milandro

all you got is the brownie? Your signature displays a different story X-T1 | X-T2 | 18-55 | Zeiss 12/2.8 | Fuji 16 1.4 | Fuji 23 1.4 | Fuji 35 1.4 | Fuji 55-200 | For Special Projects: Nikon D800e and a Nikon 50 1.8G lens (Sold)

what the world needs now... is a great song! I propose an addition to the lyrics "Oh Lord , do we need another ’n larger camera? There are cameras and film cameras everywhere. Enough to last all of us till the end of times. " Sure, one more camera, one more phone, one more computer, one more car... we don’t want to stop THAT! Here we go round the mulberry bush the mulberry bush the mulberry bush ... fade out!

sure, why should we be surprised that it prints well or better than other cameras? It would be news if it didn’t! And it is very good that someone actually made print comparisons ( I remember that I was ridiculed to have asked precisely that when the X-pro-2 was introduced, I wanted to see if there was a practical advantage, not a theoretical or high performance monitor one). I suppose this isn’t the last of the Giant Fuji’s that we are going to see and after the introduction of a lens system another body will come with yet improved this that and the other and also then someone will show us that now everyone (?) will be able to print XXXL pictures , which, as we all know, are printed every day in their millions around the world ( )!

Fuji digital cameras is a very small part of a company that is mostly copiers and instant photography. They are not struggling but the digital photographic sector was not particularly profitable with the exception of few models. https://www.fujifilmholdings.com/en/investors/annual_reports/2016/index.html

then It won’t be . Seriously I could certainly use my X-t1 to the end of its natura; life ( it is not infinite by the way apparently there are only so many clicks).

Same thing for expensive cars, you only need a license, which only means that you can drive a vehicle with 4 wheels . The only thing with that is that if you try to drive a Bugatti Veyron and you can’t you probably kill yourself. If you buy a super camera to take snapshots nothing serious will happen. But buying expensive cars or cameras is not forbidden or should be. I have no doubt that many of various ability would buy the GFX. Some would probably just shoot snapshots which will at most be printed 30 x 40 cm (if at all). I’ve played saxophone for years in a community band when some of the worst players had instruments way more expensive than much better players. Among saxophone players there is the illusory thing that if I only had a better mouthpiece then I would be a better player. I suppose the equivalent among camera owners is : “ if only I had the latest camera and lens... then and then alone I would be able to accomplish that illusive picture”.

I know plenty of people who seem to like to buy cameras way above their capabilities for no good reason than owning it.

what people “ need” and what they want ( or say they need) are two very different things. My prediction is that the market will fragment itself and automatically segment. some would go for the “ Bigger = Better” option and get the GFX, there will be pro’s and rich amateurs alike in this category, some would be previous XT owners. Some will indeed shoot 4K videos ( although few will really buy the new video lenses because cheap though they relatively are they are still long and expensive) with the XT. I don’t know that many realize that mounting 4K videos requires expensive software and hardware but this is the same with any fad. Some long to have something, regardless. Some will go for the retro feel and compactness of the X series, these are the hardcore X folks. The ones whom were attracted by these specific characteristics. I am very much on the fence and will wait and see, most probably my next X camera will be an X pro 3 or XE4. I have all the toys that I need and even after this many years that I am in this game I still have to find a camera that limits my creativity.

there is not much happening in the X accessory ( made by independent makers) department. However I still come across new photographic things. Some are strange like this “ new” 3D printed box camera that you could ( would I...mmm, I don’t think so!) build yourself. You could, alternatively buy a brownie camera which does exactly the same thing and costs maybe $5? http://www.3ders.org/articles/20140120-the-lux-a-3d-printed-medium-format-camera-you-can-build-yourself.html

I think they are just as much on the fence as OP is They are waiting to see where to go. In the beginning they might have had a clear project but then they started to reconsider as soon as the market was sending them signals. I personally think that it was a great move to introduce a camera witha lager sensor than full frame because they felt the pressure of all those whom were asking the impossible, a full frame X system. This, couldn’t happen, because of their choice made for the lenses. As we should know, these lenses couldn’t be used for a larger sensor so they would need a totally different system. They came up with a system that is cheap enough to be able to entice the amateur with deep pockets ( and apparently there are many out there) and the professional alike (Lately I have been thinking of what this word really means these days, since there is less and less paid work , and paid way less than it once was, but the ranks of the professionals seems to be growing more and more). At pretty much the same time they gave us the X-T2 (X-T20) and X-Pro 2. They are telling us that for whatever reason the X-Pro 2 won’t get 4K filming. But they are also teling us that they have made their new affordable professional video lenses ALSO for the X cameras. Now this makes little sense at the moment because there are many better specialized video cameras than the X-T2 BUT it is just possible that they are now segmenting. Of course it is only speculation but I feel that the Giant Fuji X system (remember they said this was the first of a generation) will get the benefit of a lot of goodies in the lens department. The top of the XT series will become more and more video oriented in future but receive less upgrades in the optical department. There will always be some lenses for those who will use these cameras for photography. The X ( pro and we shall see the X3~ ) will stay a photographic camera and use mostly compact lenses. As soon as a company grows , they have to segment their production otherwise they run the risk to intrude in their own market with their own products and become their own competitor. Fuji has been extraordinarily successful with carving a niche and appealing to a certain market, but that market is finite. So introducing more and more products will crowd this market and ultimately damage sales. Differentiation is the word is the word.

suit yourself , angry young man ( if you know who they were...it is, unlike yours, a compliment)

No, that would be petty and cheap. The reason why I object to your post is because it has nothing to do with the thread. I don’t see the point of using the thread that I started( about something else, you very welcome to start yours on the content of your bag, there are such threads already! ) to talk about something that the thread isn’t about. But you are most welcome to do as you please. As for disagreeing on the use of the 80mm on a Rolleiflex. I suppose I have different experience from yours ( perhaps you’ve never had the benefit of using a 6 x 6 cm camera) in using a standard lens for architecture, and I just shown that it is very well possible to shoot architecture with a standard lens.

