The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

[Gadget-Guy]

This is an interesting point, sub-consciously I did exactly the same but I've never given it proper thought. I've shot weddings with my D750s and X-T1s/X-T10s and I never questioned the Fuji's AF acquisition. That said, I find the Nikon's a lot easier to work with, particularly considering battery life, a) because they go forever, and b) because you get an accurate warning well in advance of it giving up.

The D750 (with lenses micro-adjusted) is absolutely bang on 99% of the time, but even so I don't feel as confident and usually shoot extra to cover my back. I really, really miss the EVF and the benefits that gives. I'm hoping the X-T2 has closed the gap enough to consider moving back when the price has come down a bit (I don't mind changing batteries a lot as long as I'm given more than a 30 second warning).

On the battery front running at British Superbikes with the X-T2 and grip with 3 of the new S batteries i managed well over 3000 exposures in RAW with at least ten images i sent to my editor via the WIFI and it still had a few bars left on the last battery at the end of the day.
Seems to deplete one battery in the grip first and then uses the remaining 2 batteries together with a fairly accurate display of power consumption compared to the sudden loss from 20-30% to zero on the X-T1,this was with boost mode on 90% of the time and the EVF set to eye start.

 

[ukaskew]

On the battery front running at British Superbikes with the X-T2 and grip with 3 of the new S batteries i managed well over 3000 exposures in RAW with at least ten images i sent to my editor via the WIFI and it still had a few bars left on the last battery at the end of the day.
Seems to deplete one battery in the grip first and then uses the remaining 2 batteries together with a fairly accurate display of power consumption compared to the sudden loss from 20-30% to zero on the X-T1,this was with boost mode on 90% of the time and the EVF set to eye start.

I never had an issue for motorsport (both AF and battery life), 1300+ shots out of a battery in the X-T10 on several occasions no bother. I think most batteries will demolish CIPA ratings when used in that way (i.e. shooting frequently and consistently, rarely turning it off etc). However at weddings it fell back down towards 300-400 shots, oddly enough. Again not a problem in itself, but considering you need a very cautious buffer at weddings, and the T1/T10 will give up almost without notice, it was a little scary. I ended up just churning through batteries at a hilarious rate.

Does the X-Pro2 / X-T1 have a more accurate/reliable read out of battery life now?

 

[Gadget-Guy]

I never had an issue for motorsport (both AF and battery life), 1300+ shots out of a battery in the X-T10 on several occasions no bother. I think most batteries will demolish CIPA ratings when used in that way (i.e. shooting frequently and consistently, rarely turning it off etc). However at weddings it fell back down towards 300-400 shots, oddly enough. Again not a problem in itself, but considering you need a very cautious buffer at weddings, and the T1/T10 will give up almost without notice, it was a little scary. I ended up just churning through batteries at a hilarious rate.

Does the X-Pro2 / X-T1 have a more accurate/reliable read out of battery life now?

So far from my experience with the X-T2 and only ever having used it with the grip fitted it does seem to give a better indication but have not tried it without the grip fitted.

 

[snerkler]

Lets face it though, for what Nikon and Canon do well they are really the only game in town now and don't need to innovate or develop at the same pace that mirrorless seems to be doing so.
Theres a certain core of customer that has no option but to buy either Nikon or Canon because the alternatives just don't exist elsewhere, Sony has given up on DSLR with only EVF options for the A99ii and A77ii and their main focus on the A7 line which AF wise is even further away from being suitable for Pro work than the Fuji XT2.

Nikon/Canon have the safety net of knowing that there isn't anyone new coming into their DSLR market, Sony were probably the last ones who looked like they might make a decent stab at it but have all but given up and Fuji or Olympus are mirrorless only, Pentax are probably closest but only ever seem to have a very niche appeal.

Until any of the mirrorless bodies (Fuji or Sony) can fully and entirely compete with the Nikon D5, Canon 1D, Canon 7D, Canon 5D IV, hell even the Nikon D750 then theres always going to be a market Nikon/Canon and exploit without really innovating, I would love to see a Nikon FF Mirrorless system though!!

