fugu82

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.

There is no way of escaping the laws of physics. The smaller sensor of the Fuji X system requires the aperture to be approx one stop faster than the equivalent FF application for the bokeh to look the same. As Pierre points out, the Canon 70-200 f/4.0 would create an image that more resembles the Fuji 50-140.
 
Apart from the bokeh comparison though, the Fuji 50-140 is a fantastic lens. Amazingly sharp and a real joy in use. It gives good contrast and in keeping with the Fuji tradition, the colour rendition is superb.

The 80mm:
 
1) You have to be very close to your subject with the 50mm. I had it and sold it. The 80mm lets you stand further back, and it also takes the 1.4x and 2x teleconverters, meaning you can be very far away from your subject. If you shoot with a tripod, the 50mm is very hard to use.
 
2) The 80mm has stabilisation. Again, with a tripod you would turn it off, but if you shoot handheld, you get 5 stops of stabilisation. Shooting a still subject will be far easier, you can use a lower ISO for more detail.
 
3) The 80mm has a switch to choose focusing distance. This speeds up macro shooting if you are doing pure macro, but it's a great general lens too, with a useful focal length, and speedy focusing on general shooting, unlike the Zeiss, which is slower to focus.
 
Anyway, mine's on order  , has been since the day it was announced.
 
Mike

I use a rocket blower for loose debris, and Eclipse wipes & solution for wet cleaning. Not a fan of the Butterfly.

Hi all there was a fire behind my house of a car repair shed I say shed because it was a total eyesore  its a corrugated barn type shed  so it will be pulled down shortly the police had evacuated the houses, so my wife and I spent the night at a friends
home,
 
I was delighted it was on fire as it spoils my view, I was also delighted that I had my X-T2  so got some good phots
 
and sent them to my local paper whom used them,
 
see below:
 

 
 
 
had to resize files 1000kb hope the look ok had to downsize from 40meg to 800/900kb
 
anyway that was my excitement for last Sunday evening
 
the fire had started after they put an old sofa and chairs round the side and set it alight then they proceeded to throw a large 
cupboard on the fire,
 
I mean anyone with half a brain would not have placed old furniture up against a corrugated shed then set alight
 
the Fuji is a great camera  I Love my X-T2
 
 
Tom G  Scotland
 
 
 
 
 

A quick format method that I have seen listed several places.  It works great for me.
 
I only format with the trash button.  I do not delete an image or group of images.
 
With camera turned on, hold trash button down for  3 sec. or so.  While continuing to hold down trash button, press the rear command dial  (the wheel at the upper right of the back).  The screen will ask you to choose slot 1 or slot 2.  Follow commands to delete all of the images on the card in that slot.   You must do the process twice, each time choosing the slot with the card you with to format.   Remember this process, by reformatting the card, deletes ALL images on that card.
 
Saves menu diving to clean and format cards.
 
 
With regard to uploading.  I use a card reader.  I download my images for the day and often continue to use the card the next few days, downloading only my new images for each day, usually to a separate folder in my main images folder.  I use 32 GB files which often last me two or three days when I am seriously shooting. \\
 
I shoot only RAW so my slot 2 is a backup.  When I have essentially filled the 32 GB card, i retire it and use another card to finish my trip, event or whatever.  The second slot contains a 256 GB for backup and this card is good to backup at least eight 32 GB cards.  At the end of the trip or event, when I get home I download my images via card reader from my 32 GB cards to my computer and to my backup external drive.  At that point I reformat, using the technique listed above for both all of the 32 GB cards used and the 256 GB back card.
 
I carry sixteen 32 GB cards and two 256 GB cards.  I have yet to run out of space even on a four week trip.
 
Maybe more than you all want to know, but perhaps this is a help or idea trigger for someone.
 
Jerry

All cameras will respond to infra red light. If you take infra red photos the way you describe your exposure times will be considerably longer for a given ISO. This is because not only does the infra red filter block almost all the light in the visible spectrum but there is a filter on the camera's sensor that blocks infra red light so not a lot of the light entering your lens reaches the sensor. At least the XT-2 has an electronic viewfinder so you should still have a reasonable view for framing etc.
 
If you just want to try infra red photography the cokin IR filter will be OK. Just be prepared to either bump up your ISO (a lot) or use a tripod.
 
If you decide to get into infra red photography, you might be better buying a body that's been converted for IR or paying for a conversion. IR conversion is basically removing the IR blocking filter from the sensor. You can choose to replace the IR blocking filter with an infrared filter at the sensor (that's what I have done) or you can just remove the IR blocking sensor and replace it with clear glass and use an IR filter on your lens. There are pros and cons for both.
 
Google infra red photography to find some websites that can provide more detailed advice.

Well I've been testing today again, taking around 3000 shots at CH 11fps. Uncompressed RAW. No lockups!
 
