Jump to content

Woodworth

Members
  • Posts

    103
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Everything posted by Woodworth

  1. I do. I just think Fuji are missing a trick here.
  2. Ha Ha! I can't really believe that there are still people who pay any serious attention at all to Ken Rockwell! The camera is used by professionals (like me) who earn their money with their cameras. Personally I don't want a "pro spec" camera as they are usually far too expensive and heavy to boot. It's not the camera that defines a "pro" its how they earn their money.
  3. Lets take a look at the new cost of the Sony A7II compared to the Fuji X-T2, they are both roughly in the same sort of price bracket. In the UK A7II body £1349 and the X-T2 £1399, The A7II has both full frame and IBIS whereas the X-T2 doesn't. Many have protested at the price of the X-T2 and in comparison to the price of the X-T1 (based on pre X-T2 introduction of about £800) and again there are those early adopters of the X-T2 (the lucky few) who have been disappointed that the price hike has not been reflected in a similar rise in quality/features/performance (not my sentiment). With this in mind, in my opinion, Fuji could have incorporated IBIS into the X-T2 without the need for a further price increase. Also not every Fuji would need IBIS, maybe just one version of a X-T2 (X-T2as) or an X-E3?
  4. I don't really know why you object to image stabilisation so much. You can always switch it off if you don't like it but I can't switch it on if it's not there in the first place! It's a common feature with many cameras, it serves a useful purpose (even if you can't see that) and it does no-one any harm. I would pay more for a Fuji with IBIS, but I'm not asking them to make IBIS in all their cameras so there is no need to worry about price hikes. I can see as you say that IBIS doesn't matter to you, well that's jolly good for you, but please don't expect me to agree as I and others have different priorities.
  5. "the Fuji 90mm F2 is an outdoor portrait lens for good light" Really? I think many would disagree! It is a lens for many purposes. "Just because it is a prime or F2 doesn't imply that it is meant for lowlight photography." Yes, but not necessarily. A fast lens that is sharp wide open lends itself to low light work. If you're going to shoot at f5.6 or f8 why not save some money and space in your kit bag and get a zoom? I think most experienced photographers choose fast lenses for situations where stopping down isn't possible, such as low light work for example. "Maybe my experience with lowlight photography is limited, but I don't know what I would need IBIS for." When you need to shoot wide open and at a low shutter speed IBIS will make the difference between a useable picture and one that you need to bin. It won't stop subject movement blur but it will help alleviate camera shake. "So if my shots are bad, I blame my lack of creativity to get the shot right and do better next time" It's not just a lack of creativity, but also a lack of technique and the wrong choice of equipment. If my pictures are bad, there is no "next time" my clients won't pay the bill or come back for more work. As it is I have plenty of repeat clients. "If you demand perfection at any price, then maybe Fuji is not your system." Come one Opteron, that's not very friendly. For one I didn't "demand perfection at any price" these are your words not mine, I merely made one criticism of Fuji and you want to show me the door? Shame on you! The point is Fuji would bless us with IBIS and I don't think this would be impossible or unreasonable.
  6. My current thoughts on continuing to use Fuji. I have been using various Fuji cameras for a number of years professionally, however I have reached something of an impasse. The chief issue I have is the lack of in body image stabilisation (IBIS). I am a great fan of Fuji cameras (with the exception of the X-pro series which I have tested extensively but decided that the X-T1 and X-E2 suit me better). I love their lenses, particularly the primes (I have an extensive set of both zooms and primes) but I cannot understand why if they won’t stabilise the prime lenses they don’t have at least one body with IBIS? The argument that IBIS may result in a slight deterioration in edge image quality has been put forward by Fuji and I can see the point they make, however, if the whole shot is ruined because of camera shake nothing is gained. Those seeking ultimate quality can always switch off IBIS after-all. The 90mm is a prime candidate for inducing camera shake in my experience. When shooting in good light levels this is no problem but when using available light such as photographing a play or for candid work in the evening the problem becomes real. My solution is to use higher ISO to allow higher shutter speeds, but this has resulted in noisier images than I like or want to accept. The Fuji zoom lenses have image stabilisation but this is of no comfort to those who need the extra speed a faster prime lens allows. 