The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

Paulie-W said:
We I started with a T2, after the Nikon debacle with the d750, I gave up on them and switched to Fuji. Always had Nikon before that. D40, D300, D700, D810 and then the recall special D750. Hey ho. I don't need lightning fast AF for what I shoot. So will most likely keep the T5 until it gives up the ghost.
Click to expand...

It's taken me a long time and several wrong turns to work out what I want and don't want (so why was I looking at Leica M6's and Summicron 35mm's today :oops: :$). In digital terms I'm happy with what I've got, can't really see myself changing it (there's nothing 'digital' thats grabbed ny attention recently), and I'm definitely on a one-in one-out policy, but today I have
  • X100 (not going anywhere, had it since new, and still enjoy using it)
  • Leica Q3 (everyday camera no 1)
  • Leica Q3 43 (everyday camera no 2 - rarely take both Qs out at the same time though)
  • X-H2S + 50-140mm and 100-400mm - my motorsport kit

But in film terms I'm still messing about a bit, sold my Fuji GM670 earlier this year, so that I could buy a Plaubel Makina 670
  • Rolleiflex 2.8E (just a lovely thing to use, and images are amazing for a 64 year old camera)
  • Plaubel Makina 670 (my 'travel medium format camera, new to me but nice to use and compact for a MF camera)
  • Fuji GX680 - currently up for sale, I don't really care if it sells, the images are stunning, its just the portability thats an issue!! If it does sell, it leaves an opening in my one-in one-out policy :D
Yeah and the D750, more recalls than @bl0at3r 's owned X100VIs
 
Last edited:
I agree with the one in, one out policy. Haha I wouldn't take two Leica 's out either ;)
Film is just too expensive for me. Plus I'm not that good.

I almost spat my coffee with the @bl0at3r remark
:ROFLMAO:
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Poor Effort :ROFLMAO: , in Fuji ILC

X-E1 -> X-E2 -> X-T1 -> X-T2 -> X-H1 -> GFX50S .......break ..... back with X-T3 -> X-H2S

Also owned X-A1, X-M1, X-Pro1 and a second X-T3 all as side hustles

In Fixed lens

X100 (still have)
X100F (sold when I bought a Q3)
Click to expand...
Paulie-W said:
We I started with a T2, after the Nikon debacle with the d750, I gave up on them and switched to Fuji. Always had Nikon before that. D40, D300, D700, D810 and then the recall special D750. Hey ho. I don't need lightning fast AF for what I shoot. So will most likely keep the T5 until it gives up the ghost.
Click to expand...

I started with an X-T20, then had to sell it due to needing the money. After a fairly brief dalliance with Lumix bridge cameras, I found an absolute bargain X-T30 and 18-55 kit, then got an X-T1 because I'd read great things about the sensor, and needed weather sealing for a trip I'd booked... that made me realise that I liked the larger form, it fit my hand better, so I got rid of both of those (I actually made money on the T30, due to it being such a bargain!) and got my T4. As I've been musing for a while in this thread, I was thinking of getting rid of it and getting a T5, but I've decided that I'm not going to do that now. Instead I'm going to have a look at the X-E5 and then either get one of them with the 23mm pancake, or possibly an X100VI, if I can afford it.
 
skullfunkerry said:
I started with an X-T20, then had to sell it due to needing the money. After a fairly brief dalliance with Lumix bridge cameras, I found an absolute bargain X-T30 and 18-55 kit, then got an X-T1 because I'd read great things about the sensor, and needed weather sealing for a trip I'd booked... that made me realise that I liked the larger form, it fit my hand better, so I got rid of both of those (I actually made money on the T30, due to it being such a bargain!) and got my T4. As I've been musing for a while in this thread, I was thinking of getting rid of it and getting a T5, but I've decided that I'm not going to do that now. Instead I'm going to have a look at the X-E5 and then either get one of them with the 23mm pancake, or possibly an X100VI, if I can afford it.
Click to expand...
Nicely done, sir
(y)

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
 
nx4737 said:
How noticeable is the size difference between the two?

