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

 
FORUMS Other Digital Cameras Fuji Digital Cameras 
Thread started 09 Feb 2018 (Friday) 22:30
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Fuji X-H1 with IBIS

 
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
6,996 posts
Gallery: 69 photos
Likes: 895
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Mar 27, 2018 10:24 |  #181

Jeff Hanson wrote in post #18594912 (external link)
Am I the only one trying to suppress my brain from imagining the involuntary documentations?


Oops I mean I volunteer for my kids elementary school both video and stills.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 35mm f/2 IS | 85 mkII L | | 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 | 50-140 | TT685
Sony A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Two ­ Hot ­ Shoes
Goldmember
Avatar
2,928 posts
Gallery: 319 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 2967
Joined Apr 2014
Location: Ireland
     
Mar 27, 2018 10:34 as a reply to  @ post 18594903 |  #182

Great shots Menelaus.

Alan: A follow focus moves the rotation to the side of a camera [Usually] and allows you to easily mark off the focus points, with a pen/marker on the FF ring itself - very handy. All they do is turn the focus ring of the lens.

Fly by wire focus systems usually don't work linearly, none that I know of anyway, with a nonlinear lens if you give a small but fast twist you'll get a longer focus pull than you would by giving the same degree of throw at a slower rotation.

Bobby, I think I missed that bit when it was launched - pity as it's good and just further confirms Fuji's lean towards better Video with the X-H1.


Fuji: X-PRO2, X-T3. 16/1.4, 18/2, 23/1.4, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 90/2, 16-55/2.8, 50-140/2.8.
Pelican, Ona, ThinkTank, Matthews Grip, Elinchrom

Gear & Discounts (external link)Instagram (external link)Blog (external link)
Coffee & Fujis (external link)YouTube (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rantercsr
Goldmember
Avatar
2,846 posts
Gallery: 34 photos
Likes: 5241
Joined Mar 2014
     
Mar 27, 2018 10:46 |  #183

The linear focus option works in photo as well as video. Don't know if that was answered .
When they announced it, I was very happy about it..
Great for both vid and photo.


I got a couple of Cameras and lenses ...Canon, Sony, Fuji, Pansonic, pentax
My portraits IG (external link)My everything else IG (external link)
MY flickr (external link)
My latest YT video -->https://youtu.be/YzJ1o​eiHm7Y (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
19,281 posts
Likes: 1333
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Mar 27, 2018 11:09 |  #184

I think it is little things that Fuji does which are important.


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Two ­ Hot ­ Shoes
Goldmember
Avatar
2,928 posts
Gallery: 319 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 2967
Joined Apr 2014
Location: Ireland
     
Mar 27, 2018 16:09 |  #185

rantercsr wrote in post #18594951 (external link)
The linear focus option works in photo as well as video. Don't know if that was answered .
When they announced it, I was very happy about it..
Great for both vid and photo.

Yes, particularly if you have the lenses with hard stops, like the 23/1.4 and 16/1.4


Fuji: X-PRO2, X-T3. 16/1.4, 18/2, 23/1.4, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 90/2, 16-55/2.8, 50-140/2.8.
Pelican, Ona, ThinkTank, Matthews Grip, Elinchrom

Gear & Discounts (external link)Instagram (external link)Blog (external link)
Coffee & Fujis (external link)YouTube (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,425 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 3373
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
Post edited 11 months ago by EverydayGetaway.
     
Mar 27, 2018 20:33 |  #186

AlanU wrote in post #18594274 (external link)
Keep us posted on the self analysis of how canon render with new generation nano coated glass appears less film like vs fujifilm with their lens lineup. There is a difference I can see with my personal gear I own and shoot with. Not seeking the internet for someone else’s experience.

Renting/buy/borrow new modern gear from other manufacturers will give you a real feel of the differences vs YouTube and internet research. No need to reply if you have not used the gear. Hard to come to your own conclusion as an expert researcher over the internet.

