The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

I m on Android 4.3 on my phone and 4.4 on my tablet and they both work a treat. Using them both with camera at the moment on holiday and I m loving it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nod
Thanks for that. Got to be in town fairly early tomorrow morning so hopefully the Orange shop won't be too busy! As I said, this will be almost purely for using as a remote for the camera - "proper" phone and tablet are Windows and unfortunately not supported.
 
Was thinking of upgrading from a Nikon d5100 to a d600 but the XT1 has me really intrigued, I mainly shoot landscape and do some prints but really love the Fuji colours and sharpness so much not to mention portability. Anyone else shoot landscape with it? Or should I stick with the idea of upgrading to the fx format?
 
Last edited:
Was thinking of upgrading from a Nikon d5100 to a d600 but the XT1 has me really intrigued, I mainly shoot landscape and do some prints but really love the Fuji colours and sharpness so much not to mention portability. Anyone else shoot landscape with it? Or should I stick with the idea of upgrading to the fx format?
Click to expand...

Thanks for asking this Karl, I already use FF, but interested in the Fuji myself for pretty much the same reasons as you

Know its unlikely, but would be great to see a comparison of the same scene using the XT-1 and a FF format DSLR at the same sort of focal length and light
 
Last edited:
Karl (and Rich), what sort of focal lengths would you be using on FF for landscapes? I occasionally go as wide as 12mm on my D700 but am limited to 18mm on the crop X-T1 which equates to 27mm on FF... There is a 10mm option available for the Fuji (for ease, I'm referring to the native Fuji XF mount lenses and ignoring the use of other mounts using adaptors, although this is possible) but I don't have it! I'm hoping to be out and about in a couple of days and will try to remember to take both systems and shoot as close to identical landscapes with both (using in camera JPEGs and the Standard/Provia film simulation on the Fuji and maybe the Velvia setting as well).
 
Sorry to report that my Expert Shield LCD protector not only started coming away in the corners, but eventually came off completely at some point and is now lost. Disappointed, but I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt and putting it down to user error despite not having any problems with their protectors previously and not noticing any obvious issues with this one.

I will order another.
 
what sort of focal lengths would you be using on FF for landscapes? I occasionally go as wide as 12mm on my D700 but am limited to 18mm on the crop X-T1 which equates to 27mm on FF
Click to expand...

Thanks Nod, widest lens I have is a 17-40mm and that's on a FF (Canon 5D) daresay if I looked at the exif there would be very few under 20mm and most about the 24mm range.
 
OK, I'll try to snap a few pairs at 18 on the crop XT and 27 (or so) on the D700. Can't make any promises but we're planning on going towards Dartmoor on Friday so will try to remember both cameras.
 
Nod said:
Karl (and Rich), what sort of focal lengths would you be using on FF for landscapes? I occasionally go as wide as 12mm on my D700 but am limited to 18mm on the crop X-T1 which equates to 27mm on FF... There is a 10mm option available for the Fuji (for ease, I'm referring to the native Fuji XF mount lenses and ignoring the use of other mounts using adaptors, although this is possible) but I don't have it! I'm hoping to be out and about in a couple of days and will try to remember to take both systems and shoot as close to identical landscapes with both (using in camera JPEGs and the Standard/Provia film simulation on the Fuji and maybe the Velvia setting as well).
Click to expand...

Hi Nod, with my D5100 i tend to use the Sigma 10-20 the most, which is plenty wide enough for me. I know theres the Fuji 10-24 which will more than fit the bill.

The big question is, as someone that wants to improve their images to a pro standard, would the X-T1 do the job, or am i better off sticking with the D610 fx format. So for me it's a simple D610 vs X-T1 situation with image quality being the most important feature.

The other burning question is how large do the prints go? Anyone printed a 36" canvas from an X-T1?
 
Last edited:
OK, 18mm on the crop should be wide enough - it'll have to be for any test I do (I really can't justify a 10-24 just for the purpose of the test!!!)

No change in kit will suddenly improve anyone's photography - if you can get "pro standard" images from your D610, you should have no problems getting them from the X-T1.

I haven't printed anything that large from either of the X series CSCs - I generally only go up to A3+ (13" x 19") and that's on glossy paper. Canvas is much more forgiving of lower resolutions so I can't see 36" canvas prints being a problem.
 
Thanks for that Nod, much appreciated. I didn't expect you to go out and buy a 10-24 lol. Very grateful for any comparisons you can provide, you're a star.
 
I don't need too much encouragement to spend money!!!

Weather looks better for tomorrow so should be getting out and about.
 
Trevor that's great and very kind of you. When you say processed in Photoshop are any of the settings tweaked, contrast, saturation etc? Or do you mean just resized?

