rrrrrichard

Of course we all know that specific cameras and lenses are far from the most important things in photography but I just got a new lens and here are some images I used it in creating. I expect it will replace my 55-200mm on my next trip.
 
Sharpness in this lens is adequate. In other words, it may well be the sharpest Fuji lens, as other reviews suggest and may make some other lenses seem inadequate in comparison. Mind you, if all you want to do is to post images online, it’s questionable whether you’ll see the benefits in your posted images because even a 4K monitor is only equivalent to the resolution of a 6MP sensor.
 
It’s a genuine 1:1 macro lens that also works well as a general lens. Autofocus works well from macro to infinity and not all macro lenses have good autofocus for macro. I had great difficulty getting focus on the petals of a white rose in low light but that’s more a product of Fuji’s contrast based autofocus than the lens.
 
Using it with the 1.4x teleconverter is excellent. Hardly any additional weight and quite viable wide open. No doubt better if you stop the lens down a stop or two but no need to avoid wide open.
 
Vignetting? Meh. Several reviews have suggested a problem with vignetting. I find it to be minimal and in any case easily correctible. (Out of focus image of clouds included).
 
Bokeh seems fine from my point of view.  I didn't do any artificial; testing, though.
 
Image stabilisation works very well. Fuji claim 5 stops and while I have not systematically tested this, the shot of Ashoka (the red Burmese cat) is at 1/15 sec.
 
No good for portraits because it’s too sharp? Several reviewers have suggested that but I don’t agree though I have little interest in portraits unless in the context of live music or street photography (ie unposed, not street portraits). The 90mm is no doubt more of a portrait lens but sharpness is not a problem. It is very easy in the current version of Lightroom to roughly paint the face with the Adjustment Brush, then select skin tones with the new colour range and blur accordingly.
 
I also have a Sigma 180mm f2.8 macro. On the Nikon D3s, that is twice the weight of the Fuji X-T2 + 80mm f2.8 macro + 1.4x TC. That is an advantage for travelling, but ironically because the Fuji is much lighter, it is much more difficult to hand hold steadily for macro focusing.
 
Focus stacking works well provided you use a tripod. There are three possible methods here. (1) You can use the autofocus to select different points of focus. (2) You can use the focus scale in manual focus to set different points of focus. (3) You can use focus peaking in manual to select different points of focus. I don’t recommend (1) because you are likely to miss a focus point but (2) and (3) work fine. I have included examples using both focus methods (2) and (3).
 
The main disadvantage for me is that hand-held focus bracketing is not possible. With the Nikon and the Sigma I could turn the focusing ring from out of focus at the back to out of focus at the front for quick focus bracketing on the fly. Usually I used a monopod but sometimes I actually hand-held. This is not possible with the Fuji alternative. This is a problem with the X-T2 rather than the lens, probably correctable in firmware.
 
Attached images:
 
(1)  Lichen on tree.  1/125 sec, f5.6, 200ISO, plus 1.4x TC.  Handheld.  Cropped in from the sides.
 
(2)  White rose. 1/160, f14, 250ISO, plus 1.4x TC.  Handheld.  Uncropped.  The spider in the corner is sharp.
 
(3)  Ashoka (red Burmese) at point blank range and 1/15 sec, f2.8, 800ISO.  Handheld.
 
(4)  Small cactus.  Focus stacked.

Tamrac Apache 2 is a big disapointment, I'm sending it back.
 
Didn't realise over 600g was _that_ heavy in relation to the size (It's really small). The strap is too short for me (I'm tall but not 2m either) and unpadded, would hurt quickly. It's very cubic, screams camera bag from the format.
 
Well that was it whith looking for a decent camera bag, I'm ordering a normal (but water resistant) messenger bag and putting an insert, seriously how much padding and extra weight do those companies think people need? Are people routinely throwing themselves with their equipment against walls or something? I'm really sceptic over all those bags that overprotect the material against god knows what, yet are never really waterproof, and attract so much attention by their design and logos.