And yet here you are, constantly spewing your rhetoric as though it's factual and provable without ever proving anything. I seriously don't understand how you're not getting the issue here.

If you don't know how to support your own stance than just stop being so outspoken about it, because what's the point if all you're going to do as a follow up is tell everyone to "try it for themselves" and belittle the demonstrations/example​s of other people on the internet then your posts contribute absolutely nothing to the discussion. BTW, have you tried the X-H1? The a7iii you ordered? An a7S? No? Do you get the problem here yet?

Seriously, I would LOVE to see you explain your stance on prints and other viewing mediums that we discussed (or rather, tried to discus since you ignored my follow up) earlier.

AlanU wrote in post #18594665 (external link)
Compare an old generation 24-70L f2.8 and 70-200L f2.8is vs the newer gereration mark 2 versions and that's an extremely big difference in sharpness. Even the 24L vs 24Lmk2, 35L vs 35Lmk2 (even 35 f/2IS) was a very big change. All newer generation mk2 glass is sharper and more clean looking. If you've owned an old 5d classic to the 5d2 there was a big change in how Canon render has changed over the recent years of new generation nano coated lenses...... more sharp and less film like [...]

[...]If you've owned a Canon 100L and compare it to a newer 100L IS the two lenses render completely different. If you analyze the 135L, 85 f/1.8, 85Lmk2 f/1.2, 35Lmk1 that all were sharp but the new nano coatings have completely transformed the canon look much more sharper. Also colours seems more lush for some reason.

The Fuji 16mm is a fine lens and the sharpness "look" resembles more of the Canon 24L mk1 on a 5d2/5d3 and definitely NOT like the 24Lmk2. In lightroom I really dig the 56mm f/1.2 and it has that same type of sharpness you get with an old clunker 85Lmk2 f/1.2 that we own. Test a Sigma 85ART or 85 f/1.4IS and you'd see a difference in how the image renders and nothing like Fuji "look".

Again, that's already been refuted. If you disagree, show us why. 24L mk2 vs XF 16/1.4 https://ivanjoshualoh.​com …1/30/x-pro2-takes-on-5d3/ (external link)

Man, you're a marketing teams dream. You really bite on those buzz words, huh? :lol:

AlanU wrote in post #18594665 (external link)
I've never played with the GFX raw files or 5ds raw files so I cannot comment at all about how the fuji or higher RES canon file feels in LR.

I will say just using the 5dmk4 I find all of my lenses as improved noticeably in how the image looks. Just those extra megapixels have improved my image quality. Next phase for me is considering on buying an A7Rmk3 for the high resolution and amazing sensor. A7iii is showing up soon so I will be conducting my own conclusion with a 24MP sony sensor with Sigma adapter with my Canon glass.


The Fuji crop sensor files have this certain unique look in how the image renders as you know. I just can't pony up for a GFX for a niche application.

Looking forward to hearing your opinion if you conduct the test. If not no worries....... I'm on a research path at the moment and new hardware for real hands on testing.

The "uniqueness" you keep referring to has almost entirely to do with how the RAW converter is treating the file. Throw both files into CO or even PS and edit them both using the same presets and color profile and you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference (as has been discussed with you by myself and others with examples on numerous occasions). If you're shooting Fuji entirely for how the files "look" (and not talking JPEGs out of camera) then you're shooting Fuji for the wrong reasons.

Now when it comes to JPEG output, yes, Fuji has a definite head above most manufacturers and I'd love to see them share that "Eterna" love with the other cameras in the X system :)


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T // XF 18mm f2 // XF 35mm f1.4 // XF 60mm f2.4 // Rokinon 12mm f2 // 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
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
6,996 posts
Gallery: 69 photos
Likes: 895
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Mar 28, 2018 08:04 |  #187

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18595340 (external link)
And yet here you are, constantly spewing your rhetoric as though it's factual and provable without ever proving anything. I seriously don't understand how you're not getting the issue here.

