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

 
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
EverydayGetaway's Avatar
9,769 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Oct 2012
Bowie, MD
Sep 18, 2017 16:56 |  #5446

AlanU wrote in post #18455155 (external link)
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 :)

You could easily (and I frequently do) make the same exact argument for APS-C vs FF.

Modern sensors have gotten to the point where we're honestly just splitting hairs. You can create beautiful professional images consistently with M43's these days, the format war should have ended years ago, but too many people are obsessed with 1:1+ views. Just my $0.02.


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T // XF 18mm f2 // Rokinon 12mm f2 // XF 35mm f1.4 // Rokinon 21mm f1.4 // XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 // XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 // Rokinon 85mm f1.4 // Zhonghi Lensturbo ii // Various adapted MF lenses
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
Joined Feb 2008
Vancouver, BC
Sep 18, 2017 17:56 |  #5447

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18455186 (external link)
You could easily (and I frequently do) make the same exact argument for APS-C vs FF.

Modern sensors have gotten to the point where we're honestly just splitting hairs. You can create beautiful professional images consistently with M43's these days, the format war should have ended years ago, but too many people are obsessed with 1:1+ views. Just my $0.02.

What is the need for a Fuji medium format then? They are in the arena with big companies playing the mega pixel race and medium format performance.

I'm not a pixel peeper. If you talked to me 10yrs ago I was extremely critical but now I am critical when I buy new lenses for my mirrored bodies. Once I deem a lens perfect I do not pixel peep. When I buy new lenses for Fuji I just blindly have faith that it's perfect :)

I wonder if the only Fuji users buying medium format needs them for billboards. Otherwise I do not fully understand why Fuji jumped in if the current system fully meets all of the requirements?? There are Stock photo photographers using full frame and I guess crop sensors too. I'm just curious to see sales numbers for the new Fuji medium format camera. I guess it's a budget medium format camera for serious studios that do not want to spend PhaseOne or Hassie sticker prices. Even so I cannot see the GFX surpassing sales that much since Medium format is quite a niche system in it's infancy.

I just know many like the fuji render. The world is interesting as very few print. So far viewing alot of fuji forums and websites I see maybe 90-95%?????? artistic nature not heavily weighted for events photographers. Perhaps the entire draw to fuji is this type of photography is more specific?

Again a camera is just a tool for specific needs for individuals application. Many applications in the world of photography.


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
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. 4 edits done in total.
Sep 18, 2017 17:56 |  #5448

AlanU wrote in post #18455155 (external link)
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 ?

Well the pixel size on the GFX is twice that of the D850, twice.

The D850's pixel sites are less then 1/4 bigger than the X-T2's. So there's that. Then you do get the fall off of colours and tone - nothing quite like it, it's just so gentle. But really is you take it that the difference between APS-C and FF is negligible, and if you take it that the difference between FF and MF-c is also negligible, the difference between APS-C and MF-c is much larger. Go shoot a Phase1 XF100Mp all you see a big difference, at home, OMG the detail and dynamic range of that sensor compared to any FF camera. MAAAAAAAaaaaaa...

Sorry lost the run of myself there, you get a couple of points of extra dynamic range from the GFX over the D850, the 24Mp X-trans has about the same range as the D850, not quite but it's really close.

Go borrow one and shoot if for a week, properly, and see if you don't want one afterwards, then you'll know.

I know I said this before but little of what I shoot is at 12800, most is well below that so I, for one, don't need a camera that shoots much above that. Lucky me :)

Fujifilm's entire camera division [Including their broadcast lens] only makes up 4% of the revenue of the company so I doubt they'd ever make a FF mirrorless now that the GFX is out, especially when you consider their views on FF.


EDIT: I forgot the biggest benefit of shooting Medium Format over Full Frame, telling others on the internet that their camera is not professional as it's sensor is too small. Oh the looks...