Have to say im surprised how much bolder the colours are on the fuji, on my iMac screen anyway. You can define each rapeseed flower more clearly as well as those in the foreground against the grass, much more contrasty but seems a little lost on the d700. The white barn looks nice crisp and white with the shadow clearly detailed but kinda looks flat and grey on d700 and the shadow is lost. I guess what we are seeing is the advancements in technology, not that the d700 is bad in any way, it's a cracking camera but I didn't expect so much difference. I bet you're chuffed to bits with the Fuji. Really helps to make my mind up.
 
rodd1000 said:
Trevor that's great and very kind of you. When you say processed in Photoshop are any of the settings tweaked, contrast, saturation etc? Or do you mean just resized?

Have to say im surprised how much bolder the colours are on the fuji, on my iMac screen anyway. You can define each rapeseed flower more clearly as well as those in the foreground against the grass, much more contrasty but seems a little lost on the d700. The white barn looks nice crisp and white with the shadow clearly detailed but kinda looks flat and grey on d700 and the shadow is lost. I guess what we are seeing is the advancements in technology, not that the d700 is bad in any way, it's a cracking camera but I didn't expect so much difference. I bet you're chuffed to bits with the Fuji. Really helps to make my mind up.
Click to expand...

Karl. Your thoughts echo mine. Processing was via an action from Guy Gowan. That way both are identically processed.
Very very happy with the performance of the Fuji. I only have the 18-55 lens.
Could be that my old 28mm ais I used on the D700 lacks a bit of contrast.
 
Thanks Trevor, I too am surprised how much more contrast there is in the first photo. Not a Nikon user, but I would be a bit disappointed with that level of detail on what looks a nice bright day, can't say for certain, but think my old 5D would do better

Certainly impressed with the X-T1 though and would be more than happy with that outcome, thinking even more seriously now about a change when the prices drop or a good cashback deal is offered

Thanks again
Rich
 
Last edited:
tijuana taxi said:
Thanks Trevor, I too am surprised how much more contrast there is in the first photo. Not a Nikon user, but I would be a bit disappointed with that level of detail on what looks a nice bright day, can't say for certain, but think my old 5D would do better

Certainly impressed with the X-T1 though and would be more than happy with that outcome, thinking even more seriously now about a change when the prices drop or a good cashback deal is offered

Thanks again
Rich
Click to expand...
You're welcome Rich. Don't wait, get one now.
 
Last edited:
I resisted the temptation to use the excuse to buy a 10-24!

I also chose a field of rape as a foreground for my test shots. Unfortunately, I had -1 stop of EC dialled in to the D700 so that shot was no good for the purposes of this test. However, I realised my error before we headed home so took another pair of shots, this time correctly exposed! I thought I had set both cameras to exactly the same settings but it seems that one was set at 1/250th and one at 1/200th so the apertures are different by a corresponding amount. Both are close enough to the sweet spots for it not to make too much difference. Both were shot as in camera JPEGs and the Fuji was set to Provia (forgot to do a Velvia one as well but I do have a hole in my head!) Top one is the D700 shot and the bottom is the X-T1's offering.View attachment 9790 View attachment 9791

Without a pair of prints to compare to the actual scene, I couldn't tell you which is closest to the true colour temperature neither can my wife, although we both prefer the way the X-T has delivered the colours (of course, I knew which was which but she didn't so it was [for her] a blind choice) on A5 prints. Not yet done an A3+ print from the X-T - am just whizzing through today's efforts to decide which ones to do! The A4 one I did of this scene looks pretty damn good and that's SOOC.

The above shots have been through PSE 7.0 purely for resizing. They were saved after the resize at JPEG level 8 for consistency and to keep file sizes reasonable. I keep an eye on the preview to make sure artefaction doesn't creep in when resaving. If you would like the files SOOC, I can e-mail them to you if you can accept attachments of 5.65 and 5.88 MB - if you want them, PM me your e-mail address.
 
Thanks for your comparison efforts Nod, both look very acceptable to me and only difference appears to be colour rendition

Certainly seems that the XT-1 can produce a decent landscape photo, have to say the above results are better than any crop sensor camera I have owned.

Cheers
Rich
 
Thanks for this Nod, brilliant. Contrast seems to be much lower in both shots than Trevors examples but probably due to the difference in sunlight. As Rich says, definitely doesnt seem as night and day as Trevors pics, although the Nikon colour looks practically orange by comparison (or fuji is blue?). Certainly proves the Fuji is well up there with the FX sensors. Very impressive.

Thanks again Nod (y)
 
Last edited:
No problem, usually happy to help when I can. Like I said, hard to tell which of the cameras gave closest to correct colours and very subjective as to which one prefers.
 
Big thanks to Trevor and Nod for posting comparison images, viewing this on two different screens the X-T1 looks very good by comparison.

In the centre of of York, surrounded by multiple WIFI signals from virtually every shop in range. I have found it difficult to get the Fuji App to parr with X-T1. I'm not sure if that was down to operator error or some other reason. At home I haven't had an issue. Anyone else had any issues? I'm going to experiment further when I'm next in town.

