Jump to content

markwelsh

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I've just bought the Fuji XF 100-400mm lens to go on my Fuji X-T1. Yesterday I tried it out for the first time, and straight away I have a problem, the image that I see in the EVF is great but when I take a photo and view it, the photo is very dark even though I'm shooting in daylight. I have already updated the firmware for the lens and my X-T1 has the latest firmware as well. The exposure dial is set to '0' so it's not that. Has anyone got a suggestion as to what could be causing this? I have the ISO set to 'A', shutter set to 1000. The lens is set to auto aperture, I've also tried manual aperture but got the same result.

 

I'm fairly new to Fuji so it's probably some simple fix that I'm missing.

 

Kind regards

Mark

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you got the Preview Exposure and White Balance setting on or off? On gives you a "what you see is what you get" image preview as you're looking through the viewfinder, and Off gives you an optimal brightness for viewing, regardless of your exposure settings.

 

Is the picture consistently dark? Try shooting with all manual exposure, then change settings and see if the brightness of the photo changes.

 

My guess is you've got some setting changed in the Image Quality settings. That controls your JPG settings, but even if you're shooting RAW the camera will display a JPG with whatever settings you have it defaulted to. So basically you could have the camera set to burn photos down (-1/3EV, -1EV, etc). That's in one of the first menu pages. If you have that and shoot a JPG, it'll be darker. If you have that and shoot RAW, the RAW file won't be affected, but the JPG displayed on the LCD will look darker.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is it dark ? On your computer's screen ? The camera's LCD ?

 

Also, daylight with full bright sun ? Overcast cloud ? Very heavy cloud ? 

 

Don't forget that the XF 100-400 has F4.5 at the widest, that's a rough 2 stops lower than most Fuji lenses and about a stop from most zooms and you lose even more light if you zoom fully to 400 mm.

If you auto ISO is capped at a lower value, like 800, it's quite normal that your picture will be dark if you had the speed set at 1/1000 of a sec.

 

Please give us the details about the picture you took so we can get a better idea of what happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Vidalgo has a good point. My first pictures with my 100-400 where birds. So mostly I had a lot of bright sky as background which fooled the exposure automatic and I had to use two or three stops positive exposure compensation. The same may be nessecary when doing manual exposure setting but using the meter of the camera.

Of course this was not necessary when the background was darker like the leaves of trees and bushes behind a deer.

 

Edit: Sentence about manual exposure added.

Edited by Jürgen Heger
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • The yellowing issue has always been easily fixed in my experience. It's a result of the presence of Thorium. it can be greatly or eliminated by exposure to UV light, so I've on occasion simply left a lens on the window sill for a few days. It also kills fungus, but fungus can create unrecoverable etchings in the glass if it is particularly aggressive. Note: this can be done on cloudy days. UV light penetrates the clouds. Next note: We're speaking a lens and possibly strong sunlight here. It could create a risk of fire the orientation of the lens and its configuration leads to it focusing on a spot. I use tinfoil at the camera end of the lens. It reflects the UV light back up the barrel, giving a double bath to the lenses. 
    • Cheers! I hope to enjoy it as much as I have enjoyed the Spottie I grew up with and which will remain in my bag for life not simply in my bag, but with a roll of film in it, and more to come. I'm coming at the XT5 from a very weird angle. It sort of goes back to unpreparedness. I found myself with my Spotmatic in "the Garden of Ireland" - Wicklow - beautiful county. I was spending a week exploring its beautiful valleys. When the batteries on my Spotmatic failed, I reached into my rucksack for a replacement set. There were none. So I shrugged and decided I had to use my eyes to meter. Things were cheaper then. When picking up processed films the photos came with a new film thrown in, so it was easier to take that decision. Within a few months I was getting nearly 100% keepers - at least in terms of focus and exposure. So circumstances forced me to be ever vigilant of light. I've had many other cameras since then, but the bare bones (it doesn't even have a self-timer) Spotmatic was an ever-present. Expense has forced my hand, though. That and some curiosity. I feel as if my first car is a Ferrari! In fact, when I explained at the shop that I was an experienced photographer looking for a digital which placed the emphasis on stills, they tried to force a €7k model on me. That would be a step too far. Thus my experience in approaching this camera is somewhat unusual. Thus far I have had great enjoyment with it. I was thrilled on opening to box to discover that I was getting utter rubbish from it. Yes!!! I had to learn how to use it! Praise the Lord! I also found a magic button which was the answer to my dreams - the diopter adjustment. That's how naive I was (and am) about the digital offerings - this was an enormous and hugely welcome surprise. I've been learning. The supplied kit lens is not ideal - a 16-80mm zoom. It's pretty sharp, but demanding in manual mode. My old glass reminds me of my father's Opel Senator, which was forgiving to the point that it would comfortably take off at the lights even if you'd mistakenly selected third. My old glass is much more forgiving. At the moment, I'm leaving everything to automatic ISO. I'll wean myself away from that quickly enough, though. in the past I'd retrofitted my son's lenses to my older kit, and found that you needed to be much more precise. I guess when you're designing something which will be adjusted by algorithms then you can make the continuum as tight as you want. My son laughs at me. "You have bracketing mode if you want, Dad.", he'll remind me. "Use burst mode.", he'll add. Some of my habits are deeply ingrained, though. Two other things people find odd about my photography: I never ever use post-processing - what comes out of the camera is the final product. Secondly, I have never once taken photos where the subject is a human being without first requiring a lot of persuasion. 
    • Seconding this! Would be nice to preview a desqueezed image in camera + output it via HDMI.
    • I found my answer. Actually you can assign the profile from a .dng conversion but not from a .tiff conversion. I hadn’t double checked the .dng option.
×
×
  • Create New...