Fuji: X-PRO2, X-T1, X-E2 | 16/1.4, 18/2, 23/1.4, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 90/2, 16-55/2.8, 10-24/4. AD600BM, TT865F, AL-H198, ThinkTank AS2, Peli1514, Ona Bowery, Matthews Grip
flickr (external link)Instagram (external link)Blog (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
rantercsr
Goldmember
rantercsr's Avatar
Joined Mar 2014
Sep 18, 2017 18:13 |  #5449

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18455031 (external link)
And you can just see the off bits on his hoody and back of head here. The 16-55 @2.8 & 44mm
QUOTED IMAGE
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/soAg​Tt] (external link)Colin (external link) by Kim Farrelly (external link), on Flickr


i'm ready to order this lens.. theres one on fredmiranda i'm very tempted to buy ..

i'm assuming you have canon history as you've posted canon pics..

would you consider this Fuji's very good attempt at a 24-70 2.8 mkii?
I don't just mean focal length equivalent.. but quality , is this as close as it gets?
with canon I loved the lens , on my t4i and 5d3 .. prime like quality .
would you say that is the case with Fuji's 16-55 as well?

otherwise i'd rather just get the kit lens (18-55?) and continue with primes ..


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
Two ­ Hot ­ Shoes
Goldmember
Two Hot Shoes's Avatar
Joined Apr 2014
Ireland
Sep 18, 2017 18:28 as a reply to rantercsr's post |  #5450

Yes came from Canon. All I can say is the AF is very quick & the bokeh, as you might notice, is quite nice. The lens is weather sealed and built like a brick. If you shoot events you get constant f/2.8 so you don't have to keep sawing at your ISO/SS every time you zoom. I like it and it's in my bag on almost every shoot but I don't often shoot with it, I really like primes and always did. It's practical but I don't really love it but I do take it out when I feeling lazy or inconsistent. I think using a few primes [constant angels of view] can help you tell he story of and day better. If you get my drift there.

The quality is there in the 16-55/2.8 both in build and QI as fas as I'm concerned. The 18-55 2.8-4 would do well in most places too and you get OIS, not that you really need it in a wide angle but if it's there fine. My thoughts are in the blog if you want more of my take on it.


Fuji: X-PRO2, X-T1, X-E2 | 16/1.4, 18/2, 23/1.4, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 90/2, 16-55/2.8, 10-24/4. AD600BM, TT865F, AL-H198, ThinkTank AS2, Peli1514, Ona Bowery, Matthews Grip
flickr (external link)Instagram (external link)Blog (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
Joined Feb 2008
Vancouver, BC
Sep 18, 2017 18:31 |  #5451

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18455234 (external link)
Well the pixel size is on the GFX is twice that of the D850, twice.

The D850's pixel sites are less then 1/4 bigger than the X-T2's. So there's that. Then you do get the fall off of colours and tone - nothing quite like it, it's just so gentle. But really is you take it that the difference between APS-C and FF is negligible, and if you take it that the difference between FF and MF-c is also negligible, the difference between APS-C and MF-c is much larger. Go shoot a Phase1 XF100Mp all you see a big difference, at home, OMG the detail and dynamic range of that sensor compared to any FF camera. MAAAAAAAaaaaaa...

Sorry lost the run of myself there, you get a couple of points of extra dynamic range from the GFX over the D850, the 24Mp X-trans has about the same range as the D850, not quite but it's really close.

Go borrow one and shoot if for a week, properly, and see if you don't want one afterwards, then you'll know.

I know I said this before but little of what I shoot is at 12800, most is well below that so I, for one, don't need a camera that shoots much above that. Lucky me :)

Fujifilm's entire camera division [Including their broadcast lens] only makes up 4% of the revenue of the company so I doubt they'd ever make a FF mirrorless now that the GFX is out, especially when you consider their views on FF.