If you don't know how to support your own stance than just stop being so outspoken about it, because what's the point if all you're going to do as a follow up is tell everyone to "try it for themselves" and belittle the demonstrations/example​s of other people on the internet then your posts contribute absolutely nothing to the discussion. BTW, have you tried the X-H1? The a7iii you ordered? An a7S? No? Do you get the problem here yet?

Seriously, I would LOVE to see you explain your stance on prints and other viewing mediums that we discussed (or rather, tried to discus since you ignored my follow up) earlier.

Again, that's already been refuted. If you disagree, show us why. 24L mk2 vs XF 16/1.4 https://ivanjoshualoh.​com …1/30/x-pro2-takes-on-5d3/ (external link)

Man, you're a marketing teams dream. You really bite on those buzz words, huh? :lol:

The "uniqueness" you keep referring to has almost entirely to do with how the RAW converter is treating the file. Throw both files into CO or even PS and edit them both using the same presets and color profile and you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference (as has been discussed with you by myself and others with examples on numerous occasions). If you're shooting Fuji entirely for how the files "look" (and not talking JPEGs out of camera) then you're shooting Fuji for the wrong reasons.

Now when it comes to JPEG output, yes, Fuji has a definite head above most manufacturers and I'd love to see them share that "Eterna" love with the other cameras in the X system :)

On print you're saying you cannot hide digital noise? Average size photos for many consumers is 5x7. Even 8x10 can still hide deficiencies. I printed a Canon 80D digital files that fell apart in low light on purpose for experimentation. Printing 5x7 the image looked fantastic which would have shocked you if you looked at the file on a computer monitor. I've had this kind of discussion numerous of times at the my friends pro lab. I just looked up the specs of the Noritsu wetlab and it's selectable at 300 dpi to 640 dpi. I take photos and not really going to be scientific about what my Pro lab does for me. I wont regurgitate theory of dry/wet lab printing from the internet and appear to be a professor in the science of print. PRINT is a photographers best friend.....

I've attended two Sony Demo's and played with the A7iii enough to say it's a different beast in body AF response over my X-t2. Didn't handle the X-H1 all that long as the excited fuji folks were drooling at the demo LOL. I was not really digging the bulbous hand grip and I've already decided the size of camera wasn't the biggest issue (pun intended) but the small battery and same 24MP sensor was the deal killer. IBIS was the only thing that intrigued me. It would be imperative for me to use a battery booster grip with that camera and that just doesn't sit right in large form factor. I might as well just use the gear I already own and use the 5dmk4 for casual video and entirely different performance over the Fuji system.

The old A7S I didn't care for the horrible grip. Battery life was also extremely disappointing. I'll admit the only draw I had was that it was full frame and very good high iso performance but low mega pixels didn't thrill me either. I didn't want to put much investment in sony glass when the A7S was first introduced 4yrs ago?? The Sony A7iii is extremely comfortable with the new grip, high iso is well....nothing like Fuji!! My 5dmk4 is getting extremely tough competition in the iso department. A7iii AF speed it refreshingly instant and battery life is the way it should be for a single battery. 24MP is a sweet spot in resolution too. Already picked up a Sigma MC-11 for my Canon lenses. Next to buy is the batis 25f2 and cheap Sony 85 f1.8.

Is the link you provided suppose to inform people??? Comparing photos from a FF at f/1.4 vs Crop at f/1.4 is not logical. I use my X-t2 w/ 16mm a lot simply due to convenience. My 5dkm4 with 24Lmk2 totally delivers too. If you cannot tell the difference that is fine.

Photographer's have a choice in their tools. I'm a doer.....I'll make my own conclusions with my own personal gear and compare. If people cannot tell the difference while post processing your own images from an X-t2/Xpro2 w/fuji 16mm to a 5dmk4 with 24Lmk2 I cannot comment on their vision. Fuji users are just spoiled that the image quality is very good but there is no "mark 2" versions to really use as a reference point. Going from a 24L to 24Lmk2 was extremely rewarding. 24-70L to mk2 is an extremely big upgrade. 70-200 f/2.8IS from mk1 to mk2 was a massive upgrade too. I didn't get this experience and observation from watching youtube videos or someone elses blog on the internet :) I'll admit I read and watch but I do not base facts on internet research. However you do not hear me ask people to prove it...prove it..... I'll figure it out myself!

