milandro

I am always very interested by accessories when I see them but there are really many out there varying from small affairs which you can mount on your camera and around your lens to large contraptions which need being mounted on a stand. There are also many DIY solutions but I am afraid that I would favor a ready made, off the shelf one. I have seen this Falcon Eyes one, any experience?

I simply used the same wikipedia article which you quoted, I just took the list of lenses scrolling down, from the same place and copied it there, you forgot to do that. You obviously are selective in your quotes. Just in case someone might think that yours is the whole page that you’ve quoted I took the time to make my point with examples. They should have shown you something, but they obviously didn’t. Quote selectively all you want, the fact, plain and simple for all to see in a list of lenses from a page which you quoted first, and it is and remains that many macro lenses are not fitting your arbitrary criteria. I don’t dispute that most modern lenses have succumbed to this 1:1 business but I put to the attention of the members of this forum that the predicate Macro, as applied to a lens and not to enlargements or other contexts, simply defines a lens with close up capabilities from 1:4 to 1: 1 and perhaps even more , 2:1, 3:1...where is the limit? The 60mm fuji IS a macro lens as much ( or as little) as others before of it, were. Again, maybe you’ve missed these. None of these is even close to 1:1 reproduction ratio. Two are called Macro one is called Micro. May I rest this case? It is getting heavy and I am no longer entertained. You can bring an wise and stubborn equine to the water but you cannot make it drink, this is now painfully obvious let’s leave it to that.

My search for the new and unusual in photography brings me to unexpected places. Some things are interesting but some are plain are simply weird. This gizmo has been invented ( energy which could have been better used in a different and more productive way) to encourage a mobile-phone-photographer, whilst using his phone as a camera, to better compose his pictures by transforming the phone into a bulky and not particularly good camera. Look! The ridiculous thing is that you buy and extremely bulky box to put ypour phone in, why you could buy a proper camera and make better pictures while carrying around a much smaller object! Same thing applies to a Go pro house which transforms the look of your go pro into a look alike of a classic camera, Why? video-585056-h264_high.mp4

Santa appears to have delivered lots of crystal balls already.

none of this in the Netherlands YET and we are not eligible for rebates offered in other countries. The promo is open to all residents in Malaysia with valid bank account in Malaysia. If I would be able to buy a new X-E2 for €400 I would certainly buy it and even more so if offered in a kit with the new 35mm

The the plate with the tripod screw socket, which is normally held in place by 4 retainer screws, has moved from its position ( it can be seen in the picture, I think). You probably can hear something rattling inside if you shake your camera. They at Fuji will be able to fix this but it will cost you, obviously you did this, somehow, yourself. It couldn’t have happened on its own.

I beg to differer and sincerely hope that Fuji will never follow this minority and in my opinion extravagant trend. There are already enough cameras suiting the supposed “ needs" for this monochrome " one trick pony" feature and if you wish to profusely and lavishly spend you money on a camera that does one thing alone, I suppose that you should rush out and buy one of these? But I suppose that the reason for not doing this would be that these extravagant cameras are very expensive and that you are longing for a cheap Fuji body to perform this one trick? One of the reasons why any camera which would only sell in limited amounts always ends up being so expensive is that the entire costs of its development and realization of a production line, marketing, advertising and distribution, has to be spread among the limited amount sales of this minority market segment. How large is this market? Not very large. Which returns a high cost in all but one case ( The Sigma Foveon) which while a aps-c is not really a monochrome sensor like the other cameras have. Besides, Fuji, which as a camera company heavily depends on other for the sensor which they use, don’t have the sensor which could do this off the shelf. They don’t have the option (even if they wanted to) to buy someone else’s sensor because, because of their lenses, it would have to be a aps-c sized one ( the only option therefore would do the same as what Sigma did) and , as far as I can tell there aren’t any proper monochrome sensors of this size. You could though, but at a very high cost, have a Fuji camera of your choice made into a monochromatic camera pretty much the same way (but more expensively and with higher complication) as people have been converting their cameras to infrared. Here’s where http://www.maxmax.com http://www.maxmax.com/maincamerapage http://www.maxmax.com/shopper/category/9241-monochrome-cameras For now they only seem to offer Sony, Nikon and Canon conversion “..........Monochrome: The ICF/AA filter stack is remove, sensor coverglass, microlenses and CFA. We have a variety of options for how the camera is put back together.........." LDP LLC www.MaxMax.com We started our business in the basement in 1997. Over the years we have grown to our own 6,500 square foot building with many thousands of satisfied customers. We are known to deliver the highest quality products with knowledgeable assistance spanning decades of experience. We have created much of our growth by listening to our customer's needs and finding novel solutions. LDP LLC 220 Broad Street Carlstadt, NJ 07072 USA (001)-201-882-0344 Voice (001)-201-882-0326 Fax Email: sales@maxmax.com