I agree. Plus I do also wonder whether we are reaching the peak of DSLRs and there's isn't much more you can get from them whereas with mirrorless they have had much more 'room' to develop. The trouble with DSLR is that we've kind of reached a point where we can't get any more substantial improvement from the sensors, AF systems are already super duper, even in the enthusiast market, and they already have enough bells and whistles to please anyone. For example, my D750 has far more options than my XT1. I think when mirrorless do catch up up wit DSLR we'll see a significant slowing down in advancements to the point where Fuji, Olly etc might be accused of being "lazy"

 

[ukaskew]

I agree. Plus I do also wonder whether we are reaching the peak of DSLRs and there's isn't much more you can get from them whereas with mirrorless they have had much more 'room' to develop. The trouble with DSLR is that we've kind of reached a point where we can't get any more substantial improvement from the sensors, AF systems are already super duper, even in the enthusiast market, and they already have enough bells and whistles to please anyone. For example, my D750 has far more options than my XT1. I think when mirrorless do catch up up wit DSLR we'll see a significant slowing down in advancements to the point where Fuji, Olly etc might be accused of being "lazy"

Worth mentioning that being fully electronic, there is a whole world of things mirrorless can/could do that an inherently mechanical DSLR with an OVF is going to struggle with. That side of things is only really starting to be explored in depth, look at the Live Time and Live Composite from Olympus, genius.

DSLRs are innovating though (ironically to replicate some of the inherent advantages of mirrorless), Auto AF Fine Tune, Canon Dual Pixel AF etc. And Live View now being a standard thing opens up quite a few possibilities.

What I love about Fuji though is that they'll throw any innovations they come up with in pretty much any body that has the internals/processing power to do it, even if they've been on the market for a while. Canon (and Nikon) historically have intentionally borked their cameras so they don't cannibalise their own sales, meaning an unbelievably protracted feature creep. Look at the X-T10, Fuji essentially gave us a camera that had almost everything electronically in their flagship at half the price.

 

[JohnN]

Its a great world to be in at the moment - things are moving so quickly.

Hey maybe one day there'll be a magiclantern for Fuji Heres hoping, although Fuji are good these guys go so much further... All on "lazy" Canon - silent shooting, focus trapping, pull focus, sound bars, focus peaking, uncompressed video - the list just went on and on, what was funny was seeing some fo the features appear in later bodies

 

[snerkler]

Worth mentioning that being fully electronic, there is a whole world of things mirrorless can/could do that an inherently mechanical DSLR with an OVF is going to struggle with. That side of things is only really starting to be explored in depth, look at the Live Time and Live Composite from Olympus, genius.

DSLRs are innovating though (ironically to replicate some of the inherent advantages of mirrorless), Auto AF Fine Tune, Canon Dual Pixel AF etc. And Live View now being a standard thing opens up quite a few possibilities.

This is one area that Canikon, and now more Nikon have been very slack imo. There's just no excuse for slow liveview anymore.

What I love about Fuji though is that they'll throw any innovations they come up with in pretty much any body that has the internals/processing power to do it, even if they've been on the market for a while. Canon (and Nikon) historically have intentionally borked their cameras so they don't cannibalise their own sales, meaning an unbelievably protracted feature creep. Look at the X-T10, Fuji essentially gave us a camera that had almost everything electronically in their flagship at half the price.

Yeah, Fuji and Olly are very good at keeping old cameras up to date.

 

[Gareth_E]

One of the not so obvious things I love about mirrorless, is not having to micro adjust or calibrate lenses for the AF to be accurate. Maybe I was just unlucky, but I had to micro adjust most of lenses I had for my Canon and nikon cameras... some to the point where they were almost too far out of tolerance. It was a breath of fresh air to put a lens on a mirrorless camera and it just work perfectly in that respect.

 

[JohnN]

One of the not so obvious things I love about mirrorless, is not having to micro adjust or calibrate lenses for the AF to be accurate. Maybe I was just unlucky, but I had to micro adjust most of lenses I had for my Canon and Nikon cameras... some to the point where they were almost too far out of tolerance. It was a breath of fresh air to put a lens on a mirrorless camera and it just work perfectly in that respect.

I was lucky in that I didn't adjust any of mine on Nikon, however I was put off the idea back on Canon when I used focal and literally between tests it would move so tried manually a few times, but always it would move a point or two, and sometimes it would be viably worse, so in the end I just left it well alone - but it was always in the back of my mind whenever something was a bit soft.

