darknj

Agreed but facts are still there. The F2 is faster than F3.5. For some the 2/3 stop is not relevant enough, for other, even 1/2 stop value means a lot of different things.

The 18-135 almost as big as that XF 16-55 F2.8. Then again, I consider it as the swiss knife of the Fujinon XF series. The pro for it in my book are: - Super wide zoom range, you can point at pretty much anything and get something out of it from wide angle to almost quite far away. - 5 stops OIS, super handy when light goes away or you need to nail that thing at 135mm handheld with slow speed. I frequently able to get 1/15 sec shots at 135mm without too many issues. - WR, moot point for you but it is relatively important for me with my X-T1. Cons: - Yeah it's slow with F3.5-5.6. - Big chunky piece of metal. - Makes you super lazy because you can just zoom into things instead of finding a better angle for the picture. (personal point) - Get super spoiled by the OIS and pester that you can no longer do a 1/15 sec shots handheld with the XF 35mm F1.4 (also personal point) To compare both lenses, the 18-55 will be sharper, at 18 the lens is even sharper than the 18mm prime, and is of course faster but you would need to carry another lens with you for short tele and further away subjects. Now, from personal experience, unless I know beforehand what I am going to shoot, I will always pack the 18-135 with me, the versatility it brings is uncanny. It is a good lens that will bring you good picture with good sharpness. Will it be excellent ? Nope, but then again it doesn't have to be and also it is not the purpose of that lens to be. Also, it is the lens that stays always on my X-T1 for family sortie. I can hand the camera to my wife and she will be able to take picture too without fuss nor complain about "Where is the zoom" like on my primes. So in the end, are you looking for an excellent short zoom or a good super versatile lens ? Oh and if you do plan on getting the 18-135, you might want to consider some extra grip for the camera, I know it helped me a lot with my X-T1 which is both bigger and larger already than your X-T10.

The only advice I can really give is to have fun. Don't think too much about it, just take pictures of anything and everything you want. Try things out, experiments here and there, take it easy, it's a hobby, quite a fun one even. If you have friends/colleagues/... with photography experience you can ask them to judge your pictures, take what they say with a grain of salt as if they are experienced, their ways of shooting might not be yours. By taking more and more pictures, you will naturally find things that you like to do and others that you won't like and slowly your own style will show up in your pictures. Photography is a very personal thing, it has to please you first. If that shot also happens to appeal to others, that's even better. As for the technique, just stick to auto at first and slowly learn up things like the Aperture, ISO, speed, composition,... Gear wise, you are pretty much set for most things, there will be very little need for more except when you will start getting picky about your pictures, even so you can still make do with what you currently have.

To add a few more details, while I was never under such a downpour, I do travel to Asia on regular basis and because of the heat and moisture all around, I can vouch that the X-T1 with the 18-135 lens are perfectly able to tackle that weather condition without any hitch, just make sure to not change your lens outside of your hotel room, specially in very humid areas. That aside, Nikon AW series and the Olympus Tough series are both very good compact rugged cameras for pretty much anything you would want to travel but the fixed lens can be impacting on usability. But the Nikon AW1 kind of fixes that since it's one of the only rugged cameras that can swap lenses, granted there are only 2 at this moment, but Nikon has been quite diligent lately and registered half a dozen of patents for the Nikon 1 series along a wide angle zoom for the AW1.

Nope, went Fuji for the weight/IQ ratio. 200MP... I don't even dare to think how much it would weight with the glass needed to fully use the sensor... If wanted to go super big and large I wouldn't have picked up my X-T1.

