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 06 Jan 2013 (Sunday) 14:29
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

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

 
F2Bthere
Goldmember
Avatar
1,029 posts
Likes: 452
Joined Oct 2015
     
Dec 04, 2018 23:58 |  #9151

Osa713 wrote in post #18764597 (external link)
Why would you need a 1.8 50-140? I’m curious...

Sometimes people get obsessed with setting up rules for themselves which must be followed. :)

The theory goes that if you are using camera X you need to be able to get the same image as you would get on camera Y. If the lenses don't have the equivalent f stop so you can get the exact same framing with the exact same depth of field, you will die. ;)

Also, don't step on cracks in the sidewalk.

But seriously, most of the time, it's better to just make pictures and only worry about gear when it's keeping you from creating what you want.

If I want shallower depth of field, I'll pull out a prime lens :). Heck, I've got a 35mm f0.95 Mitakon right here!

All camera systems are compromises and the trick is to find a set of compromises you can work with and then get on with the business of taking pictures.

Sitting around in a Fuji thread relentlessly hammering on Fuji's breaking your personal rule set is just silly.


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
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
soeren
Whoops Im not updated
521 posts
Likes: 193
Joined Nov 2017
     
Dec 05, 2018 00:11 |  #9152

I don't get why you if you have a 16-55mm f/2.8 would add a 10-24mm f/2.8 instead of the 8-16mm f/2.8 the extra mm's are just the 10-16 with 16-24 being redundant so you be gaining little in terms of usefulness for the weight and bulk of the full lens. With the 8-16mm f/2.8 you at least get the benefit of the full extra coverage for the added weight and bulk.


If history has proven anything. it's that evolution always wins!!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Osa713
Goldmember
Avatar
1,332 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 870
Joined Jun 2011
Location: Houston, TX
     
Dec 05, 2018 00:31 |  #9153

F2Bthere wrote in post #18764618 (external link)
If the lenses don't have the equivalent f stop so you can get the exact same framing with the exact same depth of field, you will die. ;)

Sitting around in a Fuji thread relentlessly hammering on Fuji's breaking your personal rule set is just silly.

Post of the year...


LIGHT>LENS>BODY

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
6,997 posts
Gallery: 69 photos
Likes: 897
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Dec 05, 2018 01:10 |  #9154

F2Bthere wrote in post #18764618 (external link)
Sometimes people get obsessed with setting up rules for themselves which must be followed. :)

The theory goes that if you are using camera X you need to be able to get the same image as you would get on camera Y. If the lenses don't have the equivalent f stop so you can get the exact same framing with the exact same depth of field, you will die. ;)

Also, don't step on cracks in the sidewalk.

But seriously, most of the time, it's better to just make pictures and only worry about gear when it's keeping you from creating what you want.

If I want shallower depth of field, I'll pull out a prime lens :). Heck, I've got a 35mm f0.95 Mitakon right here!

All camera systems are compromises and the trick is to find a set of compromises you can work with and then get on with the business of taking pictures.

Sitting around in a Fuji thread relentlessly hammering on Fuji's breaking your personal rule set is just silly.

Your mitakon if definitely fast glass but dof it's no shallower than your standard f/1.4 prime on a FF  :p Also note any autofocus system will outperform focus peaking manual glass with such thin dof too. For events that's just asking for oof pivotal moments unless your a master at manual glass with thin dof. Static subjects is a luxury....

Osa's question regarding 50-140mm f/1.8 was a fantasy lens that Fuji will not produce. It would be fast glass that would reduce the need for higher Iso and provide the f/2.8 dof you'd find on a full frame. To achieve almost prime lens pop factor using a versatile zoom during events will miss less moment comparing to running 2 prime lenses on two bodies...been there done that.........reasons why I just use the Gmaster and Canon mk2 since fuji lacks an f/1.8 telephoto zoom.

If gear doesn't meet my needs it gets sidelined and others take over what others lack. No big deal...... :p:-P


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
Osa713
Goldmember
Avatar
1,332 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 870
Joined Jun 2011
Location: Houston, TX
     
Dec 05, 2018 01:24 |  #9155

Let me rephrase my question, why do you constantly compare crop to full frame? Do you enjoy shooting or are the comparisons more important to you?


LIGHT>LENS>BODY

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
6,997 posts
Gallery: 69 photos
Likes: 897
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Dec 05, 2018 01:35 |  #9156

Osa713 wrote in post #18764645 (external link)
Let me rephrase my question, why do you constantly compare crop to full frame? Do you enjoy shooting or are the comparisons more important to you?

osa you and other photogs are always using a reference point for comparison as well.

Why did you buy an 80mm f/2.8? you could have bought a 60mm instead?