So glad those days are behind me.

 

[architectfadi]

Anyone had experience of selling to MPB? I have an X-T1 in the Classifieds but thinking of just using MPB. Not sure what condition to say it's in. I assume if I say it's "excellent" and they class it as only "good" they just pay the lesser amount.

Just sold mine to them. Although camera stores are buying lots of xt1s there I am huge demand on them

 

[Pick]

Question, when you charge the battery grip does the battery in camera get charged as well ?

 

[snap-happy]

Whilst the X-T2 is a big leap forward it still comes up short in AF compared to the top end DSLRs according to those who have both, so if AF is your primary concern I would not recommend swapping over just yet.

If you have no experience of the X-T2 yourself you're hardly qualified to offer an opinion. AF is now great on the X-T2 - show me something it can't handle!

 

[snap-happy]

Question, when you charge the battery grip does the battery in camera get charged as well ?

sadly no - but you can charge it via USB whilst still in the camera body.

 

[snap-happy]

I would love to see a Nikon FF Mirrorless system though!!

Why? It would just be a brick. What could it give you that the latest Fuji bodies can't? Apart from more weight to lug around. Quality from the X-T2 and X-Pro2 is quite superb.

 

[snap-happy]

Great review Damian! I was only looking at this flash yesterday to consider. As I am only a very casual flash user the slower recycle time doesn't really bother me, but I'm glad to see HSS!

HSS is not yet available with this flash and the X-T2 or X-Pro2

 

[snerkler]

If you have no experience of the X-T2 yourself you're hardly qualified to offer an opinion. AF is now great on the X-T2 - show me something it can't handle!

Re-read my post and tell me if it's my opinion or those that have both? There are plenty a number of people on here that have posted scenarios where the XT2 has not been up to speed compared to the best DSLRs. All I've done is relayed info. I get that the XT2 is great, but it's also important to keep perspective.

 

[JohnN]

sadly no - but you can charge it via USB whilst still in the camera body.

Hmn, just thinking (and could try myself) but can you charge it off the body, as in be out with the camera and leave the grip at home charging?

 

[Stephen L]

I have next to no experience of needing fast focus or focus tracking on mirrorless or mirrored cameras so am not qualified to add my own comments. However, I would not rely on the reviews, positive or negative, of just one or two people. I would take the consensus of many, especially those who have real-world experience, not just "testers". And if it were critical to me and I really wanted to change I would hire a setup and try for myself.

 

[Stephen L]

Hmn, just thinking (and could try myself) but can you charge it off the body, as in be out with the camera and leave the grip at home charging?

Yes, the grip with its batteries will sit charging quite happily off the camera.

 

[chrism_scotland]

Why? It would just be a brick. What could it give you that the latest Fuji bodies can't? Apart from more weight to lug around. Quality from the X-T2 and X-Pro2 is quite superb.

Well assuming full frame and assuming 24mp it would be better in low light, would be better for landscaping as I wouldn't run into X-Trans issues and I don't think anyone can argue that going toe to toe a 24mp Fuji sensor is going to be better than a 24mp full frame Nikon/Sony sensor?

As Snerkler says the XT2 is great but perspective is also important.

 

[JYC]

If you have no experience of the X-T2 yourself you're hardly qualified to offer an opinion. AF is now great on the X-T2 - show me something it can't handle!

Why? It would just be a brick. What could it give you that the latest Fuji bodies can't? Apart from more weight to lug around. Quality from the X-T2 and X-Pro2 is quite superb.

No need to be quite this chippy.

People are allowed to have different opinions to yours.

 

[woof woof]

Well assuming full frame and assuming 24mp it would be better in low light, would be better for landscaping as I wouldn't run into X-Trans issues and I don't think anyone can argue that going toe to toe a 24mp Fuji sensor is going to be better than a 24mp full frame Nikon/Sony sensor?

As Snerkler says the XT2 is great but perspective is also important.

Maybe not but one thing that many people don't seem willing to do is to consider giving careful and realistic thought to what they want to achieve. If for example you mostly view whole images and light crops on screen and only print to reasonable sizes, lets for arguments sake say table top photo album size and the occasional A4 for wall mounting, then without the use of a magnifying glass and without going to stratospheric ISO levels the difference between an APS-C picture and a FF picture may be hard to spot. Even very hard to spot. I think there's a tendency to pixel peep and expect to see results good enough for a 6 foot wide gallery print but in reality many pictures may only be viewed on screen or as relatively small prints.

