Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Other Digital Cameras Fuji Digital Cameras
Thread started 06 Jan 2013 (Sunday) 14:29
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

STICKY: Fuji Users Unite - Post your comments, questions and images here

 
Osa713
Senior Member
Osa713's Avatar
Joined Jun 2011
Houston, TX
Sep 18, 2017 10:40 |  #5431

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18454679 (external link)
Fuji have said the they perceive the difference between their cameras use of an APS-C sensor and a camera with a full frame sensor is negligible & there is little point in producing a camera so close in sensor size. That is why they opted into Medium Format territory while continuing to improve their X series cameras with feedback from the community. When you consider their aim for the price point and quality of the GFX both in build and, of course, the image quality of that much larger sensor, you can see why they didn't bother in developing a Full Frame system that would give only a marginal improvement in some areas.

If you look through your EXIF data to see just how many shot are at very high ISO I think most people would not be above 12800 for the most of it. I know most of mine are on the other end of things even at events. Yes there are times when I need to shoot 12800 buy the Fuji does OK there, nice film looking grain noise as opposed to the awful colour noise that I was use to in my pervious system.

A couple of 12800ISO images [top one is untouched raw]

thumbnailHosted photo: posted by Two Hot Shoes in
./showthread.php?p=184​54679&i=i253157902
forum: Fuji Digital Cameras

thumbnailHosted photo: posted by Two Hot Shoes in
./showthread.php?p=184​54679&i=i40893300
forum: Fuji Digital Cameras

The more portraits I shoot the more I want a GFX:cry:




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Two ­ Hot ­ Shoes
Goldmember
Two Hot Shoes's Avatar
Joined Apr 2014
Ireland
Sep 18, 2017 11:23 as a reply to Osa713's post |  #5432

I feel and share your pain. A GFX and a couple of Fuji lenses and also an adaptor for that full frame and old MF glass...


Cameras: X-PRO2, X-T1, X-E2
Lenses: XF16mm F1.4, XF 18mm F2, XF 23mm F1.4, XF 35mm F1.4, XF 56mm F1.2, XF 90mm F2, XF 16-55 F2.8, Samyang 8mm F2.8 Fisheye & 12mm F2, Zeiss 35mm F2.4 MC
Gear: AD600BM, Nissan i40, AL-H198, ThinkTank Airport Security 2, Peli 1514, Ona Bowery

flickr (external link)Instagram (external link)Blog (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
rantercsr
Goldmember
rantercsr's Avatar
Joined Mar 2014
Post has been edited 1 month ago by rantercsr.
Sep 18, 2017 12:11 |  #5433

have been Full frame less for the past 2months .. last time before that was since aprox 2012 .. since then its been either canon or sony FF ..sold the 5d3 a while back.. sold off the sony about the same times I got the Fuji ( a couple weeks after )

So, these are just my opinions of course , again MY opinions, I emphasize that here because I don't want to have to type "in my opinion " after each sentence..but I say them just to share my take on things not with the intentions of offending... or saying that one is inferior .

The old FF vs Crop, is there a difference?..
Yes there is .
I can see the difference .
I CAN'T always see the difference.
The majority of the time the difference I see (or think I see)has not mattered in terms of visual appeal ("FF look" vs "apsc look")(if that's the correct way to express that ? hopefully i'm understood )

But , If there were a FF Fuji I would certainly pay for it ..there is enough difference when it comes to low light that I think its worth paying for it.
In terms of light gathering , I've become quite comfortable with f2 and f1.8 lenses over the past year or so when owned FF cameras .
BUT being APSC only at the moment i'm starting to feel the need for f1.4 lenses.

I know people will question how much it really matters.." who will notice? " , "has anyone ever questioned the format I used? " ,no one will ever say "you should have used an f1.4 instead of that f2"

But I see it , .. and i'm the one that's paying for it :p

Doesn't really matter to me that my Friends or family , or who ever never notices
I agree that very little of that will ever matter either I have a picture worth looking at or not .
I could get used to what an apcs gives me in terms of high iso performance.
But do I want to is the question for myself.

The Fuji Xt2 has been the easiest , most fun camera to use I've ever purchased.. sure I can list complaints , but I can do that for any camera I've ever owned..
i'm still in the process of making it mine, customizing it to fit my shooting style .
The only time I think about the fact that its an apsc sensor in there is of course in lower light situations.

