milandro

we will see, I think I’ll pass on generation 2

depends on the reducer but he wants a 23 equivalent not a 27 and he doesn’t want a Fuji lens(at least that’s what I understood) although I agree it wouldn’t be much less expensive.

Why? Unless you have a better crystal ball then mine

or not and wait for generation 3

why not? stay optimistic and buy an insurance.

so, its down to a little more pixels, better autofocus, electronic shutter and more automatic exposure correction, maybe better video but that’s it?

But, as I understand, OP wants a lens which will work as a 35mm once it is on an aps-c camera so he wants either a legacy 35mm lens with a focal reducer can be used as a 35mm on a aps-c or a 21-23-24mm which once on the aps-c works as a +/- 35mm the 27mm fuji won’t fall in these categories

how wise

well, I had written a long exposé ( which was not correct, apparently, although I have yet to see where this is really for sale), where I clearly stated this wasn’t in production ( for all I knew and I was wrong). So one gets surprised that one efforts are unappreciated. Anyway, unlike you, I gave a polite though annoyed answer.

maybe OP lives alone and has no cats

I have my camera and lenses in a large camera bag, the same I use when I go out. If the bag protects my camera and lenses from the elements outside it will protect the camera indoors too. I have always done this with cameras digital or analog for many many years. My home is not damp, in winter we have central heating. It is possible that people living in the tropics in a non air-conditioned house might need some desiccant... but I would not think this is common thing because your clothes and shoes would go moldy before your camera does and you would know your living quarters are not fit to have you or your camera there. Seriously, even living in a boat or a caravan wouldn’t require you to have silica gel packs in your bag unless everything is covered with mold. I have stored the camera sensor up or dow or vertical and I have yet to get dust on the sensor. I occasionally blow on the sensor with a blower while changing lenses. Never removed battery or lens. Don’t worry too much it’s bad for your health.

I'm intrigued by the fact that you’ve sent it for repair on account of alignment problems ( not the noise that the abrasive materials which they have found would have made by grinding inside the lens) while according to them you should have at least seen lots of dust in your lens? I don’t doubt what you say, but how can abrasive material have found its way into your lens if it was only exposed to normal use? If that is the case then everyone’s lens should have that or even more. I don’t use filters in front to the lenses for example. Never did. That sand has com inside your lens somehow. Going to Disneyland and occasional and normal use of the camera that you describe can’t have put it there.

Apologies then, I didn’t know it had made production, then maybe our member who compiles lists of lenses can add it to his list if it is not there yet. http://www.fujirumors.com/first-samples-taken-with-the-fujifilm-xm-fl-filter-lens-cap-more-images-of-the-new-lenses/ $105 but have seen only one picture taken with it and the result is underwhelming

does your computer built in the system program “ preview” opens the raws?

what part of the word “ prototype” , therefore not in production, didn’t I explain?

well, one small dot isn’t much retouching and you won’t even see it in most situations, thanks for braving this out for all of us!

certainly, well done, it is possible that the one spot had been there longer than other things and would come off with a wet clean

I don’t expect any camera to hold its commercial value that long. But a professional digital camera such as the X pro 1 is, will be made to outlast its commercially valuable years. The EOS was already ancient even when my company was still open and it was “ sold” to us as a back up, from one of the partners who found this way to pocket extra money for himself for things which had little o no value selling them to the company. Yet, the majority of people ( most of whom are in the “ mature” part of their lives) who I see publishing here pictures of their family, holiday scenes and landscapes, would, in all fairness be very well served for the rest of their foreseeable lives from the X pro 1, the results of which would be able to be viewed ( the majority of pictures are never printed) or printed for decades to come. Most people use cameras for very simple work and don’t need at all to upgrade their game. Many will and if one is wise enough and buys an older camera no longer produced from a person who used it sparingly, can, as long as he in not hung up with having the newest of anything, for years and years to come.

