The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

For panning (airshows for me but I guess applies to motorsports and bif) do you have ois on or off. Tried both last week and couldn’t work out which was best (shutter 1/250, with the 100-400)
 
cambsno said:
For panning (airshows for me but I guess applies to motorsports and bif) do you have ois on or off. Tried both last week and couldn’t work out which was best (shutter 1/250, with the 100-400)
Click to expand...
OIS on, it should automatically determine that you are panning as there is no option for it to be set on the lens or in the IS MODE menu.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
If you are a lightroom user, use the web based Lightroom Analytics tool before selling any gear, you can get reports on focal length usage for a given period, IMHO anything with less than 1% use over the last 12 months is fair game for a cull!!

http://www.lightroomdashboard.com/
Click to expand...

So, after a good play with the analytics tool I've managed to come to a few conclusions.

1) I did a 6 year year run over two catalogues and proved to myself that going to Fuji was the right thing to do. My wildlife shots have tended to be what I did most, and over the last 2 years over 50% of my catalogue has come from my 100-400 with or without the 1.4TC. In the previous 3 years, I shot less than half the number of images on my 7D2 & 150-600. Confirming that as my new kit is lighter, it goes out more often.

2) Removing the 100-400 from the analytics shows that the 10-24 and the 50-140 get similar use. That surprised me as I don't take the 50-140 out that much, but when I do, it gets a lot of use. Not sure how it will stack up in the future now I have the 90mm though.

3) I hardly ever use the 60mm - I think it's time to move it on.

4) I don't use the 35mm f1.4 that much, but when I do, it's almost always used at f1.4 - f2 (as you would)

5) I used the 16mm f1.4 more than I thought I did (before I swapped it for the 90mm). So will you guys stop talking about it as you're going to get me in trouble!!!

What a useful tool though....
 
Last edited:
Jelster said:
So, after a good play with the analytics tool I've managed to come to a few conclusions.

1) I did a 6 year year run over two catalogues and proved to myself that going to Fuji was the right thing to do. My wildlife shots have tended to be what I did most, and over the last 2 years over 50% of my catalogue has come from my 100-400 with or without the 1.4TC. In the previous 3 years, I shot less than half the number of images on my 7D2 & 150-600. Confirming that as my new kit is lighter, it goes out more often.

2) Removing the 100-400 from the analytics shows that the 10-24 and the 50-140 get similar use. That surprised me as I don't take the 50-140 out that much, but when I do, it gets a lot of use. Not sure how it will stack up in the future now I have the 90mm though.

3) I hardly ever use the 60mm - I think it's time to move it on.

4) I don't use the 35mm f1.4 that much, but when I do, it's almost always used at f1.4 - f2 (as you would)

5) I used the 16mm f1.4 more than I thought I did (before I swapped it for the 90mm). So will you guys stop talking about it as you're going to get me in trouble!!!

What a useful tool though....
Click to expand...

Pleased to be of service, I'll take that virtual pint for commission on the 60mm :beer:

Your issue though is:-

50-140 v 90
and
10-24 v 16

I know my views, I'd rather have two exceptional lenses, than two great ones. But your viewpoint may differ, especially as the 50-140 can take the TC may allow that wildlife shot when you've left the 100-400 behind!
 
Jelster said:
So, after a good play with the analytics tool I've managed to come to a few conclusions.

1) I did a 6 year year run over two catalogues and proved to myself that going to Fuji was the right thing to do. My wildlife shots have tended to be what I did most, and over the last 2 years over 50% of my catalogue has come from my 100-400 with or without the 1.4TC. In the previous 3 years, I shot less than half the number of images on my 7D2 & 150-600. Confirming that as my new kit is lighter, it goes out more often.

2) Removing the 100-400 from the analytics shows that the 10-24 and the 50-140 get similar use. That surprised me as I don't take the 50-140 out that much, but when I do, it gets a lot of use. Not sure how it will stack up in the future now I have the 90mm though.

3) I hardly ever use the 60mm - I think it's time to move it on.

4) I don't use the 35mm f1.4 that much, but when I do, it's almost always used at f1.4 - f2 (as you would)

5) I used the 16mm f1.4 more than I thought I did (before I swapped it for the 90mm). So will you guys stop talking about it as you're going to get me in trouble!!!

What a useful tool though....
Click to expand...
Is there a similar tool in Capture One?
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Pleased to be of service, I'll take that virtual pint for commission on the 60mm :beer:

Your issue though is:-

50-140 v 90
and
10-24 v 16

I know my views, I'd rather have two exceptional lenses, than two great ones. But your viewpoint may differ, especially as the 50-140 can take the TC may allow that wildlife shot when you've left the 100-400 behind!
Click to expand...