The medium formats from Fuji .. whats that about $9000 for body and one lens? a bit too steep for me lol
I think eventually I will get a FF something again , probably,,, maybe

for now i'm just trying to decide between 16-55 f2.8 or 10-24 f4 .
I want the 10-24 because of its uwa capabilities of course but also its OIS for video as I do like to do a fair amount of video.
but.. the 16-55 is just a better range for photos no matter what type of photos I'm doing


Canon 80D//Rebel T4i//EF50 f1.4 //EFS 24mm F2.8//EFS 18-55//EFS 10-18 //EFS 55-250
Pentax k1000* k50 f2*135 f2.
Fuji XT2 // xf 23mm f2/ xf50 f2 WR
https://www.instagram.​com/shotbypops/ (external link) MYflickr (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
benji25
Senior Member
benji25's Avatar
Joined Jan 2010
Twin Cities
Sep 18, 2017 12:29 |  #5434

rantercsr wrote in post #18454961 (external link)
I know people will question how much it really matters.." who will notice? " , "has anyone ever questioned the format I used? " ,no one will ever say "you should have used an f1.4 instead of that f2"

But I see it , .. and i'm the one that's paying for it :p


I just moved from a 6D kit to all Fuji. I would agree that at times I would see a picture with the 6D and be like "that is why I use full frame". However as I shot with the XT2 side by side with the 6D I found myself shooting the XT2 more often. I was easier to use, smaller and the EVF and focus peaking were awesome - not to mention the color and film simulation from the Fuji.

So for me I decided to switch because the few times where I could notice a difference between FF and crop was far outweighed by the benefits of the Fuji. Not to mention a client would never even know a difference. The whole package of the Fuji outweighed the small difference between FF and crop.


Websiteexternal link
flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
FarmerTed1971
fondling the 5D4
FarmerTed1971's Avatar
Joined Sep 2013
Portland, OR
Sep 18, 2017 12:33 |  #5435

I agree completely... I shot a fashion event on Saturday and used the Xt-2 and 6D. The 6D/135L combo still slays the Fuji for bokeh... at least for the lens lineup I have. Was mostly shooting the 50-140 f2.8 wide open. It's just a different look. The Fuji shots are dead nuts on accurate but sometimes it seems a bit sterile to me.

Perhaps it's just what I'm used to having come from 5 years as a Canon shooter (T1i, 6D, M1 & 7D2).


Getting better at this - Fuji Xt-2 - 18-55 - 35 f2 WR - 50-140 - 6D - 135L - 70-200 f4L IS - 600EX-RT x2 - ST-E3-RT - flickr (external link) - www.scottaticephoto.co​m (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
benji25
Senior Member
benji25's Avatar
Joined Jan 2010
Twin Cities
Sep 18, 2017 12:38 |  #5436

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #18454979 (external link)
The 6D/135L combo still slays the Fuji for bokeh...

This combo is literally the only reason I was holding on to the canon stuff still. I ultimately decided it wasn't worth it to carry around all of the additional charges/cables/gear/li​ghts for that look. So I got rid of it and pre-ordered the 80mm macro in hopes that will satisfy me.


Websiteexternal link
flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
rantercsr
Goldmember
rantercsr's Avatar
Joined Mar 2014
Sep 18, 2017 12:39 |  #5437

benji25 wrote in post #18454974 (external link)
. The whole package of the Fuji outweighed the small difference between FF and crop.

Right .. this is where Fuji is earning its place for me.

IF , it were all bout IQ .. to be honest I would have stayed with the sony A6500, I feel its better in terms of Dynamic range and detail(not talking worlds difference but there is a difference)
but it did nothing to inspire me to use it... it was literally annoying to me .
althought quite capable , just annoying to use..
I cant remember who on the forums said it .. but said something like it being a canon 7dmkii in terms of capabilities but in a rebel body with its poor button layout and ergonomics so that using it to the best of its capabilities was difficult.

with my xt2 , yeah they really nailed it when it comes to being user friendly.. the film simulation is something i'm starting to use more and more as a base when editing raws


Canon 80D//Rebel T4i//EF50 f1.4 //EFS 24mm F2.8//EFS 18-55//EFS 10-18 //EFS 55-250
Pentax k1000* k50 f2*135 f2.
Fuji XT2 // xf 23mm f2/ xf50 f2 WR
https://www.instagram.​com/shotbypops/ (external link) MYflickr (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
FarmerTed1971
fondling the 5D4
FarmerTed1971's Avatar
Joined Sep 2013
Portland, OR
Post has been edited 1 month ago by FarmerTed1971.
Sep 18, 2017 12:40 as a reply to benji25's post |  #5438

Please post your findings when you've had some time to play with the new lens.

f2.8 on a crop probably will not get close to f2 on FF. I hope I'm wrong.


