Hermelin
-
Posts
426 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
18
Content Type
Forums
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by Hermelin
-
-
I wonder if we can expect a new lens.
I guess it will have the new Xtrans sensor (same as X-T3)?
-
Hoping for X100f successor to come out early 2019.
x100 - 2011
x100s -2013
x100t - 2014
x100f - 2017
x??? - 2019? -
Leaning towards the x100f right now. Bookeh seems smoother on the x100f @ f/2 than on the 27 @ f/2.8.
Also, I get the impression that the x100f is more robust built than the X-E3
-
I'm going through a personal crisis and sold my gear 1-2 months ago. I had the X-T2 with 18-55, 35 f/2 & 90 f/2.
Now I'm missing shooting with a real camera. As much as I enjoyed my X-T2 I think I want something even smaller and less conspicuous.
Therefor I'm eyeing the x100f and the X-E3 with the 27 f/2.8 (to start with).
How does these 2 lenses compare to eachother?
1. I heard that the x100f f/2 lens is soft in close ups. How does the 27 f/2.8 work in closeups?
2. Will I get same amount of bokeh of these 2 lenses?
3. How is sharpness compared to eachother and generel IQ. Does any of them have that magic dust that the 35 f/1.4 and 18 f/2 have?
-
I would like to join this topic I have X-T2 with 18-55 mm lens and I am wondering is it worth buying new prime lens? What suggestions do you have? I am thinking about lens Fujinon XF 23mm F2 or 35mm F2. Which is better?
They're equally good pretty much. Decide on which focal lenght what suits you best.
I personally prefer 35 f/2 because I shot a lot of shots of candid shots, but 23 f/2 would be more useful for indoors shooting.
-
How does this make sense? AF motors are a bit slower than on the f/2 version, but AF speed isn't really a problem with any camera that has the X-Trans III sensor (X-Pro2, X-E3, X-T2, X-H1).
In lower light, the 35/1.4 is actually better here as it lets in a full stop more light and therefore more contrast to the sensor to actual focus properly.
I have owned the 35/2 and did some shoots with it, but sold it again in and kept the 35/1.4 which I had for some years now. The 35/2 is optically the weakest of the f/2 lenses, not well corrected, in real life not much smaller than the 1/4, so the only real life advantage is WR. I prefer having it, but optical performance and creative options are more important, that's why I kept the 23/1.4, 35/1.4, 56/1.2 and sold the 23/35/50 f/2 I also owned.
I always had the impression that the 35 f/2 was better than the 23 f/2 optically. 50, I'm not sure. Eitherway, I would love to have the 1.4 but I probably need that extra af speed when I shot my kids running around like crazy. I fear that the AF on the 1.4 wouldn't be sufficent.
-
-
Clean shots! Very nice!
-
I got one for my X-E2 because my wife prefers zooms. It's really not bad, but the deal-breaker for me is the lack of an aperture ring. I'm so used to having an aperture ring now that it really throws me off.
OT question, but I noticed you have both the 16 and 18. Which one do you use the most and in what situation do you use resp.?
-
-
Still tempted to swith my 35 f/2 because of 1.4 and "magic rendering" against this. But my mind says no because of "af speed and WR"
-
This tiny little "bean herb" blossom was taken with X-T10/XC16-50mm at 17.5 mm, f3.6, 1/125s.
Kind regards Rieke
Ouch
-
-
-
-
-
No news on the rumord 18 f/2 MK2. It's been over a year since first rumord
-
-
-
Filip,
otoh, when you are outside you would miss the 90. Or when you need to reach to the stage in not so good light when your kid starts playing in school plays. So I provide you a good excuse to keep the 90 and buy another lens. For inside I would say the 35 (f2?) is maybe an ever better focal length than the 56.
Cheers
George
I have the 35 f/2 as well
Im keeping the 90.
I want to sell my 18-55 and get wide angle prime instead, 18 or 16.
-
If I was into video recording, I'd consider getting it, but I'm not, so I'm more than satisfied with my X-T2
-
Blue bubble
in Misc
-
lol, Fujirumors is not a source, lol !
Dear Hermelin, what do you think about yourself?
Fujrumors is a source for rumors from credible sources which has been proven being correct 9/10 times.
You're just a member in a forum like me. But if you have a reliable source I would like to know what kind of source. I just find it hard to believe that you know anything before FUJIRUMORS does
I don't know, I don't have any source. But it would make no sense if the 18 f/2 MK II would be as a big as the 16 f/1.4.
One of the selling point of the 18 is the size.
-
Warwick, I heard from an well informed source that the size of XF18 MK II will be almost the same size as XF16mm is. Probably also more expensive as the original XF18.
lol, what source. I'm sure FUJIRUMORS.com has more sources and I haven't heard anything about the 18 being same size as the 16.
27 f/2.8 vs X100F f/2
in Fuji X Lenses
Posted
I ended up with the x100f 😀