darknj

yeah, although i took inspiration from the work of Paul M Smith, and Kelli Connell

You know the 60mm F2.4 pretty much fit your request, right ?
 
Otherwise, legacy lenses. A focal reducers with any of the 50-60mm legacy lenses would fit your need perfectly and you would still have some money left over.

I think you misunderstood my post entirely. I have listed it with specs that we will probably (most likely) see in the x-t2, then what we hopefully will see in the x-t2 and then what I don't really care about seeing ported to the x-t2 :-)
 
- The x100t has a ND filter, but shutter speed is only as fast as 1/4000 sec. (never mind the electronic shutter), so given that the x-t2 will get the 1/8000 sec. shutter speed of the x-pro2 this remedies the lack of ND filter, so you can shoot with open lenses in sunlight.
- No, you are misinformed. The 4.0 firmware changed the x-t1 from +2.5EV to +0.5 EV. The x-pro2 is even better with its -3.0EV
- I don't see why the x-t2 should get any bigger. The x-pro2 got bigger than the x-pro1 because of the added weather sealing.
- You may be right about the 4K heat issue, but I think Fujifilm will prefer to keep the size as is as opposed to fattening the x-t1 solely because of 4k video.
- Is Acros limited to the x-pro2? Why?

In 2013, the Chicago Sun Times fired all their photographers and handed out iPhones to the reporters/journalist and any person going on field as replacement.
 
That was referred as one of the many nails in the paper journal world.

I've recently partially disassembled 40-150mm from the rear side. It's very well built lens, and internal metal chamber has very thick walls. There are many sealing rings in every moving area.
 
There are two moving modules inside, probably same as in XF 55-200mm. One module I think is OIS, powered by electromagnets and connected with four springs to the frame - it moves perpendicularly to optical axis, and makes little noise. Another module is bigger group of lens - moving in direction of optical axis and produce that famous knocking sound, I think it's autofocus.
Or maybe they function vice versa.
 
When 50-140mm is powered on - the constant noise is produced by electromagnets of autofocus module, ready for action. When you power on OIS - that module is also moves.

If that would give me the quality I want, that would be great. 
But it doesn't, so when I take something more than a smartphone, I usually limit myself to a X-Pro1 with one lens, and two spare batteries.
 
I do use my smartphone quite a lot though. The best camera is the one you have with you.
 
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

most people don’t have any idea of what we are talking about, let alone know that they need it.

I disagree with the notion that there is something boring or "clinical" about modern lenses. Lenses are not "interesting" — photographs are, or are not. 
 
Yes, older lenses exhibited various sorts of anomalies and technical imperfections that some nostalgically associate with photographs from an earlier era, but it doesn't follow that just because that is how things looked in the past that the older look is better. Different? Yes. Better? No.
 
I've been doing photography for as long as those older alt lenses have been around, and I used some of that vintage stuff when it was new or almost new. I'm very happy to have the optimized equipment we have today.

The pics are SOOC. All shot at f8 and ISO3200 on a tripod. It was a quick test in remaining daylight. I did move the cactus and changed the angle of the camera to position the cactus in the picture. No post processing. AF was on the "white dot." In the EXIF you will see that the timing went down from 1/50s to 1/25s with MCEX and TC. I will probably do some more examples next weekend.

I think that 18/f2 is quite useful and enjoyable for street and people, but not very useful for brick walls.

LOL.  I know someone who bought a RX1 with the expensive EVF attachment.  I bought a X100s and we both went shooting.  Imagine the look on his face when he realized he left his RX1 on a restaurant's table and then the look when I caught up with him, and handed the RX1 back.  He said, for a moment he had visions of drowning his despair in a newly purchased X100s he would have bought as a replacement.

Lenses are needed for any camera to work, the size of it is of course fully detrimental to the whole system's size.
 
If I am to buy the XF 23 F1.4 lens, should I complain about its size ? No, that lens is the size it needs to be for an F1.4 aperture, no matter what, you still can not bend the law of physics, the Nikkor 24-70 VR lens is doing a good job at showing that example, the non VR lens was already big, the VR version is just got larger because of the extra space needed for the stabilisation to work.
 
Want smaller lenses ? Go to an even smaller system, m4/3 is also a very good balance of size/weight even in the lenses department, but again, F2.8 zooms are going to be large on it, it's the same thing repeating itself all over the place and the general pro-sumer market can not, or will not understand.
The Nikon 1 system is another good example, I can have the heaviest of any Nikon 1 body, with 3 lenses, that covers wide angle with super zoom and "nifty fifty" all this for roughly the weight of a Nikon D800 body only. But in exchange, my IQ is taking a dip to counter balance the gain in size/weight.
 