Fuji will really change the game if they put IBIS in the X-t3. This would be the stills photographer's innovative step for both zoom and prime shooters. They can retain the X-h2 as a larger body for 4k bliss with evolutionary updates.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 35mm f/2 IS | 85 mkII L | | 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 | 50-140 | TT685
Sony A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Two ­ Hot ­ Shoes
Goldmember
Avatar
2,928 posts
Gallery: 319 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 2967
Joined Apr 2014
Location: Ireland
     
Mar 28, 2018 08:59 as a reply to  @ AlanU's post |  #188

Yea small battery, the same one in all the newer cameras, I think that is great now all my Fuji camera use the same battery. In the real world people are getting 1000 shots with almost a 1/4 of the battery left. How much battery did you say you need to get the shot?

I don't find the hand grip all that big, much bigger than the X-T2 alright, but that's what people asked for and the battery grip fits like the X-T1/GFX flush mounted ones. A lot nicer to move about on.

I have no complaints about the sensor even if it is now just two years 'old' Readout speed & ISO are great as is the dynamic range - it mixes it up with the full frame sensors here. Have a look at the measured DR from the knuckle dragging 'new sensor' Canon 80D, the 5D4, A73 and the X100f. Very close between the full frames and the Fuji there so tell me again what's the deal breaker with the Fuji cropped sensor?
http://www.photonstoph​otos.net …m%20X100F,Sony%​20ILCE-7M3 (external link)


Comparing full frame to crop, this is what you have been doing all this thread, comparing a Full frame Canon or Sony to a crop Fuji. I find that article by Ivan Joshua Loh highly relative given the contact of this thread. Proof is in the pudding and all that. See, simple statements of findings and the examples to support them. Now all can have a look/read at the words and see for themselves if they agree, rather and blindly doing so or and more to the point not being able to do so as their [Sometimes vast] experience tells them the opposite.

Ivan simply posts a picture of a hat to help demonstrate his points. I mean, how hard can that be for someone to do to show why one lens is so much better. Anyone could do that by plonking a hat beside a window and taking two shots with two difference cameras/lenses... Anyone who makes the claims that is.


Fuji: X-PRO2, X-T3. 16/1.4, 18/2, 23/1.4, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 90/2, 16-55/2.8, 50-140/2.8.
Pelican, Ona, ThinkTank, Matthews Grip, Elinchrom

Gear & Discounts (external link)Instagram (external link)Blog (external link)
Coffee & Fujis (external link)YouTube (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
F2Bthere
Goldmember
Avatar
1,029 posts
Likes: 452
Joined Oct 2015
     
Mar 28, 2018 09:02 |  #189

I'm noticing a few trends in this conversation which are leading us down a path which is more "personal" and less about the gear and photography--the reason I am guessing most of us are here: to discuss gear and photography. I could be wrong about this, since there are folks who go see hockey games hoping a fight will break out, but I believe most of us don't want to watch grown men (?) thrashing it out in the forum.

So these are the three trends I am noticing:

One is that sometimes a person notices a valid difference and draws too broad of a conclusion from the difference.

Another is that statements are made using language in a way that is not clear to everyone reading it and this leads to problems.

A third is that a person notices a difference between two things and decides that the cause is one of the features which differs between two systems and doesn't realize the cause may be something else.

I think I could give plenty of examples of these issues from the last few pages of responses. If I phrased them carefully and not personally, I might persuade the poster to see the truth. Or not. But I would certainly have a good chance of protecting the "innocent bystanders" from misinformation without creating more arguments which serve no one except perhaps the individual(s) involved in the argument.