Hi, 
Fuji has just announced its new Firmware update for X-Pro2 (ver.4.00).
Few months ago I had a conversation with a Fuji Guy during a Tradeshow and he told me that the coming firmware update on Xpro 2 might affect compatibility with the Godox AD 200 HSS and TTL functions.
Does someone who own an AD200 had the opportunity to test it with today XPro2 firmware update?
I plan to buy an AD200 in the coming days and would like to be sure it will correctly work with the new Xpro2 firmware
Thanks
Cyril

Just installed the new FW
 
Camera still works afterwards
 
I only just did this, so far to early to judge...
 
The histogram change looks promising though
 
RGB histogram, even when a BW film sim is in use... that could be very helpful
 
Don’t care about the video, so nothing to say
 
As a Windows user I haven’t tried the new software yet
 
I might have a play with the tethering thing.... but Fuji have managed to pick a busy weekend to launch all this, a weekend that’ll leave little time for camera testing!

.
I refocused the lens. With such a long distance the DOF had to ‘travel’, compared to the short working distance, moving the camera would have changed the perspective considerably (also refocusing did, but not that much).
 
 
Yes, I do like the XF80 – with caveats.
For close-up/macro work it beats the Zeiss Touit 50 Macro by a slight margin. Nothing to write home about though. Despite its size, I prefer the XF80 for its longer reach and faster AF, and for its OIS at times.
I’ve hoped for XF90 bokeh with contrasty background at farther distances though. Instead, it’s rather like the XF50-140 here. Bummer. Albeit being a tad sharper than the XF90, the XF90 would still remain my 1st choice when it comes to portrait or landscape (within this range of focal length).
 
The Sigma 180/2.8 macro I used on the D810. Sold it in favor of the Sigma 150/2.8 Macro - because of the bokeh. The 180’s rendering of strong highlights, especially in the transition zone, looks terrible to me. Heavily ring shaped and with onion patterns.
I’ve used the Sigma macros 105 OS, 150 Apo OS, 180 Apo OS and the Nikkor 105 VR (all on the D800 or D810). To my eyes, the XF80 is easily sharper, with AF only a bit slower (on X-T2 3.00).
Based on the same angle of view on sensor level (different magn. ratios), on the APS-C x-Trans X-T2, the really very sharp XF80 provides no benefit with respect to enlargeability compared to, e.g., the Sigma 150 Apo OS on full frame D810 (prints from Epson 3880). Actually, I’d clearly still give preference to my D810 shots owing to the overall clarity and tonality. Based on the same magnification ratio on sensor level, the XF80/X-T2 can beat the Sigma150/D810, when using sophisticated x-trans demosaicing. Sure the D810 can go further given the right glass (some of my old shots with the Zeiss Apo Sonnar T* 135mm f/2 on D810 still wipe the floor with Fuji-X - on large prints…).
 
PS: After many years of using the D800 & D810, I must admit that I don’t like x-trans. Don’t see any advantage, only workflow hassle (from raw). I prefer the Fuji-X System as a whole over the FF bulk though (yes, XF lenses can be bulky too). Miss the DR and pushability of the D810 files but, other than that, the IQ compromises are rarely relevant (large prints), esp. with lenses like the XF90 or XF80. If I go back to a larger format than to medium format (provided I hit a jackpot…).
 
.

[uPDATE] Here's a sample, a slightly Lr-tweeked RAF exported to JPG. Subject is a very old 10 UKP note (I'm American, but it just came to hand) shot at f/11 using a cheapo ring flash. The shutter speed was 1/180, and the output of the ring light was attenuated a bit. (I don't really understand where all the light was coming from, but that was the necessary exposure. Possibly I forgot to close down the aperture after focusing? The note was parallel to the sensor plane. so who knows?) The magnification is somewhere just north of 1:1 (the Meike is capable of 1.5:1, that is, slightly "super macro"). My technique is far from polished, and I expect a better focus is possible. I did use a tiny, but good, desktop tripod.
 
