The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

Ian W said:
Already been looking at the Jupiters :)
Click to expand...

Once you start looking at the world of MF lenses, there are loads to choose from. This is from a Carl Zeiss Jena Zebra lens, only the lowly 50mm f2.8, picked up at a car boot sale for a couple of quid.


Pegged Out sm by Mr Perceptive X100, on Flickr
 
Speaking of Zenit cameras, when I first got into photography when I was 13, I bought a Zorki 4K but the camera I really wanted was this

408628039_36e03cbba6_z.jpg

I thought it was the coolest thing I ever saw, in fact I still quite fancy getting one. I would have even taken this over a Johnny 7 OMA gun, anyone remenber them ?
 
Last edited:
Al1944 said:
If someone was seen using one of those today they would probably be shot with no questions asked :)
Click to expand...
That was one of the reasons I didn't get it, I was living in Belfast at the time, 1970's, that and the fact it would have cost me around 5 years pocket money !
 
jimgallaher said:
Speaking of Zenit cameras, when I first got into photography when I was 13, I bought a Zorki 4K but the camera I really wanted was this

View attachment 65405

I thought it was the coolest thing I ever saw, in fact I still quite fancy getting one. I would have even taken this over a Johnny 7 OMA gun, anyone remenber them ?
Click to expand...

The Tair 300s is still a fantastic performer! Loads of people still use these with an adapter :D Dead cheap to pick up now as well...
 
jimgallaher said:
Speaking of Zenit cameras, when I first got into photography when I was 13, I bought a Zorki 4K but the camera I really wanted was this

View attachment 65405

I thought it was the coolest thing I ever saw, in fact I still quite fancy getting one. I would have even taken this over a Johnny 7 OMA gun, anyone remenber them ?
Click to expand...
Oh yes, I remember them! I made a replica for my Praktica out of wood!
 
jimmyjamjojo said:
While i'm here - anyone else got one of the eBay grips on an x-t10? Are they all as bad a fit as mine or have I just picked a dud? Don't want to order another of the same...

View attachment 65397
Click to expand...
The original fuji one is nice for the xt10, mpb sometimes have them on for half new price or less.

I purchased the neweer versions for my xp1s from Amazon and they are a perfect fit. That looks like an xt1 bracket!
 
@Ian W

I would also consider expanding your mount range. If I was going down a large MF experimentation phase, I'd buy convertors for M42, Pentax K and Minolta mounts. There are some cracking lenses (bargains) in these ranges, and because they are not canikon they are often available at good prices. I'd also check for fungus, sticky blades, etc, with the general availability of these lenses you can afford to be picky.

One of the disadvantages is the availability of wide angel lenses, since all these were for 35mm film (FF), the crop multiplier on an APS-C sensor means that just about everything is in the medium to telephoto range. The Fuji handling makes them a joy to use (but I'm awfully slow at this MF lark, how I managed in the 70's I'd never know, must have slowed down in old age!!)

(A useful link on the Minolta lenses http://www.rokkorfiles.com/Lens History.html)
 
I screwed up on my last visit to the Naval College in Greenwich and came home with a bunch of blurry shots but went back yesterday and tried to pay attention to what I was doing. I still don't know what I did wrong last time but at least these shots were sharp enough. I used a ten stop filter and a old canon fd 35mm tilt-shift lens. I think this is a nine shot pano. Despite the ten-stopper the shutter speed was still pretty fast and the slow-moving clouds are visible in the original even if the Thames is blurred, so there has been some drastic PP applied.

1605_MoreNaval_047-Pano-Edit by Ian, on Flickr
 
ianmarsh said:
I screwed up on my last visit to the Naval College in Greenwich and came home with a bunch of blurry shots but went back yesterday and tried to pay attention to what I was doing. I still don't know what I did wrong last time but at least these shots were sharp enough. I used a ten stop filter and a old canon fd 35mm tilt-shift lens. I think this is a nine shot pano. Despite the ten-stopper the shutter speed was still pretty fast and the slow-moving clouds are visible in the original even if the Thames is blurred, so there has been some drastic PP applied.

1605_MoreNaval_047-Pano-Edit by Ian, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Lovely, Time for a 16 stopper!!!
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Lovely, Time for a 16 stopper!!!
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly. I tried doubling up with my two ten-stoppers - I had one filter properly mounted on the lens and the bigger one just hooked on the front. I got a four minute exposure but there was too much distortion. Next time I will take a polariser along too and get another couple of stops.

I was at 200 iso. I couldn't get the L iso setting to work (shooting raw+fine or just fine). Am I missing something?
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Once you start looking at the world of MF lenses, there are loads to choose from. This is from a Carl Zeiss Jena Zebra lens, only the lowly 50mm f2.8, picked up at a car boot sale for a couple of quid.


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


Liking that shot Sir, great lead in and composition, and very nice bokeh.(y)

George.
 
ianmarsh said:
My thoughts exactly. I tried doubling up with my two ten-stoppers - I had one filter properly mounted on the lens and the bigger one just hooked on the front. I got a four minute exposure but there was too much distortion. Next time I will take a polariser along too and get another couple of stops.

I was at 200 iso. I couldn't get the L iso setting to work (shooting raw+fine or just fine). Am I missing something?
Click to expand...

No, not missing anything, L will only give you JPEG the native ISO is 200, and thats the lowest setting for a RAW file.

BTW I have the Hitech Firecrest Filters, in 3, 6, 10 and 16 stops (they do make a 13 as well), I've found that with the bright (ha ha we're in the UK) summer light, I'm often using 13 stops (10+3) or 16 stops, these typically give around 30 seconds and 4 mins respectively. I normally shoot around F8/F9 to make use of the sweetspot on the lens. Polariser will typically add 1-3 stops depending on it's angle of rotation.
 
