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

Thinking about ditching my nissin setup for the Godox ad200 and mini zoom. Currently waiting for the X1 controller to be available for fuji though

rantercsr wrote in post #18403176
I got a simlar bundle from adorama.. body, grip and 23mm f2 for $2045(and a 32gig sd card, and some other stuff they throw in sensor cleaner ,sd card wallet etc)


Didn't go with 18-55 because im pretty certain i want the 16-55 2.8

The 18-55 is a very capable lens as it is f/2.8-4.0 variable aperture. I'll admit I do prefer my 16mm and 10-24mm image quality over the 18-55. The 18-55 was one of the reasons why I was impressed with the Fuji sensor when I jumped on board. I have a preference to constant aperture zooms so in due time I may consider the 16-55. I would happily pay a premium price for a 10-24mm if it was constant f/2.8.

OUR Canon 80D with Canon 10-22 UWA zoom honestly almost feels identical in weight to my Fuji X-T2 with 10-24mm UWA. I think it's due to hand grip ergonomics as I hold the camera body. However balance wise I find the beefier ergonomics of the 80D with Flash to be substantially more balanced than my X-T2 with EF-X500 Fuji flash. If I throw Sony ergonomics in the discussion the Canon to my average sized hands still feel more balanced than holding a Sony A7 series with flash.

If your a studio strobe shooter you can simply buy any dummy trigger and utilize manual power settings. The modeling light will give ample light for the Fuji to lock on effortlessly. Portrait shooting with the luxury of time you can do absolutely killer work with Fuji. Fuji render on human skin gives a soft organic film look even though you still get tack sharp eyelash detail. Nikon, Canon or Sony definitely renders different in more contrasty sharper look while Fuji easily has SOOC eye pleasing photos (if your looking for that kind of thing.) If you observe Micro 4/3 render of images it's similar to Canon/Nikon where it documents more close to life. Fuji definitely cooks the digital file both in ISO noise reduction and softer film like look while maintaining sharpness.

I'd probably be mad if a sales guy sold me the new thing and forgot to look up about if Fuji would upgrade the old model too. As an X-E2 user I was happy. Anyway the only reason to be mad was if you rushed into buying [or where sold] a camera you didn't need. Fuji's press release for the X-E2 Firmware update was handed out on the same day as the press release for the new model. Not like they were hiding anything. So you really can't lay any blame on that door, can you?

Yep that IR assist beam, how I miss that at times it's a shame mirrorless cameras can't use such a brilliant device, it's a life saver in dark fast paced shoots alright. I know the mirrorless offer a different approach but that is a little more involving and at times you just want to point and shoot. I think it's one of the things a DLSR will always have as a trump card & if it's working for you all is good.

I'm think the same right now, as I only have one i40. Nearly bought a couple of i60's after borrowing on for a run and gun event launch I shot for Heineken. But since I liked shooting with the AD600 so much and the rumours of Fuji compatible flash fast approaching from Godox, Elimchrom and Profoto I though I'd just hold off a little.

A GN36 flash had little to offer me really but now that they have a GN60 speed light in Fuji, with TTL and HSS, I might go 'all in'.

I never took to the X1T though, I find it not so good to change settings with. Nissin's Air1 is really nice to use although I think now the camera menu can control things so perhaps it is a moot point.

Alan, I always found Nikon files to have a little too much green in them and Canon a little to much red, the later being much better for people to my eye. But as for documenting more close to life, the raw files are colourless and low contrasty from Canikon, if anything the raw files from Fuji are more close to real life out of the box.

I remember how amazed I was when I did my first shoot with Sigma art lenses on the 5D3, the colours and contrast in the raw files where so much stronger than any of the other Canon 'L' lenses I had, one can only guess that the lenses have much to do with how the output from the camera looks. Just because the files are rendered differently in your processing software doesn't mean there is something untoward going on, it just means it's different than what you are use to, if you shot with Fuji for 10 years and then Canon you'd be saying how flat the lifeless the 'digital files' look from the 5D. It's simply the point that you are looking at things from. Different processor design, different sensor design bound to give a different look.

Bug Zoo in Victoria, BC.

Just your friendly neighbourhood tarantula and hissing roach LOL!!

16mm prime was handy shooting no flash.

Rain near the airfield as we sat at the gate waiting for our next group of passengers to board. Fuji X-e2 with 50mm f2.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Wxu3​WE

Might be a really silly question to ask, is there any guides to maximizing the leaf shutter of the X100 series? I don't use flash much at all, but I keep on hearing one of the benefits of the X100 is the high flash sync speed and being able to overpower the sun. Is this maximized by using a external flash? Is this benefit useable at all using the small built in flash? Or would the benefit require using an external flash?

The further away your flash is from your subject the more power it needs to expose correctly. It's not dependant on your shutter alone. This a big answer to give it correctly here alright so have a look at x-photographer David Hobby's site - it's all about using flash:

Here is a link to his page about flash and the x100

So what's this new rumor about IBIS in XT2S. Don't own XT2 and i was hoping Fuji will have something better to rival somethings from A9.

