darknj

If you can not access regular sources of electricity, the only way I would advise you is this. It saved my bacon a few times when traveling abroad without reliable source of electricity. It does take time to charge anything up, but it's a lot more reliable than solar panels. Now, if you really want to use solar panels, find one with several panels, like these. The smaller ones are not good enough to get enough juices for your ,eeds.

Did you check if the OIS is enabled at all time or only when half pressed ?

The X-T1 is a slower AF camera, it really can't not compete against the likes of the 5D Mk3 or any of the Nikon Dx. Heck, it even lags behind the Sony A6000 (great performer on AF btw). But that was mostly before the FW 4.0 update. Now, we are still slower but it's no longer so indecent. For comparison, my Nikon 1 AW1 with the 18.5mm F1.8 (50mm equiv) focus much faster in good light than my X-T1 with any of my owned lens. The Nikon 1 is about the same AF speed as the Nikon D3S which is a tad slower than the 5D Mk3 and D4S. So yeah, not the best for sports and/or fast moving subjects. It does okay with my son when he "pose" for me for half a second but not much more. For wedding, I used to think that the Fuji X gear would be sub-par for the need, but I have been proven wrong by many of the forum regulars who are wedding shooter.

If you are willing to go bridge format, it's hard to compete against the Nikon P900, provided you are able to grab one. 83x optical zoom, IBS, it goes from 24 to 2000mm with 16MP sensor. You can still crop into the picture for a total of 166x zoom. Small video of the camera in action: https://youtu.be/mfshAzV0FN4

Another thing, don't leave the LCD or EVF turned on constantly, both screens are quite the battery hog. I usually just turn the back LCD off and leave the EVF on eye sensor mode, thus only that part lights up when my eye get near it. With the 18-135 OIS enabled and enhancement mode on, I get around 350 shots per battery before reaching the red icon, I guess I could take maybe 10-20 more before it shuts down completely.

You are correct on the Sony A7S native ISO, sadly the camera sacrifice a lot to reach that uncommonly high ISO value, the first one is the resolution, it's a 12 MP camera, even by 2013 standard, that's low. Second point, I have been told that the AF isn't really that good, it's about the speed of the A7R which was about as slow as our X-T1 pre FW 4.0. But if you need to go deep into the night, that camera doesn't have any direct competitor, just for reference, the Nikon D4S native ISO is a 25k, that's 2 stops lesser than the Sony. Now, the Nikon D5 is expected to use also the BSI sensor from Sony which would also allow 102k native ISO with a 20 MP sensor. The X-Pro2 is also around the corner.

Quick question, since I do not have the X-T10, I am very newbie regarding it, but doesn't it have also the enhancement mode ? If so, I assume you have it enabled during your tests, right ?

In all honesty, I don't think there is anything, yet, on the market that would satisfy your requirements. Maybe the next iteration of the Sony A7S ? Considering the very impressive update the Sony A7RII got, if the A7S gets anything alike that, it will be a very impressive camera. The main issue is the high ISO value, currently only the D4S and the A7S hold such value with relative decent quality, maybe the Nikon D810A too, not too certain about it at the moment. Also, if you feel that your gear doesn't take you where you want it, maybe it's true. We can not tell you how it should be used, you know it better than we do, the best we can do is provide personal experience that might not match what you want/expect.

I don't understand how this suddenly became a comparison between the 18-135 and the 16-55. Both lenses were made with different ideologies. The18-135 is an all prupose lense that will do good in most situations, it's a lens of comprise. You trade quality for practicability. True they are better options if you need to go far, but would any of them allow you to go from wide to close up without changing lenses ? Or take that shot at 135mm at 1/10 of a sec handheld ? Not many can do that, so yes, they had to cut some coners here and there and IQ took a bite. The 16-55 on the hand was made to be a high IQ zoom lens, no VR because it would have made it even bulkier than what it is now, but still has WR to please a certain crowd. It's more targeted at the "Pros". Both lenses are very good in their own expertise area. The right tool for the right job.

Err... well... I use zip bag... I put 2 in a bag, good enough to keep moisture and sands away and still maleable enough to put in the way I want in the camera bag. The batteries are solid enought to not be afraid of any extrenal chock, beside something that could get your battery any external damage is already a bad thing for the rest of your camera bag. Maybe something like this ?

The original purpose of a lenshood is to block the flare from any source of light. But if your lenshood is not on the right angle, you could be getting an unwanted vignetting effect becase its edges come into the view. That aside, it won't really be an issue.

Metabone have very good adapter for both Canon and Nikon lenses, just don't forget to multiply the focal length by 1.5 if using their FF line of lenses. I know mostly about Nikon, thus I can only talk about those. The AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G is rather old now a bit softer on the edges but for less than 180$ it's hard to complain about it. The price/quality ratio is very good. One thing tho, there is no VR on it, so tripod is quite often needed. The AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED is what I use with my AW1, it's pricier at around 600$ but it's hard to argue with it, the VR works very well, even at 300mm I am still able to get shots at 1/60 without too much camera shake but still, tripod make things a lot easier. One thing about both lenses, in bright light, both are very good performer, specially on the 70-200 range. Starting 200 to 300, you will gradually lose sharpness. It is not THAT bad, but it can be noticed if you have 2 pictures put side by side. Low light isn't their forte either, hardly an issue for me since the Nikon 1 series sucks iron coated lead balls when light goes down. So I learned to work with that limitation. I guess it will be a bit less worse with the X-T1. I have no idea of your photography experience or knowledge, so please don't take it personally, but make sure to use lenses that are either made for the same sensor size or for large sensor size. Well, unless you like the natual lens vignetting effect.

