milandro

there is no correct perspective because there in no up or down in the universe but yes, I take you point antipodal though it is

down-under they have a different perspective, might be not only upside down but even back to front

Because there are at least 3 market segments for this and many other things. In Marketing this is called “ vertical product differentiation " the customer of the f1 is not the same customer of the f2. Performance and price level will vary so greatly that will make the two lenses not alternative. Look it up here, it will give you some basic knowledge of marketing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_differentiation

@Sluw, also @Patrick FR, I agree, this forum has shown a definite proclivity to the overlapping of many threads ( Duplicate threads with virtually the same theme, duplicate images posts in different threads without a clear reason to do that, duplicate text posts, threads started to publish one picture only.......) This is in my opinion a phenomenon which could indeed be better addressed now, at this stage, by the administrators in order to prevent future problems. Later on it will be impossible, even now it will take several days to fix it. It is not a problem now that the forum is young and there are relatively few threads, with a little patience you can find what you are looking for, but, sometime down the line when you want to find something that has been buried in the archives and it will be all mixed up in a big entangled ball it will be impossible to do that. Which then makes one question also why to keep everything for future reference if at some stage finding it back will be next to impossible.

the only weather resistant body, at present, is the X-T1 but this lens is clearly been marketed to be the sold with the X-T10 as kit ( this was the introduction of the lens...)

I really don’t think that the dimensions or weight of these two lenses will be a game changer to prefer one lens ove the other. I am sure that when this lens will officially come out, lots of comparative tests will sprout everywhere to compare image quality, performance at fully open aperture ( sometimes one wonders why do some people even bother buying lenses that can close the aperture since all they want is shooting fully open), and the autofocus performance, both in terms of speed and in terms of noise. The fact that one is weather resistant might just be a slight advantage but not if ( like in the example given above) this is going to be the Ideal companion of an NON weather resistant body as it is with the X-T10.

It looks like my appeal to the courtesy of my fellow forum users needs a gentle reminder because not many have been responding with a simple act of courtesy and disable this message which appears at the bottom of each and every posts made “ Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk" It really adds nothing to your participation to any forum and it would be very kind of you to disable it, it is possible, takes 5 minutes and you no longer advertise for Iphone and Tapatalk. Please?

indeed, besides they look cool , you don’t need to use an original one so if you don’t like the vented hood... there is plenty of choice!

Obviously prices vary greatly, abroad unfortunately they don’t in the Netherlands, all shops seem to always use the same tuning fork ( to the penny!) buying in other countries is a possibility but only if within Europe otherwise any savings will be used to pay the VAT (21%) at entry or shipping charges and the mysterios fee for “ handling through customs" , besides international guarantee is one year ( and they are always fussy about it) while national guarantee in any country of Europe is at least 2 years and my shop offers 3 to 5 years sometimes.

If it is true that it will cost only €399 this will be enticing for many of us to buy it. I’ve sold mine, the 35mm 1.4 for not much less than that, in as good as new state, after a little more than one year. That lens has a theoretical price of €549 in the NL. But in reality when bought it in combination with a camera, its price is seriously smaller than that. So, if you buy a XE-2 with a body price of €699 you pay €1039 with the 35mm 1.4, bringing the price of the lens to only €340. So I should expect that this lens might cost €399 on its own and a lot less if sold with a camera that they are either trying to get rid of or to promote. The kit of a WR lens with a non WR body like the X-T1 would make little sense but maybe it will be offered or the last of the X-E2 bodies will go for sale at a slashed down price. Either way this is very promising especially for those, like me, who are not hand up on having a lens a little more light efficient than another. Another thought. If this is the price, sell your old 35mm as soon as you can because prices will be tumbling down as soon as the other comes onto the market.

Again the ISO sensitivity of the sensor should be a standard but the are some discrepancies between brands and between cameras of the same brand although there shouldn’t be. The aperture, is value expressed in f numbers and it is the ratio between the diameter of the pupil ( which we will consider for this purpose, circular, even if it is not, there is a calculus way to make this calculation anyway) and the exact focal lens of the lens. So 2.8 of a 100mm lens corresponds to a the same amount of light let through the 50mm lens at 2.8 BUT the pupil will be larger. This is simply explained here and even if you only have a basic knowledge of geometry and arithmetics you one should be having no problems in understanding any of this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number Ultimately one should point the camera at a grey card reflecting 18% of light, make a reading and produce the image of a grey card with a 18% of reflection with any camera and any lens. Each criterium ( shutter speed, real aperture value as opposed to the theoretical one) has tolerances, staying within the norms, of 33% ( 1/3 of a stop).

I honestly would like to know about the buyers (if there are any around here and I have some doubts) of these kind of super light efficient lenses, and ask them ( and yes, would want to see what kind of pictures they take which are requiring such an expensive lens ) what they are actually using these lenses for other than the possible exceptional (as in “ not all that commmon” not as in “ great” ) “ bokeh” ( Ah! The Bokeh! The Bokeh! ). More importantly, did anyone ever find out it this lens is, in fact, a rebranded Mitakon at 3 times the price?

I think this is the wisest approach. Use things for what they are and not for what they should be. It is what it is. When we had analog cameras we had a tool and by means of changing film and and the way we processed it, we changed the results. Digital photography has put us in a different position. The camera sensor-processor, is the film which we are using. We can use all sorts of tweaks on the data collected and produced by the camera but ultimately it is what it is. Love it or hate it.

is that not next to it? In other words it is not part of the eyecup itself but the frame around the eyecup. Isn’t it?

