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

PLLphotography wrote in post #18685850
interesting video.
https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=2oqDfsxCcjE

Of course, they were using the Fuji 35/1.4 which isn't a speed demon in focusing.

Fuji is a "hobbyist camera". Not for professional use.

Perfect example of why fuji needs to produce that new 33mm f/1.0 prime!!! Fuji is quite on the ball when it comes to feeling out the loyal users. They do seem to listen and produce what is demanded of them. The fuji 35 f/1.4 is great but I would feel the 33 f/1.0 will be a step up in AF performance and hopefully retain similar colours as the old 35 f/1.4.

People can use whatever they want and proclaim themselves as a professional. Photography and Yoga seems to be a world where there is no true designation of certification.......ye​t there is a range between phenomenal to mediocre. Strange analogy but it is what it is.

The A7iii clearly displayed how superior it is compared to the Fuji when it comes to recovering blown out over exposed images. The thing is being human there will be times where we can just cull the messed up image and pretend that image never existed.

A photographer's preference will always win and we will fight to the death to defend it. In my case Fuji will seldom ever be used for hired work for me. I'll actually grab the Canon first and Sony A7iii second. This is my preference and appreciation of the gear's sensor capabilities.

The youtube vid did show how easy-peasy Fuji files retain that eye candy look. Nice colours with the fuji when the exposure was correct. There is a place for different tools as far as various environments and situation.

05Xrunner wrote in post #18685900
its been posted on this forum for years.

Maybe it has ...probably everything to do with the theory of photography has been mentioned at one time or another in POTN . But that doesnt mean someone who has had a diffraction issue is immediately going to say...Well Ive got diffraction here so lets go find what they say about this!. Case in point. I was unaware that some of my images that had bad IQ on the xt-20 were a result of diffraction especially between f8 and f16. I was looking at everything else such as lens ,OIS etc etc as 98% of the population would and I certainly wouldn't have gone looking for a dissertation on diffraction buried somewhere in the bowels of POTN thats for sure. Now if I had come across a current thread where diffraction is mentioned relating to the xt20 it would have certainly peaked my interest and possibly saved me the effort I went to trying to work this IQ issue I had at the time..And once I had known I would have then done a search on POTN for more info. Not the other way around.

OoDee wrote in post #18685898
I too am inclined to agree. Good part of me really wants to move exclusively to Fuji. I really like the smaller size, design, and colors. My X100F might just the most inspiring camera I've had.

I do roughly 10 paid gigs a year, most of which are weddings. And so far I've been shooting with Canon and Sony (mostly adapted lenses). I've been reluctant to jump from Canon over to Sony, because I don't really like Sony when it comes to aesthetic and other non-quantifiable aspects. The colors aren't nice, native lenses are often expensive, and so are the bodies. But even with that, recently I've started looking at the pure objective aspects. And there are just too many upsides on Sony. Most importantly the dynamic and clean ISO range, eye-AF/face recognition and consistent AF. Fuji just doesn't pull these off like Sony does. And neither does my Canon (5D3).

I do carry my X100F with me at weddings and make us of it, just because I like it so much. Last wedding, I decided to us it for taking the family and other group portraits. I was so used to consistent AF that I didn't even consider that when taking multiple shots in row the AF wouldn't focus properly on each shot. So I ended up missing a lot of shot, mostly due to front focus issues.

For my personal work I don't mind the technicalities so much. Just for myself, I tend to shoot with X100F almost exclusively. It just is that inspiring.

But when it comes to paid work, I've noticed that Sony gives me files that are the most consistent. And they also give me the most room and latitude for adjustments in post. I've been criticizing Sony for a long time for being too technical and sterile. And therefore it's almost awkward that I'm not seriously thinking of jumping from Canon to Sony.

What I'd really like to do is go all in on Fuji. But I'm not ready to do that until they up their came at least on dynamic range, ISO capabilities and AF consistency. The latter might be better on other bodies/lenses I assume. But the sensor is the same through the product line, so I can't trust on that.