2.8 zooms whilst lovely, do not compare to lenses such as the 56/1.2 for example. Also there are those who have chosen prime lenses simply because they suit their photographic style and habits better. Traditionally fast primes are the weapon of choice for the available light photographer and to have neither IBIS or lens stabilisation in prime lenses seems to be a retrograde step. Just about everything these days seems to have stabilisation of some sort, and this is a great boon, so it baffles me why Fuji persist in depriving us of this advantage. As a professional I have the budget to access to other systems and have tried both the Sony A7 series and the Olympus Pen F and have found that they are both at an advantage because of IBIS. Granted the Micro 4/3 size sensor of the Olympus may be at a disadvantage compared to the Fuji in terms of noise, dynamic range and shallow depth of field and the Sony is handicapped with a smaller lens range, but they both excel when it comes to low light photography because of IBIS. I recently photographed a play professionally. I used both my Fuji cameras and also the Olympus Pen F and to Fuji’s shame the Olympus produced superior images. The reason for this was simply down to the Olympus’ IBIS. Each Fuji image was slightly softer than the Olympus versions. I noticed that the Olympus was just a tiny little noisier, but only when viewed at 100%. I did a similar thing at a wedding with the Sony A7SII and my Fuji cameras and again the Sony gave a sharper image. I love Fuji colours, I love their sharpness in good light, I love the size and ergonomics of the cameras, I love their prime lenses, I love the feel of a Fuji camera and lens in my hands, I love working with the images in post-production but the lack of IBIS is killing it for me. As a professional, I need to use the equipment that delivers the results that satisfy both me and my clients. Sadly I am increasingly reaching for my Sony A7 series equipment. My heart doesn’t want to do this, but I cannot sacrifice image quality for loyalty. So this is a heart felt plea to Fuji, please introduce an X series camera with IBIS before it is too late.
  7. I mostly agree. The size would need to be slightly bigger than the current X-E2 but not as big as the X-Pro2 which is a bit too big for me. Size is a very individual thing, but then an APSc camera is bigger than a full frame A7 or even the Leica M6 that it was inspired by I begin to wonder ... I would definitely need an X-T2 style rear screen (movable). I think Fuji got this wrong with the X-Pro2. IBIS would make using the 90mm so much easier, so I'd love to have IBIS. If the Sony and Olumpus can do it, so can Fuji (and probably better). I love the X-E2 styling, so please don't change that too much.
  8. If you have already bought into the Fuji system, the X-T2 whilst expensive is a good option in many ways. The price is sure to lower in about 6 months and I suppose that while it is now about £1399, it will probably settle at about £1199 or lower. The X-T1 was about £1199 to start with and is now about £799. We in the UK may well end up paying more with recent referendum choices having their affect! There are going to be a lot of cheap used X-T1 bodies around for sure as people get the latest thrill. Comparing the price of the X-T2 with the X-T1 is rather unfortunate for Fuji as I don't think that the X-T2 is £600 better even with 24Mp and better AF. This makes the prospect of an Sony A7ii seem quite attractive ... If contemplating getting into mirrorless, the price of the XT-2 compared with the Sony A7ii makes for a dilemma ... which one to choose? I don't really care personally, for me the choice was made already.
  9. It's hard to take someone seriously when they seem to have such outspoken views as does Ken. He seems to either love or hate something with nothing much in between. I think it's often that he goes with his initial impression. My first impression of the X-Pro2 was that I was a little disappointed, I'd hoped for a tilt-able screen and IBIS, neither of which was provided. I decided to get one, nevertheless and after getting used to the new sensor, I actually have grown to like it. Life has shown me that I need to try things out and use them for some serious work before either praising them or damning them, a lesson for our Ken?
  10. I've done plenty of real estate work with an X-T1 and a 10-24. There are no issues from my perspective, except that it would be nice to have a decent wireless flash system for this kind of work.
  11. If you're using zooms IBIS is of no use, however if using primes, particularly the 90mm it would (imo) be a Godsend!
  12. I've got to say that whilst I like the new sensor in the X-Pro2, that's about all I really like about it. Now, I may change my mind but I think I'd prefer an X-T2. What features do you think the X-T2 should have, apart from the new 24mp sensor? My personal favourites would be for IBIS (yes, I know I keep banging on about this!), twin SD card slots and a lockable dioptre change knob (I keep catching this when putting my X-T1 in and out of me bag). I wouldn't mind if it came with the battery grip made into an integral part of the design (similar to Canon and Nikon Pro cameras). I'd be happy to road test it on some of my future jobs if Fuji are listening! So what features do you people think should be on an X-T2?
  13. It's all down to personal taste. I have never liked silver lenses, particularly on black bodies but somehow black lenses work alright on silver bodies - strange?