Yes, you get that by using high ISO jpeg’s straight out of the camera By processing your own RAW’s you can avoid that particular effect + it really makes me think that old fashioned photographer like myself rarely did those mistreatments and even back then they came at a cost. Or they were “ special effects”. There was a time when there was a deliberate technique to obtain more or less the same effect on skin tones using slide film , I think, if memory serves me right, that it was over-exposing 3 stops and under-developing 2 stops.

Patrick, I would be curious to know a bit of demographics about the people of this forum. Obviously not from person to person but anonymously and a general poll, just to understand better the forum. Age Gender Continent Country Education Employment status Have used analog cameras

did you need to push it to that ISO value ( 1600 not enough?) and how about processing raws shot at high ISO instead instead of using jpeg’s ?

I don’t think that all the people who use any product are necessarily on line and are fora members but, the difference with say saxophones ( my other hobby as you can tell by my avatar) is that since the Fuji cameras require you to have internet and use it to profit of any firmware update and you cannot use any digital camera without using a computer, the chances that all the Fuji owners will be aware of what’s going on are very high indeed. But on this forum there are many threads dedicated to the X-E2 update or the lack of it. Although I cannot say for certain that all the X-E2 users are aware of this I think that we can safely assume that the great majority, for the reasons given above, are. Some probably are happy with their cameras the way they are and keep using them as they’ve always done with or without upgrade. Some others wait in hope. But there is a percentage among the XE2 owners ( but I am not sure of how big or significant that percentage is) who certainly have experienced this lack or postposition of kaizen as unpleasant to say the least. After some vague assurances that some form of Kaizen will descend upon the X-E2 owners ( and in the meantime the X-E2 cameras, at least so I am told by the people in the shops, are practically no longer selling because people aren’t sure whether they are buying yesteryear product at the same price of the X-T10 which, on the contrary has all the new features already and will get even more in future) by Christmas, the lynching party seems to have found some reason to not roam the internet. Yet we all have to accept the fact that any camera will lose touch with the most modern of the software. It doesn’t mean that you can no longer use the camera! It will, as long as it work, still perform at the level it was made to perform at and my guess is that it way exceeds the ability of most of us already! It is exactly like the computers that we need to use these cameras. I have an old Emac 16” with a G4 processor , its about 12 years old or thereabouts. Its Os cannot be updated anymore and although it can still go on the internet it would be unwise to do so. Yet it still works and does almost all the things that it did at the time I use it to reproduce music with which I playalong with my saxophone. It also operates an old Agfa scanner ( which is by the way also obsolete and disappeared from the market) which can scan up to 8" x 10" transparencies ( I still have an archive of large format negatives and transparencies) just in case I might need it. A few days ago there was someone ranting on his blog about cameras not lasting long enough these days they do, they are not up to date, but if you don’t care why should this bother you?

I don’t even mind the so called “ waxing” allegedly happening above 1600 ISO

I suppose at Fuji they might consider doing this for the X-T10 too although I suspect that they did it with the X-T1 in the first place because the first version of the eyecup (apparently because I never had that problem) kept of falling off. I don’t even know if the eyecup of the X-10 is removable and replaceable, is it? Some people hacked the X-T1 eyecup and made another longer one by grafting other eyecups onto it As you can see here http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2014/04/14/fuji-x-t1-ergonomic-dyi-improvements-by-ronald-grauer/ http://www.shuttercount.co.uk/tag/modifying-an-x-t1/ So, you might go down the same road. It is possible that as the camera finds a larger market share, more third party accessories will appear on the market, whether made by some Chinese company or way more expensively by some western counterpart.

Oooooops.......don’t want to hold you up!

I think fuji might have slightly tweaked the later types of the cameras. Mine has never had this issue and I have replaced for aesthetic/functional reasons rather than having lost the original eyecup ( I still have it if someone wants it for a little fee )

One of the real great performance traits of Fuji is its performance at higher ISO. You might say that Fuji 200 ISO equals 100 Canon or Nikon. Well, even if that would be the case, forget the nominal ISO value and consider incremental intervals only. Call the minimum sensitivity 1 , 2 its double value and so on, now compare to Nikon or Canon and see what is what. Chances are that Fuji at incremental value 3 is still offering great performance, in some cases better than other brands. The values might be arbitrary ( to some extent) compare results at each increment value. Nobody wants to put up or down sensitivity with no reason but on the other hand the camera is the “ film” that you are using. Exactly as one did one he put the film in the camera, you chose the film ( the camera) and you deal with the situation that you are given by exposing and developing accordingly.

I understand that, despite ISO referring to an “ International Standardization's Organization” there is very little in terms of exact standard when it comes to sensitivity between different digital cameras and different brands interpretation of the ISO sensitivity. So, if you find differences this might be so but so what? You would only experience a problem if you would attempt to expose one “ sensor” with the exposure data of another. Even if using a separate exposure meter, you can fine tune it comparing and adapting the value to the outcome.

The autofocus speed is, together with the video quality, the feature of the Fuji system that is making it be less appealing to some. This , coupled to the lack, in the system of any really long and light efficient lenses has produced a reduced popularity among the sport and wildlife photographers. The latest and most serious firmware upgrade squeezed as much performance as it possibly could from this sensor. The rumors involving a sensor change have gone just about anywhere they could. So there were rumors of a larger sensor ( which would mean completely redesigning all the lenses and therefore unlikely) , or one with the same size but with more pixels, an organic sensor ...you name it. The reality is that nobody knows. Autofocus speed is, because of its lower performance, the field which will probably see more innovation in future. But no one knows when this will happen or can forecast beyond a guess any of this. It is what it is now and it will be, possibly better.