The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

Phiggys said:
Yes I was just trying to offer a cheaper alternative to soul deep having to buy a macro on top of the X T1 with 18-135mm lens he had made thats all sorry.
Click to expand...


yeah I know I get ya :) Just wondering, as I'm pondering the 60mm myself. Might just get a macro ring for the 35mm though, not sure yet
 
Cagey75 said:
yeah I know I get ya :) Just wondering, as I'm pondering the 60mm myself. Might just get a macro ring for the 35mm though, not sure yet
Click to expand...


I've often thought about getting the 60mm macro lens Keith, but never got round to it.

I'll probably hang on now until the new 80mm F2.8 is released in the new year, as for me that would be a much more useful focal length generally and for macro work would give a better working to subject distance than the 60mm with a tube fitted for 1-1 etc.(y)

George.
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
I've often thought about getting the 60mm macro lens Keith, but never got round to it.

I'll probably hang on now until the new 80mm F2.8 is released in the new year, as for me that would be a much more useful focal length generally and for macro work would give a better working to subject distance than the 60mm with a tube fitted for 1-1 etc.(y)

George.
Click to expand...


Good point, an 80mm would be ideal for me too. Last macro I had was a 150mm, and I loved the extra bit of space it offered for 1:1, you didn't have to be almost touching the subject to fill the frame. That was on full frame, an 80mm macro on the Fuji will be closer to that end. I wonder how much it will be? it'll have to be a lot cheaper than the current 90mm or most would opt for that and just get macro rings

I see that it will have OIS and will be compatible with Fuji's Teleconverters!
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
Good point, an 80mm would be ideal for me too. Last macro I had was a 150mm, and I loved the extra bit of space it offered for 1:1, you didn't have to be almost touching the subject to fill the frame. That was on full frae, an 80mm macro on the Fuji will be closer to that end. I wonder how much it will be? it'll have to be a lot cheaper than the current 90mm or most would opt for that and just get macro rings
Click to expand...


Most of the macro stuff I do at the moment is with a 105mm micro Nikkor (D) on the fooj and works very well, but obviously fully manual operation. The new 80mm lens is rumoured to have OIS which would be nice on a prime especially for macro/close up work. I would imagine it'll be reasonably expensive though, just have to wait and see.(y)

George.
 
Cagey75 said:
Gorgeous colours! Wish they had stuff like this in my boring town
Click to expand...

It was incredibly impressive. I had the two year old with me so couldn't really spend any time taking photos though.

Lived within 10 miles of Longleat for 34 years and only been 3 times (quite expensive though!), Lacock is only up the road too and I've only been there twice.
 
So I finally managed to get out with the 10-24mm today. Sadly, it was bloody freezing and my walk along the Clyde didn't offer too much in terms of foreground interest which is clearly absolutely essential when using an UWA.

Shot both of these in RAW and edited in Lightroom. I really need to get myself some filters as the original files were drastically different to what is seen here. I am impressed at the amount of detail recoverable so will look out my grads and give them a bash next time around.


Down the Clyde by Ian Williams, on Flickr


Inaccessible Jetty by Ian Williams, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Ian W said:
So I finally managed to get out with the 10-24mm today. Sadly, it was bloody freezing and my walk along the Clyde didn't offer too much in terms of foreground interest which is clearly absolutely essential when using an UWA.

Shot both of these in RAW and edited in Lightroom. I really need to get myself some filters as the original files were drastically different to what is seen here. I am impressed at the amount of detail recoverable so will look out my grads and give them a bash next time around.


Down the Clyde by Ian Williams, on Flickr


Inaccessible Jetty by Ian Williams, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Not sure about the glow around the jetty, but the top one looks great!
 
dave.hallett said:
Not sure about the glow around the jetty, but the top one looks great!
Click to expand...
Thanks for the comments, Dave.

The exposure was boosted specifically around the jetty in the second one, I admit. Be interested to see if it's as noticeable to others as I thought it was subtle enough to get away with it [emoji51]

Edit to say, it is really quite noticeable on second look! Will go back and tone it down / remove I think. Cheers!
 
Last edited:
Went back to the Oxford Canal again last night. Not such a clear sky this time, but even colder! Still had a good time though :) Still with the 18-55 kit.

I'm noticing greater mismatch between the in camera histogram and the resulting RAWs doing these long exposures. Generally the RAW isn't nearly as underexposed as I expect it to be. Anyone got any thoughts on that?


