The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread

@Nuzik I hope you don't mind but for my own curiosity I've just had a play about with your photo and it is possible to enhance it quite a bit just in post and that's just working on a small already processed jpeg on flickr. There's much more detail to extract, not Dan's leica level, but better so I wouldn't give up on the Fuji just yet. I didn't want to post it on here as I wasn't sure if I was stepping on toes already by even playing about with it in the first place :exit:
 
snerkler said:
@Nuzik I hope you don't mind but for my own curiosity I've just had a play about with your photo and it is possible to enhance it quite a bit just in post and that's just working on a small already processed jpeg on flickr. There's much more detail to extract, not Dan's leica level, but better so I wouldn't give up on the Fuji just yet. I didn't want to post it on here as I wasn't sure if I was stepping on toes already by even playing about with it in the first place :exit:
Click to expand...
I think I have it clearly written my photos are not to be edited!! FFS Toby! Can't you f*****g read........















Perfectly fine dude, I did it in LR for the first time not used it before so (as you know I like my PS) I wasn't too picky. But yeah feel free to share if you like.
 
Nuzik said:
I think I have it clearly written my photos are not to be edited!! FFS Toby! Can't you f*****g read........















Perfectly fine dude, I did it in LR for the first time not used it before so (as you know I like my PS) I wasn't too picky. But yeah feel free to share if you like.
Click to expand...
Lol, I panicked there for a minute :eek: :LOL: Now I'm no guru, and these are with small jpegs so imagine what you could do with the RAW.

Edit Photobucket's ruined them, I'll add dropbox link shortly

Dropbox link
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/u4aj52pjm8kovry/AABFpqdHB0LTpElmw3GE_SHLa?dl=0
 
Last edited:
the pinks def better but the blue is worse, i know imagine what i could do if i knew how to use LR no guys you can flame me for that. I actually shoot JPG and Raw, i go through all my shots in JPG and write down all the numbers i like then edit in PS! Thats actually true even for weddings.
 
Nuzik said:
the pinks def better but the blue is worse, i know imagine what i could do if i knew how to use LR no guys you can flame me for that. I actually shoot JPG and Raw, i go through all my shots in JPG and write down all the numbers i like then edit in PS! Thats actually true even for weddings.
Click to expand...
Added a link because photobucket ruined the quality. TBH I didn't concentrate on colour, just detail. It took me a while to extract the best detail out of Fuji files, you do have to approach it differently to other manufacturers. In fact I still revert to Aperture sometimes. Imagine what I could do too if I knew how to use any of the available software ;)

Apologies again if stepping on toes, just trying to help :oops: :$
 
Nuzik said:
probably would have done this slightly brighter but i've lost the will to live! in PS

NEIL4921 by Neil Hinder, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Better. Do you not enjoy processing? I almost enjoy it as much as taking the photos :D
 
graycbr said:
what hand straps you guys using on the X-T10 ?
Click to expand...
I wove my own from paracord, cost me about £2.75 plus 20mins of learning on YouTube. If I ever end up hanging over a cliff suspended obly by my camera strap, I know i'll be safe. ;)

View: https://youtu.be/bentrOlcfFs


That's the weave I went with, but I didn't bother with clips at either end, just a small loop at one ebd and a large loop at the other, thread the large loop through the camera, then through the small loop and it just slides to tighten on your wrist.

Alternatively, you can buy pre-made "cordy's", but where's the fun in that?
 
Had you asked me at the time of taking this shot whether I thought it would be a success, I would have been pretty dubious. Taking two 12 second exposures without a tripod (balanced rather precariously on some metal thing, using the foldout screen to compose) and stitching them because I can't be bothered to take off the 18-55 and put on the Samyang 12 isn't exactly a reliable working method :) But I have to say, the result rather exceeded my expectations...


Euston panorama by David Hallett, on Flickr
 
Depends what it is and what i am doing whether I can be bothered or not. I strive for perfection, to know a photograph is satisfactory or better than a novice is not acceptable
 
Does Adobe still struggle with xtran raw files?

Download a free trial of another raw converter
 
rjbell said:
Does Adobe still struggle with xtran raw files?