I've created great portraits with the 50-140mm. However I've also "noticed" differences in IQ with my other gear.

I enjoy shooting as well as being critical in what I do too. Fuji love is strong and I get it too.


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
Osa713
Goldmember
Avatar
1,332 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 870
Joined Jun 2011
Location: Houston, TX
Post edited 2 months ago by Osa713. (3 edits in all)
     
Dec 05, 2018 01:44 as a reply to  @ AlanU's post |  #9157

That’s a poor analogy though...

But to answer your question I purchased the 80 over the 60 because it’s checks off every box in what I “need” with a macro lens. Also I don’t post in a fuji sub-forum about what it lacks because it’s perfectly aligned with how I use it.;-)a

If constant comparison is your thing, I’m not judging and please forgive me if it appeared that way. I notice a constant theme on this forum with two types of users. I lean more towards make a great photo and keep it moving vs. analyzing the technical detail of it all.


LIGHT>LENS>BODY

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Two ­ Hot ­ Shoes
Goldmember
Avatar
2,929 posts
Gallery: 320 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 2970
Joined Apr 2014
Location: Ireland
Post edited 2 months ago by Two Hot Shoes.
     
Dec 05, 2018 04:21 |  #9158

I find I have little use for the 50-140 focal length, mostly I'm shooting no more that 56mm. When I do use the 90/2 it's generally for it's close focus ability but I have one event next year that I'll need longer reach but the 100-400 would be too much, the 50-140 + 1.4TC would be about right. Wonder if I could borrow/rent a 200/2?

Anyone seen the Mitakon 65mm F/1.4 for the GFX mount, Jonas Rask has been posting some shots. Apparently it's been made for the medium format sensor not a converted up 135mm lens. Looks interesting. I've seen loads of shots with the Canon 85/1.2 also and man talk about thin DOF....


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
benji25
Goldmember
Avatar
1,015 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 90
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Twin Cities
     
Dec 05, 2018 09:43 |  #9159

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18764673 (external link)
I find I have little use for the 50-140 focal length,

As I shoot mostly weddings the use I find it best for is formals - 100 to 140 for a tighter framed waste/head shot, then zoome out to 50 - 90 for a full body. This is for things like the bride with each of her bridesmades etc. Also some times need it for reach at cermonies but other than that it stays in the bag.


Website (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Two ­ Hot ­ Shoes
Goldmember
Avatar
2,929 posts
Gallery: 320 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 2970
Joined Apr 2014
Location: Ireland
     
Dec 05, 2018 09:53 as a reply to  @ benji25's post |  #9160

At weddings I’ll just get in closer with the 56 after I shoot the groups. I’m thinking of the times I need a little bit more reach and the light is low. As the 90 can need 1/200 or so to get no blurr at times so with the OIS and the extra 30mm I could shoot a bit slower. Probably just want it rather than need it but I’m sure I’d find a use for it like the 16-55. Fuji have a good deal on right now over here with €300 off


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
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
6,997 posts
Gallery: 69 photos
Likes: 897
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Dec 05, 2018 10:12 |  #9161

Osa713 wrote in post #18764649 (external link)
That’s a poor analogy though...

But to answer your question I purchased the 80 over the 60 because it’s checks off every box in what I “need” with a macro lens. Also I don’t post in a fuji sub-forum about what it lacks because it’s perfectly aligned with how I use it.;-)a

If constant comparison is your thing, I’m not judging and please forgive me if it appeared that way. I notice a constant theme on this forum with two types of users. I lean more towards make a great photo and keep it moving vs. analyzing the technical detail of it all.

It’s interesting how one can change the weapon of choice. At one point I was a 35mm/ or 24mm and 85mm events shooter. As the iso performance improved dramatically over the years I went to uwa 16-35mm and 85mm/ or 70-200 f2.8.

Oddly I’ve never used a 24-70 f2.8 as a workhorse.

When I have a lens mounted I loose the fixation of fl mounted and I just fly with what I see in the viewfinder automatic pilot.

It’s when I analyze the files afterwards and see the difference and feel of image depicted with shallow dof when I shoot wide open. Fuji 16mm and 56mm delivers but in some cases I do NOT miss certain opportunities and moments using long telephoto. It’s just easier getting prime lens pop factor with the F2.8 dof with my Canon and Sony. These are observations and not measurebating.

I will say the mirrorless world will put more consumers in a better spot as competition is getting fierce. Previous Nikon/Canon users will probably see how the FF mirrorless gear performs. Once majority of folks appreciate mirrorless performance I can see a higher percentage of larger bulkier lenses but benefits of extremely faster primes and zooms. I’m interested in the RF canon 28-70mm f2 !!!! Massively bulky but will match well with a new revision of the current lame EOS R.

