Jump to content

Stealthy Ninja

Members
  • Posts

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Stealthy Ninja

  1. For daily use I use my Hadley Pro. I like this bag so much I bought two. I also use a Hadley Digital for short trips when I don't want to carry too much. For work I'll bring my Thinktank Streetwalker Pro. I have the Thinktank belt/pouch system for events and such and it attaches directly to that bag. I was recently perminately loaned a Billingham 207. I am thinking to try at as a serious shooting trip bag. I also have a retrospective 7 I hardly use anymore since getting my first hadley pro and a billingham 555 that's mainly a travel bag (I use it for clothes to be honest). If I'm carrying a lot or traveling by plane. I have a f-stop rolling bag. It's international carry on size and just perfect for that purpose. I have a few other bags for video stuff like a Gura gear backpack I forget the model off and some generic backpacks for lighting and such.
  2. I own the 23mm and I was considering the 16mm too. So I got out my 16-55 and tested the difference. It's essentially two steps back and your 23mm becomes a 16mm (well not really, I mean it covers the same field of view). So for me I decided it's a bit too close to 23mm. I might get a Samyang 12mm though. The 16mm would be good if you want to shoot wide and close. But for me the 23mm is the more versatile choice. However, since you own a 35 already I'd go for the 16mm since it would compliment it more. Here's what I think are good two lens combos. 16mm and 35mm 23mm and 56mm Personally I went for the latter.
  3. 35 f/2 just because it's so light and I bring it with me everywhere pretty much. Then 16-55 as I take this with me whenever I travel with my family and I know I will want to take some photos.
  4. Gosh... Another temptation. LOL I bet I will end up with that lens one day. I keep hearing great things about it.
  5. You can press the back dial in and it'll zoom in to 100% on the point the focus was on.
  6. 16-55 2.8 seems literally made to go together with the 50-140 2.8. This (approx) gives you the classic zoom combo of 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 in full frame equivalence (of course will a deeper DOF).
  7. Wow gotahave you sure like glass Just wondering what made you leave Canon? For me fuji just hit the right balanced for me and I started to hardly touch my Canon stuff. The switch made sense for me. How about you?
  8. Yeh I'll agree with that. I want 4K well done in the X-T2, but not at the expense of other more important things. If it comes down to it and I see the need I'll go the GH4 or black magic route. I'd prefer not having to buy into more camera brands though. I'm lucky to be in a "transition" stage of life and I'm able to wait and see. I'm looking forward to the X-T2.
  9. ^^ I'll agree with a lot of what you said. Fuji should continue their good work with video (Xpro2) and make the XT2 a very capable 4K video camera, but not at expense of stills (I have no doubt fuji won't compromise stills for video). They should NOT just half heartedly do video on the XT2. They should offer a high end video solution and a first class stills experience. If they can't do both, I'd agree, why bother. This is why I'm so passionate about encouraging Fuji to pursue the video side of things. Give us a great hybrid camera. Auto focus should take priority over video though, as much as I want it to have great video. Class leading AF would be very great. I'll also agree that 4K devices aren't common enough to need to deliver in 4K. But I'm talking about using 4K as an editors format (with the final product being HD). Not just going straight from camera to a TV
  10. I actually own a Voigtländer 35 1.2 (m-mount) and while I really like the images it produces, I'm using it less and less because of the quality I get from the fuji glass. So I guess if you got the fuji 56 you might end up selling off your Leica lenses. Your lanscape shots remind me of why I should one day get the 10-24. In Hong Kong I can mainly stitch to get wide angle shots, because buildings are mainly static and I'm not going for long exposure shots. However, I hope to move back to Australia this year if possible and I know when I'm back there I'll be taking more landscapes. UWA landscapes on a tripod often require longer shutter speeds and stitching isn't an option. I'm quite sure I'll be picking up a 10-24 before the end of the year, but I want to keep some money aside for the X-T2 right now. I am considering a 12mm Samyang to use in the meantime though. They're super cheap here and I do like my 8mm fisheye.