Download a free trial of another raw converter
Click to expand...
Not nearly as much as it used to I'm sure, though it's still not perfect. Just need to approach the files in a slightly different way.
 
rjbell said:
Does Adobe still struggle with xtran raw files?

Download a free trial of another raw converter
Click to expand...
Yes but not as much as they did, and it's only certain things and even then it's not every time. There's plenty of other RAW converters and I must've tried about 8, but all barring aperture feel extremely clunky in comparison IMO.
 
Simes123 said:
Bought the 16-55 on Friday and had a chance to play with it, and the 50-140 on Sunday. The pair of them are bitingly sharp - I'll even thrown in a millennial OMG in there - I was using a tripod, but wasn't prepared for how much detail I was going to see in the end result. Never saw such clarity, sharpness and contrast in my 24-70L on my Canon. I have a 10-24 on order from Digital Depot, and the wife got the call today to say it's on back order. Got to decide what to do. I already have the 12mm Zeiss Touit, and having seen how sharp the two zooms are, I'm thinking I might just save the cash on the 10-24 and let it go. I'd only really be using for 10-15mm in any case, in which case the 12mm prime will suffice for that Use Case, and requires no more of a lens change than 16-55 to 10-24 would. I am expecting a 16mm 1.4 today as well, and am struggling now to justify that given how good the 16-55 is. For sure at f1.4, 1.8, 2.0, the prime will outclass it, but I've never had a sharper zoom. My 3 week old, used twice 18-55 will be up for sale too - I can't justify keeping that and the 16-55, even for the OIS - as good as it is, I can't see me picking it over the 16-55, which is already my new precious. Fuji know how to make a good lens.
Click to expand...

Must admit I love my 16-55 as well fast to focus and very sharp. I ended up selling my 18,23,35 and 56 and replaced them with the 16-55. Most of my photographs these days consist of walks with the dog so the 16mm comes handy for landscapes, the WR when the weather changes and i dont have to mess around changing lenses. The weight does not bother me and feels fine on my xt2 and the lack of OIS hasn't been a problem yet.
 
Ian W said:
Just read that on there too. Sounds like someone has been advertising double cash back when they shouldn't have done.....not that they'll admit it.
Click to expand...

If it's only a few sales probably best to honour it, does look pretty clear it was offered.

Bit puzzled why the lenses are unused after a month, did the OP smell a rat from the outset?

Just seen the venue, hope the kitchens are a bit nicer than they used to be if anyone ate there. Organised the telecoms there for a couple of Telethons (remember them?) and brought my own food with me.
 
Last edited:
tijuana taxi said:
If it's only a few sales probably best to honour it, does look pretty clear it was offered.

Bit puzzled why the lenses are unused after a month, did the OP smell a rat from the outset?
Click to expand...
I'd say so, yeah. Hard for them to refute it as the video still shot is pretty clear.

As you say, bizarre they're unused. I'd have them straight out the box [emoji1]
 
Ian W said:
As you say, bizarre they're unused. I'd have them straight out the box [emoji1]
Click to expand...

Me too, seems very peculiar behaviour, would at least want to know they were ok?
 
southernjessie said:
Very interesting...thanks for posting your first impressions. I'd be interested to see a comparison with the 18-55 at the same f stops (2.8, 4, 5.6, 8) of the same subject.

I have the 18-55 and it's always performed well, and I wonder if it's sample variation with the 16-55 (and 18-55)?
Click to expand...

I haven't published them, but I took a load of test shots recently and found the 16-55 to be a touch sharper in the middle at all focal lengths, but quite a bit sharper at the 55mm end compared with my 18-55mm. Shots were at infinity. However, the 18-55mm had better borders! I'm not sure if the 16-55mm has field curvature or if I had a bad copy, but I ended up flogging the 16-55mm as I preferred the weight and size of the 18-55mm anyway.
 
jimmyjamjojo said:
I wove my own from paracord, cost me about £2.75 plus 20mins of learning on YouTube. If I ever end up hanging over a cliff suspended obly by my camera strap, I know i'll be safe. ;)

View: https://youtu.be/bentrOlcfFs


That's the weave I went with, but I didn't bother with clips at either end, just a small loop at one ebd and a large loop at the other, thread the large loop through the camera, then through the small loop and it just slides to tighten on your wrist.