Just sayin'.

Of course that doesn't take into account what we want and like using or stuff like focus speed

 

[snerkler]

Maybe not but one thing that many people don't seem willing to do is to consider giving careful and realistic thought to what they want to achieve. If for example you mostly view whole images and light crops on screen and only print to reasonable sizes, lets for arguments sake say table top photo album size and the occasional A4 for wall mounting, then without the use of a magnifying glass and without going to stratospheric ISO levels the difference between an APS-C picture and a FF picture may be hard to spot. Even very hard to spot. I think there's a tendency to pixel peep and expect to see results good enough for a 6 foot wide gallery print but in reality many pictures may only be viewed on screen or as relatively small prints.

Just sayin'.

Of course that doesn't take into account what we want and like using or stuff like focus speed

This is one of the reasons I've bought Fuji, I've been trying to stop judging images on 'technical' merits and just looking at the image and overall 'feel' of it. There are of course times when the technical parts of the camera are important such as noise handling, AF performance, which is why for sports I'll always use the D750 and 70-200mm f2.8, and will also opt for the D750 in low light. However, often Fuji files are often more pleasing somehow, especially with street and people photography. Sometimes it's not all about which has the best noise handling, which has the best AF etc etc, it's about which gives the most pleasing end result. Crikey, if it was all about the technical ability Leica wouldn't sell a single camera

 

[woof woof]

This is one of the reasons I've bought Fuji,...

I like gear but I think that some of the overly critical comments we see are frankly... way OTT.

I can shoot at ISO 25,600 with MFT and after only minimal processing and resizing I can (usually) have a useable shot. Not useable for a 6ft wide gallery print but for screen viewing and small prints for sure. Actually going back to the idea of 6ft wide gallery prints I wonder how todays cameras compare with those of 10 years ago.

And I'm not plugging MFT here in a Fuji thread just using it as an example of an even smaller format than APS-C being pretty good. I think that anything from MFT and up through APS-C is probably suitable for many people and of course image quality is just one factor, you have to be able to take the shot so focus performance, lenses etc are in the mix too.

 

[Stephen L]

@snerkler and @woof woof both well said. Also, for hobbyists like myself at least, there's how the camera feels and handles in the hand. I only print up to A3+, so just about any digital camera, even going back to the 5Mb days, can handle that if you're realistic about viewing distance. Certainly any camera I'm likely to own is going to be far superior than my abilities.

 

[snerkler]

@snerkler and @woof woof both well said. Also, for hobbyists like myself at least, there's how the camera feels and handles in the hand. I only print up to A3+, so just about any digital camera, even going back to the 5Mb days, can handle that if you're realistic about viewing distance. Certainly any camera I'm likely to own is going to be far superior than my abilities.

^^^ this, for me probably the biggest thing. It is hard to quantify but some cameras are just a joy to use whilst others aren't so much. Both my D750 and XT1 are the former (with the D750 edging it for me), both really nice to use and make photography enjoyable, which is what it's all about for us hobbyists after all

 

[Houston1863]

I think for critical shooting, especially if it's for paid work, high-end DSLRs are still the best option and you can put all your trust in them.

The X-T2 is (by all accounts - I've never seen one) a big improvement over the X-T1 and may be fine for 90% of people. It probably is a learning curve with the custom AF settings and possible that after some trial and error the user would find a setting that works.

The other thing to consider is that Fuji will probably bring a firmware update to the X-T2 at some point in the future that improves AF tracking even further. My bet is that in 2-3 years an X-T3 will finally catch up with the best DSLRs in AF.

Thank you for taking the time to share your views SJ. As said in an earlier reply, I'm going to have a look at the unit over the weekend, shoot as much as they will allow me and see what to make of it. If I'm not too embarrassed by my shots I may post some here. Basically I will be looking at AF and tracking in low light, if such conditions may be available in a camera store..... If all is well and dependent on stocks, I may run two systems simultaneously and see how this works out.

