milandro

we’ve been there many times. “ untreated raw file” means that you are making your judgment based on a low resolution (meant for preview use only!) jpeg embedded file. NOT the raw file! Which needs a preview because it cannot be seen before it is converted. This low res preview file is there only for the purpose of visualization not for using or even viewing for evaluations such as the one you are seeking since you can’t use a raw file for publishing or printing. This topic has come back in a million shapes before. There are many threads in which people make their evaluations based on a wrong conception. The fact that your previous Canon might have had an embedded image larger than your Fuji has no bearing to the actual quality of the image once it is processed. I am quoting you two threads about this but there are many more http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/1837-possible-concern-over-quality/page-2 http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/5689-shooting-in-raw/

you can simply leave and cancel any notification and you will never hear from us anymore. It is that simple.

just stop posting,there is no other way if you want to cancel your posts you can by editing your posts (only 17 so it shouldn’t be difficult) but you won’t be able to erase any quoting from other’s people posts.

this is not a distortion but a difference of field view (or angle or view). As I wrote before, the nominal focal lens is always an approximation (and it is always been throughout the history of photography) They have published this pictures that I’ve shown above and the difference in angle of view is to see in plain sight. And, to me they are absolutely consistent with OP’s pictures above. They show one lens having a little wider field of view (and a difference in exposure consistent in both examples, Fuji’s and Op’s). So they have never made any mystery of this. The declared ( in the lens specifications by Fuji) angle of view of the 1.4 is 44.2º and the one of the f2 is a 44.1º and this is clearly what we see in their pictures too. One is minutely wider than the other. That’s it. No big deal.

actually I see the exact same smaller field and aperture differences that your pictures have. Anyway there are no revelations there that Fuji didn’t dislclose

the focal length in all lenses is always been and always will be an approximated value. Clearly one is approximated per excess and another per defect of 35mm or the angle of view can be slightly different even at the same focal length. The same slight difference of angle that you have s “ discovered” is clear to see also on the pictures by Fuji itself. Curiously they too had a 35 1.4 which produced a darker image than a 35mm 2 and this shows also that , as it is always been, these values are approximated too.

on the other hand the kind of stress that they are subject to doesn’t require a much sturdier construction. Perhaps you can sell your solution and advertise its connection to the camera as stronger than the neck that holds it.

There are tons of mirror lenses like this in all sorts of mounts. Since they don’t have an aperture it is a very easy thing to adapt to our cameras. 300, 400, 500, 800, 1000... it’s all there.

I really don’t think that such a thing happens at all. Perhaps you are comparing two quite different things and your impression might be due to a misunderstanding created about the APS-C lens “ equivalence”. Although it is true that a 35mm lens on APS-C has a field of view equivalent to the one of a 50mm on full format digital (or analog 35mm cameras), a 35 mm remains a 35mm in terms of depth of field. Therefore the “ blurring” of the portion out of focus will be more pronounced in a FF or a 35mm analog camera. Other than that, no, the camera doesn’t sharpen automatically (even more so if you use the raf files) anything that you don’t want to be sharp.

the sling doesn’t even come attached to the lens , I have never used it. The caps are excellent. The Fuji lens caps don’t come off but they are a pain to operate compared to this. The 35mm1.4. rubber lens cap has a life of its own.

this is also good

I normally stick the cap in the front pocket of my trousers . However if you really want to do something fancy you can use a cap holder. I had one but I’ve lost it

I don’t use the sling, just the cap

apparently you are not the only one Follow this link (and maybe next time look around most of the times things have happened before) http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/5731-x-t20-brand-new-locks-up-cant-take-pictures/

there are tons of aftermaket caps, like the one shown above and of a different design, they perform very well and cost a fraction of the original Fuji.

buy other ones available everywhere on line for peanuts (or not, you choose).

well, it very much depends what you needs are. It you need to carry around a 15” laptop (I don’t) you can’t escape its dimensions. Also, if you carry the camera with one lens (even a zoom) it’s a whole different story than carrying a camera several lenses and things that you may need. I truly hate ( and I have all my long photographic life) to pile up lenses and camera in a small space. All ONA are, for this reason too small for me because the majority of so called messenger bags will need you to, at some point place came and lenses in layers. Of course this means that at some stage you will have to juggle at least three things with one hand ( the camera, the lens above the one you need and the lens under the lens above, which, at some stage or other, you didn’t need as opposed to the one under which is the only one you want). So My bag of choice is large. Would allow for a laptop ( currently I have no need for it and I have only once had the need for an assignment to carry a laptop to show the journalist the pictures that I was taking for her article). And if I am going to stay away for several days I can also put clothes and other items or simply put all my photographic equipment (and even in such a large case I will end up with a couple of lenses arrayed in a layered fashion. So my bag of choice (which you can see above) is made of leather,witha waterproof material on the protective flap, large, not incredibly expensive, reasonably waterproof, carries a laptop ( or a change or two of underpants and t shirts for just in case your luggage isn’t there when you arrive) and it is reasonably mistaken for any ordinary piece of luggage. But yes, it is large, no two ways about it.

for those among us ( apparently quite a few) who have never used a tilt shift and don’t know about cameras with movable bodies and their application in product and still life photography perhaps this illustrates better what I said above. I taught studio photography for many years and I see that not many still know about these things. In the second video see how, with open aperture, you get the WHOLE door in focus just by movements

Yes..Right

actually the best thing to do is restrict the size 1250 px on the base is generally showing very well even at 50% quality and they may weigh less than half the allocate size per post. Naturally there is no use than more than 72dpi.

The limits are, per post 1000 Kb. No limit in the numbe rof posts or the total size of space used. If you don’t save the image at 100% quality, many programs allow for this that in Photoshop terms was called “ save for web”, you can post huge pictures here (but in the end the screen size will limit the way they show in the browser). I normally post pictures here and even those that weigh less than half of the maximum look better than the third image posted above.

often times there is simply no way( when objects are close by and big) to have the entire object in focus. This is why, long ago, photographers learned to use movements of the lens (and ideally also of the back) called tilt and shift , to move the focal plane is a position other than parallel to to film or sensor plane. In order to achieve this you need to learn how to use that or otherwise you could back up a bit and then crop a section of the image. Sometimes this is needed even if you master the Scheimpflug principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheimpflug_principle This Image is shot at f8 with a tilt adapter. No cropping.

as we all too often see, the majority of people asking about features on this forum ask about all sorts of features that they can’t find (let alone understand) in the ever increasing number of options in the menus.

lots of folks seem to think that the more features, the better, even if they end up never using it.

and it is still not clear whether that applies to photography too or only to filming If you shake your camera it will work in panning, but panning existed before any of this existed. Neither Ibis nor Ois can render still a picture of a subject moving if you are shooting with a shutter speed too long for the movement . For some reason that I don’t understand someone expects it to happen .