Different companies have different idea as on how to focus should work, heck, they can't even agree on the ISO value... The camera is just a tool and with any tool, you need to learn to use it, different tools need different learning process. It might not the case of the casual shooter who just need to point at something and expect a great shot but those of us who got Fuji to actually slow down our picture taking and not just spray around the area because "one of them will be good enough". My X-T1 never let me down on the AF (aside fast subjects), if it misfired, it was because I was the one who made the mistake, the same thing applies when I use any other cameras. The tool by itself is rather stupid, it just take a picture. You could do that with marginally great effect with your regular 2 years old iPhone. The hardest part when using a Fuji is to get rid of your old reflex and expectation from Canikon, they simply don't work the same way, I love how the D3S never let down on the AF, it can even find focus point when my eyes can't seen any. But I still prefer my Fuji even with its "faults" and its merits.

I like and dislike DxO, they are good if you need raw numbers but then again their scale is a bit weird. On several occasions you have much older dslr that are equally good then recent top dogs while real world clearly prove the contrary. Also they test only the Bayer sensors, hence Fuji not being tested at all. Not even their lenses. This leaves me with a sour after taste when looking at DxO reports. In the end, they are jus that a raw amount of numbers.

Fuji and pretty much all mirrorless at the current stage are bad at sports, it's just a matter of fact. The continuous AF speed is not fast enough, nor accurate enough for past paced subjects. The rolling shutter effect shouldn't be visible on the X-T10 if you use the mechanical shutter, the electronic shutter could have it but then again, it would mostly be a matter of working around it. We have several sport shooter who would gladly prove me wrong but a Nikon D4S, for example, would be much easier to use in those situations and achieve a higher number of keepers.

Tony is quite wrong on that video, or at least he is leading ppl into the wrong assumption. What Tony is talking about the Depth of Field differences, which is 100% true and related to the camera sensor. Larger sensor mean larger area and thus a shallower depth of field. But you still do not multiply the F-stop on smaller sensor camera to get a full frame equivalent of F-Stop, that part doesn't make any sense at all. The F-Stop is a measure of a certain amount of light hitting your sensor. What Matt explained is all true but the differences is mostly because lens constructor are allowed up to 0.5 F-Stop value as error margin. Meaning a Nikkor 50mm F1.8, could have a variable F-Stop from F1.8 to F2.3. That's one of the reason why some legacy lenses from the film era has scratching on the barrel marking the actual F-Stops values. So if you are a Protog, and really need to be that precise, you need to test out your gear to be 100% certain of what you are getting on your lenses. And that variation can happen from lenses within the same series manufactured in the same place at the same time.

Just an idea, if you are not overly seeking for the shallow depth of field from the 52 F1.2, why not consider the 60mm F2.4 ? It's a bit of a generic all rounder that can do some portrait and cost a third of the price of the 52 F1.2.

Not really agreeing on the AF speed from the Mirrorless against DSLR, if you take the fastest focusing mirrorless camera against the fastest AF DSLR, the mirrorless camera will be more out of focus than the DSLR with equivalent lens and that number doesn't seem to shrink that much even with the fast pace of body release by a certain company. The D3S I get to use on regular basis is miles and more ahead of my Fuji X-T1 in term of AF speed, I hardly need to do any half press with it to get an accurate focus and that camera is considered slow against the D4S and I have no doubt that the Nikon D5 will be a wonderful body too. As for the low light, mirrorless is getting there. We have a couple of example where we are better than DSLR, Sony A7S line for example, it is still a very capable still camera even if it had to sacrifice much for the low light capabilities.

I shoot in ISO 400 to take advantage of the DR200 mode and honestly, unless I go super 3:1 pixel peeping, I don't really see that much differences to fret about. Even ISO 6400 are quite usable on the Fuji X-T1.

