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

GlimmerMan wrote in post #18401811
Loving it. Makes me want to be there.

Thank you!!

I had to wait as the Ferry moved further away from my "subject". I waited till the islands tucked in behind the little lighthouse.

I think I'll be putting this one on canvas. I really am amazed at how the Fuji rendered this shot!!!!! I was smiling as I took this photo!!!

file compression on this site does not really give this image justice. I was impressed on the detail the 24mp sensor provided me.

Just a point on balance to Alan's experience, check out what two X-Photographers are doing this year with their Fuji gear - lots of extreme stuff going on:

Another shot of the Moulin De Moidrey, this time with the 16/1.4

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Vszx​ua

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18402083
Just a point on balance, check out what two X-Photographers are doing this year with their Fuji gear - lots of extreme stuff going on:

Another shot of the Moulin De Moidrey, this time with the 16/1.4

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Vszx​ua 2HS03961 by Kim Farrelly, on Flickr

Really cool shots. Nice to see the Scotland flag on the boat too

The 16-55 F/2.8 is a fast focusing lens, Fuji's equivalent of Canon's L glass so it has little problem keeping up with the action, Fuji's other two 'kit' lenses the 18-55 & 55-200 have a slower AF setup and are not built to the price point that Canon's big L 2.8 zoom is.

Both John and Jeff shoot Le Mans cars racing, as well as other fast moving sports, with Fuji gear. They seem to get on fine as I doubt the $1 million+ car club that is Le Mans would settle for shots that are any less.

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18402097
The 16-55 F/2.8 is a fast focusing lens, Fuji's equivalent of Canon's L glass so it has little problem keeping up with the action, Fuji's other two 'kit' lenses the 18-55 & 55-200 have a slower AF setup and are not built to the price point that Canon's big L 2.8 zoom is.

Both John and Jeff shoot Le Mans cars racing, as well as other fast moving sports, with Fuji gear. They seem to get on fine as I doubt the $1 million+ car club that is Le Mans would settle for shots that are any less.

I've been hesitant in buying the 16-55 as the 16mm f/1.4 and 10-24mm suites my style in photography. Every single lens I own from Canon delivers in fast AF needs except my 85Lmk2 of course. I do accept that fuji does not have the same type of performance in all of their lenses.

I never realized the 55-200 is a kit lens. In Canada I've never seen such offerings.

The photos of that boat (x-photographer images) looks almost extreme hit of HDR for my taste. I guess it's still a great promo photo though. I was quite impressed with that waterproof "bag" they used to hold the camera. NO action shots for that photo shoot though.

Hey him did you see the undesirable looking sunflare I got with my 10-24mm with my car photos. I encounter this sunflare look on many occasions witht the 10-24mm. The UWA is one of my primary tools and this is one reason why I still use my Canon gear for some applications. This is just my discussion regarding both performance of the camera body and how some fuji lenses renders in some situations. This is just some reasons why i shoot both camera systems still.

My landscape lighthouse shot yesterday was in fact taken with my 55-200. I was very impressed with that shot considering the AF does not meet my needs for some of my photography needs. Nonetheless the luxury of time the 55-200 suited the photo I took. That landscape shot has the typical "painting render" I see from the fuji sensor for landscape shots.

yes my 80d isn't going anywhere ..
I got it for 2 reasons ,, family affairs where I need quick and reliable af..

and for its easy to use video AF .. plus fully articulating screen .. the gf and I love doing selfy style shot together during vacations as we go to different areas , for sharing with the family and friends on Facebook or whwere ever..
and I already have some efs lenses that cover a decent range plus the EF 50 1.4

so yes I do agree with you different tools for different situations... I couldn't get reliability out of the a7sii or a6500 for family events .. too many OOF shots..never have that issue with canon 80d , 5d3 (when I had it) or even t4i..
But I do LOVE the dynamic range with sony cameras when doing cityscape shots.. no need for bracket shooting!!

I AM very excited about the xt2.. i'm fairly certain it will be a keeper
I've held it at store and it feels good.. grip could be a bit beefier but .. I got the extended grip with it for that and for added benefits , not really added fps as I rarely shoot at high fps

yes I do like FF look .., but it only matters to me in certain situations..
for the most part I don't often shoot my 80d or a6500 , t4i and think it would have looked better in FF.. only because of ISO do I find myself wishing it were FF.. most of the time when I miss FF

Well I say kit lens with parentheses, simply it's very similar to the 18-55 that is offered as an option to buy with a body. They were offered over here as a two kit option for a while. Good lenses the pair all the same. I've had Canon fit lenses that sucked in AF speed, indeed the sigma 35 and 50 Art where not meant for action but the optics where truly great. Know thy gear is all, Fuji have lenses that have great AF ability, the 55-200 being not as fast as those other zooms. { 16-55 & 50-140 }.