Kim,

I've only played with a digital PhaseOne. Scary how many pixels you can play with. I haven't bothered my friend much lately as he works for a large company that basically has rentals and sales mainly for professionals.

I can see that pixel density plays a big role in medium format. I still do not see the need for majority of photographers needing medium format for the price they charge locally anyways. I'm trying to speak in sensible terms for working professionals that do not charge large like ANNIE LEIBOVITZ for the Royal family. Even high profile portrait photographers like Sue Bryce uses Canon full frames for her portrait work. Her kit doesn't even comprise of high res Canon bodies.

I would think Landscape/cityscape photogs love dynamic range as well as events photographers accidentally messing up exposure when the document events. Portrait photographers have much more control over light using scrims both indoor and outdoors and have more control over manipulating light.

A regular fuji shooter should not be envious of the Fuji medium format. An affordable approach to me would be going high res camera's from Canon or Nikon full frames for affordable gear that has alot of pixels to play with plus excellent dynamic range.

Odd how a while back Fuji shooters said 16MP was a manageable amount of pixels even for relatively larger print. The 24MP came out and fuji shooters got alot more confidence in larger print. A very costly approach for more pixels Fuji wants loyal users to buy a GFX medium format body I guess. My sensible brain thinks that is quite a bold jump in $$$$

I'm very happy with 24MP fuji crop sensor. I think the next wave of Fuji sensors they will jam higher MP in their crop sensor since they are not going to enter the full frame realm.

Off topic. I just recently taken some photos of a yoga studio for website, print and social media. I used my X-t2 with 10-24mm and 16mm. In those situations I would typically use my Canon gear. I was very pleased with my Fuji performance but even during Lightroom editing I know that my 5d4 is substantially cleaner in all of the images using available light. High iso the X-t2 did well but I do bite my tongue in loss of detail but with pleasant noise.

Here's the thing..........

In reality on a webpage presentation or print the fuji files look killer. My Canon satisfies my mind and it would look equally as killer. My point is my personal preference in cleaner files does get the best of me sometimes "ideally" speaking. Realistically speaking depending on presentation you can get away with the noise. I do notice when a photog wants to present an image but gets distracted noise they convert the file to black and white...(savior). So many ways to skin a cat when it comes to photography.

Man I just cannot justify spending on a Fuji GFX $9100 CDN (body only, incl tax) for the price I charge for a photo session or portrait session LOL!!! I can almost buy 2 x Canon 5dmk4 for that money.


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
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
Joined Feb 2008
Vancouver, BC
Sep 18, 2017 18:39 |  #5452

rantercsr wrote in post #18455241 (external link)
i'm ready to order this lens.. theres one on fredmiranda i'm very tempted to buy ..

i'm assuming you have canon history as you've posted canon pics..

would you consider this Fuji's very good attempt at a 24-70 2.8 mkii?
I don't just mean focal length equivalent.. but quality , is this as close as it gets?
with canon I loved the lens , on my t4i and 5d3 .. prime like quality .
would you say that is the case with Fuji's 16-55 as well?

otherwise i'd rather just get the kit lens (18-55?) and continue with primes ..


If your ever concerned with full creative control you'll never ever go wrong with a constant aperture zoom.

I regret selling my 18-55 but ultimately if I want to increase my versatility of my Fuji gear I'll "need" to buy a 16-55.

If you want to get into analysis just understand that your previous 5d3 with 24-70Lf/2.8mkii will have different bokeh and "3d pop" than a Fuji with 16-55. This is no different using a Canon 80D with canon 17-55 f/2.8 vs any Full frame with 24-70 f/2.8 equivalence. The 80D shooting wide open will be like your previous 5dmk3 shooting a 24-70mkii @ f/4 instead of f/2.8. You loose some of the 3d "pop" with the 80D shooting wideopen with a fast f/2.8 zoom.

This is just my observation while shooting events. If your a prime shooter we can totally "NOT" miss shallow dof to a certain extent with fuji sensor.


