darknj

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.

From the rumor mill, the X-T2 should be released a quarterly after the X-Pro2 which is supposed to be announced by end of this year.

Please define what you mean as "profesional". Is it the sensor? The build quality? Something else?

The OIS is not always of 5 stops, the 18-55 only has around 3 stops. I am not certain of the number of reported stops from the 10-24. Also, some lens are already large, adding the OIS would make them even bulkier, I assume that's the reason the 16-55 F2.8 isn't stabilized while it is being generally considered as a Pro lens. As for the WR and OIS, there are currently more non WR/OIS than with it. More might come, but currently Fuji hasn't really made any kind of indication that would go either way. Not certain if they are going to revamp some of the older lenses. One quite note, WR does not mean water proofing, your equipment can be used under light rain for a certain amount of time but by no means it can go under a downpour and come out unfazed. Some camera on the market are able of such a feat but the X-T1 is not one of them.

Oh by all means, there are no need to use my words, I can use those of Takashi Ueno in this interview. Is that sufficient or do you have further doubts ? Or are you actually having an issue in the APS-C and FF sensor fight ? Please again, don't take my words, allow me to use those of someone else, is Zack Arias a proficient enough ProTog for your taste ? I believe he had a few things to says on the subject of APS-C vs FF.

Visual softness can be something punchy too, pictures are in many way akin to paintings, some will get emotions from them, others might not. In the end, you are your best and worst critique. Look back at what you shot, what was the emotion you were trying to convey there, do you see that emotion in the shot ? If not, what went wrong ? What can be tried to change that ? An interesting exercise we had with colleagues once was to take a very mundane object as main subject and we randomly drew cards with emotions on them and that was our assignment for the month. At the end of the month, we all took look on all the pictures and tried to name the emotion we perceived from it. It was a rather nice experience but due to busy life and agendas, we had to drop the whole thing after 6 months. I do believe it could be something you could do own your own, just give it a week before you judge your own work. Let that shot seeps away for a week, don't think about it and don't look at it. Then start judging it yourself.

Fully agreeing with Tom here, I advised you the lenses on a pure theoricic level, zoom = more pratical than primes. Considering you only have primes, you will need a zoom for versatility, specially if you want to picture of further away subjects. Try out the 18-135 and either the 18-55 or the 16-55 if you have the money. My personal bias is on the 18-135, it has faults but it fits what I want.

I have a question for you, what are you trying to get back as critique ? Composition ? Quality of the shot ? The softness of the image ? From what I can see, you already nailed down the fundamentals just maybe a few pointers about the focusing points, on some picture, the focus is not on your main subject. And watch the lens flare, it's not usually something sought for, at least no longer in 201x. For the rest, just remember to have fun, if you are not trying to earn a living with your camera, remind yourself on regular basis why you took it up to begin with. As last advice continue shooting, you will get better naturally.

I am part of those that thinks Fuji should not go full frame, they are doing mighty good on the cropped sensor, it strikes a very good ratio between size and quality. Medium format, maybe. Full frame, not that big of a jump to be worth the time and effort.

All size kept to ratio, the Voigtlander is really a big lens of the M43 system, thanks to the sensor size, the lens doesn't look grotesque on the body, but still, some super zooms are about the size of that lens. Mikaton also did it with a 35mm F0.95 for the XF mount, but the IQ coming out of it, while decent, is far far lesser than we have been spoiled by Fuji lenses. Also, it will be full manual focus. I have no idea of your manual focus abilities, but if you tell me you can beat the camera's speed consistently, you sir have developed a set of skills that would make you invaluable as a sports cameraman. At F1.0 the DoF would be ridiculously small, we are speaking of millimeters, going manual focus and try to capture fast moving subjects would make that lens unusable for a lot of photographers in that situation. Pro or not. The comparison to Canon FF is not as useless as you think, it's not because it's a mirror less camera that the lenses are smaller, lens size are always compared to the sensor size, mirrorless or not doesn't really come into the equation, at least not on the rough sketches. But even if we scale it down, that 33mm F1 would be, by guesstimate, the size of the 18-55. A XF mount 23mm could be around a 16-55mm sizewise. I know a lot of us want those hyperprimes but they do come with a cost, size, weight, IQ and/or no AF. Until we find way to bend the law of physics in our current world, I would rather have something practical rather a dreamy lens that would have everything. Comparatively speaking, if I wanted something for really low light performance coupled with speed, Nikon D4S or Sony A7S if the resolution is less important than getting a shot. Otherwise one can wait for the Nikon D5 or the next iteration of the Sony A7S. As we all say, the right tool for the right job.