Ian W said:
Nothing wrong with the 18-55mm!

Loving my new toy though ;)

Click to expand...

Love this lens. I like the subtle, or not so subtle swirling...

26609503672_4a9d67a281_c.jpg
DSCF8911 by Matthew Evans, on Flickr
 
Mr Perceptive said:
No, not missing anything, L will only give you JPEG the native ISO is 200, and thats the lowest setting for a RAW file.
Click to expand...
I'd have been happy with just the JPEG but even when set to shoot just fine JPEG switching the iso to L didn't change the metering at all

I was at f16 on this lens, past the sweet spot but that gave me 4-8 second exposures which at least blurred the water. Another couple of stops would have been fine. I use screw in filters so could get a 3 or 6 stop square filter and mount that too. I got dreadful colour casts with all the strong square filters I tried but the screw-ins seem pretty good even though they are cheap (Haida and Camdiox). They hadn't launched the Firecrests by the time I gave up on square filters though and I hear they are fine (but expensive).
 
Nothing special, just a quick grab shot of some Traffic Cops that I saw the last time I was down in New Orleans. They kinda look as if they're just about to kick off and start racing.

X-T1, 18-55mm Lens, 1/500 @ F8, ISO-400.
Traffic Cops (New Orleans)-80111 by G.K.Jnr., on Flickr

:ty: for looking and any comments welcome.,(y)

George.
 
ianmarsh said:
I'd have been happy with just the JPEG but even when set to shoot just fine JPEG switching the iso to L didn't change the metering at all

I was at f16 on this lens, past the sweet spot but that gave me 4-8 second exposures which at least blurred the water. Another couple of stops would have been fine. I use screw in filters so could get a 3 or 6 stop square filter and mount that too. I got dreadful colour casts with all the strong square filters I tried but the screw-ins seem pretty good even though they are cheap (Haida and Camdiox). They hadn't launched the Firecrests by the time I gave up on square filters though and I hear they are fine (but expensive).
Click to expand...

Ian, my Firecrests are screw in (72mm, and I use step rings to adjust), and yes they are expensive, but very little colour cast even at 16 stops.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Ian, my Firecrests are screw in (72mm, and I use step rings to adjust), and yes they are expensive, but very little colour cast even at 16 stops.
Click to expand...

Ah, I didn't know they made screw-ins. I find them much more user-friendly than the square ones. I will like them even more if I can find a cheap copy of Xume magnetic filter holders as these seem to make attaching and detaching so much easier
 
Question...

Mrs Jelster has an interest in photography, and rather likes my X-T1, and as her Birthday is next month, I was thinking about buying her an X-T10, but I'm stuck for what lens to put on it. I have the 18-55 and the 35mm f1.4, but wanted to get her a lens we don't already have, so was thinking about the 27mm f2.8 XF. It will keep the combo small & light, and she will have access to the other lenses (and it won't break the bank either).

What's the major differences between the T1 & T10 ? I know they share the same processor, but other than that, I'm not so sure.
 
Jelster said:
Question...

Mrs Jelster has an interest in photography, and rather likes my X-T1, and as her Birthday is next month, I was thinking about buying her an X-T10, but I'm stuck for what lens to put on it. I have the 18-55 and the 35mm f1.4, but wanted to get her a lens we don't already have, so was thinking about the 27mm f2.8 XF. It will keep the combo small & light, and she will have access to the other lenses (and it won't break the bank either).

What's the major differences between the T1 & T10 ? I know they share the same processor, but other than that, I'm not so sure.
Click to expand...

Maybe an 18-135 might suit if she'll just be using one lens?
 
Jelster said:
Question...

Mrs Jelster has an interest in photography, and rather likes my X-T1, and as her Birthday is next month, I was thinking about buying her an X-T10, but I'm stuck for what lens to put on it. I have the 18-55 and the 35mm f1.4, but wanted to get her a lens we don't already have, so was thinking about the 27mm f2.8 XF. It will keep the combo small & light, and she will have access to the other lenses (and it won't break the bank either).

What's the major differences between the T1 & T10 ? I know they share the same processor, but other than that, I'm not so sure.
Click to expand...

EVF is smaller (probably the biggest difference in day to day life, weather sealing, and a few other functions.

The 27mm is nice and compact, good IQ and quite sharp wide open. Whether its the right choice depends on whether she wants a zoom or not, or whether its the right focal length. It really depends what the pair of you shoot, if its landscapes then I'd consider the 14mm, if its street/urban then the 27mm would be good, portraits 56mm, and so on.........
 
I think the 27mm is a good idea given she'll have access to the other lenses and in particular the 18-55mm.

Biggest differences for are the slightly smaller EVF, lack of weather sealing and dedicated ISO dial. None were deal breakers for me and doubt they will be for her. In fact, she may like the slightly smaller form of the X-T10 :)
 
27mm is a good choice, or how about the oft-ignored 18mm? A good lens, light, and retaining the aperture ring which the 27mm lacks.
 
ianmarsh said:
I screwed up on my last visit to the Naval College in Greenwich and came home with a bunch of blurry shots but went back yesterday and tried to pay attention to what I was doing. I still don't know what I did wrong last time but at least these shots were sharp enough. I used a ten stop filter and a old canon fd 35mm tilt-shift lens. I think this is a nine shot pano. Despite the ten-stopper the shutter speed was still pretty fast and the slow-moving clouds are visible in the original even if the Thames is blurred, so there has been some drastic PP applied.

1605_MoreNaval_047-Pano-Edit by Ian, on Flickr
Click to expand...

That's a cracker and the square crop works really well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top