Every so often I consider trading the X-H1 in for an X-T4 to save weight but not convinced it'll actually be worth it.
Click to expand...
The H1 is a fair bit bigger. But I have a hand grip on my T5 (Fuji one), which makes it super easy to hold. Admittedly it did take a little while to get used to it. I guess the same as driving a different car.
 
nx4737 said:
Question time, have any of you used the XC 15-45 and what are your thoughts on it?

I've not been enjoying zooms recently and have slowly been transitioning to prime lenses, all I have left is my XF 18-55 f2.8-4 which I usually use when we're going away on holiday just for convenience, but the smaller size and weight of the 15-45 is quite tempting so I'm pondering weather to do a trade...

I know it's a power zoom and they can be a bit marmite, but that isn't something that bothers me.
Click to expand...
I have and still have one use it on my infared X-E1. I have tired it on the X-T5 and to be honest for the price its a cracking little lens. Like you said its a power zoom which is a pain and no aperture ring. It is and feels very plasticly but the plus side its very light. I have a look to see if I got any photos on it thats not infared.
 
nx4737 said:
Question time, have any of you used the XC 15-45 and what are your thoughts on it?

I've not been enjoying zooms recently and have slowly been transitioning to prime lenses, all I have left is my XF 18-55 f2.8-4 which I usually use when we're going away on holiday just for convenience, but the smaller size and weight of the 15-45 is quite tempting so I'm pondering weather to do a trade...

I know it's a power zoom and they can be a bit marmite, but that isn't something that bothers me.
Click to expand...

First one on a X-E1, 2nd one on a X-T5.

Must say I dont pixwl peep so how the corners stand up to scrutiny im not sure.

DSCF4840.jpguntitled 3.jpg
 
nx4737 said:
How noticeable is the size difference between the two?

Every so often I consider trading the X-H1 in for an X-T4 to save weight but not convinced it'll actually be worth it.
Click to expand...
Dont! The XH1 is great. I have an XT4 but I still prefer the feel of the XH1.
Each Fuji camera has its own character. I dont have an XE3 and X100S but I have almost all the others.
 
cuthbert said:
I’ve been debating an x100vi for a while, but the price bump got me doubting myself.., I just don’t think it’s worth best part of £1900, especially when you can get a canon r5 for the same, I know it’s not like for like, but one is an absolute beast and the other is a compromise.

Out of interest, anybody got the wide angle conversion lens? Is it any good? 35mm eqv is good, but I do prefer a bit wider, interesting to know how it performs.
Click to expand...
I’ve not been getting notifications for this thread for some reason so I’m a bit late to the party :thinking:

The X100VI is absolutely not worth £1900 imo, that being said it’s not worth the £1600 I paid for mine but it didn’t stop me buying it :lol:
 
Q
snerkler said:
I’ve not been getting notifications for this thread for some reason so I’m a bit late to the party :thinking:

The X100VI is absolutely not worth £1900 imo, that being said it’s not worth the £1600 I paid for mine but it didn’t stop me buying it :lol:
Click to expand...
on paper none of the premium fixed lens compacts are worth their sticker price, but that’s not really the point!!!
 
At the begining of this year I paid £1275 for my X100V (used as new) including the weather seal kit (new) from LCE and I didn't think that was over priced at the time. I looked at the spec differences between the V & VI and didn't think they warranted the extra for the VI (even if I could have found one).
 
Regardless of the price there's nothing quite like a fixed lens camera. Got a 2 day work trip coming up and there's no question which camera will be thrown in the bag (and nothing I'd rather have).
 
Gold said:
Regardless of the price there's nothing quite like a fixed lens camera. Got a 2 day work trip coming up and there's no question which camera will be thrown in the bag (and nothing I'd rather have).
Click to expand...
I what way, In terms of use I find it no different to using a prime on an ILC, except of course they can make the lens smaller on the fixed lens?
 
