milandro

I was wondering how did you manage to damage the filter if there was a lens hood attached. Lens hoods offer some protection too although their presence, if you bump into something, might be the cause of damage because, an impact to the lens hood might transfer to the lens.

I have lots of experience with those geared heads and many other 3 way heads in all shapes and forms. As Crunch Time says, heavy and bulky and only worth the extra weight and volume if you need to set your camera with much precision as in studio still life, macro photography and other such things. These days a ball head with an arca swiss compatible slide and an L plate under the camera is all I need. You can go very nice and precise with Novoflex or Arca but it will cost you. I bought a cheap Beike ball head and, yes it is not Arca or Novoflex, but it is very good indeed. Not droopy or lame in any possible way and you can use it with one of the two frictions ( left and right) alone and it will lock well too. They have it in different sizes and I suspect they make it under many brands. The only problem was, for me, the top element where the L plate slides in. It was made of painted aluminum and I didn’t like that, I certainly wanted anodized. But you can buy hundreds of replacements and so I did and replaced only that part ( I re-used the part which came with the Beike to fit an old Linhof head that I had)

... and the lens hood too?

Very nice. Not unlike others that I’ve seen before for other cameras and in all honesty not even absurdly priced. My qualm with this is that the maker appears to have sacrificed looks for to function at least in one very important element and that is that the base is not a plate sliding in an arca swiss compatible head. Yes, of course you can put a plate under the base but it won’t look the same or be the same. I understand that in all probability one couldn’t make this of “ Peruvian walnut” but maybe it could have been possible to make it in “ ironwood”. Although nowadays it has lost its mechanical applications, Ironwood is an high density wood, as dense that actually sinks in water. In the early years of the industrial revolution many things were made of ironwood. Of course Ironwood is not easy to work on but it is nothing that good sharp mechanical tools couldn’t tackle. Ironwood is also heavy. Too heavy for a thing like this. So why not making this completely of aluminum? What’s the point, other than the looks, of the strip at the bottom made of wood while the most visible part is made of aluminum? De gustibus non est disputandum. OK, I get that. And yes, a few, if not all of the X pro 2 customers are sensitive to making a visual statement (I told you of my friend who has bought this camera but only ever uses the EVF but likes to have an OVF on it because it looks so Leica-ish?) with their camera ( don’t flame me for reporting this, my friend really said that...). However there has to be a point and I fear this grip is slightly missing some of it.

if he says he checked and numbers don’t match he should still have a record of having had this lens in his possession, if he says that the lens was never his ... well someone is being economical with the truth and my guess is that it is not you.

At least in the beginning of this, as we have read from several reports here, local fuji distributors did charge for the repair. Only after complaining to the main Tokyo office they were, on a case to case base and not across the board , instructed to do any different. ( this happened to the X pro 1 too) http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/996-fuji-x-t1-rubber-surface/ http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/1001-unsticking-skin-of-x-pro1/ http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/634-x-t1-accessory-door/page-5 Supposing this is due to skin oils or other external agents such as temperature or humidity is just a guess like any other. The pattern appears to be too random to say so. It might have been a bad batch of glue or rubber.

I am sure that even if it could be technically done but as I think that we are both saying, it would be pointless.

€20 or less in fact, which I am sure is what I paid, because I tend to buy locally things that cost more than that simply because they hit me ( and all of us in the EU) with VAT ( that isn’t too bad because it’s only 21% in the NL) but with a unexplained “ handling through customs “ which courier or post charge you and that you have to pay, cash, at the door, in the case of the postal employees, they won’t even deliver it ( couriers do) and then get the money afterwards! At the time when I used a Canon 5D Mark II in my studio in Italy a few years back, I remember we had one of those huge grips despite the fact that I used the camera mostly on a tripod ( I did mostly studio work with it and only occasionally some other things but my business partners did also fashion shots). I am very much happier with the cameras that I have now, but I am no longer working as a photographer anyway. Yet, the X pro 2 strikes me as another animal and I am quite sure that a grip like the one on a DSLR wouldn’t fit the needs of most users. Indeed having held the camera played with it and shot a few shots, it is a camera which could be quite comfortably use as is. I doubt that most users will make a great use of this camera with large telephoto lenses for example. Once the X-T2 will come to the market I am sure that a number of photographers will stay with the X pro 2 but some others will switch to the X-T2.

yes, the weight increase is substantial with any plate-grip combination, whether cheap or expensive. But the impact in terms of “ feel" is relative. The heavier the camera and lens that you use the less you would notice the extra weight. I’ve just tried to make sure. My X-T1 and the 12mm Samyang with and without the grip. The feel in terms of weight is just a bit heavier with the grip in comparison to no grip, but the impression of having the camera securely in my hands is way better with the grip. Mind you this might happen to me on account of a certain disability which I’ve acquired after my carpal tunnel surgery at both my hands whereby my fingers lost some dexterity, however I’d much rather have the 150gr. extra weight than the feel the camera is not comfortably held by my hands.