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
rantercsr
Goldmember
rantercsr's Avatar
Joined Mar 2014
Post has been edited 1 month ago by rantercsr.
Sep 18, 2017 18:53 |  #5453

AlanU wrote in post #18455269 (external link)
If your ever concerned with full creative control you'll never ever go wrong with a constant aperture zoom.

I regret selling my 18-55 but ultimately if I want to increase my versatility of my Fuji gear I'll "need" to buy a 16-55.

If you want to get into analysis just understand that your previous 5d3 with 24-70Lf/2.8mkii will have different bokeh and "3d pop" than a Fuji with 16-55. This is no different using a Canon 80D with canon 17-55 f/2.8 vs any Full frame with 24-70 f/2.8 equivalence. The 80D shooting wide open will be like your previous 5dmk3 shooting a 24-70mkii @ f/4 instead of f/2.8. You loose some of the 3d "pop" with the 80D shooting wideopen with a fast f/2.8 zoom.

This is just my observation while shooting events. If your a prime shooter we can totally "NOT" miss shallow dof to a certain extent with fuji sensor.


I bought the 24-70mkii when I only had the t4i and had never owned a FF camera.. people said it was a poor choice.. and still do .
I was instantly wowed by the image quality ..NEVER regretted it don't care what anyone on this forum says about putting premium L glass on an apsc sensor .,. (and tony Northrup , as much as I love his content )
got the 5d3 , and was like my old lens but a bit sharper and a different look..(aka..more bokeh)

so , if the 16-55 f2.8, Fuji's premium "24-70 2.8" equivalent cant give me the same or almost the same feel on my xt2 that canons premium 24-70 2.8 did on a 2012 rebel .. then I don't think I want it ..not for 1200 bucks .. id rather the kit lens for 1/3 the price used and continue with primes


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
Two ­ Hot ­ Shoes
Goldmember
Two Hot Shoes's Avatar
Joined Apr 2014
Ireland
Sep 18, 2017 18:57 as a reply to AlanU's post |  #5454

I already have a Fuji camera that as the same dynamic [very almost] as a modern full frame camera with more than enough to print anything I need, ish. The GFX has way more dynamic range than a FF & the photo sites are twice the size.

I'm sure some Fuji 16Mp shooters said that alright I know my 24Mp camera want out on loan to a friend who is also an X-Photographer, he hadn't got his yet and he was shooting the promos for a TV show so was worried about the print size. He ended up not using it and the 2m tall print worked out well from his X-T1.

From a business point of view I don't need a GFX, still want one though as it's a big jump is QI over the smaller sensors, FF not so much. I just need to figure out if I can make it work, it's a lot of headshots. So my for use in work and at home Fuji's system is perfect for now, moving back across to FF would be pointless for me as it's such a small step, a much bigger step is to MF.

Fuji 12800ISO, I'll stand by my images posted a page ago.


Fuji: X-PRO2, X-T1, X-E2 | 16/1.4, 18/2, 23/1.4, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 90/2, 16-55/2.8, 10-24/4. AD600BM, TT865F, AL-H198, ThinkTank AS2, Peli1514, Ona Bowery, Matthews Grip
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
Sep 18, 2017 19:09 as a reply to rantercsr's post |  #5455

You'll loose one stop of DOF over FF. That's it. Nothing about 3D-POPing out your subject as far as I understand it anyway. Why not borrow/rent one for a few days & find out.