Well, you say that but.....

I have a lot of shots taken at 24mm, and a lot at around 12mm (that's probably because my filters start to vignette at anything lower). So it would mean that I need to get a 16 AND a 23....

The 50-140 is brilliant at zoo's & wildlife parks.
 
For those who own (or have owned) a 55-200. Could you give me some pro`s and con`s in real world shooting please. I`m looking for a little more reach, as my longest other than the macro, is 56mm, It won`t be used too often, but for the odd time I fancy shooting some critters, it would come in handy. The big boy lenses are out of reach for the amount of use it`ll be getting. Plus I want to keep the weight down ;)

TIA (y)
 
Paulie-W said:
For those who own (or have owned) a 55-200. Could you give me some pro`s and con`s in real world shooting please. I`m looking for a little more reach, as my longest other than the macro, is 56mm, It won`t be used too often, but for the odd time I fancy shooting some critters, it would come in handy. The big boy lenses are out of reach for the amount of use it`ll be getting. Plus I want to keep the weight down ;)

TIA (y)
Click to expand...

It's a decent lens, a little brighter than most similar FL zooms at f/4.8 200mm, from what I remember using it on the X-T1 a few years back I could get sharp images at around 1/8th second so the OIS is pretty good on it.
 
Cagey75 said:
It's a decent lens, a little brighter than most similar FL zooms at f/4.8 200mm, from what I remember using it on the X-T1 a few years back I could get sharp images at around 1/8th second so the OIS is pretty good on it.
Click to expand...

Cheers, mate. Seems like a viable option. I`ve read so many reviews etc, but it`s always nice to hear from peeps you (kinda) know :)
 
Paulie-W said:
For those who own (or have owned) a 55-200. Could you give me some pro`s and con`s in real world shooting please. I`m looking for a little more reach, as my longest other than the macro, is 56mm, It won`t be used too often, but for the odd time I fancy shooting some critters, it would come in handy. The big boy lenses are out of reach for the amount of use it`ll be getting. Plus I want to keep the weight down ;)

TIA (y)
Click to expand...
I also had mine with the xt1. It's very sharp, OIS on the lens is amazing and as above its f4.8 at 200mm which you won't find on other similar lenses. The downsides for me are 1. It doesn't work with TCs and 2. It's not for fast moving subjects ( although this could be different with the newer camera bodies)
 
architectfadi said:
I also had mine with the xt1. It's very sharp, OIS on the lens is amazing and as above its f4.8 at 200mm which you won't find on other similar lenses. The downsides for me are 1. It doesn't work with TCs and 2. It's not for fast moving subjects ( although this could be different with the newer camera bodies)
Click to expand...

Thanks you. I`m not really aiming for anything super fast, just a bit more reach. Maybe the odd trip down to Brands Hatch, and a bird on a stick kinda thing, once in a while. Looks like I`ll go check out some deals (y)
 
Sunrise at Leigh-On-Sea with Fuji Xe1 and XF 16-55mm

eiLWFco.jpg
 
Last edited:
todders said:
Sunrise at Leigh-On-Sea with Fuji Xe1 and XF 16-55mm

xuOLl1y.jpg
Click to expand...


Very nice landscape Fujigraph, well composed with beautiful light.

George.
 
Paulie-W said:
For those who own (or have owned) a 55-200. Could you give me some pro`s and con`s in real world shooting please. I`m looking for a little more reach, as my longest other than the macro, is 56mm, It won`t be used too often, but for the odd time I fancy shooting some critters, it would come in handy. The big boy lenses are out of reach for the amount of use it`ll be getting. Plus I want to keep the weight down ;)

TIA (y)
Click to expand...

Not used mine much but very happy with it, not too heavy and for me it is an occasional lens. IQ seems to be pretty good, not as good as the 16-55 for example but you wouldnt expect that.
 
cambsno said:
Not used mine much but very happy with it, not too heavy and for me it is an occasional lens. IQ seems to be pretty good, not as good as the 16-55 for example but you wouldnt expect that.
Click to expand...

Thanks, mate :)
It will be the same for me. It does seem like a lotime of peeps are happy with it, knowing it's limitations etc. Not really heard anything bad about it anywhere :)
 
Paulie-W said:
For those who own (or have owned) a 55-200. Could you give me some pro`s and con`s in real world shooting please. I`m looking for a little more reach, as my longest other than the macro, is 56mm, It won`t be used too often, but for the odd time I fancy shooting some critters, it would come in handy. The big boy lenses are out of reach for the amount of use it`ll be getting. Plus I want to keep the weight down ;)

TIA (y)
Click to expand...