This I am afraid would be pure fantasy gone wild. One would spend a lot of money to buy a camera with a much larger sensor, then you get lenses made for a completely different camera, format and purpose, you add several complex glass elements at the back ( and incredible amount of electrical contacts) at some cost to get a image quality which, if at all possible, would be very much lower that the one reached by the camera for which the lenses were made in the first place. No, FX lenses could not ( and even if possible should not) be used for any larger format.

why?

Few days ago I was selling my 23mm f1.4, A local prospective buyer in the NL told me that he could buy the same lens “ new” for the price that I was asking second hand ( 30% less than the price in any Dutch shop) he said that despite the shop being in a foreign country he had asked Fuji if they were official dealers. They were. But this says nothing about the fact that the “ new” lens might have been one used in a show or on the shelf for demonstration purposes or a “ reconditioned” repair... none of this would have been necessarily disclosed to this prospective buyer. I sold my lens to some more discerning person. Good luck!

definitely contact paypal, now the buyer’s protection is extended to 180 days and includes shipping back costs. Get your money back and spend it elsewhere. The fact that they shipped a different lens in a different box could be a honest mistake but they should have a record of the lens having being in their possession ( so they should know they had the lens which they have sent you!) and if you have a box with another number they should know where the other lens is. So few second on their computers will tell them 1) if they have ever had the lens that you have 2) where the other one, belonging to the box is I understand that the suggestion that you have swapped an old lens for theirs and now are claiming the money back is a very offensive one ( it happened to me in a shop where they sold me a car radio and when I got home I saw that the radio was not only not new but used!) but it is not unheard of that people do these things!

Yes, bulging doors and detaching of the skin seems to affect some cameras and doesn’t affect others. Frequent complaint. Many have had skins or doors or both replaced by their local Fuji and not without any resistance from the local representative, in fact many were charged for the repair, and only referring to the head office in Tokyo made it possible to have this obvious fabrication defect being addressed at no charge. Still, to date, no official explanation to why this is and why it affects only some cameras and not others. I have asked before FR if we could hold a survey among Fuji X-T1 owners which includes serial numbers, country of operation and other criteria to be defined ( average temperature, humidity, camera use) to find out if there is a common denominator among those who have a problem. Initially I thought that the skin could have been easily replaced by a third party company when guarantee has expired ( because replacing the skin would void any guarantee). This company Aki-Asahi made many skins in the past for Fuji and other brands. http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/2226-does-anyone-know-why-aki-asahi-camera-coverings-is-not-updating-fuji-covers/ They answered me that they have tried to make a skin for the X-T1 but failed because the camera is not “ flat” whatever that means.

I beg to differ, plenty of metal is elastic ( what is often called “ harmonic steel" for example ). I didn’t say that you cannot put a spring of harmonic or spring steel onto or into an aluminum adapter. I said, which is what I believe the quote says, that you cannot use the aluminum of the adapter as a material to be making the spring with. They have opposite qualities. I am absolutely positive that It is possible to make a good product at a very reasonable price by applying the proper technology. I also believe that there are many reasonably priced adapters on the market. The metal construction of te K&F adapter that Ive bought is equally well made, if not better, than the Zhonghy lens tubo adapter or the Kipon tilt adapter that I have and I have considered buying other adapters which were much more expensive and which weren’t any better. Anyway there are people out there who would only buy the more expensive things of anything and that’s good for them. One of the many purposes of a board like this is to ask around others who might have bought something before you buy it. If you are asking for a recommendation I am very happy with a €10 adapter made by K&F. I am not the only one http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56402374 http://www.sonyalphaforum.com/topic/384-a-good-brand-of-cheap-chinese-adapters/ @https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ari4WDnGKT8

af for cheap, my K&F adapter is cheap but very well made

the person who is talking above is probably speaking of adapters for bayonet lenses, which might need being clicked to fasten it securely or de-clicked to unfasten it, by pushing a button or a prong on the side of the adapter. I have only M42 adapters so there is not any such thing but I can see that nobody in his right mind should ever make a clicking leaf spring for the aluminum of the adapter body, since aluminum is not elastic. But I really think that this is a very rare ( if not a false) problem and at best limited to the cheapest of the line adapters.

thanks.