There will always be a trade-off somewhere, until someone figure out a way to bend our laws of physics, thing will remain as they are. In the end, buy whatever makes you feel good and don't bother too much with what happens to the sides.
 
It's just a tool after all.

For a video editor, I can perfectly understand your need, working with 4k files are a lot easier to down sample into full HD or even lower resolution while retaining as maximum information as possible.
I am still impressed by what the GH4 from Panasonic is capable in its video mode. That one is really impressive, specially since the last FW update where you can change the focus point in post.
 
But I find that unnerving that people around are getting excited over the 4k video feature while there are other things that would need a clear immediate fixing instead of announcing the video capabilities of the X-T2.

Lenses are needed for any camera to work, the size of it is of course fully detrimental to the whole system's size.
 
If I am to buy the XF 23 F1.4 lens, should I complain about its size ? No, that lens is the size it needs to be for an F1.4 aperture, no matter what, you still can not bend the law of physics, the Nikkor 24-70 VR lens is doing a good job at showing that example, the non VR lens was already big, the VR version is just got larger because of the extra space needed for the stabilisation to work.
 
Want smaller lenses ? Go to an even smaller system, m4/3 is also a very good balance of size/weight even in the lenses department, but again, F2.8 zooms are going to be large on it, it's the same thing repeating itself all over the place and the general pro-sumer market can not, or will not understand.
The Nikon 1 system is another good example, I can have the heaviest of any Nikon 1 body, with 3 lenses, that covers wide angle with super zoom and "nifty fifty" all this for roughly the weight of a Nikon D800 body only. But in exchange, my IQ is taking a dip to counter balance the gain in size/weight.
 
There will always be a trade-off somewhere, until someone figure out a way to bend our laws of physics, thing will remain as they are. In the end, buy whatever makes you feel good and don't bother too much with what happens to the sides.
 
It's just a tool after all.

Pot calling kettle black?
 
 
Although I'm guilty as charged, I definitely don't hope what you've mentioned to happen. I was very glad that the XF56 F1.2 was a lot smaller than the EF85 F1.2.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Just going to quote you instead of your whole post for the sake of convenient reading.
 
4k screens is still far from reaching the general market, the general offer is still above 500$ for a 40" screen, the average family will not be spending that much on a TV just to see videos shot from their iPhone, which they have no issues changing every year...
 
 
 
 
Good screens that will not make your eyes bleed cost more than just the offer at Monoprice. The screen base cost about half the price of their offer, I truly do not believe they could have make anything of decent quality by cutting that much corners.
 
Also, I do agree that 4k video is a good thing but Fuji video implementation has been so piss poor that I would rather have them not spend any time on a technology they are clearly struggling with, just to match the market need.
The time/energy could have been spent elsewhere for other features that would have been great for us, Zebra peaking for example, even for still photography would have been a great addition.
Some more lenses ? Faster advances in the AF speed to real start getting shoulder to shoulder with the competition...
 
There are just so many other places where improvement were clearly needed but they let those slip out because of 4k video ? That absolutely make no sense to me. How long have been asking for a decent HDR mode ? How many of us have been wondering if that lens would be fast enough for the AF speed to keep up ?
 
Beside, they did marketed themselves as something different than other products, they are making cameras for people who loves taking pictures, users who like to have the tactile control over their gear again.
 
It is not that I do not want that feature, I am most likely going to get myself a Nikon D500 later this year, 4k is small reason for it but mostly the video features are better implemented.
 
I really do like what Fuji did with the X-Pro2, but I can not help to think that the X-Pro1 should have been at that level right off the bat instead of making us wait 4 years for it.
Fuji was clearly testing the water with their first few model of the X series and now they seems to be branching out into the mainstream of pro-sumers, I really think they are going to bend themselves backward to follow the current trends instead of doing what they did when the X100 was released.
Slow things down, take the time to think about your picture and compose it.
 
I don't know, maybe I am getting angsty because my beloved company is loosing a bit of itself for the sake of more market shares.

For a video editor, I can perfectly understand your need, working with 4k files are a lot easier to down sample into full HD or even lower resolution while retaining as maximum information as possible.
I am still impressed by what the GH4 from Panasonic is capable in its video mode. That one is really impressive, specially since the last FW update where you can change the focus point in post.
 
But I find that unnerving that people around are getting excited over the 4k video feature while there are other things that would need a clear immediate fixing instead of announcing the video capabilities of the X-T2.

I am going to advocate for the 18-135, it's really the jack-of-all-trade, it does have some IQ issues when compared to the other Fuji lenses, but not having to care too much about the weather and not having to change the lens with a focal view of 27-205mm (35mm equiv) is just way to handy to have.
 