100-400, 150-600 or the new 400 prime.
Anyone tried at least 2 of them or ideally all 3?

I had a 100-400, found it quite heavy compared to the 70-300 but could use more reach at times.
Can't afford anything at present but you know how it is...
 
snerkler said:
I what way, In terms of use I find it no different to using a prime on an ILC, except of course they can make the lens smaller on the fixed lens?
Click to expand...

Mostly just a mental thing. When I have a ILC it’s easy to wish for a different focal length. The fixed length just means there’s no thoughts of bringing extra kit.
 
Gold said:
Mostly just a mental thing. When I have a ILC it’s easy to wish for a different focal length. The fixed length just means there’s no thoughts of bringing extra kit.
Click to expand...

I know the feeling. But I think you can still cheat if you have an ILC. I have X-T30 and sometimes travel out with it as my only camera and with the 35mm or 16mm attached.

Not quite as compact as a X100 (or a Ricoh GR!) but the X-T30 or X-E format are a nice size as walk around if you are out and about.

I'm happy as long as I 'trust' the lens (I put that in quotes because it's not a technical thing - more about empathy with the way the lens behaves).
 
Gold said:
Mostly just a mental thing. When I have a ILC it’s easy to wish for a different focal length. The fixed length just means there’s no thoughts of bringing extra kit.
Click to expand...

Yup, and one I think you should maybe try and get over if possible.

Not that it matters too much these days but many people at least in the past had one camera and one lens and indeed I did that for a long time when I had a Nikon SLR and later with a RF. These days having kit with which the lens can be removed could save an expensive repair if you get contamination on the sensor.
 
I have had the opportunity to have a play with the 16-55mm F2.8 mk 2.

What a sweet little zoom. It was on an X-H2S and the feel of the zoom and aperture -- and the focusing felt great.

My only concern really is price and the issue with the small protective strip that seems to be causing some users warranty grief. There also seem to be ongoing availability issues. I'm using my kit a lot these days and I can't afford the time that would be out of action if it needed a repair.

If anybody is looking for one then on their open day in Glasgow Wex were selling this at a discount in-store - £926. But no stock. But it could be pre-ordered in-store for delivery at that price. So presumably the same offers at other Wex stores on these open days.

I had been looking for a new working zoom. My 18-55 has been finding more and more use in the last 12 months and fair it is a nice lens - compact and convenient. But I find I wanted a wider aperture across the whole zoom range because I was often carrying my 35 1.4 or my 56 1.2 if out and about in lower light. So the 16-55 2.8 was an option. Whatever I go for my rule is that my 'working' lenses have to have aperture rings.

I ended up going with the SIgma 17-40 which is a peculiar beast, The lens feels more compact than it looks - physically long rather than wide. It feels as if it is substantially longer than the 16-55 mk 2. You'd think it was slightly slimmer version of the 90 f2. Perversely the length and the appearance suits me. When using my 8-16 in the street you can be close to people and they think because of the size and length of the lens that you are looking past them with a telephoto. I think the 17-40 will give a similar impression when using it close and wide. Downside of the length is that when mounted it needs the same sort of space in the bag as if the 90 was on it. The focusing doesn't feel as good as the 16-55 but that's splitting hairs. The zoom feels like there is some sort of internal motor activity occurring as you turn the zoom ring but I stopped noticing that after using it for half an hour.

It usually takes me a month or more of actual use to become happy, or not, with a lens. Usually in the first few days there is the confirmation or remorse effect for me and then things settle down to a more even feeling. At the moment my remorse is that I didn't go with the 16-55 and the happy part is that the 17-40 seems to be satisfactory at 1.8 and absolutely solid at 2.8 and I'm not under as much pressure to quickly sell off one or two other lenses to help cover it because of the lower cost.
 
stevewestern said:
100-400, 150-600 or the new 400 prime.
Anyone tried at least 2 of them or ideally all 3?

