Leaderboard

My request for the other raw file overlapped your post where you noted that raw conversion always showed the problem - even using X Raw Studio. The bottom line is that its best to avoid lossy compressed raw to be safe.

I'll load a few here and below are links to several photos, others can be found here https://sdog1ablog.tumblr.com/ https://sdog1ablog.tumblr.com/post/732615816925806592 https://sdog1ablog.tumblr.com/post/732370849221476352 https://sdog1ablog.tumblr.com/post/732327247475867648 https://sdog1ablog.tumblr.com/post/728291248995254272 https://sdog1ablog.tumblr.com/post/722371763818954752 https://sdog1ablog.tumblr.com/post/728793309770891264 https://sdog1ablog.tumblr.com/post/734047988704477184

Beauty, functionality, originality, beautiful images and optics, optics, optics. What's not to like?

can't remember if I shared here, was playing with settings in the XT5, always loved this scene on the NCR trail. XT5, 16-80, 16mm, I think.

no train, just tracks......from the summer at NCR trail, XT5 70-300, I think.

exactly, awesome stuff!

Hi everyone, I picked up an X100F for my honeymoon and have been shooting with it for the last 1.5 years or so. It's been more than a decade since I last shot with a camera! I like to do portraits, architecture, and street photography. I'd love to get better at landscape and travel photography. Here's a recent one I like!

Thought it was cool, I didn't see the fly until I was processing.....70-300, XT5.

NCR Trail near my house. XT5 70-300, 70mm

Playing around in Capture One, thought it was a cool looking tree, bald eagle on top. XT5, 16-80, I believe this was 16mm, F16.

Been a while, thought I'd check in. First attempt at a Milky Way photo........when I could actually see it, lol. Assateague Island, MD in October. Beautiful night on the bayside.

I tried the sample you posted in X Raw Studio and it gives the same problem as the other raw converter. Can you post a link to the other raw - where X Raw Studio appears to avoid the artefacts? Its probably a good idea to avoid shooting in compressed raw as it doesn't buy you all that much space over lossless compressed. EDIT: I see you have now posted that you have the same problem with X Raw Studio - which is what I expected - the problem seems to be with the lossy compression algorithm that FujiFilm uses.

Maybe the 18-55 would suit you better than the 16-80 - its much smaller, lighter and less intrusive

Hi, since you mention architecture, along with interiors, I assume maybe you plan on shooting professionally? If so, consider the option of refraining from shooting super wide all the time, as the 'wow' effect of super-wides often collides with the need of representing spaces or structures with a more natural identity. One very good option could be to buy a lens with a T/S (tilt/shift) or only S adapter ring to connect with your camera. You'll have to set the lens aperture and focus manually, but it's not a big deal; you would be able to include a detail in the composition or correct vertical lines without the excessive perspective effect of super wides. The Fuji sensor, the small ones, are so good that one can happily forget about FF and prime shift lenses and go the Frankenstein way with great satisfaction. One option to investigate would be coupling a Voigtländer Heliar 15mm with the XH1. The Voigtländer is meant for FF so it would give you a sufficient portion of good image circle to shift around with. Some uses it on GFX cropping the sensor to FF. Hope it can be 'stimulating', and not make things even worse... 😁 👋

Hallo to the entire community! My name is Piero and I'm currently based in Palermo, Italy. I'm a professional photographer. I've been using Fujifilm since 2013, mostly for my personal work and sometimes for commissioned work. I like very much the sensor and the lenses of both small and medium format cameras. I'll give a look around... Cheers

Since you are zooming in and out from those settings, it sounds like you want to use wider primes and longer primes. But, reconciling that to your desire to not carry a lot of gear is going to be tricky. Want vs need. I like Fujfilm's XF14mm and XF16mm lenses. They work quite well for many situations and even give you great landscape shots if you use them that way. Perhaps the colder weather will cause some of the street photographers to come inside and offer some insights for you. For what it is worth, here are some lens lineups: https://fujifilm-x.com/global/products/lenses/ A lot of folks like the X-Mount lenses Viltrox sells. The lenses get good reviews. https://viltroxstore.com/collections/camera-lens Select X-mount in the "Type" filter. Nowadays, the are a lot of companies offering low cost X-Mount lenses, so you can experiment to find what you need without having to, ummm, 'make difficult financial choices' to get to where you want to be.