The 16-55 is not as corrected as the 16/1.4 but it's AF is a little better and the flexibility is great as a zoom can offer. Nice that it get you up to ~85mm too with a constant 2.8.

The editing might not be to taste but there are plenty of action shots going on with the photographer bobbing about in the water and the very fast boats skipping past at high speed. LMP2 cars also go quite fast I hear.

I've never shot with the 10-24 so can't comment on it other than with you have shown. I have shot with the samyang 12 and 8mm and find the flare from those two lenses good, I'll try to dig out a shot or two soon.

Yes, it's a nice shot alright, I'm toying with what lens to bring to an airshow next month. Probably will borrow a 50-140 but might also stick the 55-200 in the bag as I doubt I'll get the 100-400 but you never know.

AlanU wrote in post #18402116
Hey him did you see the undesirable looking sunflare I got with my 10-24mm with my car photos. I encounter this sunflare look on many occasions witht the 10-24mm. The UWA is one of my primary tools and this is one reason why I still use my Canon gear for some applications. This is just my discussion regarding both performance of the camera body and how some fuji lenses renders in some situations. This is just some reasons why i shoot both camera systems still.

Here you go, one sunstar shot with what I think must have been the Samyang 8mm Fisheye, probably at f11 or 16:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/xwUs​4H

AlanU wrote in post #18402058

Hosted photo: posted by AlanU in
./showthread.php?p=184​02058&i=i56650310
forum: Fuji Digital Cameras

Thats a cool interior. Do you have a picture of the outside of this van/vehicle?

starlights wrote in post #18402316
Thats a cool interior. Do you have a picture of the outside of this van/vehicle?

Those buses are now high dollars $$$

This topic sound familiar

O and the 16-55 F/2.8 is amazing btw

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18402266
Here you go, one sunstar shot with what I think must have been the Samyang 8mm Fisheye, probably at f11 or 16:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/xwUs​4H DSCF0003 by Kim Farrelly, on Flickr

Please NOTE this is two CANON files. This is just a reference between my fuji and Canon sunburst/flashburst photos. These photos are from my Canon full frame with 16-35 f/2.8mk2. Even this sunflare is ok compared to my previous 16-35 f/4IS. The DJ photo is with my 5dmk3 with 16-35 f/4IS @ aprox f/4.

Look at the sunburst images on the back ground cars. This is the typical look I get with remote flash photography with my canon gear. This is something I do not get with my fuji lenses (reason why I use Canon for hired events.)

Again this is just preference and my style of photography. I do understand we all have different styles!!

Osa713 wrote in post #18402330
This topic sound familiar

O and the 16-55 F/2.8 is amazing btw

Hosted photo: posted by Osa713 in
./showthread.php?p=184​02330&i=i131847902
forum: Fuji Digital Cameras

I like this ..

makes me more confident my decision was correct on the Fuji xt2..
the 16-55 2.8 is priority if I decide the xt2 is for me!

ill probably miss delivery on Monday , and will have to pick up on tuesday

cant wait !!

rantercsr wrote in post #18402346
I like this ..

makes me more confident my decision was correct on the Fuji xt2..
the 16-55 2.8 is priority if I decide the xt2 is for me!

ill probably miss delivery on Monday , and will have to pick up on tuesday

cant wait !!

Thanks!

This lens is extremely versatile, af is quick it renders colors well and the bokeh is very pleasant for a zoom. The only down side is it's heavy for a mirrorless setup but almost all quality glass is big in that focal length. I picked up the hand grip and it made a huge difference in ergonomics while handling that lens and when I rent the 50-140.

I hate missing the ups guy when gear is being delivered, lol.

Rantercsr,

Check out how fuji renders human subjects in studio. Depending on lighting it looks different compared to your sony and canon. That's the beauty of having different gear. The sony and canon will have a crisp sharp look to it. With my 4 light setup for headshots i did the Fuji had a more organic softer look with less micro contrast. Even with identical lighting the iso was different compared to my Canon.

I guess other factors like type of softbox will make a difference. This is just my observation with my recent setup. As usual we all shoot differently.