Alternatively, you can buy pre-made "cordy's", but where's the fun in that?
Click to expand...
cheers for the info :)
Just ordered 25ft of paracord , how long did you make yours ?
 
graycbr said:
cheers for the info :)
Just ordered 25ft of paracord , how long did you make yours ?
Click to expand...
Dunno without measuring. The actual woven part is end to end around my wrist, then just adjusted the longer loop until it felt comfortable (not easy, that lanyard knot at the end was a bitch and had to be re-done for any adjustment).
Off the top of my head, the long loop was long enough to have the strap around my wrist, with my fingertips just able to touch the camera. This left it long enough to not feel restrictive but short enough to feel safe.

Edit: i'll post pics tomorrow
 
Last edited:
southernjessie said:
Very interesting...thanks for posting your first impressions. I'd be interested to see a comparison with the 18-55 at the same f stops (2.8, 4, 5.6, 8) of the same subject.

I have the 18-55 and it's always performed well, and I wonder if it's sample variation with the 16-55 (and 18-55)?
Click to expand...

Just to be clear - I have nothing against my 18-55 either. All I meant was that having both that and the 16-55, I wouldn't pick up the 18-55 in preference given ownership of both - that's just a me thing. I bought the 18-55 with the camera as it was a no brainer, but GAS made me buy the 16-55. I should have just bought that first, but I put myself off it because of the relative size. Now that I've used it, the size really is a non issue for me, and the results, and that it goes to 16mm, and 2.8 to 55mm, combined with the fact I have the 1.4 and 1.2 primes mean I'll prob never pick the 18-55 in preference. I was the same with the 24-70L 2.8 and the 24-105L F4 canon. Despite having both for a while, I always grabbed the 2.8 in preference to the F4. However, I might get a Pro 2 and keep the 18-55 on that. I've not used it enough to form much of an opinion on the 18-55 really, but the me thing will prob mean I'd always pick the pricier lens.
 
manualfocus-g said:
I haven't published them, but I took a load of test shots recently and found the 16-55 to be a touch sharper in the middle at all focal lengths, but quite a bit sharper at the 55mm end compared with my 18-55mm. Shots were at infinity. However, the 18-55mm had better borders! I'm not sure if the 16-55mm has field curvature or if I had a bad copy, but I ended up flogging the 16-55mm as I preferred the weight and size of the 18-55mm anyway.
Click to expand...

I don't mind the size - coming from Canon's 24-70 2.8L, the size is refreshing in any case :). I didn't notice anything in the shots I took to give me any cause to doubt it, but I'll need to do more shooting to assess for sure. Looks good for now.

Thunderbird010 said:
Must admit I love my 16-55 as well fast to focus and very sharp. I ended up selling my 18,23,35 and 56 and replaced them with the 16-55. Most of my photographs these days consist of walks with the dog so the 16mm comes handy for landscapes, the WR when the weather changes and i dont have to mess around changing lenses. The weight does not bother me and feels fine on my xt2 and the lack of OIS hasn't been a problem yet.
Click to expand...

I liked the WR, was disappointed about the IS but never had it on my Canon. I've bought 16 1.4, 23 1.4 56 1.2 as well so could rationalise eventually - I'd not anticipated this quality in the zoom I must admit. I agree, weight is not an issue for a downsizer - it's very nice to use.
 
Question 10-24 users. Now I've got the 16-55 I'm wondering if I really need the 10-24 at all. I already have the Zeiss touit 12mm 2.8 and 16mm and 23mm 1.4 primes. I'm kinda thinking that in ultra wide, there is little practical difference between 12mm and 10mm, and the jump from 12mm to 16mm isn't that great either. Black Friday madness made me order it, but now thinking the only thing it would get me is OIS and 10-15mm zoom coverage vs 12mm fixed. (Given the 16-24mm range is adequately covered by the 16-55). I could sell the Zeiss, I guess, but I'm not sure there is much in the way of real practical benefit worth £550 for the 10-24 (after cashback). In the Canon I had 16-35 and 24-70 zooms, no primes, but the 16-35 only really went on for the 16mm end. I think I've talked myself into cancelling the order - thoughts?
 