  11. Of all my Fuji lenses this is my favourite to shoot with, because it's just so damned fun. Not the sharpest, not the lightest, not the fastest, not even the most useful (for me), but gosh is it FUN.
  12. I actually did pick Fuji recently over Canon because they finally are at a level (with the X-Pro 2) that I can say their AF and video have reached a point I don't need to hang onto my frequently less used Canon gear. Maybe the "old guard" don't want to Fuji to advance their technology, but new users won't be attracted to Fuji unless they can at least keep up. As for "there is only a handful of users that reported actually using the video mode on any of the Fuji cameras", well, that's because before the X-Pro 2 came along, the video mode on Fuji wasn't worth using. Much better off whipping out your mobile phone for that. In fact that's exactly what I USED to do. It's a real shame it took Fuji so long, but they've finally got decent video. I don't need to use my phone for video now unless I want to shoot 4K LOL. Now onto your last point. 4K isn't just about displaying 4K on 4K enabled devices (which are becoming much more common BTW). It's actually a fantastic editors format. 4K deals with issues like aliasing and moire by giving the system more to work with. It also can be cropped very effectivly when your final product is HD. This makes a scene shot in 4K like having more than one camera. You can shoot something wide, then cut in for a close up without losing quality. Just because some people don't know what to do with it, doesn't mean we who do know what to do with it should be denied. Also, fuji should NOT rest on the retro/hipster mindset, that can only take them so far. People WILL choose the opposition if they refuse to keep up. This is why I left Canon. Canon were determined not to bring 4K to affordable level cameras (protecting upper camera sales). I got sick of it and jumped to Fuji soon after the Xpro2 release. Resting on your laurels is a great way to lose customers. Well, I'm a professional level video editor and I know exactly why 4K is great. There absolutely is a reason for Fuji to include 4K. I never understood the "I don't want it so no one should have it" mentality some people seem to have. I don't really want a tilty screen on the X-T2, but I am not gonna whine if it's included. I can just choose not to use it if I don't want to. Same applies to 4K. Why cripple a product just because some people don't want a feature or worse, to protect sales of higher end products? That's very Canon-esque thinking. You mentioned the 80D. Canon not including 4K on that was a HUGE mistake IMHO and reflects their backward/old fashioned thinking.
  13. 1. 16-55 2. 50-140 3. 23 1.4 4. 56 1.4 I could shoot most of what I want with that. This is exactly my event shooting lenses too. The zooms for when the light is good, the primes for when the light is bad/low. For all primes: 1. 14 or 16 (I'd want something wide, 16 at least, just based on its repuation, 14 maybe better though) 2. 23 (35mm FF equiv is my go to focal length, a very versitle lens, even in low light) 3. 56 (great for many things, great in low light too) 4. 90 (good for times when things are too far away, also can be used as a pseudo macro lens) Just zooms: 1. 10-24 (widest you can go with Fuji so far, also good for video because of the OIS) 2. 16-55 (I'll sacrifice OIS for speed any day of the week) 3. 50-140 (you kinda need a 70-200 2.8 equiv) 4. 100-400 (this lens is so fun to use, good for wildlife and the occasional sports shoot). There's very little you couldn't shoot with that setup.
  14. Personally I went with the 35 f/2 because I wanted something a bit lighter and it is a perfect match with the X-Pro 2. BTW you want "advice" (noun), "advise" = verb.
  15. Similarly you could go 14, 23, 56. I own the 23, 56 and 90 and personally while the 90mm is a great lens in many ways, I like the light gathering abilites of the 56 for many uses. The 90 on the other hand can almost be used as a macro lens because you can focus pretty closely. Personally if I were going primes I'd got 23, 56, 90 and a 10-24 or Samyang 12mm for ultra wide. The 23mm and 56mm are great in low light and the 90mm could be used when things are a bit far away.
