The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

Mezza said:
One from Lisbon . I am loving my XT2! And the skies were really that blue!The Padrao dos Descobrimentos - the discoveries monument in Belem, Lisbon. by Mezzapod, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Stephen L said:
Be good in mono, though you'd lose that clear blue sky!
Click to expand...
yamahatdm900 said:
Like Stephen be a good mono but it also a very nice colour image.
Click to expand...

I agree it could look great in mono, as the shadows on the figures could be used to enhance them to give more 'depth' to the figures. it might have to be quite a sympathetic conversion though, as there is a real chance that you would get a nasty halo from where the statue meets the sky, its already got a pseudo halo look about it.

Its a great shot though, and perhaps one that would benefit from a mono conversion.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
could only be a Fujigraph
Click to expand...


Thank you kindly Sir, sure is appreciated.(y)

"Fujigraph is just my bit of nonsense that I call images produced on any Fuji-X camera":D:D

George.
 
Last edited:
Mary, I've taken the liberty of doing a rough and ready/quick and dirty mono conversion (using PSE's convert to B&W tool and the vivid landscape preset) to get the result below. I still prefer the original colour version due to the almost selectively coloured look to it (although, rather perversely, I hate the selective colour fad that seems to be dying a death!) but the B&W still works for me.

MarysPadrau.jpg

If you want it removed, just tell me or, if I'm not around, ask a moderator to kill it (report the post using the button about...
.....................HERE VVV and ask them nicely!
 
Pushed myself and walked about two miles today with camera and collie, in between the heavy showers it was nice. First time using the XT2 in anger for a while;



Breia by APM Photography, on Flickr

XT2 - XF55-200 - handheld - iso 200 - @ f/5.6 - @ 200mm end
 
Who can give me some advice on off camera flash for my X-T2?

I was considering the Nissin i60 with Flash Commander, has anybody used this set up? I'll also be looking for some sort of diffuser too.
 
Is having an marked aperture ring on the lens imperative to the fuji 'experience' or is it just as good without? Tony Northrup didn't like the kit lens of the XT2 because he thought it didn't match in with being able to see all you settings from the dials and didn't want to look at his screen/viewfinder just to adjust aperture..
 
I have very little personal experience but the Godox TT350F is very well regarded and very cheap at around £65 or so when I last checked
 
Been some great shots lately. Particularly loving @psybear 's Ireland shots, and @yamahatdm900 and @ianmarsh 's fantastic bridges!

For those asking about "painterly" foliage, these effects are only visible at something close to 100% when they exist at all, so you won't be able to judge anything from most of the shots posted here.

IMO, unless you are interested in printing very finely detailed scenes on very large bits of paper, you have no cause for concern.

If you are doing exactly that, there are many possible limits to sharpness, but if you have eliminated the others then you might want to look at whether an alternative RAW converter makes any difference, particularly if you like to push sharpening to the limit.

But I am by now very confident that with a tripod and clean lenses, even the lowly X-T10 can make highly acceptable landscape prints at 30"x20", and possibly bigger (I seldom print any larger), without stitching images. How big do you really need to go?
 
dave.hallett said:
Another Chania street shot. If you're wondering about the title, it's because while the gentleman in foreground is clearly male, the shop name on the wall is the definition of a "female" flower, by convention.


Engendered by David Hallett, on Flickr
Click to expand...

That is really well seen and perfectly executed, great stuff.
 
dave.hallett said:
Been some great shots lately. Particularly loving @psybear 's Ireland shots, and @yamahatdm900 and @ianmarsh 's fantastic bridges!

For those asking about "painterly" foliage, these effects are only visible at something close to 100% when they exist at all, so you won't be able to judge anything from most of the shots posted here.

IMO, unless you are interested in printing very finely detailed scenes on very large bits of paper, you have no cause for concern.

If you are doing exactly that, there are many possible limits to sharpness, but if you have eliminated the others then you might want to look at whether an alternative RAW converter makes any difference, particularly if you like to push sharpening to the limit.

But I am by now very confident that with a tripod and clean lenses, even the lowly X-T10 can make highly acceptable landscape prints at 30"x20", and possibly bigger (I seldom print any larger), without stitching images. How big do you really need to go?
Click to expand...


I thought long and hard before I came to Fuji X, I was worried about the foliage and waxy skin, but I can easily say I have not seen any of either in my shots. IMO I think the waxy skin comes from over PP, I always put my Raf files through LR6 and tend to sharpen using Topaz Detail :)
 
Still not sure that I don't prefer the colour version of the monument. I am really liking this group. You are all so friendly and constructive in your comments. :)
 
Last edited:
Dave70D said:
I thought long and hard before I came to Fuji X, I was worried about the foliage and waxy skin, but I can easily say I have not seen any of either in my shots. IMO I think the waxy skin comes from over PP, I always put my Raf files through LR6 and tend to sharpen using Topaz Detail :)
Click to expand...
Can't really speak to the waxy skin, I don't shoot enough portraits, although the ones I do take seem to work out just fine. But for anything either than the extreme cases I've outlined, LR6 should do you just fine. I used to use Topaz products a fair bit, especially with my old Pentax. I think I've worked out how to do most of it in Photoshop these days, but certainly they make some very worthwhile plugins.
 
yamahatdm900 said:
Went to the British Camp for the first time yesterday, rather gloomy and very windy but will be going back again.