Or I can attack the person making the statement, causing them to attack back, leading to pages of high-energy interaction with little value for anyone (except, maybe, for the people who are embattled and those who like to watch a good fight).

Please, if you are annoyed with the person who posted, take a break, have some coffee, a walk, some sleep, and wait 24 hours before typing your response so we can all benefit from your experience without having to suffer through a bunch of personal bashing.


C&C always welcomed...
On my images, of course, and on my words as well--as long as it's constructive :).
https://www.instagram.​com/storyinpictures_co​m/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,425 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 3373
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Mar 28, 2018 10:28 |  #190

AlanU wrote in post #18595622 (external link)
On print you're saying you cannot hide digital noise? Average size photos for many consumers is 5x7. Even 8x10 can still hide deficiencies. I printed a Canon 80D digital files that fell apart in low light on purpose for experimentation. Printing 5x7 the image looked fantastic which would have shocked you if you looked at the file on a computer monitor. I've had this kind of discussion numerous of times at the my friends pro lab. I just looked up the specs of the Noritsu wetlab and it's selectable at 300 dpi to 640 dpi. I take photos and not really going to be scientific about what my Pro lab does for me. I wont regurgitate theory of dry/wet lab printing from the internet and appear to be a professor in the science of print. PRINT is a photographers best friend.....

I agree, print is a photographers best friend, which is why it's important to be specific when you make broad claims about what print does to/for your images. Most photographers have a deep appreciation for the art, thus they tend to make larger prints than "consumers" who largely only print up to 5x7. I like to print poster size (20"x30"), are you suggesting that a print of that size is "hiding noise"?

You still haven't answered as to what medium you have people view your photos through, or what medium you yourself view them on. You've said in numerous threads that web size viewing hides all the differences between cameras, and make the same exact claims when it comes to print... so if there's no difference when actually viewing the images, why the constant debate over IQ?

AlanU wrote in post #18595622 (external link)
24MP is a sweet spot in resolution too.

Sounds like a "fact" based on something you read on the internet... :-P

AlanU wrote in post #18595622 (external link)
Is the link you provided suppose to inform people??? Comparing photos from a FF at f/1.4 vs Crop at f/1.4 is not logical. I use my X-t2 w/ 16mm a lot simply due to convenience. My 5dkm4 with 24Lmk2 totally delivers too. If you cannot tell the difference that is fine.

How is it illogical? He doesn't say what aperture he's using, but judging from the crops of both photos the DOF looks to be as near as makes no difference and yet sharpness between them looks to be a wash. If the 24Lmk2 "blows the 16mm away" then the difference should be clear and obvious... it isn't. If you've observed otherwise... please show us ;)

AlanU wrote in post #18595622 (external link)
Fuji users are just spoiled that the image quality is very good but there is no "mark 2" versions to really use as a reference point. Going from a 24L to 24Lmk2 was extremely rewarding. 24-70L to mk2 is an extremely big upgrade. 70-200 f/2.8IS from mk1 to mk2 was a massive upgrade too. I didn't get this experience and observation from watching youtube videos or someone elses blog on the internet :) I'll admit I read and watch but I do not base facts on internet research. However you do not hear me ask people to prove it...prove it..... I'll figure it out myself!

What does that have to do with anything? So because there's no mk2 version of Fuji lenses somehow that means the mk1 versions are "worse" than Canon's offerings? I can't even begin to imagine where this line of reason comes from (other than marketing that your buying into full sail).

People are asking you to "prove it" because you're spouting it off as though it's an observable and even obvious fact... if that's true then proving it should be extremely easy.

Sorry for derailing this thread, it just really bothers me when misinformation is touted as fact that could be bought by newcomers who don't know any better than to buy into one persons conjecture..


