milandro

No problem here too. It has to be a loca problem perhaps due to the country you are in or even your connection, hard to say. Perhaps, next time, better check with others before sounding unwarranted alarms.

There is not one original fuji made product which isn’t way more expensive than a no logo counterpart. I mean even the modestly priced long ocular at €15 is several times the price of a Chinese no name part for another brand. I suppose that people don’t realize that buying a product made by a world wide company which has a large organization and spends considerable amounts of money in promotion, advertising and management has a cost which wildly exceeds the cost price of the item bought and that ultimately we, the customers, pay for all of that. Did you ever consider the perfume industry when the liquid and the bottle cost almost nothing compared to the selling price? Frankly speaking I am much more puzzled by why would the cost of some independent accessory makers be so incredibly high compared to their unknown counterparts. Why does a lens completely manual and a copy of an ancient design so, not even anything innovative, made by a small company cost an exorbitant amount of money while another company produces a way more advanced and technological new designa t half the price?

Apparently Etsy is offering a number of Fujifilm oriented wooden accessories

take the battery out, put it back in again see what happens

Funny how Thai makers of accessories work especially with wood to make all sorts of things to complement a rather high tech look camera like the X-T1. This is a combo seen on Etsy for grip, soft release button and a very naively carved thumb grip ( it should be called thumb rest really) this is another similar one

It has a very distinct DIY look but it is very interesting this is the address where they sell it. Apparently it is a place where you can order all kings of 3D printed items. It ain’t cheap ( curious price €21.97) if compared to the ocular made for the X-T1 but is not too expensive either. The only drawback is that you lose access to the left side ring to use you camera with a neck strap. http://www.shapeways.com/product/SYCAN5H84/ocular-adaptor-for-x-e1-x-e2?li=shareProduct

Yes, indeed. this was the general spirit of this thread. If they are not discounting them are they going to revamp the X-E2?

Yes, thank you, I do know how to read charts and I too did own the 10-24 for more than one year. My findings are consistent with what the 10-24 charts show. Now I own the 12mm and I have no regrets . Its performance, as shown in the charts is not far off the 14 or the 10-24mm . Samyang 12mm

the lowest price in the Netherlands at the moment is at Calumet which, for the silver version alone, charges €599 while the black costs €699 like everywhere else. Even Black Friday hasn’t changed anything while it has for the X-T1 now on offer for €599 with a 18-55mm. Shame I don’t want the X-T1 OR that lens!

the 14mm has also a serious drop of performance in the corners, the only positive thing is that past f11 the overall performance of the lens drops so much ( to unacceptable levels really) that center and edges are almost coinciding. 14 mm ( courtesy lenstip) 10-24 center and edge ( courtesy lens tip), you can see how f11 is the best compromise between center, edges and different focal lengths. At that aperture the resolution charts between 14 and 10-24 are very similar indeed. center edge

Hilarious first scene that lens that was mounted when the girl was startled? ... that must have a BIG scratch onto the front lens . When I see the level of almost sterility of this operation I cannot keep on wondering how can we find lenses with specs of material, dust and hair in new unopened boxes ( I have, my first copy of my 10-24 was returned because of some black particle inside).

No X-T1 skin by Asahi, yet, they seem to have not updated the Fuji line at all after the X-E2. What’s keeping them I don’t know, maybe Mr. Fuji has talked to Mr. Asahi and told them that they were not amused ? Just a thought. Anyway this thing of the skin wearing out or coming off is certainly NOT affecting all the cameras and that calls for some thinking and speculation. If you were to hire a lawyer ( but the cost would be prohibitive) the fact that they replaced it the second time would guarantee you would get a refund for money that was incorrectly charged to you. Get in touch with the TOKYO office and demand that they put pressure on the lab to refund you the money. You cannot be right the second time and wrong the first!