My light travel kit lens is the 10-24, the 18-135 and the 35mm F1.4 for low light situation, with these 3 lenses, I am covered for pretty much 95% of all situations.
 
Now that's only if you really loathe changing lenses during your trip, if you do not mind that part, others above have all posted very good options that will have less IQ compromise than my kit.

^^ I'll agree with a lot of what you said.
 
Fuji should continue their good work with video (Xpro2) and make the XT2 a very capable 4K video camera, but not at expense of stills (I have no doubt fuji won't compromise stills for video). They should NOT just half heartedly do video on the XT2. They should offer a high end video solution and a first class stills experience. If they can't do both, I'd agree, why bother.
 
This is why I'm so passionate about encouraging Fuji to pursue the video side of things. Give us a great hybrid camera.
 
Auto focus should take priority over video though, as much as I want it to have great video. Class leading AF would be very great.
 
I'll also agree that 4K devices aren't common enough to need to deliver in 4K. But I'm talking about using 4K as an editors format (with the final product being HD). Not just going straight from camera to a TV
 

Well... It's just my own opinion but the results look very artificial (like 90% of the shared production nowadays).
By the way, developing X-trans RAW with the last version of LR looks better than before and sharpness is enough for me.
And don't forget that "sharpness" is also a personal perception and a part of subjective aesthetic. Being satisfied yourself of your own job is the most important.

As said before the XF 18 is a fine lens, my only issue with it is, it has less sharpness on the edges @F2.8 when compared to the kit lens 18-55 F2.8-4.
 
The center sharpness is just as good, if not a tiny bit better.
 
So if your edges are valuable to you, might be worth considering the purchase, if you don't care about edge to edge sharpness and just want something small, cheaper and nifty field of view, the XF 18 will be a perfectly fine lens.

That part got corrected with the X-Pro2, so it's very safe to assume it will be ported over the X-T2 too.

Well I went and bought the 50-140, 100-400, 56mm
 
I asked for the 10-24 but currently no stock. So I'll wait a bit on that one.
 
The 50-140 is very good. Just like my old Canon 70-200 2.8L IS II. Just as sharp but the OIS on the fuji is better than the IS on the Canon. This is a worthy substitute for me and it's lighter to boot
 
The 100-400 is about the size of my old 70-200. It's so fun to shoot with though avoiding mistakes at the long end can be challenging. The OIS on this lens is the best I've ever used. At the 100mm end its like you've got it on a tripod at 400mm it moves about a bit, but it's certainly clearly working. Sharpness is a bit below the 50-140 but it's certainly very sharp. So fun though but needs practice to get the best out of it.
 
The 56mm is a light sucking machine! I am quite glad I have this. The 90mm is maybe slightly better in terms of pure IQ. But if you want a low light short tele for event work, this lens can't be beat. It also seems to be a great portrait companion to the 90mm. I'll say now that although the 90mm gives better IQ. The 56mm is the one to get if you only want or can afford one lens.
 
As for the 10-24...one day.

Personally, I really like the Super Takumar 105mm F2.8 with a focal reducer, it really gives a smooth bokeh in my book.
 
This exemple is about as unprocess as it can be:
 
Super Takumar 105 F2.8

There is hardly any distortion on the 10-24 F4 lens, it is very well controlled. I gave bee shooting with it on semi-regular basis and really don't have any issues with it.
Plus, a lot of the modern raw file development programs are perfectly able to correct any of the left over distortion.
 
As both poster above, stop caring about what other think and go for what you want, the only two advantages Canikon has over Fuji at the moment are the lenses selections, they have been making lenses for their camera for over 30 years for Canon and over 50 years for Nikon, kind of hard to compete against that when the XF mount just passed 5 years old some month ago. The second one is fast moving subjects with erratic movements, such as birds for example.
 
At below ISO 6400 you will bit just as good as most of Canikon, above you will struggle a bit more as X-T10 native ISO caps at 6400, anything above that is going to be jpeg only files.
 
If you are worried about the kit lens, don't, it is a perfectly fine lens for a starter photograher.
 
For the speedlight, unless you really know what you are doing, I would not advise you to get one. Keep the money to the side for the moment and start learning your camera first, when you start to understand the limitation of your popup flash, then start looking for a speedlight, chances are, newer model will be released and old good ones could drop in prices.
 
Comparing the a smartphone camera with anything with dedicated camera is surprising, it is akin asking if your 900 bicycle is better than a real motorbike. 
 
Long story short, pick what YOU want, don't hesitate to go to a camera store and ask to hold the X-T10 and manipulate it for a bit to see if it feels right in your hand and remember, have fun with it, it's just a hobby after all :]