10mm is pretty wide though, when I had a Sigma 10-24 on a Canon crop, after I got over the effect, whoooaaaa, I can shoot wide, I mean really wide, I found that most of my shots were around 14mm, so thats what I plumped for with the Fuji (I do have the Samyang 12mm as well, but I'm not sure that is a keeper). Interesting that many pro-landscapers use the Zeiss 21mm on FF, which is also 14mm on the Fuji :)
 
I just wanted to say thanks to David (Mnnnt) for selling me his wonderful 50-140 zoom. I was actually thinking of the 55-200 but had to jump on this one when it came up for sale.

I took it to the Natural History and V&A museums last weekend - my first time using it properly. Surprisingly, I took more pics with it than the 16mm wide angle I brought along with it.

Here are three pics I took with the 50-140

View attachment 43354

View attachment 43356

View attachment 43358
 
Last edited:
Very nice shots, people like you should carry a GAS warning, now I want a 50-140mm :(
 
Last edited:
What settings were these taken with ? Are you using the lens wide open ?
 
Peter B said:
I've got a couple of shots with the 14mm on the linked thread. Click through to the Flickr version and then click on it to get the bigger size and you'll get a better idea of the photo.

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/abandoned-cottage-b-w-shots-added.591806/

And while I'm doing lens things, here are a couple from the 50-230 I got from eBay last week. They are handheld at 230mm, f10 and are centre and edge of the same frame.

Fuji 50-230 frame by Northsnapper, on Flickr

Fuji 50-230 edge by Northsnapper, on Flickr
Click to expand...
There appears to be a lot of CA on the edge crop, is this a problem with this lens ?
 
LOL - sorry, Jim....it was all David's fault :)

The windows were 1/80 @ f5.6 and ISO 400

The second pic was 1/80 at f3.6 and ISO 800

The third pic was 1/250 at f2.8 and ISO 2500

Not quite sure why I used such a high shutter speed for the last one but maybe it was to experiment with different combinations (and it was a very awkward angle shooting this pic)

jimgallaher said:
What settings were these taken with ? Are you using the lens wide open ?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
jimgallaher said:
There appears to be a lot of CA on the edge crop, is this a problem with this lens ?
Click to expand...

No idea as it was literally the first time I'd put it on the camera, but it certainly warrants further inspection. The photozone test says that

"The Fujinon XC 50-230mm f/4.5-6-7 OIS is a good performer in relation to its price level. The results are mostly sharp in the image center. The corners aren't quite as snappy in the upper range but let's be fair - you don't tend to place the main subject of your scene into the extreme corners anyway. The level of CAs is pretty good at the extreme ends with a weak spot (135mm) in between. Distortions and vignetting are taken care of by the automatic image correction. However, the original characteristics are quite a bit worse though - especially in terms of light falloff." http://www.photozone.de/fuji_x/880-fuji50230f4567?start=1

I'd agree that the edges of such a lens aren't going to be that wonderful, but I reckon this is not a bad performance for such a cheap lens and the centre performance looks good enough?
 
I've been viewing MANY images lately taken with the Fuji XF10-24mm f/4 lens which is an amazing versatile landscape lens. I actually owned one of these for a short time until I stupidly sold it and moved a different camera direction (silly me), but I'll be looking for another one in a few weeks time as the results it can achieve are fantastic.

pete
 
minnnt said:
Bloody hell.
Click to expand...

I thought you'd come out with something like that David.:D:D

But honestly m8 I will try (well maybe) and use something else.(y)

George.
 
rodd1000 said:
Can't believe I sold my 55-200, I'm a doofus :mad:
Click to expand...


Yeh!! I just love that chunk of glass Karl. But to be perfectly honest I've yet to come across a bad Fuji lens, they're all optically very good.(y)

George.
 
macvisual said:
George;

That's a great quality capture, even better when you enlarge it in flickr. Nice!
Click to expand...


Thanks for that Peter, much appreciated comments.(y)

George.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Car Boot Sale Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 2.8/50mm on an X-T1 - the best attempt at manual focusing at f2.8 (so far) - Just don't ask how much the lens cost, it will make you weep!!! BTW they are not scratches but spiders webs on the clothes line!!!!


Pegged Out sm by Mr Perceptive X100, on Flickr
Click to expand...


That's sounds like one hell of a good result David, not a bad shot as well.(y)

George.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top