Absolutely!

well, my intention when I started this thread was different and was precisely to pointing people to using as little as possible Not in relative but absolute terms. Incidentally, a Rolleiflex is a 6 x 6 cm camera and the normal focal lens( 75 to 80mm) is approximatively equal to the 35 on the aps-c and there is plenty of architecture shot with it, just not the same way you do with a wideangle. One needs the right tool for oneself and for one’s vision and experience when doing any job. Just found on line a great example of Rolleiflex ( and normal lens , this is the humble Tessar 75mm 3.5, although there is a wideangle and tele version of the camera) architecture shot by photographer © Stephen Lewis https://bubkes.org/category/rolleiflex-6x6cm/page/2/

well this thread was about minimalism. You made me remember of the second assignment when I started my own studio, many years ago. My business partner and I, not knowing exactly what we would be facing once we got to the client, we took anything we had, from small format to my FATIF tripod ( incredibly heavy) and 4” x 5” DS camera. Anyway, I shot many portraits for CD’s using only my Rolleiflex GX 2.8 with the 80mm alone.

well, the new sensor has had several people puzzled about noise and about the pattern which shows in some pictures. http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/4281-is-it-just-me-or-the-lowish-light-files-are-too-noisy/ http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/4810-xt2-and-digital-noise/ I guess that higher pixels count and higher AF speed come at a price or they would have done these things the first time around. In my opinion someone at fuji knew that the boosted aps-c would have given these trade offs for the supposed “ gains” but they decided to market this new cameras, regardless. I can’t remember if there were so many who had second thoughts about generation two of the sensor as opposed to generation one as there seem to be among the buyers of generation 3. The only consistent complaint abut generation 2 was the so called waxy skin which affects shots on portraits above ISO 1600 . As for immediateness, you can batch process all your pics as soon as you get home ( I am sure your would chose them and not use them straight out of the camera). Good though jpegs are ( Fuji or otherwise) they limit you to what the camera gives you and that will never be pleasing everyone every time. It is a way to punch pics ( I use jpegs for tests or non crucial pictures) one after another but it is the same difference that I had bringing a B&W film to be developed & printed by someone else or to develop and print myself. A print coming out from the best minilab in the world would have never equalled a print that I made myself! NOT the same thing and by a very long shot not.

why would raw not being good for street shots?

the question is and remains, if you processed a raw picture in Silver Efex wouldn’t you get a more flexible result?

I’ve only has a passing experience with using Acros on a friend camera when the acros thing came into fruition to have a look at what I was missing and I wasn’t impressed so this was another reason NOT to upgrade. I find especially the shot at ISO 640 very bad. Can one get better results? I’ve seen better but again I don’t understand this simulation as opposed to process pics with NIK.

that they are very noisy

actually there were many more in the thread that I’ve quoted, not just one “ opinion”. http://www.fuji-x-fo...using-tapatalk/ Thanks for removing it.

they have they say so themselves in the last interview.

After some thinking caused by looking ( with a certain sense of disconcertment ) at all the growing in size of lenses and cameras that I’ve witnessed ever since I started my companionship with the X System, I decided to take a step back and strip things to the minimum. I have now (shown in another thread) rehabilitated an old and small case. I can only put a camera and one or two lenses in this bag. Also, even only my X-T1 camera would only fit in there if I strip it down to its bare minimum. It would be even smaller if I were to equip it with a small lens alone but I am not sure that I want to sacrifice a certain zoom and lens interchangeability capability. After all I chose not to go for a fixed lens camera. So, I’ve stripped my X-T1 of its L plate with front grip, taken away the long eyecup ( wouldn’t fit in the bag right way up otherwise) and the comfortable but bulky leather strap. I want to see how this goes. Perhaps it is a bit of a luddite attitude but I really think that we can all do with quite a bit less.

long, depending on the resolution, even hours ( and sometimes you needed to start all over again). We also had a 4" x 5” back for cameras which was capable of producing files 720Mb. Sometimes shooting something took 20 minutes with that! It was a very long time ago and, as far as I know, that A0 scanner had only one other equal at the time in the NL. I also shot a huge “ illumination” ( the painted images of ancient manuscripts) project which was all shot on Fuji film and then digitized (by me). Another incredible project was doing the scans of the X-Rays of paper watermarks ... most people don’t even have any idea of how much high quality work is done at National libraries. Projects that are only possible with huge investments that nowadays are everywhere under threat because we put weapons above culture.

I didn’t buy one we were given one by the library! We had many scanners the largest one ( only positives ) was a A0 ( yes THAT big!)