louiscar

Just linking here as there may be more exposure (pun intended:))

Hi Folks, I'm trying to find out why my X2T-f actually has the opposite problem when on the hotshoe of my XT-3. Most people complain about it forcing TTL mode. Mine will NOT work in TTL any shape or form. TTL is dead - The camera flash section only shows manual and no power setting is available in that section. I've only ever been able to set my 2 flash groups to work in manual and actually I cannot even remember if TTL ever worked. I just have to set the correct power settings. When a flash is set to work in TTL mode it fires weakly and simply doesn;t respond to the conditions - not surprisingly as the camera is already telling me this will be the case I only realised this when I bought an XT3 trigger and it forced only TTL mode as soon as I attached it and turned it on. Speed is immediately set to 60 in AP. That's no problem to me as it works fine if I go manual on the camera and set speed to whatever I need slower or faster, TTL works flawlessly in manual or AP mode and I realised that my X2T must be faulty (perhaps since I bought it?). I've spent hours looking in the menu for an answer. I even reset it, reverted to firmware 1.1 and then back to 1.4. Nothing alters this behaviour, there is no TTL and the camera doesn't recognise it. So before I deem this faulty and bin it, or just keep is as a manual backup, I thought I'd just ask here to see if anyone has had a similar problem and found a way to make it work.

Wish you guys would do something about the awful white balance on this model. The XT-1 was just perfect but this camera the WB shifts to odd colours when just panning and the lcd doesn't bear any resemblance to what comes out on the computer. Somewhat taking me some time to get used to after the brilliant xt-1

All links are dead " Moved Permanently The document has moved here. Additionally, a 500 Internal Server Error error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request. "

Interesting. Thanks for your thoughts. I had 2 things I didn't like and one is probably a fault (the under exposure ) but the other, noise, I expect is what is probably the consequence of the extra pixels. I just didn' think it'd be as bad as I found it. And for me when I consider image quality, noise is definitely part of what I'd term IQ even though it appears not how others view IQ. I couldn't produce the same quality pics compared to the xt1 and manipulating in LR resulted in unacceptable noise at base iso. For me I don' see what the advantage is of going from 16 to 24 mp when noise is the trade off. I don't require prints bigger than 16mp can give me. Some of my best pictures were with a 6mp Nikon D70s. Manufacturers just love to play the mega pixel game I think, so they'l cram more regardless of the extra noise. I really wanted the xt2 for the other features including flash. One thing I miss about my Nikon is the creative lighting system, it was a joy and the xt1 has a primitive flash system. From my understanding Fuji have gone a long way to addressing that in the xt2 and I was looking forward to exploring that. Sadly though I want IQ over features and the noise I got on that xt2 was too much for me at ISO 200. Ive no idea what the xt3 is like but as I'm a RAW shooter it would be a while before I could start to deal with the pictures and so it' not an option for me to even investigate right now. I will try to get another xt2 sample to see if I just had a lemon but I will not get rid of the xt1 in a hurry, that has produced the most fantastic images this summer.

Thanks all. I'e been chatting to Fuji who thought , after I sent some examples, that there might be an exposure problem. Nothing other than that though and since I sent the camera back there's no way to get to the bottom of it. I ended up getting another xt1 to keep me going and the images from this are just so much better and exposure is perfect if not slightly over but I can live with that. From what you guys have said I'm sure that xt2 was sub par but knowing my luck I'm scared to try again. Right now I'm stuck on this issue but at least I can carry on taking pictures.

I don' think the aperture was that small. I bought the lens around the beginning of summer as I did want macro capability. Its been great fun on the xt1 and I did use it for normal shots however, this anomaly could be easily missed as I only use the jpegs for reference and quite often they get discarded fairly quick. I'l have to have a look and see if I have anything left from previous xt1 shooting but nothing really stood out like this example.

yes although I think when I look at the jpeg it appears to be over-sharpened - even though in camera it is set to 0. looking at the bricks on the dormer and the block of flats on the right. There may be a bug (or feature) that gets kicked in when this lens information is read by the camera. I don't know - I did a 50mm shot with my 18-55 and this did not happen.

Cropped them till they fit my 1mb limit - jpeg Sharpening 0 NR-0 - I think the RAW is the LR default sharpening - the RAW appears first here

I was testing 100 iso at this point - I wonder if that has a bearing I will check it with base iso - I doubt it though. I am restricted to 1MB upload so I can't upload the comparison RAW from LR but if you look at the windows on the row of houses on the left they are highlighted almost.

Thanks for your input merlin

This is an old thread but I thought to add my thoughts as I took the plunge and am thinking of going g back. Image quality what is it? Well to me I really hate noise , it ruins pictures for me and the xt2 is absolutely full of it at base iso. I'm wondering if I got a duff one with so many people not complainin about it. I would happily use iso 800 on the xt1 and provided it was well exposed it would be fine. Xt2 ? Not a chance it' too nasty for me and since I think that 200 is too noisy I hesitate to make it any worse. Not a pixel peeper I don' go past 100% and the xt1 doesnt show noise at this level at 200. Other things I notice is that I get a consistent 1 stop under exposure most of the time and strangely a couple of times when comparing jpegs to raw in LR the jpegs was in some cases (usually low light cases) brightened by the camera by about 1 stop. The downside of course is even more noise in the raw version. The magic? Well after 3 weeks I can say the colours and the fuji magic are not there compared to the xt1 but maybe I haven't had enough time but the summer gave me some of the most beautiful shots straight out of the camera with the xt1 and I'm finding that the xt2 pics are rather lack luster but maybe again it just needs time to get used to the differences and do more processing to get similar results. A curious one that I can' explain, comparing jpegs to raw I note a lot of smoothing going on but when I took pictures with a particular lens (zeiss touit 50mm) there was a shocking difference. The picture was of a hill packed with houses mainly and the white windows in the jpegs were appeared to be over processed and smoothed with a high shine to them. The raw didn' have this, the were natural and similar to any other lense used. Quite shocked I rated the shot with similar results . Wierd. So those are negative things and I do like the I improvements in other areas which amount t to handling and convenience and features but "image quality" must mean different things to different people because to me a beautiful landscape with fluffy smooth rich clouds is not so attractive when that quality is degraded by noise on top and any processing usually makes it worse, so to me there is madness in wanting more pixels at the expense of vastly increased noise. Given many are happy with the xt2 I have to wonder if I have a problem with this xt2, others accept the compromise and still see the IQ as improved, or I'm expecting too much. Im trying to talk to Fuji about it but they are not the best at support when it comes to answering emails so after 4days I still have no reply and will just have to wait.