  16. 27 2.8 from all reports is a nice pancake, but the 2.8 max aperture and lack of aperture ring would put me off so... I'd say no, unless you really want something extremely small and light. 23 1.4 would be my personal number one choice for a "do it all" prime. I fine the traditional 35mm field of view to be the best all round focal length and the 23mm is a fast lens too boot. That's why it was one of the first lenses I bought when I was buying back into the fuji system. However, this lens might be beyond your budget... 35 1.4 would be my budget choice for an all round lens. It's fast and sharp. It's quirky though (I owned this lens first when I got my Xpro1. I don't own it anymore as the 23mm is better for me) 35 f2 is my number one choice for a daily lens. It's faster than the 27mm and not much heavier/bigger. That's why I bought it despite having the 23mm. From reading what OP wants, I'd recommend the 35 1.4 for OP
  17. I know it's too late for OP. But I'll give my opinion anyway. I have the 16-55 23 1.4 and the 35 f/2. I owned the 35 1.4 a long time ago when I first got the Xpro1 and didn't have much choice. If it were me I'd save and buy back the 23mm. You have the 1 stop of light and I find the FOV better. I bought the 35 f2 for four reasons: Weight (it's my daily lens and I don't want to carry a heavy lens everywhere) Size (it doesn't block the OVF on the Xpro2) WR (I can use it anywhere anytime almost) I don't really miss the difference between 1.4 and f2 for a daily lens like this. It would be cool if it were faster, but that would make it bigger.
  18. Cool, sounds like me but I came from Canon. I have the 23, 35 f/2, 56, 16-55, 50-140, 100-400... I never bothered with the x1.4 though. I'm thinking about the 10-24 and x1.4 extender, but not 100% sure. I considered the X-T1 and X-pro 2 like you, but I'm going to wait for the X-T2 (to go with my xpro2 I mean)
  19. Oops how do you delete your own post? ;O
  20. Well I went and bought the 50-140, 100-400, 56mm I asked for the 10-24 but currently no stock. So I'll wait a bit on that one. The 50-140 is very good. Just like my old Canon 70-200 2.8L IS II. Just as sharp but the OIS on the fuji is better than the IS on the Canon. This is a worthy substitute for me and it's lighter to boot The 100-400 is about the size of my old 70-200. It's so fun to shoot with though avoiding mistakes at the long end can be challenging. The OIS on this lens is the best I've ever used. At the 100mm end its like you've got it on a tripod at 400mm it moves about a bit, but it's certainly clearly working. Sharpness is a bit below the 50-140 but it's certainly very sharp. So fun though but needs practice to get the best out of it. The 56mm is a light sucking machine! I am quite glad I have this. The 90mm is maybe slightly better in terms of pure IQ. But if you want a low light short tele for event work, this lens can't be beat. It also seems to be a great portrait companion to the 90mm. I'll say now that although the 90mm gives better IQ. The 56mm is the one to get if you only want or can afford one lens. As for the 10-24...one day.
  21. I use it for streets too. It's great to be able to anticipate people coming into the frame. The ERF makes it waaaay better (than the Xpro1) too. Most of the other times I use the EVF, it's good to have a choice.
  22. Yeh the 12mm looks nice indeed. As for video, in the past I'd agree with you totally, however video on the Xpro2 is actually very good (it could do with more features, but the quality coming out is apt for pro work). Additionally, the XT-2 seems to be going go be even better for video. If I wasn't impressed with the xpro2 video I'd have never left Canon, however the Xpro2 is such an improvement over the old video I have no issues using it for my work. I actually own a very small production company.
  23. Living in Hong Kong I can go to a shop and try the Samyang 12mm. In fact I did once. It's worth the money I suspect. The 8mm sure is (if you're into the fisheye look). Here's a test shot I took with the 12mm when I tested it. http://i.imgur.com/7yXLWvR.jpg
×
×
  • Create New...