Not really a convert per say, I still use the D3S and D800 on regular basis, I just use the Fuji gear for my personal photos. As for the range, we do have the XF 55-200 and the XC 55-230, you loose some reach but not overly either. The X-T10 is a good camera, not so great for sports or fast moving subject, then again, nothing on the Fuji X series is good at that. So if you put that aside, there is very little else that you won't be able to capture with the right gear. Also, while not as long in reach, the XF 18-135 is still a small wonder and lots of reach in a single 5 stops stabilized WR lens. It is my get go lens for uncertain weather or subjects. I do not own the X-T10 per say, but I have his big brother the X-T1 and I really can not find much fault with it, I kinda hate the press and turn ISO button but that's about it, after a bit, you do get used to it. Worst case, I just usually swap between Auto ISO and ISO 400 and manually bump to 6400 when really needed. Lens wise, it really depends on what you want to shoot, in very broad sense, the XF line is very good, there a couple of exception but nothing overly deal breaking. The XC line is cheaper but not lacking in IQ either, Fuji cut down the price by using plastic for the build. For the sake of convenience here is the link to Fuji's lens roadmap. Also, unless you really want to go pixel peeping, you won't be noticing much of the differences between the Nikon 24MP and Fuji's 16MP, Adobe Lightroom might give you more troubles tho as they have an issue at correctly decoding the Fuji raws. Here is a cropped shot from my X-T1 with the 18-135 @135 F5.6: DSCF1538.jpg

I could be interested into it, mostly because of the WR, the size would also be a factor for my bits and pieces of streets here and there.

Yes ! Thank you very much for the new word to add to my vocabulary

Agreed but it's bloody annoying to spell out things like Optical In-body Stabilization instead of OIS. Plus, admit it or not, this is forum where technical information are shared, at one point any reader would need to either research the information needed or read the manual, a lot of the acronyms used are inside that little booklet that you get when purchasing the gear. I am not saying we should be super elitist and shun away new members when they don't know an acronym, from where I come from, the most simple and healthiest foundation of learning anything is to ask when you don't know or when you are in doubt. If during an exchange of information on a thread someone ask for more details about the terms used, I really do not think anyone on this forum would turn the person away or just plain being rude. This is after all, a small forum and we are passionate about our gear and like to share the details about it.

Had that issue with the standard issued one, the long eyecup clips itself much better and I haven't had any accident with it and I usually just shove the camera in my bag with the eyecrup clearly rubbing against the cloth (sorry I do not know the correct term here) every single time I take it out or put it back. Side note, I think you got a double thread post.

As silly as it sounds, why not simply create a sticky where new user can use and refer to for those acronyms ? They have such sticky on many tech or tech related forums and works relatively well

We are getting there but there is still quite a lot of work ahead before we get there. I know that Nikon is in the making/testing a FF mirror less body, if everything goes fine, it might see light in Q1 2016. Could be the next hit or could a dead end like the Nikon Df... But mirror less camera haven't been around for a long time, decade maybe? And we already have very impressive things, Fuji for one, Sony for their A7 line, Olympus also. Quite a lot of improvements have been made and plenty are still to come.

Same advice as Patrick, both camera are good traveling partners. Kinda hard to pick one over the other... Only hint is, are you going to need some reach or would you be able to make do with a fixed lens?

Yes we have it and yes it's normal, no need to worry about it :]

Plus, it should only have softness on the edges, the center is usually quite sharp.

The 50mn equivalent have always been rather cheap to produce, the Nikkor 50 F1.4 is cheaper than our XF 35mm F1.4 by around 15-20%. True is plasticky but if you follow the trend, the Nikkor 50 F1.8 is barelly half the price of the F1.4 version, so it is not so unreasonable to think that the XF 35 F2 WR would be cheaper than the F1.4 version.

Side question, official Fuji Battery grip ? Or third party ? If the later, I would look closely at the contact parts both on the camera and on the grip for any loose ends. Same thing inside the grip battery holder.

If you really feel like upgrading, I would advise you to wait for the X-T2 to be released. Not with the idea to immediately get it, but it would lower the price of the X-T1 and possibly the X-T10 too. The X-E2 is still a very solid camera, perfectly capable on tackling a lot of things and it's also smaller size than the X-T1/10. As for your freezing and feeling of having it stuck. As Milandro said, double check your FW version on both lens and body. Also, what are your reference point for when it get stuck ? Couldn't it be related to your SD card too ? I tend to trash mine after a max of 2 years no matter which brand I use.