Ektachrome

Edit is much better!

This one is nice.

Some lovely shots there!

Love the first shot with the roots.

@ johant I love the third shot

On mine, it's the opposite - the AF frame moves to compensate so you don't miss focus, but you can't frame accurately as the framelines stay fixed. If you know a setting to make the framelines move, please let me know!

Could you explain how to switch on the mode where the whole frame moves too? I've looked in the manual and menus to no avail and I really need to turn this on or the OVF is kinda useless to me...

Forgot one - on lenses with a pull back to MF ring, can doing so override the AF mode switch so it's a one pull to MF mode on the lens, please?

Thought it might be cool for people to add FW requests for the XP2 to a thread? Apologies if there is already a thread but I couldn't find it! OK me first - I love my XP2 to bits, and only have a couple of niggles, but they're quite important to me - 1. Can we have a focus patch in the EVF, like the OVF, please? Sometimes I want to focus critically and manually, but still see the full composition (i.e. not zoom in). The XT1 has the dual screen view for this, and I use it a lot. Honestly I didn't know the XP2 wouldn't have this in the EVF too. Doesn't have to be a separate split like the XT1 but maybe just the same patch we get in the bottom RH corner of the OVF, please? 2. Can we have framelines which move (like the focus area) to reflect the parallax correction in the OVF, please? I would use it a lot more if this were available. Apart from those I really love it (yes, even the ISO dial).

Yes, it works! Thanks, that's brilliant James

Thanks Patrick

For the past few weeks I can't sign in on my mobile devices. Password, etc., is correct, but the sign in dialog box disappears and leaves me signed out. Any ideas? Tried sending a support message a week or so ago, but haven't heard anything back. Thanks

I'm pretty addicted to it, also. I used to be addicted to Kodachrome film too - I practically held a wake when it went out of production - so it makes sense, I guess!

I love the composition and colour tones in this - Classic Chrome?

That's gorgeous.

These were stunning, thank you!

@vanicekv that's awesome, Dalí-esque.

I wonder if the problem with 'watercolour' effect has been mitigated on fine grasses, etc., too? In Lightroom, anyway, never found it so much of a problem in Capture One, or Iridient, with the right settings (NR turned right down, etc.).

That's just beautiful.

danwells - yes, I consider most of the Fujinons optically superior to the 90s C/Y lenses, although the 85 1.4 is pretty nice and I neglected to mention my 28mm f/2 (the 'Hollywood' Distagon) is a modern ZF.2. Both are extremely heavy, though. However, there's an issue with X-Mount Fujinon lenses in terms of serious video work - focus is by wire, and the focus motors on most lenses are noisy, as is aperture 'chatter'. This is irritating in stills, but crucial in single camera drama work. That said, if the X-T2 had stellar video, etc., I would just buy that instead of the A6300, as my Zeiss MF primes would adapt just as well, I think, and then I wouldn't have to buy a camera body just for video. I'd probably move to an X-Pro 2 first though, so I'm selling on the A7rii while it still has a good amount of it's value - Sony's bodies do appear to depreciate quite fast once the next body appears, and they have a very fast product cycle.

It's highly likely, now Sony have truly shown they aren't going to consider size/weight of lenses at all in FE (not to mention price) that I shall be selling my A7rii to fund an X-Pro 2 and some more Fuji primes. When I come to do my next lot of filming, I will pick up an A6300 (which looks to have excellent video specs) for cheaper than its launch price and use with my MF C/Y glass which I already own, and a speedbooster.

There's definitely truth in this. I had got used to the way files from Canon and Nikon behaved in LR when I first went Fuji, and for one thing, that taught me much more about colour adjustment in post than I knew before - I don't think I'd ever touched the hue/sat/lightness colour sliders in LR before that, but having gone through the learning curve with Fuji, which I wasn't happy with out of the box, it's rare I don't touch these sliders and some curves for a little tweak on almost any file regardless of camera. As far as detail goes, I still personally find LR isn't optimal for Fuji raw files. However, there is a big caveat, and I believe this is why some photographers notice the 'smearing/watercolour' effect more than others - it depends on subject matter. I've never once had cause not to use LR/raf for urban, people, or seascape work. But where I live, a lot of the landscapes contain a good proportion of fine, green grasses and foliage, which I've found to be a kind of worst case scenario for LR/raf, and it's these shots I tend to only find pleasing after using C1. Ymmv.

The more I use it, the more I like it. I think LR is more immediately intuitive, but C1 is potentially more powerful and just produces nicer looking results in the end. I'm reaching the end of my subscriptions for C1 and LR+PS, so I have to choose between the two shortly. At this point I'm actually leaning towards C1 even for my Sony.

Funny, I find the RAW out-of-the-box (in other words, Lightroom's profile) for the A7rii much more appealing than their canned profiles for Fuji. I always ended up applying VSCO or Replichrome to Fuji's RAW files in Lightroom to get appealing colours, or playing with curves and hue/colour. I found Capture One to be much more appealing in terms of aesthetics and to have much less smearing of fine detail than LR for raf files. Again, I find the Fuji files spectacular when you get them right, but personally I've always found myself working more to get that look.

I agree with this - the weakness of the A7rii right now is lens selection at a certain size/availability. The 55 f/1.8 is stunning, and the right size and price. 35mm is a difficult area - the 35 f/2.8 is a little slow to justify a prime, but very small, the 35 1.4 is a monster size-wise, but wonderful optically. The Batis 25 and 85 are lovely, but very difficult to get hold of, and very pricey. What I will say is that all the above lenses (and I believe most of the range) have super fast and dead quiet AF and are weather sealed, whereas Fuji are a bit of a mixed bag in that regard. A couple of people mentioned having to use tripods/careful technique to extract the maximum from the A7rii. While this is true of any camera, I have been surprised to find the A7rii to require less technique to get pin sharp shots in real usage than any other camera I've owned. Despite the 42mp, I have pixel sharp shots at very low shutter speeds handheld (as long as nothing in the frame is moving, like any camera) with the truly excellent IBIS. Also because ISO is pretty painless, I can bump it up a little without affecting image quality much. I rarely now reach for a tripod except for long-exposures, or ones made after sunset. Amazing thing. The Eye-AF, which really works and works fast, also makes it trivial to get pin-sharp casual portraits. I recently made a chart with A7Rii and X-Pro 2 with comparable prime lenses, in terms of weight I was shocked how close they got. The Sony lenses, depending on choice, can be a little larger. I greatly prefer Fuji cameras looks-wise and some (not all) of the ergonomics. FWIW, I also believe the Fuji lenses and images have a little more 'character' - the Sony system is huge on technical IQ, but Fuji reminds me more of a Leica with Kodachrome - it has a certain something about it which is very hard to define on specs or test charts, but can be very appealing under the right conditions (but sometimes limiting under others). This is only my personal experience between the two systems based on ownership and a lot of use of an X-T1 and A7rii.