Just tried switching it back to compressed RAW, and guess what, it locked up within the second burst of shots, took just a few seconds. Again, I had to remove the battery grip to reset it.
 
To be sure, I did this twice, and it locked up both times.
 
So for me it's a no brainer, the compressed raw is to blame.

with Minolta 35-70/3.5 Macro MD on Fuji X-A1 (700nm) ...
 

IR - Bayern-Park by Enzio Harpaintner, auf Flickr

Just bought a 90mm but honestly would sell it for the 80mm. I still use Canon and the 100mm is used 95% for macro beauty makeup shots. Did not fancy the 60mm due to not enough working distance with subjects.

Clearly 1:1 will be better than my 60, but I was thinking the OIS and the shallower depth of field may make it a competitor for the 56mm for portraits, better bokeh maybe and from calcs the same depth of field as a 56 at f1.2 at 3m. Just hope it's not huge and heavy.

I think both cameras are very similar and you would get same IQ in most of the situations. I would suggest you check what are the differences in terms of features between both. If you are sure you will never need / miss any of them, then go with T20. If however you are not sure and you think what T2 offers over T20 is valuable and nice to have down the road then you should go with T2. If you are starting with the Fuji ecosystem, over time you will be investing in lenses anyway. However, if you have no short term plans to buy a second body, you will be "stuck" with whatever you buy first. At least for a while.
That is what I would do.
A month ago I went with T2 kit (+ XF 18-55). Like Elisha I try to spend as much as I can, for what I would need to start, in the beginning. I added XF 55-200 and battery grip.
Good luck

Another fan of Peak Design here. 
 
I'm afraid my XT-2 looks a little strange with three dongles hanging from it, but truth is the Peak Design just works.  Two dongles hanging from the top for when I am carrying a heavy lens like my 100-400 and then one more hanging from the bottom of the Vertical grip for when I just want to handhold.  The straps just attach and unattach so easily it makes shooting so much easier.

That's an intriguing response, please elucidate.
 
I realize that 'no rectilinear distortion' is probably a simplistic, subjective overstatement on my part. However, after shooting with the lens for four or five months now - and with an eye for architecture (even though I don't spend my time taking square-on pictures of brick walls) I don't think it's an exaggeration.
 
I didn't make my judgment from the EVF or the little screen on the back, so much as the results I see on my computer screens. And while I'll grant that at the 55 mm end of the zoom range, there's a suggestion on pincushioning, nowhere in the zoom range - particularly at the 16 mm end, where I find myself using it most often - have I been able to identify any barrel distortion.
 
And (perhaps because I'm an old fart who doesn't grasp modern technology) I fail to understand how the image that the lens transmits - be it in-camera or in-jpeg (new terminology, OK?) can be evidentially 'different' in terms of what's being passed through the glass to the 'film' plane. Either it's bent, or it ain't, surely?
 
--------------------------------
 
 
 
 
Jaco, what on earth do you think you're talking about, here? Why are you participating in this thread, you silly person?
 
You are off topic completely (we're discussing a particular lens, here) you can't spell 'waste' and the general attitude you convey is one of arrogance and condescension, despite your obvious ignorance.
 
Please get over yourself, before next 'contributing' to this discussion. Sheesh!

18-135mm for travel with 16mm f1.4 and 23mm f2 - I have the 35mm f2 but don't find that I use this as often as the 16 and 23

Cheers!.  Coming from the DSLR world, got used to turning on the camera in the morning and turning it off 3 weeks later when the battery was getting low. I'll give it a go to have it mostly turned off and see if i can get more pics per charge.   And im not a chimper. Unless the .5s preview after the shot counts as chimping. 

To the OP: The reason I left Canon was because of their emphasis on video, instead of stills photography. In terms of me and myself, Canon thus ignored their current market, went after another market and lost a customer. Probably no big deal to them and I'm sure, just like Canon, FUJIFILM won't fold if I stop being a customer when they make video cameras that can also do stills.

I've owned the T2 for 4 months and have yet to try the video. If video is a priority then I would recommend you get a Canon DSLR, a Sony, or a Panasonic camera. I will eventually try out the video but it is not at the top of my list. Right now if I need video I use my iPhone, which has been more than adequate.

-1. Photo is priority.

Why must video be top priority for Fujifilm? I think flash, for instance, is higher on the list? Or better battery life (without resorting to a bulky grip).

Two comments:
1. Your personal priority of video over still photo is hardly shared, in my opinion, by the majority of Fuji users.
2. Comparison of arbitrarily chosen video clips made by people of varying skills under different lighting conditions with differing lenses, shooting different subjects proves nothing. I mean, absolutely nothing.

Peak Design. Much more practical than BR. I use the larger Slide for big lenses, and the Lite for everything else.

I own both the Peak Design and the BR.  I always grab the Peak Design.  It's much more easily removable, and less obstructive.

Bad troll! Back to your cave.