Zeiss, Kern, Fuji, Nikkor, Pentax, Olympus... they all called at some stage macro lenses which according to your questionable criterium and again, the original Nikkor micro which only got to 2:1 ? No need to be hung up with this definitions , if you want 1:1 ( or more) on the 60mm just add a tube or a lens. Life is already too complicated to argue about terms However, I’ve shown providing ample examples that the term macro was and still is being used for many types of lenses ( with reproduction ratios varying from 1:4 to 1:1) which clearly disproves, with facts, the idea that the term macro is ONLY applicable and limited to lenses offering the 1:1 reproduction ratio. Think what you want of it, but the 60mm is a macro lens.

Degustibus non est disputandum. The lens cap on the 60 was, to me, both an eye sore and the most impractical piece of equipment which I have ever seen in my life rendering instantly, an otherwise very small lens, large and clumsy ( to me)

you are not listening, it is not my mac alone, read other people’s reports. Fuji specifically says to download to and upload from empty and formatted cads. Which is what I do. You do what you please.

I really don’t like the shape of this as a lens hood and I am sure it would drive me nuts but if you keep losing the cap of your camera you may consider using one of these Hoocap, a lens hood which turn into a cap when collapsed

You are misinterpreting what I said. The fuji official site, clicking on the firmware update link provides automatically TWO identical files. On mac computers you even see the two files departing from the origin and reaching the target location ( which can be different and you can decide which location it will be). I’ve tried several times, deleted the files and repeated the process to be sure that it was this way. This was the first time ever this freak occurrence has happened. I am experienced with firmware update done for at least 4 lenses and 3 Fuji cameras before and never encountered this before. I don’t and never did have any other fuji files left anywhere on my computer. Several people confirmed the same behavior at their end on their computer on at least two different platforms. Read that. Fuji, by the way, for your information, advises against keeping old versions of the firmware updates on the card and specifically tells you to NOT store any there, not only, storing old version of the firmware might be not only be pointless but very dangerous since going back to older versions is impossible. So it would be pointless, dangerous and outright stupid to keep older versions stored on the card or on the computer. I am not stupid so, I don’t do it. Obviously, once again proof that no good deed goes, as always, unpunished.

there will never be a camera to fit everyone’s needs.

Some people like speculating . They tell us that others are going to follow the trend set by Fuji and that Nikon is going to have a mirrorless camera which looks exactly like a Fuji! http://nikonrumors.com/2014/09/23/nikon-large-sensor-mirrorless-camera-is-a-possibility.aspx/ Nikon-mirrorless-camera-concept4.jpg

well, along with the camera grips which make your camera look like a pistol or a gun like this glorious Zenith sniper or this other contraption , all things that are guaranteed, these days, to get you at least in trouble... this accessory side “ holster” for mirrorless cameras ( thank G-D, not available for Fuji!) by Roberu ( a Japanese maker) is almost guaranteed that it would get you shot and maybe killed and I can just imagine the scenes at an airport if you would be unwittingly trying to board with this camera holster at your hip. . And it ain’t even cheap./ Only $240! An expensive BAD idea!

So we have a precise countdown measuring the seconds separating us from the almost but not quite certain release date. Knock yourselves out and count-down away! http://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?iso=20160114T08&p0=248&font=cursive

Well, they are also steaming on with the X-E2-S ( not 3 apparently, at least according to the rumors of this forum, however reliable they might be). The fact that this update is this late it shows, to me, that they had to reconsider their marketing strategy and engage very late into providing an update that they might not have programmed at all at first but them, when Fuji saw the level of hostility that that cause, were forced to reconsider. I too am waiting to see what the future would bring. Very likely I will buy a X-E2 if price drops. If they keep on pricing it the same price of the X-T10 I am afraid that it will lead me to different choices.

checked again just now, still does that, once again, no problem, just upload the file without 2 on mac or 1 on windows in the file name.

Oy Vey! I would like my camera to be provided with wheels but then, would it be a wagon?