The sensor size still helps quite a lot in the high ISO quality. With equal technology, the large sensor will always do better. Nowaday, if you were to compare even my old and aging D5000 with the newer Nikon AW1, at 1600 ISO, the smaller AW1 is a lot better than the APS-C sensor size D5000 and there was only 4 years in between them. That being said, I have seen a few high ISO shots on the GX8 and I have to say that they look good, not nitpicky good but still decent enough for most usage.

It will be also the very last update from the Adobe Camera Raw for lightroom 6.x Any and all further updates will be on the lightroom CC version... Yay...

GGS Larmor, nice and thick, scratch resistant and does well under the rain. Very good visibility too and not too reflective under the sun. I have the same brand for my Nikon 1 AW1 and it has survived several dive trips in the ocean and a fall about 5 feet straight onto the screen.

If you pack light, like 2 zooms and a small prime lenses, it should be sufficient. Depending if you need to put more things in the bag like extra clothes of a rain coat, you might want to get the 15L version just to stay on the safe side. Now if you already have the 10L version, no need to go grab a new bag. It will be a waste of money, I would rather work around the smaller bag and pack lighter.

Owning a 27mm and loving it, I am thus awfully biased toward it. The greatest thing to goes for it, is of course, its size. It's really small and there are no reasons to not pack it whenever you go out. I like it for streets mostly because it's not tight like the 35mm and not too wide like the 23mm. It strikes a nice focal view in my eyes. But that focal does take some time to get used to and the minim focus is rather large for something so small, I would have prefered something akin 35-40ish cm instead of the close of 50cm it has. Image quality, it's hard to really complain about it considering the size of the lens. Image are nice and sharp enough, you won't be getting razor edge sharpness like the 90mm but it is still mostly sufficient for what you would use it.

Left side is actually the Jpeg file. I didn't really wanted it to look like the Jpeg, I processed the right side RAF as it would be pleasing to me and noticed how damn close the Jpeg was, which makes me wonder why I spend time processing my pictures to begin with. I didn't knew they had constest for that, thanks for the pointers. It gives me something more to look at.

That one of my issues, every single camera bag I got seemed like the perfect bag and then after a while the magic goes away and you really notice the issues with that belt, that shoulder strap or the inner spacing... I got a full cupboard filled with empty camera bags that might no longer see the light of day. The only one that is on regular usage is my Billingham 305, but that was before I jumped to Fuji, now that bag is way too large for what I have. I can put all my Fuji and Nikon 1 gear inside, including shoulder straps chargers, SB600 with at least a backup battery for everything and still have room for a 13" laptop and an extra smaller carry on bag.

In overall, the reception of the X-T1 is pretty good, the few bad reviews I saw where those of the camera handling came into way. When you are used to Canikon for several years, having a Fuji X-T1 in your hands feels alien. A colleague of mine was genuenly interested in the camera until he got it in his hands and fiddle with it for a while before handing it back to due to frustration with "Thanks but I still prefer the controls of my D800". Which is quite understandable, the X-T1 does have a learning curve and it does take time for the muscle reflex to get acustomated.

I shoot both out of sake of security, if I mess up my exposition on the Jpeg, I can always use the RAF file. But really, every single time I take a look at the Jpeg files out of the camera, it really makes me wonder why I am spending time to lightly retouch my pictures to begin with. Let's play a game, the Fuji regulars will find it quickly but can you tell which side is processed RAF and which is the Jpeg directly from the camera ?

Allow me to jump on the boat and as a question about filters. I am by no means a landscape photographer but I got the itch to give a try. Now considering the prices of either Lee or HiTech filters, that sounds like quite a heavy investment for something I might not like. That being said, a friend from Taiwan advised me to take a look at Kood filters, he got them last time he went to UK and they are around 22ish £ per 84mm filters, they have pretty much everything aside the equivalent of Lee's big stopper. Does anyone around has any experience with Kood ?

That's one of the reasons I don't get reviews on gear from only a single sources, I try to get as much possible from pretty much every single corners and niches I can find. Globally it allows me to build a better idea of what the camera/lens/gear is capable of and also why for some, that super great feature is actually a downside or vice versa.

Oh I love the stuff they have at Peak Design, I am heavily considering getting their new Kickstarter for that new bag, it looks really well done. Plus, it's less noticeable by thieves than my Billingham, which is a much welcomed thing if I have to travel with more gears.

Fully agreeing with you here, but then again I am heavily biased toward that lens since I grew quite fond of it. But let's try to keep the advice toward what the OP has currently and don't need to shed too much money for more lenses.