Oxford Canal by night 2 by David Hallett, on Flickr
 
Ian W said:
Thanks for the comments, Dave.

The exposure was boosted specifically around the jetty in the second one, I admit. Be interested to see if it's as noticeable to others as I thought it was subtle enough to get away with it [emoji51]

Edit to say, it is really quite noticeable on second look! Will go back and tone it down / remove I think. Cheers!
Click to expand...

No worries! Sometimes it just takes a fresh pair of eyes...goodness know I get too close to them sometimes. :)
 
dave.hallett said:
Went back to the Oxford Canal again last night. Not such a clear sky this time, but even colder! Still had a good time though :) Still with the 18-55 kit.

I'm noticing greater mismatch between the in camera histogram and the resulting RAWs doing these long exposures. Generally the RAW isn't nearly as underexposed as I expect it to be. Anyone got any thoughts on that?


Oxford Canal by night 2 by David Hallett, on Flickr
Click to expand...


Not sure about longer exposures, but I'm noticing the opposite in general with the XT-1. The RAWs are underexposed toward what I shoot, going by the camera histogram. And I'm in manual mode mostly. When I do shoot Aperture priority I usualy have exp comp set to -2/3 for faster shutter speed and I find it calms highlights better. I'd expect maybe slight differences in that case, but full manual?
 
dave.hallett said:
No worries! Sometimes it just takes a fresh pair of eyes...goodness know I get too close to them sometimes. :)
Click to expand...

Oh 100%. I've toned it right down to literally just boosting the shadows slightly rather than overall exposure / whites so much. Think it's certainly helped :ty:
 
Ian W said:
Oh 100%. I've toned it right down to literally just boosting the shadows slightly rather than overall exposure / whites so much. Think it's certainly helped :ty:
Click to expand...
Yes, that's often the right answer, in my experience anyway. And certainly better in this case!
 
Cagey75 said:
Not sure about longer exposures, but I'm noticing the opposite in general with the XT-1. The RAWs are underexposed toward what I shoot, going by the camera histogram. And I'm in manual mode mostly. When I do shoot Aperture priority I usualy have exp comp set to -2/3 for faster shutter speed and I find it calms highlights better. I'd expect maybe slight differences in that case, but full manual?
Click to expand...
Yes, same with the X-T10. That's what I would expect - a bit more headroom in the RAW when the JPEG is burned out. But with these 2 minute exposures, it seems to be the other way around. It may be partly that I'm shooting a WB far away from what I'll end up with. Next time I'll try switching to Auto WB and see if the in-camera histograms look markedly different. I know, we've kind of been here before... :)
 
dave.hallett said:
Yes, same with the X-T10. That's what I would expect - a bit more headroom in the RAW when the JPEG is burned out. But with these 2 minute exposures, it seems to be the other way around. It may be partly that I'm shooting a WB far away from what I'll end up with. Next time I'll try switching to Auto WB and see if the in-camera histograms look markedly different. I know, we've kind of been here before... :)
Click to expand...


Ha yup, I'm all about the AWB because I will tinker with it in post anyway. And I mostly shoot RAW
 
Phiggys said:
Yes I was just trying to offer a cheaper alternative to soul deep having to buy a macro on top of the X T1 with 18-135mm lens he had made thats all sorry.
Click to expand...

Hi Phil,

Thank you kindly for suggesting an alternative. Most appreciated. Unfortunately your Flickr link not working for me - it takes me to Flickr - then just shows a loading bar at the top.

I settled on the 35mm as my second lens (which doesn't break the bank). If I've understood the comments here correctly, it's better than the 60mm for my street work, still gives me tight focus when shooting wide open, and will produce quality Macro shots.

Thanks again :)
 
Last edited:
Then again - I'm a patient sort of a fella. We almost at 2017. The XF80mm Macro road mapped for next year ;)
 
A family selfie.

Probably not far off my last frame with the XT2.... before I sold it :D


34672ut.jpg
 
Hi Adam,

A very happy memory captured.

I like what you're doing with the PP here. Washed out tones. It's a fun effect to work around with.
 
souldeep said:
Hi Adam,

A very happy memory captured.

I like what you're doing with the PP here. Washed out tones. It's a fun effect to work around with.
Click to expand...
Thanks,

There wasn't much going on in terms of colour so I decided to embrace it :)
 
It feels warm - nice light to play with - I wish I was where ever that shot was taken right now - gone very cold here in old blighty.
 