I wasn’t aware of the existence of any adapters with a ND filter and I looked them up only after reading this It is indeed not very clear to me why nobody came up with this idea before. There might be some reasons why but if one would make this a screw-in-and-out system you could always chose whether to use the filter, or not. On a sideline I really like my K&F adapter too! Very well made. JUst a little more expensive than other no name adapters but much better made and very much cheaper than any branded adapter.

Well done @addicted2light If well executed this is potentially a very, very good idea and it would be a great thing if brands such as K&F, the one that you’ve used in your prototype, would simply include the possibility to screw-in a filter ( and sell it as an accessory) in their already very well made adapters. I would prefer the screw in and out solution for cleaning or replacement purposes. One of the reasons which drove me to buy a lens turbo II adapter was that the lens elements would work as a barrier for the exact same reason that you are mentioning.

on second thoughts, and hindsight, this is not a specific X pro 2 baseplate, in fact they show the X-E2 and the X-T1 in their ad too! And in both cases the plate is useless to me since it blocks the access to the battery (or the card and battery for the X-E2). The reason why I would want a plate is in order NOT tho continuously fiddle with a mini plate blocking access ( I have 3 of those and don’t really know what to do with them!) Front grip is also an added bonus absent on this contraption.

probably not

Some use them some don’t. The UV thing is completely useless on modern cameras because the sensor filters the UV radiation out. So now they sell “ clear lens protection” filters... which are more or less expensive pieces of glass designed to block dust, fingerprints and splashes of various liquids. There is no doubt that there will be few people out there with some entertaining story of when they got a splash of some liquid ( soda, paint, bird’s poop) which fortunately didn’t get on the lens because they had a filter in front of the lens or someone who had some high velocity impact with an object which cracked the filter but left the lens intact ( while it is entirely possible that such a close encounter smashed both or that the filter twists the filter thread or that an otherwise almost innocuous tennis ball cracks first the filter and then the shattered glass of the filter scratches the lens seen the close proximity of the two). On the other hand these events are all extremely rare. If we held a poll, few would ever have had anything like that and just do this out of a habit. Introducing, yet another, piece of glass of dubious quality ( unless you spend an arm and a leg) in front of your lens might be not the best idea ( we have seen here on FR at leas twice people complaining that, under certain light circumstances the lettering on the front of the lens is reflected onto the lens and in the image by a filter in front) and in the following cases they were good brands too! http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/1977-filter-reflections-with-xf14mm-f28/ http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/169-samyang-12mm-f20-ncs-cs-x-mount/page-6?do=findComment&comment=12256 I do own a few filters. 1) I use because otherwise the lens cap won't fit the lens hood of my Helios lens. 2) is on a Meyer 50mm for which I have no front cap (yet, it is coming from China) 3) this is an otherwise expensive ( bought secondhand) B&W for the 60mm, it is not used as a filter as such but since I wanted to adapt a lens hood I needed a spacer between the lens, the step up ring and the hood otherwise the lens goes into erro and won’t focus.

Ok, I got an email from the company ( it was unsigned so I am not sure who was the sender I suppose it would have been Mr. Asahi himself ) “.. Thanks for your inquiry. I tried to make TX1 coverings but the body is not flat, I gave up. my apologies for this inconvenience. I will see Xpro2..." So the “problem” is the shape of the camera not being flat. I am not so sure of what that exactly means, by holding my X-T1 and the X-E2 that I own I don’t notice one not being “ flat” over the other. I do notice that the X-T1 is very complicated, yes, for the detail observed above about the rear part of the camera being almost completely covered with some rubber thumb-rest, but most complication comes from the front which has many parts which would have to be a cut out into a very flimsy surface. Nevertheless Mr. Asahi comment on the X-T1 not being “ flat” could have something to do with the reason why some of the skins on some of the X-T1 cameras are failing? Who knows? I have tried to launch the idea to ask Fuji to use FR as a platform to hold an survey under the forum’s users to find some common ground among those whom have had the camera’s skin separating and the ones who didn’t. To date no answer to that.

as long as one doesn’t put it in anyone's wounds or consumed in unhealthy amounts, there is nothing wrong with salt or humor