If I were to quit doing paid work, then I'd probably jump over to Fuji system. I still feel like they're the most intriguing system. I just don't want to trust them for work that other people pay for.

That all said, though, I recognize that a lot of professionals, including wedding photogs, are shooting Fuji exclusively. So I personally can't label them a hobbyist cameras.

I've been just cruising along with my Fuji. I've been enjoying the system for what it offers me in my demanding ways.

I'm still finding great benefits in using a mirrored body. My 5dmk4 just is instant gratification once I push the shutter button. This is where my Fuji or even Sony A73 (with e mount sigma or adapted canon glass) does not offer me.

The Sony and Canon sensor performance is just in a different level than Fuji. There is no denial that sensor tech is getting better and better. It is the photographer's choice in what gear they use for hobby to hired.

I'll admit Sony colours do not meet my needs. However using Xrite passport shooting open shade I use that profile with alot of my Sony images. The colours start to appear "less" Sony colour science so this is what works for me. Fuji colours are nice and the render is just more polished sooc so I almost find editing Fuji a child's act in no effort.....it's a good thing!!

We all do what we do. What tools we use is so personal.....

clipper_from_oz wrote in post #18685928
Maybe it has ...probably everything to do with the theory of photography has been mentioned at one time or another in POTN . But that doesnt mean someone who has had a diffraction issue is immediately going to say...Well Ive got diffraction here so lets go find what they say about this!. Case in point. I was unaware that some of my images that had bad IQ on the xt-20 were a result of diffraction especially between f8 and f16. I was looking at everything else such as lens ,OIS etc etc as 98% of the population would and I certainly wouldn't have gone looking for a dissertation on diffraction buried somewhere in the bowels of POTN somewhere. Now if I had come across a current thread where diffraction is mentioned relating to the xt20 it would have certainly peaked my interest and possibly saved me the effort I went to trying to work this IQ issue I had at the time..

ramble on as much as you like. Dont act like this is something new and an issue with fuji when it has been talked about to death on every forum I have seen and almost every review out there of lenses seems to also mention when diffraction kicks in.

AlanU wrote in post #18685930
I've been just cruising along with my Fuji. I've been enjoying the system for what it offers me in my demanding ways.

I'm still finding great benefits in using a mirrored body. My 5dmk4 just is instant gratification once I push the shutter button. This is where my Fuji or even Sony A73 (with e mount sigma or adapted canon glass) does not offer me.

The Sony and Canon sensor performance is just in a different level than Fuji. There is no denial that sensor tech is getting better and better. It is the photographer's choice in what gear they use for hobby to hired.

I'll admit Sony colours do not meet my needs. However using Xrite passport shooting open shade I use that profile with alot of my Sony images. The colours start to appear "less" Sony colour science so this is what works for me. Fuji colours are nice and the render is just more polished sooc so I almost find editing Fuji a child's act in no effort.....it's a good thing!!

We all do what we do. What tools we use is so personal.....

I would agree. With the Canon I got more hits (good photos). But when I get the hits with Fuji oh man it is great. Plus they are a joy to shoot with.

I have thought about going to the GFX to quell the FF crave I have.

benji25 wrote in post #18685935
I would agree. With the Canon I got more hits (good photos). But when I get the hits with Fuji oh man it is great. Plus they are a joy to shoot with.

I have thought about going to the GFX to quell the FF crave I have.

hmm I find that to be opposite of my canon experience. My XT2 seems to do a much better job of keepers vs the way my 7D2 was.

05Xrunner wrote in post #18685934
ramble on as much as you like. Dont act like this is something new and an issue with fuji when it has been talked about to death on every forum I have seen and almost every review out there of lenses seems to also mention when diffraction kicks in.