Here're the RAF and xmp (my Lr changes, FYT) files. If another kind of sample image using this lens, shared in this way, would be useful to you, let me know and I'll try to produce a decent one. I also have an X-Pro2 and an X-E2s (if I don't sell it), and I can use one of those instead of the X-E3.
 
 

I’m turned off by the X-H1 larger size. I don’t care if Fuji has IBS or not. I will wait for the X-T3 to go with my X-T1 (assuming it’s the same size).

The Sunlight Stroll by Adam Bonn, on Flickr
 
X-Pro2 and XF35

NYC Central Park Fall 2017
 
XT-1
1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.


 

8.


9.


10.


11.


12.


13.

I too have been waiting for this lens for what seems like forever. Based on experience with the X-E3's waitlist at Adorama, I may not get it even weeks after the official US release date (30 Nov). Boo hoo!
 
(Of course, all the flowers are gone anyway. Great macro timing, Fuji!)

I purchased the XE2s and it is a great camera.
However I did not own a previous XE camera
 
I do not think the XT2s is meant to appeal to XT2 owners
Or even XPRO2 owners
 
It will be there for people who do not own these cameras and at the time of purchase require the latest modern gear
they will compare and contrast  to other camera manufacturers
put yourself in the position of the camera salesman trying to flog off an old model

And mine! Bloody annoying waiting though!

Seems very strange that selective blurring could be caused by (or fixed by) software. Not doubting your reports at all. I figure if I could hear an authoritative explanation, I'd learn something very interesting.

The X-Pro is excellent, but it's just too large for me - I like to have my camera most days.  The X-T2 is a great camera - but why does it need to look like a 'mock DSLR'?  It's like one of the new VW Beetles that has the engine in the front - it's a fake DSLR with a pretend prism.
 
Sony did the same with the 7 series.
 
An X-E3 would be perfection.

I hope you see the weakness of your reasoning yourself? Attacking the posters instead of their arguments?
 
Edit: congratulations, you are the very first person on this forum who made it to my ignore list.

You don't push an iPhone against your face ...
 
A touch screen only makes sense for me on a camera you use without a viewfinder.

It's like if biker would tell to cyclist that the fundamental disconnect here is that he need to realize an engine is now an absolute requirement for virtually any vehicle that has some wheels.

Who says? I suspect that a large part of Fujifilm's target group thinks otherwise. Besides, the "screen only" design makes the camera bland and ugly.

Finally received my ultra wide angle for X-M1:)
 
some test shots

1



2


3


4


5


6


7 bokeh is great f/2



testing out starburst f/22
8


9


10@  f/2.8 maybe


Unfortunately, I can only post 10 images at once.

Uh, no, APS-C has reached a point it is miles ahead of what full-frame was a few years ago, without the lenses size / weight.

....but but.....why?   

I think you are missing the best: Godox setup. Cheap, work well, updatable and have plenty of flash models.

I really don't like the idea of my sensor shaking like it is hit by an earth quack all the time. Adds extra moving parts and that always results in a shorter lifespan of the camera.

if you shoot concerts or acts on stage at less than 1/125s I'd imagine the motion blur is present on almost every photo, if that is the look you're going for that's your artist interpretation.
When i shoot events I'd much rather have a usable high ISO, than be able to slow the shutter speed, as I generally do not want motion blur on the acts i'm photographing. (the exception being if I want to show movement)
 
All IBIS or OIS does is allow you to use a slower shutter speed, on long lenses > 100mm it is an advantage being able to use a shutter speed of 1/60 seconds without camera shake.
 
But shooting a 50mm/35mm lens (or wider) it makes no difference, as less than 1/60s motion blur will appear on anything that moves, and shooting a 35mm lens at 1/60s or faster there is no camera shake.
 
I also do plenty of candid street photography, again never missed a shot because of no ibis, as I'd never be using a shutter speed so slow camera shake became an issue before motion blur did