Getting better at this - Fuji Xt-2 - 18-55 - 35 f2 WR - 50-140 - 6D - 135L - 70-200 f4L IS - 600EX-RT x2 - ST-E3-RT - flickr (external link) - www.scottaticephoto.co​m (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Two ­ Hot ­ Shoes
Goldmember
Two Hot Shoes's Avatar
Joined Apr 2014
Ireland
Post has been last edited 1 month ago by Two Hot Shoes. 3 edits done in total.
Sep 18, 2017 13:12 as a reply to FarmerTed1971's post |  #5439

Edit: just realised you guys were talking about the 80macro. I'll get my coat...

Not anyway near as close, 135/2 on a FF body = squishy amount of focus depth particularly for headshots or similar. The 16-55/2.8 has acres of depth but still nice bokeh.

Look at how shallow that 135L is @f/2 The subject was just leaning on the wall.

IMAGE: https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3883/15021460219_724541715c_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/oToU​Mr] (external link)Joel (external link) by Kim Farrelly (external link), on Flickr

Cameras: X-PRO2, X-T1, X-E2
Lenses: XF16mm F1.4, XF 18mm F2, XF 23mm F1.4, XF 35mm F1.4, XF 56mm F1.2, XF 90mm F2, XF 16-55 F2.8, Samyang 8mm F2.8 Fisheye & 12mm F2, Zeiss 35mm F2.4 MC
Gear: AD600BM, Nissan i40, AL-H198, ThinkTank Airport Security 2, Peli 1514, Ona Bowery

flickr (external link)Instagram (external link)Blog (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Two ­ Hot ­ Shoes
Goldmember
Two Hot Shoes's Avatar
Joined Apr 2014
Ireland
Post has been edited 1 month ago by Two Hot Shoes.
Sep 18, 2017 13:19 |  #5440

And you can just see the off bits on his hoody and back of head here. The 16-55 @2.8 & 44mm

IMAGE: https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8764/17320926133_7dfca24664_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/soAg​Tt] (external link)Colin (external link) by Kim Farrelly (external link), on Flickr

Cameras: X-PRO2, X-T1, X-E2
Lenses: XF16mm F1.4, XF 18mm F2, XF 23mm F1.4, XF 35mm F1.4, XF 56mm F1.2, XF 90mm F2, XF 16-55 F2.8, Samyang 8mm F2.8 Fisheye & 12mm F2, Zeiss 35mm F2.4 MC
Gear: AD600BM, Nissan i40, AL-H198, ThinkTank Airport Security 2, Peli 1514, Ona Bowery

flickr (external link)Instagram (external link)Blog (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
benji25
Senior Member
benji25's Avatar
Joined Jan 2010
Twin Cities
Sep 18, 2017 13:25 |  #5441

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #18454991 (external link)
Please post your findings when you've had some time to play with the new lens.

f2.8 on a crop probably will not get close to f2 on FF. I hope I'm wrong.

Yeah I am not expecting it to be as nice as the 135L but 1. I needed a macro before I switched and 2. I am hoping the sharpness is outstanding. To me it was a good compromise instead of the 90 f2 (though I still want it) because it is a similar FL and has macro. Two birds one stone I am hoping.


Websiteexternal link
flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Two ­ Hot ­ Shoes
Goldmember
Two Hot Shoes's Avatar
Joined Apr 2014
Ireland
Sep 18, 2017 13:27 |  #5442

Probably a better example of the bokeh of the 16-55, and the AF speed, here. Lovely round balls just a pity is was not dark out with all the lights on the ride.

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4164/34387102631_0392d3eb08_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/UoET​zR] (external link)2HS09300 (external link) by Kim Farrelly (external link), on Flickr

Cameras: X-PRO2, X-T1, X-E2
Lenses: XF16mm F1.4, XF 18mm F2, XF 23mm F1.4, XF 35mm F1.4, XF 56mm F1.2, XF 90mm F2, XF 16-55 F2.8, Samyang 8mm F2.8 Fisheye & 12mm F2, Zeiss 35mm F2.4 MC
Gear: AD600BM, Nissan i40, AL-H198, ThinkTank Airport Security 2, Peli 1514, Ona Bowery

flickr (external link)Instagram (external link)Blog (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Osa713
Senior Member
Osa713's Avatar
Joined Jun 2011
Houston, TX
Sep 18, 2017 14:41 |  #5443

Lol @ I will get my coat.




LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
Joined Feb 2008
Vancouver, BC
Sep 18, 2017 16:20 |  #5444

I'm curious if anyone shooting a D850 with 45.7 MP would see a noticeable difference with a 51.4 MP Fuji medium format GFX ?