Guess you'll have to wait to find out what else they pop in there

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18403205
To change the shutter speed via the command dial, select 'T' on the top shutter dial then you can use the back or front dial to change the speed from very slow to 1/8000 or 1/32000 if electronic shutter is on.

TMaG82 wrote in post #18403233
You should be able to set it to T and scroll through the entire range with the rear dial.

Thank you both !!

normally don't resort to asking those sorts of questions so quickly but wanted to try to get out after work for some test shots to have some raws to fiddle with..
and I cant search that during work , as I drive for a living

slowly getting the hang of this camera ,, as far as settings and trying to costumize it for myself

rantercsr wrote in post #18404344
Thank you both !!

normally don't resort to asking those sorts of questions so quickly but wanted to try to get out after work for some test shots to have some raws to fiddle with..
and I cant search that during work , as I drive for a living

slowly getting the hang of this camera ,, as far as settings and trying to costumize it for myself

If you update to the most recent firmware you should be able to set ISO to A and be able to control ISO with the front dial as well.

I think Fuji is a long time away in matching anything close to the Sony A9 in tracking (also eye track)or high ISO capabilities of the Sony full frame cmos sensor.

The impression I'm now getting from fuji files is that we enjoy the slightly cooked raw files SOOC and appreciate the SOOC jpg files.

Even top level dslr bodies cannot lock as well as the A9 in the dark. If Fuji gets to that level I think it will take many revisions for fuji to even match a current D810 or 5dmk4 in being a universal application beast (Canon/Nikon being a loser in heavy weight though)

Couldn't imagine what the Sony A10, A11 etc will be. They will be a benchmark for the mirrorless camera world.

IBIS is welcoming for some applications but we are already experiencing poor battery performance as it is . IBIS Would be nice for my video application but not much help for my ultra wide angle and wide angle shooting. I'm usually more concerned about high ISO performance for faster shutter speeds to stop action .

Looking forward to seeing Fuji improve its performance in the newer revisions.

AlanU wrote in post #18404375
I think Fuji is a long time away in matching anything close to the Sony A9 in tracking (also eye track)or high ISO capabilities of the Sony full frame cmos sensor.

The impression I'm now getting from fuji files is that we enjoy the slightly cooked raw files SOOC and appreciate the SOOC jpg files.

Even top level dslr bodies cannot lock as well as the A9 in the dark. If Fuji gets to that level I think it will take many revisions for fuji to even match a current D810 or 5dmk4 in being a universal application beast (Canon/Nikon being a loser in heavy weight though)

Couldn't imagine what the Sony A10, A11 etc will be. They will be a benchmark for the mirrorless camera world.

IBIS is welcoming for some applications but we are already experiencing poor battery performance as it is . IBIS Would be nice for my video application but not much help for my ultra wide angle and wide angle shooting. I'm usually more concerned about high ISO performance for faster shutter speeds to stop action .

Looking forward to seeing Fuji improve its performance in the newer revisions.

There comes a time when technology catches up and will plateau at its current level. I don't envision anytime soon where Fuji will equal a FF sensor, because when that times comes, the current FF sensor will beat out the older FF sensor that the Fuji finally equaled. All things being equal, for Sensor size differences are real. A m4/3 will not be able exceed a APS-C for high ISO, shallow DoF, DR, etc. Same goes for a APS-C beating a FF I those categories. So feature wise they have to come up with advantages. Panasonic has done so with their video options, Olympus as done so with their leading AF. It just so happens that Sony with their A9 has stepped up their game in terms of tracking, eye af,etc. the eye af in the a9 spanks the a7rII. Tracking as well. Everything about the a9 is phenomenal. But you can't avoid the fact that the lens are expensive, heavy, and large. The GM line is great but huge and costly. $2,200 for the 24-70, $2,600 for the 70-200, $1,800 for the 85, $2,200 for the 16-35, etc. The new 85 1.8 at $600 is considered a steal. If you buy a Sony FE lens for under $1,000 you're getting a "steal". The prices are slowly creeping up to where it's starting to price out the enthusiasts. Even pros are feeling the pinch.

There comes a time when you have to sit down and analyze a price vs performance ratio. FOr some it's lower than others. For some with higher disposable income or pros it's higher. Similar with cars, just because a Porsche is 4x the cost of a Camry doesn't necessarily mean it's 4x better.

That's the thing, Sony's a9, from most reports, is an outstanding camera but in reality I doubt it would add any value for me. I can shoot all I need with the camera system I have. A small and light system that is not expensive to own. The AF is more than up for the work on most days and for the couple of times it's not the MF is sublime.

Now when you consider that you can get into medium format sensor size for not much more money I know where I'd rather be. But then again I don't tend to spend all my time using ISO 25,600 or having to push the AF to the limit firing off at 20FPS. I know I've said this before but the FF QI hobby house riders need to get off their pony and ride a thoroughbred for a while.