Well it was new to me at so early f-stop so it will be new to others also....And not an issue just for fuji. That was never mentioned. It is something to be considered when using any dense pixel sensor like the example I gave of my xt20...end of story

05Xrunner wrote in post #18685939
hmm I find that to be opposite of my canon experience. My XT2 seems to do a much better job of keepers vs the way my 7D2 was.

benji25 wrote in post #18685935
I would agree. With the Canon I got more hits (good photos). But when I get the hits with Fuji oh man it is great. Plus they are a joy to shoot with.

I have thought about going to the GFX to quell the FF crave I have.

My last Canon before switching to Fuji was the 5D Mark II, so in comparison, the autofocus with my Fujis is incredible.

I switched over in 2014. Currently have an XT-1, X-Pro 2, and XH-1. The only major issues I've had with Fuji is I had to get my shutter button and top plate replaced on my X-Pro 2 a few months back (took 3 weeks), and my XT-1 had the bulging side door which Fuji replaced under warranty (and the rubber issue which I fixed with a replacement kit from Fuji).

I've never experienced a lock up with any of my Fuji cameras as some people have mentioned.

clipper_from_oz wrote in post #18685940
Well it was new to me at so early f-stop so it will be new to others also....And not an issue just for fuji. That was never mentioned. It is something to be considered when using any dense pixel sensor like the example I gave of my xt20...end of story

funny, I was just doing aperture tests on my Fuji lens yesterday to see which apertures were sharpest... I haven't done this since switch over from Canon this time last year...

I was actually quite pleased... My copy of the 16/1.4 was really sharp between f2-f14, f16 was a bit softer, but certainly still very usable... The 100-400 was really sharp wide open all the way to f18... f20 was just a bit softer, but still usable (though I never would have a reason to push that lens that far) and f22 was softer still...

The sharpest apertures for each were right between f7.1 to f11, but the other apertures are not what I would call "soft"...

benji25 wrote in post #18685935
I would agree. With the Canon I got more hits (good photos). But when I get the hits with Fuji oh man it is great. Plus they are a joy to shoot with.

I have thought about going to the GFX to quell the FF crave I have.

There is a reason why I enjoy Fuji a lot. The IQ is "different" and has a different flavour.

Key thing is that we all have different methods of post processing too. Opening up shadows is a common thing for me to do and this is where Sony retains real world images (almost un edited look) Canon is nice but there can be some cartoonish look that is very different from the real to life look of Sony. Is it a bad thing?? yes and no depending on how I want things to look. If I do not lift the shadows too much in Fuji the images looks great but if I open them up too much the image at small aperture landscape looks like a painting rather than real to life looks.

This is why I have all sorts of gear to cater to what I want. Fuji with primes is such a sweet spot when shooting natural light. Canon does well too and I prefer Fuji over my Canon in that type of situation. Sony portraits need more work in making them palatable in how we are brainwashed looking at post processed images in grocery store magazine isles..... Fuji has done their fuji render/cooking to make people portraits publicly fantastic sooc (almost anyways).

I shot a 3 day car event almost 10hrs a day. I had zero issues with my 5dmk4 and Sony A7iii. Didn't miss a beat!!! Sony with adapted glass was not ideal but it worked "relatively" well as far as shutter action. Canon just has absolutely zero shutter lag once you depress the button even in the pitch black darkness at the 1/4 mile track in the late evening.

PLLphotography wrote in post #18685942
My last Canon before switching to Fuji was the 5D Mark II, so in comparison, the autofocus with my Fujis is incredible.

I switched over in 2014. Currently have an XT-1, X-Pro 2, and XH-1. The only major issues I've had with Fuji is I had to get my shutter button and top plate replaced on my X-Pro 2 a few months back (took 3 weeks), and my XT-1 had the bulging side door which Fuji replaced under warranty (and the rubber issue which I fixed with a replacement kit from Fuji).

I've never experienced a lock up with any of my Fuji cameras as some people have mentioned.

Wish I could say the same. My X-t2 with battery grip has tempted me many times in throwing it against the wall!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lockup is not fun.