Click to expand...
Great shot. We used to live on the Malverns and had a house just below the Worcester Beacon. It's a lovely area.
 
Cagey75 said:
I got some shots of the fiery sky yesterday eve, the colours were too good to miss out on. The first shot here has no extra processing added, just switched to Velvia in LR and gave it a slight straightening. #2 and #3 had some additional tweaks All shot with the XT-1 + 35mm f/1.4

Unprocessed, October sky by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr

October cometh by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr

Between chimneys by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr
Click to expand...


Great set of Fujigraphs Sir, amazing sky colours.(y)

George.
 
dave.hallett said:
Been some great shots lately. Particularly loving @psybear 's Ireland shots, and @yamahatdm900 and @ianmarsh 's fantastic bridges!

For those asking about "painterly" foliage, these effects are only visible at something close to 100% when they exist at all, so you won't be able to judge anything from most of the shots posted here.

IMO, unless you are interested in printing very finely detailed scenes on very large bits of paper, you have no cause for concern.

If you are doing exactly that, there are many possible limits to sharpness, but if you have eliminated the others then you might want to look at whether an alternative RAW converter makes any difference, particularly if you like to push sharpening to the limit.

But I am by now very confident that with a tripod and clean lenses, even the lowly X-T10 can make highly acceptable landscape prints at 30"x20", and possibly bigger (I seldom print any larger), without stitching images. How big do you really need to go?
Click to expand...

With all this talk of foliage problems have you ever found it a problem Dave?
How many people do find it a problem?

I don't tend to pixel peep these days so can't say I have ever really seen it unless it's there and I have never spotted it.
 
yamahatdm900 said:
With all this talk of foliage problems have you ever found it a problem Dave?
How many people do find it a problem?

I don't tend to pixel peep these days so can't say I have ever really seen it unless it's there and I have never spotted it.
Click to expand...
I often favour a painterly effect on purpose :) but I think I have seen the effect in question. It's often difficult to know for a particular picture whether I blew the focus, or had some other issue, because I think there is more than one way to get that result. I suspect that more than a few out there are blaming their tools incorrectly, or just being paranoid.

But I have definitely seen the wormy effect when oversharpening foliage after Lightroom RAW conversion, and that can be a real problem for me. But I've also seen the effect greatly reduced by using X-Transformer at such times.

So I give some credence to the idea that in Lightroom at least, X-Trans processing is not quite as good as its Bayer equivalent, and you could see that as a weakness of the system. But I don't think it matters for most people's pictures most of the time, and a flaw that's mostly fixed by a plugin costing 27 quid is hardly a reason to move camera systems!
 
WWA said:
Is having an marked aperture ring on the lens imperative to the fuji 'experience' or is it just as good without? Tony Northrup didn't like the kit lens of the XT2 because he thought it didn't match in with being able to see all you settings from the dials and didn't want to look at his screen/viewfinder just to adjust aperture..
Click to expand...
I accept it's unavoidable using variable aperture zooms, but it annoys me that the10-24 doesn't have marked apertures as it's constant f4. But I don't let it spoil my enjoyment of the Fuji system and the stellar performance of all its lenses.
 
Having just bought into Fuji from Canon, I really like the aperture ring on the two lenses I have so far. The lenses are really good and the kit lens is way beyond any kit kens I've had before. I had a Sony A 6000 before and couldn't get the hang of it at all. The Fuji is much easier to learn. Now do I get rid of all my Canon stuff- I really like my 6D but the lenses are just so heavy? Hmmmn.
 
WWA said:
Is having an marked aperture ring on the lens imperative to the fuji 'experience' or is it just as good without? Tony Northrup didn't like the kit lens of the XT2 because he thought it didn't match in with being able to see all you settings from the dials and didn't want to look at his screen/viewfinder just to adjust aperture..
Click to expand...


One of my own personal rules is never to watch, let alone take advice from the Northrups, Jared Polin or any of the other hack, gear head 'reviewers'. They use the cameras for about 2 days and go write how-to guides on them :facepalm: I mean, god love poor Tony, having to look at the screen for a split second :LOL: - it wouldn't bother all that much, once you get to know your lens, it should be a non issue. The 16-55 has markings, it has to have something to attract more serious photographers over the "kit" lens. If no markings keeps the 18-55 a lot cheaper, especially used, then I say where's the problem? It seems like a lame excuse for him to have a moan, I bet he doesn't even mention it with other manufacturer's 'kit' lenses.
 
Last edited:
Mezza said:
Hi Ethel I had a go at converting using Silver Efex Pro 2 and am pretty pleased with it. Thanks to everyone for the mono suggestion. Hope you all like it. It's a slightly different version to the one posted earlier.The Padrao dos Descobrimentes Belem, Lisbon by Mezzapod, on Flickr
Click to expand...


That's a very nice Fujigraph Ma'am, good bit of mono PP work with a nice full range of tones giving detail in the shadows & highlights.(y)

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