You tried the other cameras under the same conditions? With the lens cap on? This is only visible on my camera ( The X-T1) under these extreme and non realistic conditions of putting the lens cap on or attempting to shoot a night scene with no light whatsoever and maybe only starlight at a very closed aperture. Again, I don[’t see or call “ light flashes” what you’ve registered on that video but to me they are variously colored dots ( “ snow” flakes at best) produced by noise generated by the sensor and display trying to amplify the light on a scene ( the lens with the lens cap on) that is far from realistic. I don’t see any problem in as much as it appears to be normal and understandable. Are you under the mistakes assumption that the image of the LCD and EVF would have to be just a black image as you would get looking through a reflex prism returning no electronically generated image, as the LCD and the EVF of a mirrorless camera ALWAYS does? Because if this is what you think... you are wrong. Even the live view image on a LCD of a digital single lens reflex camera, observed with the lens cap on will show these snow flakes (I cannot call them flashes). Shooting in the dark ! ( what’s in a term!?) will always show some noise , the amount of this will vary and be influenced by how closed the aperture has been set and how small the amount of light there is. From the video that you shot with the lens cap on ( no light at all on the sensor) I cannot see anything strange that wouldn’t be normal. @https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6ZVk_FCPWs&feature=youtu.be

As I have shown, a lot of lenses were produced by lens makers ( not internet commentators, but actual lens makers) such as nikon, pentax, zeiss,olympus, and were given the predicate macro and micro but didn’t get to 1:1 reproduction ratio. I suppose that one might agree that lens makers know a few things more about macro lenses than dictionaries compilers whose task is to register the use of language ( I have been studying languages & linguistics and I am aware of how a dictionary is compiled) but don’t make the things called macro and haven’t given them their name. So, if a language myth takes a foothold a dictionary will report it as it is used, even badly. However the lens makers have a different opinion on these terms. Some define and have historically defined as macro and micro ( although micro, linguistically, should indicate that the reproduction ratio should be greater than life-size so with an actual magnification of the subject) many lenses which reproduce lifesize and sometimes less than that. A substantial amount of them in this list is half size ( and actually there will be more if the would include some older lenses for example it lists the pentax 100mm f2.8 but not the earlier f4 ( which I own and use), the same is also true fro the early versions Tamron 90mm and Vivitar 90mm, also half size but not listed among these lenses below) From Wikipedia (a partial list of lenses not including many with reproduction ratios lesser than 1:1, but nevertheless apt to show that there are several Macro lenses which didn’t get any furthere than 1:2 and some a lot less than that , such as the Schneider Makro or the Kern macro switar) Lens focal length Reproduction Ratio Closest Focus Canon EF Compact f/2.5 50mm 1:2 (half life size) 6in. Canon EF-S f/2.8 USM 60mm 1:1 (life size) 8in. Canon MP-E f/2.8 1-5x 65mm 5:1 (life size) 7in. Canon EF f/2.8 USM 100mm 1:1 (life size) 12in. Canon EF f/2.8L IS USM 100mm 1:1 (life size) 12in. Canon EF f/3.5L USM 180mm 1:1 (life size) 19in. Fujifilm XF60mmF2.4 R Macro [16] 60mm 1:2 (half life size) 10.5in. Nikon AF-S DX f/2.8G 40mm 1:1 (life size) 6.4in. Nikon Micro-Nikkor f/2.8 55mm 1:2 (half life size) 10.8in. Nikon AF Nikkor f/2.8D 60mm 1:1 (life size) 8.75in. Nikon AF-S Nikkor f/2.8G ED 60mm 1:1 (life size) 6in. Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor f/3.5G ED VR 85mm 1:1 (life size) 9in. Nikon Micro-Nikkor f/2.8 105mm 1:2 (half life size) 16.08in. Nikon AF-S VR Nikkor f/2.8G IF-ED 105mm 1:1 (life size) 12in. Nikon AF Nikkor f/4D IF-ED 200mm 1:1 (life size) 20in. Nikon PC-E Nikkor f/2.8D ED 45mm 1:2 (half life size) 9.9in. Nikon PC-E Nikkor f/2.8D 85mm 1:2 (half life size) 15in. Olympus Zuiko Macro f/2 90mm 1:2 (half life size) 15.7in. Olympus Zuiko Macro f/2 50mm 1:2 (half life size) 9.6in. Olympus Zuiko Macro f/3.5 50mm 1:2 (half life size) 9.1in. Olympus ED-Zuiko Macro f/2 50mm 1:1 (35mm eqv. 2x life size) 9.5in. Olympus m.Zuiko Macro f/2.8 60mm 1:2 (35mm eqv. life size) 7.5in. Pentax DA 35mm f/2.8 Macro Limited 35mm 1:1 (life size) 5.4in. Pentax D-FA 50mm f/2.8 Macro 50mm 1:1 (life size) 7.67in. Pentax D-FA 100mm f/2.8 Macro WR 100mm 1:1 (life size) 9.9in. Schneider Kreuznach PC-TS MAKRO-SYMMAR 4.5/90 HM[17] 90mm 1:4 (quarter life size) 22.8in. ( 1/4 size......!) Sigma 50mm F2.8 EX DG Macro[18] 50mm 1:1 (life size) 5.3in. Sigma 70mm F2.8 EX DG Macro[19] 70mm 1:1 (life size) 10.1in. Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro[20] 105mm 1:1 (life size) 12.3in. Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM APO Macro[21] 150mm 1:1 (life size) 15in. Sigma APO Macro 180mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM[22] 180mm 1:1 (life size) 18.6in. Sony DT 30mm f/2.8 Macro Lens 30mm 1:1 (life size) 4.8in. Sony 50mm f/2.8 Macro Lens 50mm 1:1 (life size) 7.8in. Sony 100mm f/2.8 Macro Lens 100mm 1:1 (life size) 14.4in. Tamron SP 60mm f/2.0 Di II 1:1 Macro[23] 60mm 1:1 (life size) 9.1in. Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Di 1:1 Macro[24] 90mm 1:1 (life size) 11.4in. Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Di VC USD 1:1 Macro[25] 90mm 1:1 (life size) 11.8in. Tamron SP 180mm f/3.5 Di 1:1 Macro[26] 180mm 1:1 (life size) 18.5in. Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/50[27] 50mm 1:2 (half life size) 9.6in. Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100[28] 100mm 1:2 (half life size) 17.6in. [29] [30] [31] [32] To these I would certainly add the Alpa Kern Macro Switar with only 1:3 reproduction ratio, but, called macro, nonetheless. Pentax 100mm f4 Macro ( half life size) Micro Nikkor ( half life size) What do they ( Kern, Pentax and Nikkon) know about lenses?