Comparing a Canon 5dmk2 is like comparing it to the older gen Xpro1 performance. Very poor in the demands we have today in AF and sensor tech.

Everyone has a preference and requirement in their gear. I was glad I lugged my 5d4 to the track instead of using my Fuji. ISO 20,000 while demanding some shutter speed for movement. Even this image isn't perfect but the RAW did not fall apart if I used my Fuji.

Goes to show different usage of tools is the key. I am not brand agnostic....... why use my fuji when I know I can deliver with my Sony or Canon since it's better in low light!

5dmk4

I see 2 static cars. where was the demand in shutter speed?

AlanU wrote in post #18685951
Wish I could say the same. My X-t2 with battery grip has tempted me many times in throwing it against the wall!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lockup is not fun.

Comparing a Canon 5dmk2 is like comparing it to the older gen Xpro1 performance. Very poor in the demands we have today in AF and sensor tech.

Everyone has a preference and requirement in their gear. I was glad I lugged my 5d4 to the track instead of using my Fuji. ISO 20,000 while demanding some shutter speed for movement. Even this image isn't perfect but the RAW did not fall apart if I used my Fuji.

Goes to show different usage of tools is the key. I am not brand agnostic....... why use my fuji when I know I can deliver with my Sony or Canon since it's better in low light!

5dmk4

Hosted photo: posted by AlanU in
./showthread.php?p=186​85951&i=i76743181
forum: Fuji Digital Cameras

This is the second time you've paraded this shot as a "good" example of something Fuji can't do... yet the shot is unremarkable. The shadows by the Lamborghini are very splotchy and filled with artifacts... I'm not really sure what it is that you're trying to show off here?

I say this as someone who actually agrees to a certain extent too. I think there's undeniably an advantage with an a7iii at low light, it's just not nearly as drastic as you imply it to be.

Also, why not just slow the shutter speed a bit and pan with the car at launch? I get that you're trying to capture the launch, but this shot doesn't show the launch anyway, so what's the point?

I'm not trying to tear apart your photos, I just don't understand using this as the example. If the a7iii was a clear advantage shouldn't it be easy to pull out many different (and better) examples?

05Xrunner wrote in post #18685958
I see 2 static cars. where was the demand in shutter speed?

I see someone that has never documented night drag racing Night sports is another tough one which I do not shoot by the way......

I actually should have lowered the shutter speed because I wasn't using primes to get a perfect "launch" image with f/2.8 glass. I wanted versatility so I just stuck with the 70-200. I really wanted fast shutter speeds but I wanted to move around more for different perspectives.

If I was up close with a prime the fuji would work. With my 50-140mm....um noooo way!!

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18685960
This is the second time you've paraded this shot as a "good" example of something Fuji can't do... yet the shot is unremarkable. The shadows by the Lamborghini are very splotchy and filled with artifacts... I'm not really sure what it is that you're trying to show off here?

I say this as someone who actually agrees to a certain extent too. I think there's undeniably an advantage with an a7iii at low light, it's just not nearly as drastic as you imply it to be.

Also, why not just slow the shutter speed a bit and pan with the car at launch? I get that you're trying to capture the launch, but this shot doesn't show the launch anyway, so what's the point?

I'm not trying to tear apart your photos, I just don't understand using this as the example. If the a7iii was a clear advantage shouldn't it be easy to pull out many different (and better) examples?

Lucas you can criticize and analyze all you want. If you were in that low light environment like that you'd be saying different. It was a very tough situation. I am not a pro in shooting drag cars ...very rusty documenting this sort of thing. Image has been stated that it's not perfect but it did hold up rather well considering 20,000 iso in brutal light conditions.

So if you owned a d850, 5dmk4, A7iii or A9 would you use your Fuji for extremely low light images that you are attempting to have faster shutter speed for action?

As you can see I'm not brand agnostic unlike many loyal users of one brand. I use camera's like tools not solely based on loyalties. Loyalty is strong in many forums. Oddly I meet more folks now that are more open minded in brands for their tools.