Fuji: X-PRO2, X-T1, X-E2 | 16/1.4, 18/2, 23/1.4, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 90/2, 16-55/2.8, 10-24/4. AD600BM, TT865F, AL-H198, ThinkTank AS2, Peli1514, Ona Bowery, Matthews Grip
flickr (external link)Instagram (external link)Blog (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
Joined Feb 2008
Vancouver, BC
Sep 18, 2017 19:22 |  #5456

rantercsr wrote in post #18455281 (external link)
I bought the 24-70mkii when I only had the t4i and had never owned a FF camera.. people said it was a poor choice.. and still do .
I was instantly wowed by the image quality ..NEVER regretted it don't care what anyone on this forum says about putting premium L glass on an apsc sensor .,. (and tony Northrup , as much as I love his content )
got the 5d3 , and was like my old lens but a bit sharper and a different look..(aka..more bokeh)

so , if the 16-55 f2.8, Fuji's premium "24-70 2.8" equivalent cant give me the same or almost the same feel on my xt2 that canons premium 24-70 2.8 did on a 2012 rebel .. then I don't think I want it ..not for 1200 bucks .. id rather the kit lens for 1/3 the price used and continue with primes

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18455300 (external link)
You'll loose one stop of DOF over FF. That's it. Nothing about 3D-POPing out your subject as far as I understand it anyway. Why not borrow/rent one for a few days & find out.

Take Kim's suggestion and rent. The Fuji 16-55 should give you great images. Please note 70mm @ f/2.8 will produce more compression (potentially more bokeh depending on your subject/camera distance) than a 55mm long end of the Fuji lens. All in all I would imagine dof would be so close to the Canon crop and Fuji crop.

When I first bought my Canon full frame i was told to be aware of the different look I will get shooting wideopen on a zoom. To my eyes 1 stop faster zoom on a full frame produces a different look compared to a crop sensor with f/2.8 zoom. This is what i've really liked initially when I first exposed myself to a full frame during events photography.

If you love prime lenses i'd say stick with it as long as it keeps your workflow undisturbed. If you need the versatility i always try to have constant aperture zooms for certain events.


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
rantercsr
Goldmember
rantercsr's Avatar
Joined Mar 2014
Post has been edited 1 month ago by rantercsr.
Sep 18, 2017 19:34 |  #5457

very aware of the diffenece at same focal lengths in apsc and full frame..

I was referring to sharpness and detail

.. but anyways yes maybe renting is a good idea


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
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
Joined Feb 2008
Vancouver, BC
Sep 18, 2017 19:39 |  #5458

rantercsr wrote in post #18455317 (external link)
very aware of the diffenece at same focal lengths in apsc and full frame..

I was referring to sharpness and detail

.. but anyways yes maybe renting is a good idea


I must test a 16-55 as well.

i will admit the 24-70L f/2.8 mk2 is a freak lens that is like a prime lens. I love using it when I use it:)


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
jrscls
Goldmember
Joined Mar 2008
Pittsburgh, PA
Post has been last edited 1 month ago by jrscls. 2 edits done in total.
Sep 18, 2017 20:00 |  #5459

rantercsr wrote in post #18455317 (external link)
very aware of the diffenece at same focal lengths in apsc and full frame..

I was referring to sharpness and detail

.. but anyways yes maybe renting is a good idea

I was a long time Canon shooter (5D III and 6D) and Nikon D750, so I have shot my share of FF cameras. The X-T2 with Fuji primes has every bit of detail and sharpness as far as I can tell. You really need to get a high resolution FF body and corresponding lenses if you want significant more detail (e.g. Nikon D850).


Fujifilm X-T2, Power Vertical Grip, XF 16mm f/1.4 R WR, XF 23mm f/1.4 R, XF 35mm f/2 R WR, XF 56mm f/1.2 R, XF 90mm f/2 R LM WR, Flashpoint R2 Strobes/Flashes

LOG IN TO REPLY
Osa713
Senior Member
Osa713's Avatar
Joined Jun 2011
Houston, TX
Sep 18, 2017 20:59 |  #5460

benji25 wrote in post #18455166 (external link)
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.

This was beautiful, I shed a tear on my keyboard.


Do not reply to spam, report it!

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

630,944 views & 2350 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 0.0077 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.06s
Latest registered member is lookingglassphoto
950 guests, 443 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016