I too believe that down the line, firmware will be forthcoming that would improve the AF and tracking of the X-T2 especially as Fuji appears to be on a path of exponential growth. I would like to think that their AF can be relied on as that which can be achieved with DSLRs. Their lenses however need working on, both wrt range and capability. Time will tell

 

[Houston1863]

@snerkler and @woof woof both well said. Also, for hobbyists like myself at least, there's how the camera feels and handles in the hand. I only print up to A3+, so just about any digital camera, even going back to the 5Mb days, can handle that if you're realistic about viewing distance. Certainly any camera I'm likely to own is going to be far superior than my abilities.

That's another thing - printing. Glad you brought this up Stephen

I recall speaking with a lady at Park Cameras back in the summer who assured me that one can print up to Size 0 with images generated on the X-T2. This is handy for me since one of my clients does make enlargements of my work for posters and for their own internal display of concerts in low light. With my Canon gear I have had no concerns but I am certainly keen to ensure that printing to this size is possible with the Fuji.

 

[snerkler]

My bet is that in 2-3 years an X-T3 will finally catch up with the best DSLRs in AF.

Now there's a bold statement

When it does happen I can see a huge shift from Canikon if they've not pulled their fingers out and joined the party. The only saving grace for them is that mirrorless FF lenses aren't really any smaller and I'd argue that larger lenses are still better balanced on DSLRs.

 

[snerkler]

The D750 (with lenses micro-adjusted) is absolutely bang on 99% of the time, but even so I don't feel as confident and usually shoot extra to cover my back. I really, really miss the EVF and the benefits that gives. I'm hoping the X-T2 has closed the gap enough to consider moving back when the price has come down a bit (I don't mind changing batteries a lot as long as I'm given more than a 30 second warning).

It may be more down to familiarity but I still trust the AF on the D750 more than the XT1, I've had more missed/OOF shots with the XT1 than the D750.

 

[Mr Perceptive]

Now there's a bold statement

When it does happen I can see a huge shift from Canikon if they've not pulled their fingers out and joined the party. The only saving grace for them is that mirrorless FF lenses aren't really any smaller and I'd argue that larger lenses are still better balanced on DSLRs.

The laws of physics dictate that a certain focal length lens with a given aperture range will be a minimum size. The required image circle for FF on DSLR is exactly the same as Mirrorless. There are some postemntial slight differences due to the position of teh sensor on mirrorless being much closer to the lens mount, but overall you won't see much difference in size.

The balance of camera is a very personal thing, and one persons preference may be an issue for another.

But as the demands of the lens get greater, ie fast telephoto's then the weight saving of mirrorless becomes much less significant, and if you were a wildlife or sprts shooter, personally I think there is very little benefit to be gained in weight by going mirrorless - all other things being equal (ie FF on both systems)

If though you are prepared to sacrifice the FF element, then weight savings are possible with either APS-C or M43

Where the Fuji scores is that it has some great glass, and for APS-C possibly has the best range (macro excepted) of great glass for any APS-C system (I accept that you can put FF glass on an APSC DSLR but you won't save weight or size and thats not really comparing like for like)

With M43 you start to get even more compact lenses, but folks really do need to remember that equivalence applies not only to focal length buy to aperture as well,

 

[woof woof]

Now there's a bold statement

When it does happen I can see a huge shift from Canikon if they've not pulled their fingers out and joined the party. The only saving grace for them is that mirrorless FF lenses aren't really any smaller and I'd argue that larger lenses are still better balanced on DSLRs.

I think that for focus speed, accuracy and consistency in many situations and scenarios mirrorless is very possibly (arguably) there already or even better. The question is therefore maybe about other stuff than static shooting, such as tracking maybe. Anyway, when looking at focus performance we need to be specific about body and lens combinations as there can be significant variation in both speed and other aspects of performance.

On the size of the lenses I think it's worth considering quality too as some of the more recent relatively larger CSC lenses are very possibly better than some of the possibly smaller and maybe older DSLR lenses. One thing that's impressed me about my CSC lenses both zooms and primes is how sharp they are wide open and across the frame, not every DSLR lens is that good and of course this goodness often comes at the expense of size and weight.

Looking at FF mirrorless lenses and why they can be the size of DSLR lenses we need to consider what we're comparing and why there are differences. If we're talking FF mirrorless then I assume it's Sony and/or Leica? Some of the Sony lenses are arguably the same size as DSLR lenses but they're maybe built for some upcoming high mp count camera and that'll very probably account for some of the size and weight. Dunno about Leica lenses.