  14. I'd like to see a 23mm f2 and a 10mm 2.8 plus a Fuji body that has IBIS for us prime users who love low light work!
  15. I've got both the 56mm and 90mm and if I had to choose just one of them it would be the 56mm. They are both excellent lenses but the 56mm get the desired image more often for me because, in my experience, it is easier to suffer from camera shake with the 90mm. This only really applies when you aren't using a tripod or when you rely on available light instead of flash. With the 90mm I have to employ more careful shooting habits to avoid the camera shake, whereas the 56mm is more easy to work with quickly. IBIS wanted Fuji! As to which focal length is better for portraits, this entirely depends on your style and the amount of room available to shoot in. If you favour a tightly cropped look, the 90mm works best but if you are going for a more traditional head & shoulders look the 56mm works best. The amount of room also is important, are you working within small rooms or in bigger spaces? The answer to that may decide which lens is better for you. If I was working in confined spaces such as cars or train carriages I'd probably favour the 56mm or the 60mm macro. I'm the kind of photographer who likes to work quickly and fluidly when taking portraits, I like to react to people's mood and expression and so find that the 56mm is ideal for that kind of work. Some have dismissed the 90mm because it doesn't appeal to them, I think each person has a sense of what is right for them and so even if everyone on the forum suggests the 56mm, you should explore the options for yourself and find out what works for you. I suggest a visit to a friendly camera shop and try them both, I think the right lens will become evident to you,
  16. Not always, but it does allow for cropping without significant loss of quality. It's difficult to anticipate what my customers would want beyond the initial commission, sometimes they do want pretty huge prints, so I like to be prepared. "Chance favors the prepared mind" (attributed to Ansel Adams) might be amended to "chance favours the prepared photographer"? Now I don't think we can anticipate any eventuality, but having done quite some industrial work in fairly dangerous situations, I like to be ready for what might face me. Overkill? Maybe, but ...
  17. I don't miss carrying a Linhoff 5x4 system or a Mamiya RB67 kit although they did produced some lovely images. My back certainly loves modern cameras! The advantages of the lovely little Fuji are many, especially when working quickly. We're probably getting a little off-topic here so I feel the need to comply just a little and say something about the X-Pro2. One thought I had was that I used to prefer my XE-2 to the X-Pro1 but (despite the lack of IBIS) if I had to choose again, I'd get the X-Pro-2 instead of an XE-2 mostly because of the higher resolution. Many say that 16Mp is enough but I've always thought that 24Mp was about right for me and so the X-Pro2 fits that standard very well.
  18. Ah, but if you were brought up with 5x4 and 6x6 cameras, like me, you would reach for the loupe when inspecting transparencies or negatives on the light box - pretty much the same thing isn't it? Granted that too much emphasis is put on critical sharpness and maybe we were (in the day) more tolerant of a little creative softness when the picture was deemed beautiful enough to allow for this, however, I think there is a need to get the very best technically amongst many photographers and perhaps this crushes creativity just a little bit. That said, when doing weddings or portraits I don't mind minor imperfections if the mood or expression is what I wanted, whereas when I'm shooting commercially, I need to get the very best technically and aesthetically if I can. The topic in hand is however the X-pro2 and I have to say that I'm still disappointed that IBIS has not been included as shooting with my 90mm would have been easier (yes, I am banging on about that - again). The 24Mp sensor and improved low light performance are tempting but I'll probably wait for an X-T2 in the hope that it will have IBIS...
  19. Plus a side (rather than base) card slot like the X-T1 would be pretty handy. Have to say that the XE-2 is my favourite Fuji camera, so any improvements would be rather nice!
  20. Fair point, however, I think that Fuji are missing a trick. For those who choose zoom lenses, they have in lens stabilisation and that's all well and fine, no complaints from me. For those (like me) who prefer prime lenses, there is no stabilisation on offer and so we are at a disadvantage in low light levels. My solution is to use higher iso settings, but this isn't ideal by any means. With lenses like the 90mm, stabilisation of some kind would be a real bonus. IBIS would solve this for people like me and if Sony can get it into their A7II, I don't really see why Fuji can't. So far I have an XE-1, XE-2 and X-T1 so don't see any real advantage for me in getting the X-Pro2 other than higher resolution. I might as well wait until Fuji produce a suitable model.
  21. I'd like to see IBIS for us prime lens users and a tilt screen but other than the addition of the X-E2s improvements that would be about it for me.
  22. I use my 18/2 a lot, in my opinion it is a superb low light option. The difference between your 18-55 at 18mm and 2.8 and the 18/2 at f2 won't be huge and there is no anti-shake on the 18/2 but in my opinion, it will be slightly better and I would choose it over my 18-55.
  23. Hello, I'm Chris from Cumbria, England. I'm a working photographer and I mainly shoot with Fuji cameras.
×
×
  • Create New...