Cheers, the 3rd is a great image, you should certainly enter that in some Fuji photo contest and I predict an easy win.

it makes a serious difference whether you buy from a reputable on-line shop or from a vendor with a questionable reputation. If you are buying form a private person you might have someone just like yourself. It happened to me. I bought a Samyang 8mm f2.8 fisheye, secondhand, from someone on the canary islands. I could have bought it new from a shop on line in Poland or a private seller. I preferred a private seller. I paid a good price, for a second hand copy. It wasn’t even the newest type but it was precisely the silver version which I wanted. The lens arrived and was precisely as described and shown on the pictures. NEVER send anything back to p.o. boxes but at a registered paypal address and, as far as I know, they don’t accept p.o. boxes as a regular registered address ( and ALWAYS send as prescribed by the rules with a system which requires a signature, in that case, there is NO denying possible, someone at the registered address has signed and the it has been returned.).

regardless, it shows that a picture, in itself, means not what people think that it should be, that is a representation of “ the truth “, Any picture can easily mean different things. Integrity is what keeps pictures real, not silly rules on the use raw or not. http://www.worldpressphoto.org/sites/default/files/upload/Integrity%20of%20the%20Image_2014%20Campbell%20report.pdf

life is unfair

wishful thinking ...

I am keeping an eye on the X-E2 prices and offers and despite my best efforts the best I can find in the Netherlands is a €599 while, by and large, the camera has been stuck to a €699 price ever since the X-T10 has been on the market. As I said many times, friendly vendors told me that they aren’t selling any large numbers of X-E2 ever since the X-T10 was announced and then brought to the market. So one would reasonably expect the price to drop. But it isn’t. Also the promised firmware update which, at the very best, will put this camera close to the X-T1 ( while the X-T10 will still have some extra features-important or not- which neither X-E2 or X-T1 will ever have) has still to materialize and we don’t even know whether it will provide as much as the X-T10 has, right now. The camera isn’t even offeren with the same kit lenses. The X-T10 has been, for example, offered, pretty much since its first appearance with a 16-50 50-230 combo at only €200 more than the body only price ( funny how Fuji vendors repackage offers that were already there presenting them as huge NEW rebates like the cashback refund going on now which was already there but before but with no need of going through the cumbersome cash back procedure).

wel , you could use a waterproof “ bag” such as EWA marine They are not the easiest thing to work with underwater but they are great at doing precisely what one would want to do with a camera while kayaking. But they are NOT cheap or hassle-free! I think that a real underwater case will be better and actually easier to use whilst offering way more capability should you want to take a dip in the beautiful waters of the Philippines. The Meikon underwater case cost about the same as the Ewa Marine @https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtPCw_25npk @https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Tuq62EjAyE

I always thought that the mirrorless concept was especially suited to produce cameras without the “ hump” which makes them look like they have a pentaprism and a mirror box since thy don’t have any such thing. I don’t even know if it is necessary for the X-T1 and the X-T10 to have the hump and certainly it does them no favors in terms of looks. So, yes, If I could have a mirrorless body with everything inside that the X-T1 or T10 has I would. Mind you, this might very well have ben the X-E2 if and when they would update the software and bring it at par with X-T1 and 10. But I suppose that the X-E3, if and when there will be one, would be indeed the OVF-less version of the X pro 2. The question is when will Fuji release such a camera? We’ve seen that timing of such releases has proven particularly tricky. So Not so long after the X-E2 was released the X-T10 hits the market with better characteristics and being way cheaper than the introduction price of the X-E2 and to this day the X-E2 is sold at the same body price of the X-T10. Also the release of any software update that would have brought the X-E2 and the X-T10 in direct competition was halted in order to give an advantage to the new model. But this has made some dissatisfied customers among the people who had bought the X-E2 who, and probably not without any reason, felt slightly left out from the distribution of freebies which almost anyone else got. So, if and when the X-E3 will be an the market it will be a X pro 2 light version but will come out quite a long time after, I guess.