Simes123 said:
Question 10-24 users. Now I've got the 16-55 I'm wondering if I really need the 10-24 at all. I already have the Zeiss touit 12mm 2.8 and 16mm and 23mm 1.4 primes. I'm kinda thinking that in ultra wide, there is little practical difference between 12mm and 10mm, and the jump from 12mm to 16mm isn't that great either. Black Friday madness made me order it, but now thinking the only thing it would get me is OIS and 10-15mm zoom coverage vs 12mm fixed. (Given the 16-24mm range is adequately covered by the 16-55). I could sell the Zeiss, I guess, but I'm not sure there is much in the way of real practical benefit worth £550 for the 10-24 (after cashback). In the Canon I had 16-35 and 24-70 zooms, no primes, but the 16-35 only really went on for the 16mm end. I think I've talked myself into cancelling the order - thoughts?
Click to expand...
As you say, you've talked yourself into cancelling it I think.

You either keep the Zeiss or the 10-24mm, no need for both. I bought the 10-24mm, but only in addition to my 18-55mm. If like you I had the 12mm and 16mm+ covered, I doubt I'd have bought it at all.
 
Ian W said:
As you say, you've talked yourself into cancelling it I think.

You either keep the Zeiss or the 10-24mm, no need for both. I bought the 10-24mm, but only in addition to my 18-55mm. If like you I had the 12mm and 16mm+ covered, I doubt I'd have bought it at all.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's really an either or at that end. If I need wider than 16 it's a lens change either way. The "difference to change" cost from the Zeiss to the Fuji 10-24 is probably around £100-£125 extra, given I bought the Zeiss used, but I'm not convinced that it would be a "better" ultrawide for the extra money, albeit it appears a nice lens. The OCD part of me really only fancies it because it's the same design as the other Fuji lenses, while the Zeiss is a bit odd. Think I'll cancel for now - if I have a burning need later, I'll look out for a used 10-24 in due course. Maybe next BF!
 
Is anyone able to comment how good the auto eye detect is on the xt1/2 compared to the oly em1? On my em1 it was very good, on my A7ii I did not like having to press a separate button to activate it. And then not a good hit rate.
 
Something odd with this update. I just re enterred it and the short cut is now back, but only takes 1 second rather then the three seconds it needed before.
 
Not tried it myself, but according to the blurb the Nissin i40 now works. Interestingly it doesn't say the TTL is operational, just that the flash fires. Anyone care to test it?

The phenomenon is fixed that Flash i40 made by Nissin for FUJIFILM doesn't fire.
 
Hi All. Long time no post. Nice to see this thread is still going strong after 2 years!

Yesterday I pulled the shutter trigger and ordered a new X-T1 for £689 with a 18-135mm lens and 32G ultra fast card. Those cash back deals really help make this kit affordable.

Yes I'm late to the party - but the camera will last me another 5 years - had to apply patience and restraint to wait for the right price. My X10 has always done what it said on the tin.

I will need to grab a 60mm Macro lens to compliment the 18-135mm. I must admit the 56mm portrait lens looks lush - but in practice I'd do better with a 35mm prime for street stuff. Will save me a bit of cash too - the 56mm ain't cheap :eek:

I have to wait for delivery, before starting to post photos. Not sure how long some of you have been using this forum, but I had lots of fun in the X10 thread. I hope to do the same in this thread :)
 
Last edited:
mickledore said:
Not tried it myself, but according to the blurb the Nissin i40 now works. Interestingly it doesn't say the TTL is operational, just that the flash fires. Anyone care to test it?

The phenomenon is fixed that Flash i40 made by Nissin for FUJIFILM doesn't fire.
Click to expand...
If anybody is looking to go the Nissin flash route who hasn't already done so, I'd wait it out until Nissin & Fuji have ironed out he firmware versions, both Nissin and Fuji have been working closely apparently to resolve it.
HSS is a key feature so wait if you can.
 
mickledore said:
Something odd with this update. I just re enterred it and the short cut is now back, but only takes 1 second rather then the three seconds it needed before.
Click to expand...

I've never been able to get this shortcut to work anyway. In fact I don't understand this two slot malarky at all, so I just use it with one card!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top