My 30.4 MP Canon 5dmk4 is more than enough for my cropping needs and resolution. I'm not interested in the 50MP Canon 5DSr at all. I to like having 30 MP for portraits for my uses.

For a person shooting a D850 Nikon full frame I wonder if they would see much of a difference for portraits compared to a GFX Fuji shooter. The cost of the lenses in the Nikon world would be massively larger as well as including 3rd party lenses too.

I often see people yearning for digital medium format but for the cost of that system I just don't see it being advantageous. If your a high profile famous portrait shooter I see medium format "affordable" since charge 5000- 15,000 for portraits. For the average hired photographer I hardly see any gains using a Fuji GFX for portraits. The dynamic range of the latest full frames and pixel density, and high iso performance is ridiculously impressive. Modest portrait session pricing for your average human being would gladly take files from a well executed crop sensor or 50MP full frame...... medium format is overkill to some respects...

Am I missing something here? is it simply Fuji film simulation render as part of the equation in yearning or even buying such an expensive fuji medium format system.

Here's my take on Fuji going for full frame. The current Fuji tech looks like they are on the right track for high iso performance and render. Hopefully Adobe can finally solve the worms look during post processing.

If Fuji did build a full frame sensor this would create cleaner files. Fuji's 12800 is acceptable but it's still no where near a Nikon or even Canon full frame. I've noticed that people seem to be a tad more critical in image quality these days. I think the latest smart phone companies are making consumer/public awareness of how much better smart phones are becoming in cleaner files. If you ever watched a seminar from Jason Lanier he warns pro's of the power of the iPhone or any smart phone as a form of photographic threat to professional photogs.

Fuji would make more money if they jumped in the full frame market vs niche medium format market. But I think they understand human nature and this would cripple their hard efforts in the crop sensor bodies and lenses. Medium format was the next natural step away from full frame.

Fuji Prime lens shooters can appreciate the amazing lens lineup. You can pull shallow dof from primes easily . I just seem to see much different performance in fast f/2.8 zooms with full frame vs crop sensor. That is where using my Canon full frame with 24-70Lmk2 produces prime lens quality images and bokeh with incredible versatility. The Fuji 16-55 does produce nice bokeh. The analogy I guess would be comparing an f/1.4 prime vs an f/2 prime. Both look great but one has different "pop" factor. This was the biggest eye opener for me when I bought my first full frame camera vs my crop sensor body with constant f/2.8 zoom. My events photography using a zoom completely changed the look. If your a dedicated prime shooter this is not a concern to you :)


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 80D | 24LmkII | 35mm f/2 IS | 85 mkII L | 100L | EF-S 10-22 | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji X-T2 w/battery booster | 16mm f/1.4 | 56 f/1.2 | 10-24 f/4.0 | 55-200 | EF-X500

LOG IN TO REPLY
benji25
Senior Member
benji25's Avatar
Joined Jan 2010
Twin Cities
Post has been edited 1 month ago by benji25.
Sep 18, 2017 16:33 |  #5445

AlanU wrote in post #18455155 (external link)
If Fuji did build a full frame sensor this would create cleaner files. Fuji's 12800 is acceptable but it's still no where near a Nikon or even Canon full frame. I've noticed that people seem to be a tad more critical in image quality these days.

I think this is the issue right here. To me everyone that uses a fuji seems to not be pixels peepers. Yes there are probably lenses and camera that out perform it if you look at 100% crop or at high ISO.

But everyone I know that uses Fuji uses it for 2 reasons: The form factor and the colors. Their lenses are sharp enough. The AF is good enough. The buffer and FPS are good enough. Yes you can look at other things that are bigger and more expensive but you only notice a difference if you specifically look for it and most times only if you compare side by side.

I think Fuji's marketing team nailed it. Just look at Zac Arias and his video on sensor size. Everyone I see on YouTube that uses Fuji and such all seem to be of the same style: they are sick of MP wars, pixel peeping and waiting 5 years between cameras. It is almost like they are concerned more about the emotion and art than the numbers and technology. In comes Fuji with very capable cameras in a fun form factor and good customer service to boot. A DOUBLING of the AF speed on a free firmware update? Like. Jesus. Fuji is nailing it right now.

If Canon/Nikon/Sony keep competing on pixel-peeping level differences they are going to continue to lose.


Websiteexternal link
flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

626,116 views & 2312 likes for this thread
Fuji Users Unite - Post your comments, questions and images here
FORUMS Other Digital Cameras Fuji Digital Cameras


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00704 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.04s
Latest registered member is jjj9070749
829 guests, 439 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016