Hi All I had been with Pentax for a number of years, but I've recently moved from to Fujifilm. My kit comprises of a TX-4 plus 16-80 lens, which I've only had for couple of weeks. I really like the the way it feels and the ease of using it, still trying to set it up. I will eventially expand my lens setup, I've only ever used zooms not had any primes, but I am thinking getting a 23m or 35mm, especially for street photography. I'm from Cambridgeshire in the U.K. My photographic interests are mainly lanscapes, anything querky, urban and derelict scenes. At The moment I'm having a go at street photography, which I'm finding very interesting and challanging. I hope to gain more experience with my camera, and hopefully pick up plenty of tips from you all. While with Pentax I was very fortunate to have had my photo Garden Bistro used by Pentax U.K. to advertise it's DSLR range which I am very proud of.

Brown Pelican Alsea Bay, Oregon. X-H2s, Fuji 150-600.

Horned Grebe Alsea Bay, Oregon. X-H2s, Fuji 150-600.

Try to activate „shoot without lens“.

Silver Lake, Brighton Utah, US f/5.6. 1/18, iso 3200, XF27mm, X-T5

North America ... NGC 7000 is the name / number / title given to a nebula in the Cygnus Constellation that actually does resemble most of North America, though I think the Canadian part gets short changed. This nebula is pretty popular because it contains so many fascinating parts. Along the left side of "Mexico" is something called the Great Cygnus Wall, and over to the right of NGC 7000 is another popular nebula called the Pelican Nebula. Pelican Nebula is a little fainter, so it needs more exposure time to fill it in so it shows as much as the North America Nebula. This is the equivalent of 80 minutes of exposure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_America_Nebula https://skyandtelescope.org/online-gallery/ngc-7000-north-america-nebula-2/ https://www.constellation-guide.com/north-america-nebula/ https://www.constellation-guide.com/pelican-nebula/

Grasshopper (Caelifera)

I have been using Fuji cameras for years. First an S-1000, then an X-E1, and now a X-T4. The main reason I switched to Fuji is that I like the lens quality. Back in the '80s I spent a bunch of money on a Nikon outfit, and the image quality didn't compare favorably to my Leica M-2, with 50 and 35mm Summluxes and a 90 Summicron, Everything seemed flat as a flounder. I was printing on grade 6 paper to get tolerable prints, so I sold it at a considerable loss. By 2014 Film and processing was starting to be a challenge, so I wanted a digital camera. I would have bought an M-9, but that was totally out of my budget. Nowadays Digital Leica M bodies cost more than most of the cars I have owned. The S-1000, was for getting my toes wet in the digital world and did much better than I expected. The X-E1 worked pretty much like a traditional film camera, shutter speeds on a dial aperture on a ring. Likewise for the X-T4. The 18-55 f:2.8-4 was excellent. Perhaps the best kit lens ever, 'though the 16-80 F:4 gives it a hard run for that title. Now, I do a lot of available light work, Or as some describe it, available darkness, and Optical Image Stabilization is a game changer. I've gotten good shots at ridiculously slow shutter speeds, so long as the subject isn't moving too much. I've shot weddings by firelight and gotten excellent results.

The Milky Way as viewed looking south in Peru.

Jefferson County, Kentucky, USA

I've owned all three versions of the X-Pro series. Overall, I found the XP2 the best. It's much more a professional grade camera than the XP1 is. I personally returned the XP3 after a few weeks. Though the EVF is better than that of the XP2, the OVF (that's why you use an XP) is actually not as good since it has only one magnification level (XP2: 2). So, it struggles with lenses wider than 23mm or longer than 50mm. You just don't get the frame lines wider than 23 or the magnification longer than 50 to work well with the OVF. Don't bother about titanium top plates and sub screens with film box logos on the XP3. These are just gimmicks. In terms of IQ there's hardly any difference between the XP2 and the XP3. In terms of durability the XP2 turns out more reliable since it lacks the strange (for me: useless) downward folding screen. As it turns out, that is an Achilles heel of the XP3. There's even a class-action lawsuit in the US against Fuji for that. The weak spot of the XP2 is weather resistance. The front- and back dial as well as the on/off collar around the shutter release button are not too well-sealed. So be a bit careful with heavy rain or snow. The XP3 is not better on that subject. It's just that its dial click function feels less mushy. $600 for a good XP2 is a very fair price. Don't worry about the 13k actuations. That's less than 10% of what Fuji claims as a life expectancy and generally cameras go well-beyond that. As you mention using MF vintage lenses on the XP2/3 you might also want to consider a XT2 or XT3. Though no 'rangefinder-style', these are great little cameras with a similar IQ. The advantage of the X-T line is that they have a better EVF with higher magnification. That will make manual focusing easier than on an X-Pro camera. Generally, they're also a bit cheaper pre-owned than the X-Pro range.

Sierra de Callosa, Alicante, Spain - XE-3, 18-135, originally shot on Vivia