I don’t see “ flashing lights” at least not what I would define as such, what you see is the camera trying to amplify a scene with no light whatsoever since you have the cap on the lens, and what you see is “ noise " ( the light dots on the screen, they would be visible also in the viewfinder). Absolutely normal.

If the firmware upgrades would be limited to the new lens compatibility and new OS compatibility with Windows10 ONLY this would have to be one of the most disappointing upgrades ever and the X-E2 client base would be seriously disappointed. Several months ago, following the introduction of the X-T10, there was a large wave of hostile comments originating within the X-E2 owner’s community which felt left out from the bonanza. To that Fuji France ( why only France?) reacted that there would be some form of Firmware upgrade some time. Later on vague assurances from others were given that this would come this coming January. To tell the truth, after the initial wave of complaints the X-E2 owners have been showing remarkable restraint and patience. I am obviously not privy to what the Fuji management is thinking but my guess is always been that they wanted to give an advantage to the new kid on the block X-T10 over the older X-E2 in order to push and establish its market. As I said, I have asked shop keepers and some kind soul who was prepared to break the radio silence, told me that initially they weren’t selling all that many X-E2’s and that they now don’t even have them in stock while only theoretically for sale ( but they don’t sell them anyway). So, the times would look ripe to provide the X-E2 base with some Kaizen if there is any anywhere. Of course there might have been a decision to cut that to the minimum. Include new lenses and provide Windows 10 operability. But these are hardly innovations. It is possible that the X-E2 is nearing the end of its useful commercial life. That would be unwise, methinks, but unless someone has been revealed Fuji’s plans for the immediate future, there isn’t much which would justify discontinuing a camera which sensor and processo have the ability to be updated to at least the same functions that the X-T1 now has.

That is the computer’s firewall which is getting mixed up about something, I seriously hope ( and frankly speaking utterly doubt) that a Fuji file contains a virus

Other people experienced this too on different platforms. This isn’t even a platform dependent bug. They did, and I did the same, chose one of the two identical files. The only problem and reason for this heads up was that computers (both Mac and Windows OS ) when downloading two identical files at the same time give the second file a name change. THIS name change could be causing the camera not to recognize the file. If you only use the file without the name change your download will, for sure, work. Mine did. I’ve used the camera already. I downloaded it from the official Fuji site as in post # 1 of this thread. That is the same place where your link will bring you in the end anyway. I personally never download any software from third parties if I can help it at all. http://www.fujifilm.com/support/digital_cameras/software/firmware/x/xt1/index.html