I had a 100-400, found it quite heavy compared to the 70-300 but could use more reach at times.
Can't afford anything at present but you know how it is...
Click to expand...
I think @trevorbray has had the first two.
 
jknights said:
Dont! The XH1 is great. I have an XT4 but I still prefer the feel of the XH1.
Each Fuji camera has its own character. I dont have an XE3 and X100S but I have almost all the others.
Click to expand...
I couldn't"t agree more. When I pick up one of my two X-H1's, I have two as an insurance against Fujifilm deciding that they will no longer support it and one of them fails, it just feels so absolutely right in my hand, just like putting on a really comfortable glove.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
I've had the WCL on the pre-40MP sensors, its a conversion lens so is just glass, its officially recommended by Fujifilm for the X100VI so I would expect little loss in in IQ, you might though get a little distortion to the edges of the frame, but it is software corrected in camera. Its light and compact (a little bit of a faff to put on if you already have the 49mm female thread adpter on the camera for the WR filter or lens hood, as you have to remove this before putting on the WCL, and the also seperatelymove the hood and filters over.

Despite its small size it does make the camera significantly larger, and less pocketable (large jacket or small bag).

You are right in that you can't really compare the X100VI to the R5, both have compromises, the R5 isn't exactly pocketable and certianly is less discrete, and an R5 with a decent lens on it is physically much bigger.

All premium compacts attract a premium price, that just goes with the territory, none of the Ricoh GR family, Fuji X100VI, Sony RX1 family or Leica Q families are desperately cheap, and could also been seen to lack flexibility, but having extensively used both X100 series cameras and the Leica Q series I'd say that both are greater than their specifications might first seem. The X100 series in particular is fun to use, it's got huge kerbside appeal, and you can feel very engaged with image making while using it. If I couldn't afford to keep my Q3, I'd be back with an X100VI in an instant. I'd also be quite happy with one as my only camera (but then I do like working with fixed focal length cameras)

Yes the price bump is annoying (and many have seen it as Fuji taking the p*ss), but Leica put their prices up regularly and its just accepted. At £1,750 the X100VI is still IMO good value for money (as a new purchase) when comparing it against the Sony RX1Riii and Leica Q3. I'm not going to compare against the Ricoh GR, as anything without a viewfinder IMO is not a camera, its a phone without the calling functionality.
Click to expand...

Thank you David - some food for thought.

I see a lot of output from the Ricoh GR that I really like - but I agree, the lack of a proper viewfinder... I'd struggle with it. Even though I've got articulating screens on my main cams, I still get myself dirty looking through the viewfinder, something with how my brain is wired I think!

I'll be honest, I've never used a Leica and I don't know huge amounts about their lineup. I suppose I've always held the view that they were just a bit overpriced for what they were... I could have a medium format cam like a hasselblad for around the same cost, obviously even less portable and more stupid, but definitely special.

I was very impressed with the resolving power and handling of the X100VI. I had a really good play with one at the photography show this year, got a lot of raw and jpeg files... I suppose it also comes down to how much I'd use it, and if I'd have too much FOMO if that's all I went out with it without my other gear. It's a difficult one, because if it was 1500 I'd prob buy it tomorrow, but it just tips the balance.

In an ideal world, Canon would make a compact with one their great R5/R6 range sensors, and a fixed prime maybe a couple of options, 28/f2, 35/2 you could just stick in your pocket with all the familiar menus and buttons.

The Cambridge photography show is in a few weeks... I'll have another play around then and maybe see if I can grab a bargain.
 
trevorbray said:
Trevor here. Actually only had one. The 150-600. Loved it. Especially the fact it’s internal zoom. Not to be underestimated. Plenty sharp enough. Don’t be scared of f8.
Click to expand...
Is the most tempting one for sure. I'm slightly struggling to understand the 400, as apart from weight it doesn't seem to bring a lot, but I am a fan of zooms and have yet to see a photo that yells 'I'm not sharp' from any fuji lens, including my 18-135..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top