Back when I had 35mm film SLR's I had small and light lenses but when mounted on todays high mp count cameras they'd be considered utter junk, by pixel peepers at least and this is pretty much what I've found when using old film lenses on my A7. They're nice but for quality across the frame they just can't live with a modern lens.

 

[Stephen L]

That's another thing - printing. Glad you brought this up Stephen

I recall speaking with a lady at Park Cameras back in the summer who assured me that one can print up to Size 0 with images generated on the X-T2. This is handy for me since one of my clients does make enlargements of my work for posters and for their own internal display of concerts in low light. With my Canon gear I have had no concerns but I am certainly keen to ensure that printing to this size is possible with the Fuji.

As I'm sure you know, printing is a whole bag of worms. You have to sort realities from the theories. A lot depends on viewing distance and subject. For instance, a low-light concert almost demands a grainy looking print whilst a model shoot needs flawless skin. Again, in practice, you need to send a couple of test images to a quality printer and view them from a sensible distance before you can make your own mind up. But I have printed (or had printed) landscapes up to A1 from 16 megapixel Fujis and no-one has said that the resolution was lousy. So the 24 megapixels of the X-T2 should be fine. With my T2 I've only printed to A3+ so far, and the results were very clean indeed.

 

[G.K.Jnr.]

No need to be quite this chippy.

People are allowed to have different opinions to yours.

My thoughts exactly.

George.

 

[Galaxy66]

My local LCE are now giving only £350 max. trade in on the XT1 because the used market is awash with them, they naturally still honoured the £400 I was offered for mine over a month ago .

 

[Nod]

My bet is that in 2-3 years an X-T3 will finally catch up with the best DSLRs in AF.

A bold statement and probably true if you'll be comparing the X-T3 with the current generation of DSLRs' AF performance but by then, Canikon will have gone forward the same amount but from their headstart so will still be ahead. However, whether the extra speed will be of any real benefit to mere mortals remains to be seen! Even my old D70 could AF faster than I ever could manage using MF, even with the microprisms and split screens we used to have to help. As for follow focussing on fast moving objects, all but impossible so prefocus and hope was the order of the day (for me, at least!) The X-T2 will do me just fine (but I said that about the X-T1...)

 

[ian-83]

Looking to possibly switch to a X-T1 or X-T10 with a 18-55 and will mostly being doing landscape photography. I've read a few posts when looking for suitable sized square filters that people are getting reflections from the white writing on the end of the lens in their images. has anyone had this problem on here?

Also what is the best size filters to get? probably won't go wider than the 18-55.

 

[Stephen L]

Looking to possibly switch to a X-T1 or X-T10 with a 18-55 and will mostly being doing landscape photography. I've read a few posts when looking for suitable sized square filters that people are getting reflections from the white writing on the end of the lens in their images. has anyone had this problem on here?

Also what is the best size filters to get? probably won't go wider than the 18-55.

I've not experienced it, but I've only heard of it with the 10-24. The Lee Seven5 system is a good size unless you need the widest end of that 10-24.

 

[mickledore]

good size unless you need the widest end of that 10-24.

@Mr Perceptive and I conducted a non too scientific experiment about all this. We found that you did get a small bit of vignetting at 10mm if using stacked filters (we used a CPL,10 stop, 5 stop and a grad at the same time), but pull it back to 12mm and there was no problem. We reasoned that shooting broad landscapes could easily be managed at 12mm, and if we were close enough to the subject to need 10mm then we wouldn't need filters anyway.
As I said, totally unscientific and someone will no doubt come out of the woodwork with all sorts of data to prove us wrong, but we don't care!

 

[ian-83]

@Mr Perceptive and I conducted a non too scientific experiment about all this. We found that you did get a small bit of vignetting at 10mm if using stacked filters (we used a CPL,10 stop, 5 stop and a grad at the same time), but pull it back to 12mm and there was no problem. We reasoned that shooting broad landscapes could easily be managed at 12mm, and if we were close enough to the subject to need 10mm then we wouldn't need filters anyway.
As I said, totally unscientific and someone will no doubt come out of the woodwork with all sorts of data to prove us wrong, but we don't care!

Was this with the Lee Seven5 system?