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T // XF 18mm f2 // XF 35mm f1.4 // XF 60mm f2.4 // Rokinon 12mm f2 // 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
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
19,281 posts
Likes: 1333
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Mar 28, 2018 14:51 |  #191

Actually 70-200 f/2.8IS from mk1 to mk2 wasn't a big upgrade. I personally owned 70-200mm f2.8 non IS, 70-200mm f2.8 IS I and 70-200mm f2.8 IS II and 135L. Did all the testing side by side. Very small differences IMHO. Maybe my 70-200mm f2.8 IS I was exceptional which used to happen at that time with Canon lenses. My 400mm f5.6 wasn't that good as some other folks while my 100-400L version I was superb. This was before the days of focus adjust.


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
6,996 posts
Gallery: 69 photos
Likes: 895
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Mar 28, 2018 17:40 |  #192

bobbyz wrote in post #18595870 (external link)
Actually 70-200 f/2.8IS from mk1 to mk2 wasn't a big upgrade. I personally owned 70-200mm f2.8 non IS, 70-200mm f2.8 IS I and 70-200mm f2.8 IS II and 135L. Did all the testing side by side. Very small differences IMHO. Maybe my 70-200mm f2.8 IS I was exceptional which used to happen at that time with Canon lenses. My 400mm f5.6 wasn't that good as some other folks while my 100-400L version I was superb. This was before the days of focus adjust.

Bobby I think a large part of the Canon community would be very surprised to hear that there is little difference between 70-200 f2.8 IS mk1 vs mk2. It was my eye opener in prime lens quality in a zoom.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 35mm f/2 IS | 85 mkII L | | 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 | 50-140 | TT685
Sony A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rantercsr
Goldmember
Avatar
2,846 posts
Gallery: 34 photos
Likes: 5241
Joined Mar 2014
Post edited 11 months ago by rantercsr.
     
Mar 28, 2018 18:12 |  #193

a couple of my old pentax.. at shutter speeds i could never get away with on the xt2 with this lens (rokinon 85mm f1.4), hand held of course. only 3 way stabilization with adapted lenses .. I'll take it!!:lol:

IMAGE: https://farm1.staticflickr.com/817/39273331460_36dc3e6232_h.jpg
DSCF0430-Edit by Randall Herrera, on Flickr

IMAGE: https://farm1.staticflickr.com/887/41039317632_0eb8622aa9_h.jpg
DSCF0424-Edit by Randall Herrera, on Flickr

I got a couple of Cameras and lenses ...Canon, Sony, Fuji, Pansonic, pentax
My portraits IG (external link)My everything else IG (external link)
MY flickr (external link)
My latest YT video -->https://youtu.be/YzJ1o​eiHm7Y (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
19,281 posts
Likes: 1333
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
Post edited 11 months ago by bobbyz.
     
Mar 28, 2018 19:10 |  #194

AlanU wrote in post #18595967 (external link)
Bobby I think a large part of the Canon community would be very surprised to hear that there is little difference between 70-200 f2.8 IS mk1 vs mk2. It was my eye opener in prime lens quality in a zoom.

I care less about others. I had all three lenses with me. How many you know do that.:lol: And when I say a lens is sharp I don't lie. Ask folks who bought my $300 30mm f1.4 or the Sigma 85mm f1.4 not Art. My 70-200mm f2.8 non IS had sort of broken but was sent to Canon Irvine for fixing. They fixed it real well, that is all I can say. 70-200mm f2.8 IS II has more contrast just like that 24-70mm f2.8 II. Some like it but I don't. You loose the look of the lens. And 70-200mm f2.8 IS II has those weird bokeh that you hate so much. I did all those test using Christmas lights in the bg (yup used to have lot of time, not anymore). It is one damn good lens, not denying it.


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Menelaus
Goldmember
Avatar
1,254 posts
Likes: 161
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Dallas
     
Mar 29, 2018 08:53 |  #195

St. Patrick's Cathedral in NYC, shot at 1/30th handheld. Love the IBIS!

IMAGE: https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/877/26212699177_fe7c99eb87_b.jpg



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

16,422 views & 141 likes for this thread
Fuji X-H1 with IBIS
FORUMS Other Digital Cameras Fuji Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such!
270 guests, 245 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.