Sluw

What don't you like about the 27mm? It's sharper than the 35mm f/1.4 and the 14, same build quality. Just no aperture ring due to size restriction. Also the rendering is great. You can say a lot of things about the 27mm, you might not like the focal length, lack of aperture ring, no weather sealing, size etc.. But the quality is great (check the reviews, amongst others: photozone.de, Ken Rockwell, Dan Bailey etc.) .

Not that milandro's answer isn't right but here's a shorter answer. I usually shoot aperture priority with this lens. So I let the camera choose shutterspeed and iso and personally control aperture and focus. around f/5.6 - f/8.0 for max sharpness and towards f/2.0 for light gathering. The viewfinder remains the same as the exposure, so it stays bright and only gets dark if there isn't enough light.

Depends on what you're looking for. If you're looking for a wider field of view, back-up body and one stop faster lens you might go for the x100. The x-e1 has a 16mp and x-trans sensor though. Plus the 27mm is sharper and you can change lenses .

I have exactly those lenses and bought it for a little over $200 on ebay. I also have the Samyang 12mm. I can assure you I definitely take my camera more often with me. With the 27mm my X-E1 has the same form factor and portability of the x100 series.

I think this is normal (except if it's as bad as the 35mm f/1.4). I tested this lens as well on an x-t1 (not my own camera) and it hunted a bit in low light, not as much as the previous one though. Of course it depends on your camera but I assume you don't use it on an x-pro1 or x-e1, if so that's the "problem" because they have an older processor and no AF points on sensor.

Hey martin, thanks for the kind words! Don't think the 27mm is really boring though! Since it's on aps-c it has a 40mm equivalent and as stated by Mike Johnson: You can read the rest here: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/why-40mm.htmlhttp://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/why-40mm.html

The manual focus of all Fuji lenses isn't satisfactory for me because of the focus by wire. On some ones it works good enough though.

Time to photograph something else next time Mini forest by Licht Sluw, on Flickr Sunny shrooms by Licht Sluw, on Flickr

What camera do you use? The older ones tend to focus slower.

Another one Mushroom bouquet by Licht Sluw, on Flickr

Since fall lends itself for beautiful pictures I thought it'd be cool to open an open fall topic. So feel free to share your pictures! Fungi in the forest #1 by Licht Sluw, on Flickr Fungi in the forest #4 by Licht Sluw, on Flickr

Maybe there should be a Samyang 12mm thread in the pictures section then we can discuss technical stuff here and share loads of pictures there.

Unfotunately Fuji didn't put much time in video yet (there are some rumours they'll fix this in the x-pro2). It's doable and it looks allright for home some videos, just don't expect too much of it. Because of the sensor and processor you'll see moire in certain textures and patterns, detailed scenes can look pretty bad. For the audio you can use an adapter. I'd say, do some test shots. But since you're saying your project is important I'd look somewhere else.

Except it won't be much smaller. Only the front of the lens is smaller in diameter for the OVF.

Except the 35mm f/2.0 doesn't look smaller on the released pictures, only in diameter in the front. But I agree with you, smaller f/2.0 primes. Like 23mm and 50mm (or 56)

I was in doubt about this lens but I think I won't buy it. My type of pictures don't need very fast AF (not missing it at the moment) and never had a problem with rain. I thought it was going to be a lot smaller but it looks like it's almost as long (only smaller in diameter). So I am happy for now with my f/1.4. A 23mm f/2.0 though (smaller than the current version...).

A close-up and night photograph. Colours of fall by Licht Sluw, on Flickr Raindrops by Licht Sluw, on Flickr

Indeed you should try to get it replaced. Cleaning is an option though. A while back I had some dust in my 18-55 (a non WR lens!) and I mailed them I didn't expect to gather much dust inside their premium line of lenses. They cleaned it free of charge. Great service!

Non WR lenses almost always gather dust. I don't check them too often because of that. Try shining in your lens with a flashlight.

Yea I thought these WR lenses wouldn't gather dust. For image quality it doesn't matter. But if I were you I'd try to get it replaced just for the idea (especially if you bought it in a store where you can just drop by). If they don't replace it, continue as if nothing happened .

Hmmm, there's always something to change. It's perfect for me for what it is. Don't mind the one stop f/2 <-> f/2.8 (same aperture as all those fantastic very bright f/2.8 zooms ). And since it's half the size of the 18mm makes it more pocketable. There will probably be more smallish lenses in te future, 35mm f/2.0 first. So I guess in a year everyboady can be happy

Burning sky by Licht Sluw, on Flickr

Love the close-ups SauveGV! Passiflora by Licht Sluw, on Flickr

To me the bokeh looks pretty good (for what it is) but it is a bit hard to achieve though. You have to photograph from pretty close and the blur isn't as extreme as for example with the 35 and 56mm. I wouldn't buy this lens for bokeh but for everything else Edit: You can also see the "not so extreme bokeh" as a plus. Sometimes I even prefer it. At f/2.8 the aperture is fully open so the bokeh is smooth. When you'd shoot the 56mm f/1.2 at f/2.8 the highlights aren't as smooth because the aperture blades are closed a bit. Crab in a jar by Licht Sluw, on Flickr Olive by Licht Sluw, on Flickr

Fuzzy hairdo by Licht Sluw, on Flickr