I simply consider any picture an allegory and these days, an illustration, at best. I don’t trust anyone who pretends to be the bearer and the keeper of any absolute truth. I am VERY cautious to form my opinions based on information that I cannot control. “ Propaganda works the best when those who are being manipulated are confident that they are acting on their free will” Joseph Goebbels, Minister of Public Enlightenment, Nazi Germany If you follow the links below you will se why things appear to be rotten nowadays, but, trust me they were always rotten... even before digital photography! http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/10/16/staging-manipulation-ethics-photos/?_r=0 http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/10/in-an-iranian-image-a-missile-too-many/ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2544662/Pulitzer-Prize-winning-photographer-fired-admitting-doctored-Syrian-war-rebel-picture-photoshopping-camera-original-image.html http://www.americanphotomag.com/interview-fred-ritchin-establishing-standards-digital-manipulation http://www.zombietime.com/reuters_photo_fraud/ Ask yourself how much of the news that you thought were true, revealed themselves to be less than true, only in the last 25 years? I know I was fooled more than once and I felt disenchanted and angry about it. But if you take anything with a substantial grain of salt and ask yourself “ Cui prodest?” ( Who benefits from this?) and be skeptical of any easy to reach conclusion, maybe you won’t be wrong as often as I have been. There is NO need to photoshop things to alter their visual message! ( From the Daily Mail UK... and they too know about these things firsthand, nobody is perfect, here is how you don’t need to doctor the picture to manipulate the picture ) “...(Left) The photo was not doctored, but was misconstrued when it went viral on the internet, with people claiming it was a Syrian child 'sleeping between his parents'. (Right) A later photo revealed the first as a staged statement rather than a piece of photojournalism, taken in Saudi Arabia..."

there is really nothing new under the sun ( re-read the history of photo retouching for propaganda purposes) I don’t trust any picture to be representing the “ truth”. http://www.fourandsix.com/photo-tampering-history/

I am sorry, entertaining the idea that journalism photographic or otherwise is anything else that a vision of the world, and that it is in any way “ the objective truth” is only not only an illusion but a dangerous one. Dangerous because people who want to manipulate the truth are going to use it exactly pretending that “ IT” is an universal truth because they are showing it on pictures. Much better to understand that there is nothing that can be classed as objective truth. In my university years I studied among other things sociology with a major expert of sociology of the media , Giovanni Bechelloni. Back then I held a seminary on photojournalism and the object of my seminary was precisely the relativity of any event and the absence of absolute and universal truth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Falling_Soldier http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1201116/How-Capas-camera-does-lie-The-photographic-proof-iconic-Falling-Soldier-image-staged.html This picture is probably a staged fake... so what? This two other pictures were staged as well, this doesn’t mean that they don’t express the situation, as the photographer wanted to represent it

If Reuter is so obtuse as to think that what they do is not providing an interpretation of the world as the photographer sees it, but that they are showing the world AS IS, I suppose they have never studied any aesthetic philosophy and they are just trying talking politically correct nonsense. If two people photograph the same thing they can, and probably will, provide two different interpretation of what they are part of ( because they are in it and they are not being outside of the reality but part of it) so the visual reality is not en “ ding an sich” and “ a priori” reality but a relative one. Each person sees , evaluates, judges and reports reality according to his personal history, culture and convictions. Even when attempting to do this in the most objective of the way. Objectivity is a myth. In a photographic frame, reality appears in a certain way rather than another, and even just composing is a choice that changes the perception of what you see and a choice of the photographer, hence, and by definition is an interpretation, to say nothing of the fact that the presence of the photographer, in itself, changes the way things are going. Photographers like to think they are objective reporters but they are not, most modern aesthetic philosophers know it. I don’t have a problem with someone wanting jpegs the problem is the artificial wall of smelly taurus waste around it. a little of basic education ( again) read it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_claim_(photography)

Cheers, good luck! I had to pay much more because of shipping which was almost double the price but it you are in the States this thing is cheap as inexpensive fried potatoes. http://lolumina.com