tractorboyx

I've had my 70-300 about 5 days, and im very impressed (enough to sell my 55-200).
Used it with both converters at 300mm, and i found the 2x very difficult to hold steady, the 1.4x is a lot easier, but even the IS and OIS miss a few shots.
There is definitely a minimal loss in quality with both converters, as to be expected.
I think using it with the 1.4x is a great option to have, but the 100-400 would be a better. 
 

I originally came from canon cameras, that had the same articulating screens, and i hated them.
They are useless in windy land/seascape situations, where they effectively double the profile of the body, causing camera shake.
While it would be nice if Fuji could produce bodies with either an articulating or hinged rear screen, its probably very impractical, and expensive.
Unfortunately video vloggers make the most noise, so the rest of use have to put up with it, or find another manufacturer that doesn't use these type of screens.
I've been using Fujiflm ever since i purchased a X-T1 in 2014, if i have to upgrade my T2, it properly wont be Fuji.
 

Be patient, the market is about to be flooded with 2nd hand mark 1s. Bargains to be had i think. 

Wow, this is what I have been thinking for sometime.
The earlier cameras were photography tool's, mostly everything in front of you, cameras for taking photos.
Unfortunately I don't believe there will be a H2 as they have ignored the H1 after taking people's hard earned money.
It's a shame my love affair with Fuji is fading.

I'm not sure what all the fuss is about, Panasonic/Leica make a 12-60mm (24-120mm in 35mm) that is f2.8/4.0, and people are getting excited about a f4,0 only lens.
Even up scaling from MFT to APS-C this still looks a sizable lens. Why not make something that is better than the opposition, say a constant f3.5.
Come on Fuji make a statement.

Many thanks for this explanation, I thought I was going mad when I experienced this problem

I still stand by my comment about the f2.0 lens.
 
Fuji have built a fantastic reputation with its original glass, that I can not understand its fixation with the new f2's, other than showing up a design flaw with the X-Pro's.
 
The 14/23/56mm etc lens are by no means, that big or heavy, or that slow to focus,  just needing a little tweak here and there.

I only carry 3 lens.
 
10-24mm f/4
23mm f/1.4
56mm f/1.2
 
these would allow you to take anything from landscape, street, and portraits.
 
if I added 1 more it would be the 55-200 or change the 10-24 for the 16mm f/1.4.

I only carry 3 lens.
 
10-24mm f/4
23mm f/1.4
56mm f/1.2
 
these would allow you to take anything from landscape, street, and portraits.
 
if I added 1 more it would be the 55-200 or change the 10-24 for the 16mm f/1.4.

I do appreciate at pro's use mirrorless, and all the technology behind them. 
That still doesn't change the fact that a large number of people choose mirror less for its compact design, and a smaller, semi fast 70-200 (equivalent) would be good.
 
 
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

The X-E2s requires evolution not revolution.
 
* Tweak the front grip a little.
* WR
* Joystick
* ISO dial
* X-T1 style tilt screen
* Front dial
 
Please don't turn it into an X-Pro2 size brick.

The X-E2s requires evolution not revolution.
 
* Tweak the front grip a little.
* WR
* Joystick
* ISO dial
* X-T1 style tilt screen
* Front dial
 
Please don't turn it into an X-Pro2 size brick.