Couldn't see any, the bottom part hold the closing clip.

Alright, this needs to stops... When you make the conversion from a cropped sensor to anything larger, you multiply the focal length to get an idea of about the field of view but you do not multiply the Fstop. F1.4 means F1.4 amount of light hitting the sensor, the size doesn't matter. The depth of field is related to the sensor size, true. But you do not multiply the Fstop. My apologies for this remark to land your plate mate, really, but it is really getting annoying after a certain point.

I would take a wide angle, like your 23 for the landscape followed by the 18-55 for the rest, if bokeh is your goal, you won't have any more practical zoom. Or if you have the budget for it, get the 16-55 F2.8, it's weather sealed but NOT stabilized. It can be rather expensive but depending on where you live, you might still have the cash back promo running until the 30th of July. That lens is large, but with I do not think you would need much else and the bokeh would be sufficient enough for most shoots, it's wide enough for landscape and stays open nicely even if the light drops some more. Maybe take either 23mm or the 35mm for that F1.4 for low light capability. Either one is small enough to fit with the camera, the 16-55 into the travel bag. As for the biking advice, make sure to leave spot for water (1L to 1.5L), spare battery(ies) with a traveler friendly charger followed by a decent powerbank (5000+ mah) as that one would be handy to have for pretty much all your power hungry equipment. Take some repair tools with you along those rubber plugs, if you puncture your wheels in the middle of nowhere it's very annoying. Most of the biking tool can be put beneath the seat in a small carry on bag, they are cheap and can carry bit of equipment safely. I used to bike in forest a lot when I was a teenager and while I never biked in the Provence parts, I remember traveling there with my parents. Very beautiful landscapes and charming people. For the rest, I believe you already know what you need to take with you. But as far lenses, the 16-55 would fit the bill very nicely. Cheaper alternative, the 18-135, OIS and weather sealed too but you won't be getting as nice bokeh and it's it heftier too.

Well I am impressed, I had no idea we had watertight casing for the X-T1!

I prefer using a black rapid strap over those kind of bag/case for quick access and put everything back on a bag when I am back on the move or just leave it hanging with the bag.

Honestly, why would you need F1 for wide angle ? Except for really low light condition where you have to take the shoot really fast, I really don't see any usage for such a lens. Also, it would HUMONGOUS, 33mm F1 is already going to be large but going wider will make it really freakingly large, take a look at the Canon 50mm F1.2 that thing is really big, I can't even begin to imagine something akin to a 35mm F1.0 on full frame sensor. Let's not even talk about the laws of physics of such a lens. The 33mm F1.0 would be a marvel of technology already.

True enough, but currently there isn't anything much better unless you want to triple the price of your camera by getting a watertight casing.

Nikon AW1 is quite good in that respect.

Unless my eyes are cheating me, none of the changes you do affects your JPEGs, including the DR settings. but the outcome from the camera is really lovely and enjoy them quite a lot.

If you havn't done so yet, try changing the DR to 200, that would bump the ISO to 400 but it's hardly an issue with that camera, I believe you will be pleasantly surprised by the deeper range of colors.

Perfectly understandable, most ppl wouldn't go get the 18-135 unless they really want a minimum of lens swap, which was my case. Anyway, your setup will be sufficient for your travel. You can't really go wrong with the 12, 27 and 35, all 3 lenses will fight into a small carry-on bag and maybe take the 12mm out when you use the 50-230. The 27mm is still considered as a wide lens, just not utrawide.

A decent touch screen can prove to be time saving at time, it's a handy to have the option. It's like the tilty screen, it's not mandatory to have it, but it sure is useful when we have those high/low angle shots. Technology is advancing at its pace, doesn't matter if you want/like it or not. A very good example of touch screen on a camera is the Samsung NX1 is very good at it, not only the camera is quite good, the graphic interface is well conceived too.

I remember their Woodlike skin on the X100 camera, it was quite well done and did looked great. But I haven't found anybody else doing that.

We have that on the Sony A7 line. You can even toss in the WiFi remote trigger/connectivity. So yes, the larger sensors cameras are catching up good now. Well, except the touch screen... Jebus, you would have believed that they would have gotten the message by now that a touch screen is something many of us would want. But it's only a matter of time before

You waited for the exposure to finish ?! I would have picked my stuff and left immediately as soon as I would have noticed the dark bag thing. I guess I will never be a war journalist in my carreer...