Ian W said:
Thanks for the comments, Dave.

The exposure was boosted specifically around the jetty in the second one, I admit. Be interested to see if it's as noticeable to others as I thought it was subtle enough to get away with it [emoji51]

Edit to say, it is really quite noticeable on second look! Will go back and tone it down / remove I think. Cheers!
Click to expand...
Nothing much gets past Dave,thats why I'm scared of posting anything here :)
 
mickledore said:
Another from Saturday's trip with @Mr Perceptive

Padarn tree by mickledore on Talk Photography
Click to expand...

Stephen L said:
Not sure about the frame - I've a thing against frames - but I like the composition and conversion, and also the unusual ripples (ripples, I said!).
Click to expand...

mickledore said:
Thanks Stephen. Frame? Well it comes built in to that conversion mode so I'm stuck with it.
Very unusual conditions on the lake so early in the morning.
Click to expand...

Mr Perceptive said:
Of course the camera never lies.......
Click to expand...

snerkler said:
I like the shot but not keen on the processing I'm afraid.
Click to expand...

mickledore said:
Thanks but I was a bit restricted in what I could do with it.
Click to expand...


These Snowdonia Lake tides are amazing, taken 1 minute after @mickledore ......;) ... I admire the PP effort, I don't have that patience!!!!


161203 Lonely Tree, Llyn Padarn by Mr Perceptive X100, on Flickr
 
Did you miss the water level rising @Mr Perceptive ?
It may have been when you were busy giving that technical lesson about camera and filter usage to the Nikon user. (Why is it always Nikon users who cause problems?) I don't like to mock but he did have a strange idea of what constituted a long exposure. 3 seconds wasn't it? Your suggestion of 12 minutes caused a look of total bewilderment!
Think I may have a sightly different perspective....with no border. When I've finished my wheatybangs I'll see about posting it.
 
That Nikon guy [was it Matt Granger?] could argue that anything that can't be handheld is a long exposure.

My 27mm goes off to a new home today. Been a nice week's trading. Actually have money in the bank and same amount of lenses :D
 
dave.hallett said:
Went back to the Oxford Canal again last night. Not such a clear sky this time, but even colder! Still had a good time though :) Still with the 18-55 kit.

I'm noticing greater mismatch between the in camera histogram and the resulting RAWs doing these long exposures. Generally the RAW isn't nearly as underexposed as I expect it to be. Anyone got any thoughts on that?


Oxford Canal by night 2 by David Hallett, on Flickr
Click to expand...
I haven't shot long exposure so don't know if it generally overexposes the RAW compared to the histogram, but do you have any shadows, highlights or DR settings altered from default? Do you shoot RAW and jpeg and if so what do the jpegs look like compared to the histogram, and to the RAWs?

Cagey75 said:
Not sure about longer exposures, but I'm noticing the opposite in general with the XT-1. The RAWs are underexposed toward what I shoot, going by the camera histogram. And I'm in manual mode mostly. When I do shoot Aperture priority I usualy have exp comp set to -2/3 for faster shutter speed and I find it calms highlights better. I'd expect maybe slight differences in that case, but full manual?
Click to expand...
Are they underexposed more than the -2/3 you've set?

mickledore said:
Did you miss the water level rising @Mr Perceptive ?
It may have been when you were busy giving that technical lesson about camera and filter usage to the Nikon user. (Why is it always Nikon users who cause problems?) I don't like to mock but he did have a strange idea of what constituted a long exposure. 3 seconds wasn't it? Your suggestion of 12 minutes caused a look of total bewilderment!
Think I may have a sightly different perspective....with no border. When I've finished my wheatybangs I'll see about posting it.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes: ;)
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
That Nikon guy [was it Matt Granger?] could argue that anything that can't be handheld is a long exposure.
Click to expand...
There is no rule as to what a long exposure is. It's very subjective and imo depends very much on the scene you are shooting.
 
snerkler said:
There is no rule as to what a long exposure is. It's very subjective and imo depends very much on the scene you are shooting.
Click to expand...


That's pretty much what I meant. To me personally it's any exposure that I can't comfortably hand hold, therefore it is too long
 
Last edited:
Alan Clogwyn said:
The X-T2 has left the building! Now awaiting delivery of another X-T1 and a 10-24, and I still have beer money left over. The T1 really is excellent value right now!
Click to expand...
Hopefully you'll be equally delighted with the 10-24mm. I know I am and doubt I'll be buying another lens any time soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top