I have the 55-200mm and each of my staff togs also use them. I’ve found it to be an “Excellent” lens optically at any focal length setting especially around the F5.6 area. I’ve had mine since they were first introduced and used it on an X-T1, and now X-T2 & X-H1 units. It was a tad slow with regards to auto focus on the X-T1 but a huge improvement on the X-T2 & X-H1. I have also tried it out on my X-T3 but I seldom use that camera as I much prefer to use an X-H1 or X-T2.

The 55-200mm is part of our standard kit for each of our togs for Motor Sports (including F1) and all of us prefer to use it as apposed to the 50-140mm.

Hope this helps.,

George.
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
I have the 55-200mm and each of my staff togs also use them. I’ve found it to be an “Excellent” lens optically at any focal length setting especially around the F5.6 area. I’ve had mine since they were first introduced and used it on an X-T1, and now X-T2 & X-H1 units. It was a tad slow with regards to auto focus on the X-T1 but a huge improvement on the X-T2 & X-H1. I have also tried it out on my X-T3 but I seldom use that camera as I much prefer to use an X-H1 or X-T2.

The 55-200mm is part of our standard kit for each of our togs for Motor Sports (including F1) and all of us prefer to use it as apposed to the 50-140mm.

Hope this helps.,

George.
Click to expand...

Wow, thank you George. That's a massive plus ... Looks like an imminent purchase coming up ;)
 
WEX have the GFX 100 stock if anyone is interested :)
 
Last edited:
I know I need to get some settings sorted, after all, I have only just bought the X-T3....a few months ago:oops: :$ and not really done much with it, anyway we are now on holiday and all I can say is wow, I mean WOW. the camera is absolutely everything I need, the 50-140 is superb, but just given the 18-55 a try out too, and boy am I really impressed.

The family pic of a family I have no idea who they are, ita a big crop but for some reason I kinda like it

DSCF0399-2 by danger_mouse1964, on Flickr

DSCF0426-2 by danger_mouse1964, on Flickr

DSCF0448-2 by danger_mouse1964, on Flickr
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
I have the 55-200mm and each of my staff togs also use them. I’ve found it to be an “Excellent” lens optically at any focal length setting especially around the F5.6 area. I’ve had mine since they were first introduced and used it on an X-T1, and now X-T2 & X-H1 units. It was a tad slow with regards to auto focus on the X-T1 but a huge improvement on the X-T2 & X-H1. I have also tried it out on my X-T3 but I seldom use that camera as I much prefer to use an X-H1 or X-T2.

The 55-200mm is part of our standard kit for each of our togs for Motor Sports (including F1) and all of us prefer to use it as apposed to the 50-140mm.

Hope this helps.,

George.
Click to expand...

Hi George and wondered why you prefer the X-T2 over the X-T3.

Have only heard good things about the advance in A/F performance over the X-T2 along with the viewfinder lag that edged me back over to Canon for another season.

Still not had hands on with an X-T3 but would love to hear your feedback as a motorsport photographer.

Many Thanks.
 
Gadget-Guy said:
Hi George and wondered why you prefer the X-T2 over the X-T3.

Have only heard good things about the advance in A/F performance over the X-T2 along with the viewfinder lag that edged me back over to Canon for another season.

Still not had hands on with an X-T3 but would love to hear your feedback as a motorsport photographer.

Many Thanks.
Click to expand...


There's nothing wrong with the X-T3 as a camera, its a fine bit of kit. I just haven't managed to gel with it like I have with the X-T2 and especially the X-H1. Those two units just feel right in my hands where as the X-T3 for some reason doesn't. Its purely a personal thing (before the flood gates open and the comments start).

I've had an X-T3 for some time now and its still got less that 300 clicks on the clock. I've not actually tried it at an F1 meeting as I've needed to take a year off from that for health reasons as I'm recovering from surgery and still not strong enough to carry a heavy bag about, so just leaving it all to my staff.

When I am able to get cracking again I'll carry on using the X-H1 units with the X-T2s in reserve. As I said nothing wrong with an X-T3 its just not for me.

George.
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
There's nothing wrong with the X-T3 as a camera, its a fine bit of kit. I just haven't managed to gel with it like I have with the X-T2 and especially the X-H1. Those two units just feel right in my hands where as the X-T3 for some reason doesn't. Its purely a personal thing (before the flood gates open and the comments start).

I've had an X-T3 for some time now and its still got less that 300 clicks on the clock. I've not actually tried it at an F1 meeting as I've needed to take a year off from that for health reasons as I'm recovering from surgery and still not strong enough to carry a heavy bag about, so just leaving it all to my staff.

When I am able to get cracking again I'll carry on using the X-H1 units with the X-T2s in reserve. As I said nothing wrong with an X-T3 its just not for me.

George.
Click to expand...

Many thanks for the reply George and hope your better soon buddy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top