Not measuring gear but what I observe through the viewfinder. Things are changing for the mirrorless world. Sadly Fuji will gain smaller crowds to the more $$$$& expensive MF crowd due to cost. Faster bulkier aps -c lenses will be needed to keep up with the new mirrorless competition. I think it’s a mistake for Fuji to decline the FF format as it’s still a big chunk of the $$$$$ market share. They already have one of the best aps-c and crop market shares. They have already eliminated “small form factor” in the Gfx series and they are not moving so well in my local big camera shops due to niche nature and cost. Consumers already struggle to buy d810, 1dxmk2, A9, A7Riii or even 5dmk4.
However the inventory still moves faster than an $8000 CDN Fuji MF body.

This is where an XT3 is a budget flagship that performs very well. Obtainable in tight budgets in the difficult photography work world. Not easy out there.

Camera gear cost and photographers income ratio is not kind as-years go by. Gear gets more expensive at a faster rate.


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
2,929 posts
Gallery: 320 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 2970
Joined Apr 2014
Location: Ireland
     
Dec 05, 2018 10:41 |  #9162

#topseller :lol:


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Those of us who shoot Fuji know what we can get from our little sensor and don’t need a small jump to a ‘full frame’ sensor to make up the image. Such a little difference and never have I wondered about how the image could have been if I shot it with a 135mm.

Sure if tiny DOF and the best in IQ is your thing then you really should be shooting with the xf100mp and their 150/2.8 but you comprise hugely by shooting with a tiny 135mm camera. Such little difference between aps-c and 135mm in the real world.

Or an f/0.95 on a Fuji for that matter :)

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
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
19,284 posts
Likes: 1333
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Dec 05, 2018 10:46 |  #9163

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18764673 (external link)
Anyone seen the Mitakon 65mm F/1.4 for the GFX mount, Jonas Rask has been posting some shots. Apparently it's been made for the medium format sensor not a converted up 135mm lens. Looks interesting. I've seen loads of shots with the Canon 85/1.2 also and man talk about thin DOF....

Saw that review. I wish I was good in MF. Hoping Fuji comes with 80mm f1.4.


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
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,425 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 3373
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Dec 05, 2018 13:14 |  #9164

AlanU wrote in post #18764813 (external link)
Not measuring gear but what I observe through the viewfinder. Things are changing for the mirrorless world. Sadly Fuji will gain smaller crowds to the more $$$$& expensive MF crowd due to cost. Faster bulkier aps -c lenses will be needed to keep up with the new mirrorless competition. I think it’s a mistake for Fuji to decline the FF format as it’s still a big chunk of the $$$$$ market share. They already have one of the best aps-c and crop market shares. They have already eliminated “small form factor” in the Gfx series and they are not moving so well in my local big camera shops due to niche nature and cost. Consumers already struggle to buy d810, 1dxmk2, A9, A7Riii or even 5dmk4.
However the inventory still moves faster than an $8000 CDN Fuji MF body.

This is where an XT3 is a budget flagship that performs very well. Obtainable in tight budgets in the difficult photography work world. Not easy out there.

Camera gear cost and photographers income ratio is not kind as-years go by. Gear gets more expensive at a faster rate.

More expensive MF crowd? They have the cheapest MF cameras on the market...

If MF only loses money, then where are the Hassleblad and Phase One FF cameras?

Your assertion of needing faster and larger lenses is also just not true. Just look at how well the 35 and 23mm f2 lenses are doing. I know of more people shooting those slower and lighter lenses than I do of people shooting the faster and heavier f1.4 counterparts.

You again don't seem to grasp how the sales market works. Just because something isn't selling in large numbers doesn't mean it's not selling how the manufacturer estimated (or desired) it to. The GFX was never intended to compete with the D810, 1DX, etc, so what's even the point of comparing it's sales to those cameras?

I would argue that now is cheaper than ever to get into professional digital photography. Frankly I'm sort of baffled how you could make any argument as to how it's more expensive now than it was a few years ago to be a professional photographer.


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
Osa713
Goldmember
Avatar
1,332 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 870
Joined Jun 2011
Location: Houston, TX
     
Dec 05, 2018 13:49 |  #9165

Alan your post are really confusing these days...

You have mentioned quite frequently that you use three systems to get three different looks then you made a thread in the camera vs camera section asking how do users get the colors to be the same when post processing with three systems. Am I missing something? :-|


LIGHT>LENS>BODY

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

1,169,435 views & 7,604 likes for this thread
Fuji Users Unite - Post your comments, questions and images here
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 is milashinyz
373 guests, 326 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.