I picked up my New Zeiss Touit 50mm M yesterday from Dale Photographic in Leeds. The first batch have just arrived in the UK. First impressions are that's it's very good the the AF is very fast. I will post some images up later.


Sent from my iPad using Talk Photography Forums
 
No problem, usually happy to help when I can. Like I said, hard to tell which of the cameras gave closest to correct colours and very subjective as to which one prefers.
Click to expand...

Presumably they were both shot on AWB and the second photo with a cooler look is how my old 40D presented on auto. I like that look, but know from comments made on a few of my efforts that some people mentioned how cold they looked and could do with a warmer tint.

As you say its a subjective thing and easily altered if shot RAW, impressed with the overall result and it has given a very good account of itself.
 
Last edited:
rodd1000 said:
The white barn looks nice crisp and white with the shadow clearly detailed but kinda looks flat and grey on d700 and the shadow is lost.
Click to expand...

That's because the barn is in shade in the D700 pic and full sun in the Fuji photo.;)
 
tijuana taxi said:
Presumably they were both shot on AWB and the second photo with a cooler look is how my old 40D presented on auto. I like that look, but know from comments made on a few of my efforts that some people mentioned how cold they looked and could do with a warmer tint.

As you say its a subjective thing and easily altered if shot RAW, impressed with the overall result and it has given a very good account of itself.
Click to expand...

Yup, both on AWB to keep the playing field as level as possible. Shot within a minute or two of each other to get the light as close to the same as possible.
 
All these tests prove is that the Fuji is better at producing Jpegs relative to it's RAW output than the D700, which should be no surprise. I'd imagine the D700's RAW files are superior.

Once you get to iso 1600 the D700 will blow Fuji away.
 
Last edited:
 
Last edited:
I have no idea why whenever I post an image the text appears in bold writing. I haven't been anywhere near the bold option! No amount of editing can correct it !
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Three images taken with my latest acquisition, Zeiss Touit 50mm Macro f2.8.
The first two were taken at 800 ISO using natural light from my living room windows:

1. Chrysanthemum ISO 800, f/20.0


2. Chrysanthemum centre ISO 800, f/20.0


3. Victoria ISO 200, f/2.8 - I was forbade to post a SOTC image so have I have had to soften the face a little.


So far I'm quite pleased with it. The AF, It is very fast but I really need to spend a lot more time with it. The build quality of the lens is superb.
I got this lens primary for portraits, I considered the 56mm which is excellent but the 1:1 macro capability sealed my decision.
Click to expand...


Very nice captures. Can you please post an image of the lens attached to the camera just to get an idea of its size? Thanks
 
architectfadi said:
Thanks for that and really nice. How does the aperture ring feel?
Click to expand...

It's firm, very positive with half-stops in between the values. The manual focus is also firm which give a very nice subtle control when combined with the manual focus and split screen on the X-T1 which works a treat. The AF is very fast and responsive.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Three images taken with my latest acquisition, Zeiss Touit 50mm Macro f2.8.
The first two were taken at 800 ISO using natural light from my living room windows:

1. Chrysanthemum ISO 800, f/20.0


2. Chrysanthemum centre ISO 800, f/20.0


3. Victoria ISO 200, f/2.8 - I was forbade to post a SOTC image so have I have had to soften the face a little.


So far I'm quite pleased with it. The AF, It is very fast but I really need to spend a lot more time with it. The build quality of the lens is superb.
I got this lens primary for portraits, I considered the 56mm which is excellent but the 1:1 macro capability sealed my decision.
Click to expand...

You have the end url bracket in the wrong place, that's what is causing the text to be bold.
If you quote this in a new window and edit your own post, using More Options and selecting the icon on the far right of the toolbar (folded corner paper and spanner), you'll be be able to compare and see the difference.
Keep future /url tags next to the /img one, and you'll be fine with the text.
 
Guys, I'm tempted by one of these. Looking at the RAW files on dpreview they appear to control the noise very well at high iso, but don't seem to hold detail as well as competitors. Can someone send me a couple of raws to play with please?
 
The23rdman said:
Guys, I'm tempted by one of these. Looking at the RAW files on dpreview they appear to control the noise very well at high iso, but don't seem to hold detail as well as competitors. Can someone send me a couple of raws to play with please?
Click to expand...

If you drop me a PM with your email, I'll fire a couple over to you. Are you looking at something in excess of 1600 ?
 
Blank_Canvas said:
If you drop me a PM with your email, I'll fire a couple over to you. Are you looking at something in excess of 1600 ?
Click to expand...

Cheers! ISO 1600 and 3200 would be good. Ideally of people, please.
 
PJ S said:
You have the end url bracket in the wrong place, that's what is causing the text to be bold.
If you quote this in a new window and edit your own post, using More Options and selecting the icon on the far right of the toolbar (folded corner paper and spanner), you'll be be able to compare and see the difference.
Keep future /url tags next to the /img one, and you'll be fine with the text.
Click to expand...

Many thanks for explaining that, I'm still getting used to the new Flicr
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top