When I closed my last company in Milan 5 years ago, we gave away for free a Canon Eos 1 Mark II to a friend who still used it for a while and sold it for €500 just a couple of months ago! But , generally old digital camera can be bought for peanuts after 3-4 years for their release, not unlike the computers and despite the fact that, performance (which of course stays the one when it was new) aside, you can virtually keep using them for years and years. So, yes, if one doesn’t mind the fact that it isn’t using the latest version of anything, if you buy an x pro 1 when the X pro 2 will be announced or the X-T1 when the X-T2 will be released, they will cost very little. You can now buy a X-E1 for €150.

well, if you are looking for a fisheye that is very small the 8mm f2.8 Samyang is then much smaller and better ( from the point of view of its size) than the 12mm. I own both lenses by the way, so I do know about both these lenses first hand. None of the two could be remotely considered pancakes. But since you ask for a pancake design...I suppose that you might refer more to a “ body-cap” lens? Is that what you meant? Unlike other brands, Olympus for example, there was a prototype of a 24mm made by Fuji of a lens following this concept but falling quite short of the expectations of many because it wasn’t a very short focal lens such as the Olympus 15 or 9mm. These lenses are certainly interesting but they tend to be of a very limited use and relatively high cost if made by the official brands. Since they are generally made of plastic and are focussed on the hyperfocal distance with no aperture to speak of and a few built in “ filters” they should be really cheap to make but what is the point of owning a great camera with a useless piece of glass in front of it? Which makes this a pretty useless lens in a system like the Fuji. How much would this lens have to cost to be convenient for Fuji to even remotely consider selling it when you can buy the 16-50mm in a kit form for about €100 more than the camera? We aren’t likely to see Fuji in-WASTING time in this extravagant exercise ( or are you prepared to pay $100 for something like that?)

I am afraid that the X pro 2 team of designers has addressed that already by now and despite your, no doubt valuable, suggestion that stage of “ thinking “ is done and dusted already.

I see, we are fortunate enough in the NL to have many shops at a relatively short distance from anyone and from each other and often they have numerous branches all over the country so if a product is not in one branch you can ask them to have it sent from another to the one more convenient to you. Besides we are a small country almost surrounded by Germany and connected to Belgium ( even France is not really too far) so one could, at least in theory, go to all these places. I suppose this is not the picture in many other countries. However these days there are many shops which would send you the lenses and offer a trial for a few days no questions asked money back, if you don’t like it. I don’t do this ( but my neighbor she gets deliveries of all sorts of items almost daily) but many try it, if they don’t like it send things back. This might apply also to expensive items since I see Items advertised by a shop which sells this way, which are a little cheaper because they were rejects from people who tried them and didn’t like them ( but there was nothing wrong). Testing and bringing back your item is important. When I bought the 10-24mm I bought it on a Saturday in Amsterdam. The shop was busy and parking is expensive so I took the lens and went away. When I got in the calm of my place at home I was testing the lens and by examining the lens I saw that inside there was a black spec of something. The Monday I was back with the lens at the shop ( we have a mandatory one week return guarantee in the Netherlands ) and got another (nicer) sales person and a new lens ( they had 3). Good luck!

There are many and convenient offers on the secondhand market of the X-T1 already ( take a look at the classified ad here, most are showing a X-T1!) because of all the people who didn’t like the camera or the ones who sold it or are trying to sell it to buy the cheaper X-T10. The problem with buying a secondhand digital camera is that it needs being tested in general and in particular for hot or dead or otherwise white pixels and for dust, oil spots on the sensor. Yesterday I was about to buy an X pro 1 at a very good price and I told the person that I was going to collect the camera ( it implied a round trip of 200 Km.) and test it for these two things. He or she told me that they didn’t want people in their house and that I could have sent the money and that he or she would have refunded me if I wasn’t pleased. I smelled a rat and didn’t send her the money. The same person also sold an interesting sound system, whoever would want to buy that will want to listen to it in action before producing the cash, exactly like I wanted to do with the camera body.

bad, bad lens

they are about the same price so why would it be more difficult to get one or the other?