azmmount

I don't believe I recall Fuji ever making such a commitment - I believe this is an assumed entitlement. I would imagine that Fuji does build some of this cost into the price of the camera - just as car manufacturers likely build in the cost of future potential recalls - but I don't recall them ever promising me anything when I purchased the camera beyond "it will not be broken."

Stealing is just taking something that isn't yours. If Fuji hasn't said "you can have this", then it isn't mine. It doesn't matter if tomorrow they say I can have it. It doesn't matter if it is going to be free - it isn't mine now so I feel that I should not have it. If I go to the local grocer every day. And once a year he gives me an apple. Can I just go ahead and take an apple today because he has always given me one next week? I think that if I take something without it being given to me then I have stolen it. But, this is kind of irrelevant, I was just trying to point out that "high risk" is not the only reason people haven't installed the leaked firmware - it is also because some of us (maybe just me) think it is wrong.

The people that had put real effort into developing the software (Fuji) have not yet told me I can have it. Therefore, in my mind, if I took it, I would be stealing. I was raised to believe that stealing is wrong. To me, the risk is irrelevant.

I have the 56 and also have not noticed it being particularly slow except when it hunts for focus. It is, in fact, light years faster than the last f/1.2 lens I had (the Canon 85mm f/1.2L v1). I do not have the 35 to compare it to but I do have the 14 (I read one of the faster focusing Fuji lenses). It does take more time to focus than that one but, for my use, it is not an unreasonable amount more.

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. Every camera in the world shoots raw data and then interprets it into an image (jpg or tiff or whatever). The RAW vs JPG debate is about what you ultimately keep - at least that's how I always understood it. You either keep the data that defines the image or you process it into an image, compress it (usually), and throw the defining data away. Of course, what we display at the end is always a processed image, so I get that the resulting JPG from the camera and the resulting JPG from our RAW conversion might well be identical (maybe that's what you're saying?), but I don't get that we don't need to choose whether or not we keep the RAW file just because we happen to shoot Fuji. Mike

The leash arrived yesterday but I just got it on today. It looks to be really well put together and feels much more secure than the Op/Tech mirrorless sling I was using (which was perfect for the much smaller and lighter EOS-M). I don't think I would want a much heavier camera than the X-T1 on the Peak Design Leash because there is no padding and the strap is quite narrow. It is more "slippery" than I imagined but that works great with the sling style carry. The button connectors are quite brilliant and I suspect engineered in a way that makes them virtually failure proof. There are no "snapping parts" that are carrying any of the camera weight and to disconnect them you have to get the weight of the camera off them. The only potential failure I can see would be the strap side connector splitting and it is reinforced with metal so that also seems highly unlikely. The strap itself is supposedly made from the same stuff used for seat belts and I believe it. I suspect the camera would rip in half before that stuff would give out I would totally drink with the people that designed this strap. So let me know when you're heading out with them next Paul Mike

Perhaps we don't have the same definitions for what is technical and what is not. IMO, there are only three technical bits everyone should know: ISO, Aperture, and Shutter Speed. You should know how they interact with each other and what the compositional value of changing each is. That takes like 10 minutes to figure out and you don't need a camera in front of you to get it. Once you know those things you can "pick up any camera and make images with it". Everything beyond that is composition - deciding what is in the image, what the focus point is, how much is in focus, etc - that is all composition - nothing technical about it. As far as letting the camera decide what to do there are only two things it really decides: the focus point and exposure. You should never let the camera choose the focus point because it generally has no idea what the subject is. However, the majority (I might even say vast majority) of the time it can figure out the exposure. The metering systems of modern cameras are quite brilliant.

I shot film for 20+ years before digital and I don't get that either. The whole "I shot film so I know more and am better than you" attitude is ridiculous.

Mine does the same. What do you mean by "No confirmation of actual focus"?

FYI, If anyone is interested B&H is offering a 20% discount on much off the Peak Design stuff for Fathers Day (see here). It also looks like you can use the promo code fathers20 to get the discount at http://www.peakdesign.com - that would get you the discount on the bundles too. I don't know if their products are good (they look good) - I have a Leash coming today. Mike

I think this leak is unfortunate and whomever did it is a d-bag. I also think posting links to the download on the rumors page was irresponsible and am glad they reconsidered and pulled it. It would be a poor (but understandable) move by Fuji to stop "live" testing of future firmware releases because of this. What Fuji should do is make sure the official release will not install over the leaked release without their intervention. Then should charge everyone that wasn't authorized to have the leaked release a fee to do the overwrite. I'll bet then next time people will wait the week for the official version Or, it might be wise for them to tie beta/early release firmware to camera serial numbers. Sad that there can be no trust anymore.

Excellent question. I was wondering the same. I have noted that on my black X-T1 (which I bought used but haven't had more than a few months) the texturing on the rubber at the "thumb bump" on the back has rubbed off completely. I am a bit concerned that the finish of the camera (at least that rubber coating) isn't going to hold up over real time.

I agree with the OP - I don't get the whole "you need to go shoot film" thing. If you fell in love with photography using film cameras then there is the nostalgia - if you fell in love with photography using digital cameras then shooting film is just stupid. There is nothing you can do with a film camera that you can't do with a digital camera. The only reason to recommend film is to feel superior - we're not superior - we're old. Film cameras required that you think about more technical things to get a decent image - digital cameras can do most of that technical thinking for you so all that is left is composition. Composition is the art - the rest is just the BS you had to do to get there. Modern cameras take away the BS and leave only the art. If slowing down is the point of going back to film then just go buy a really small memory card that will only fit a few dozen images. Same experience - virtually zero cost. Oh, and don't preview the images you took, send them to someone else and have them give you some prints in a week or two so you can see how you did. Ah yes, good times

How about Dynamic Range and Lens Modulation Optimizer? I have mine set to Auto and Off. I think these affect JPEG rendering too. I just put your settings in and changed to shoot RAW+Fine. I remember now that last time I switched to JPEG only because I thought I might need a high frame rate and many frames. Of course I didn't really Then I forgot to reset it for a while. Thanks, Mike

Looks nice. I must have done something wrong because I switched to shooting just JPEGs shortly after I got my X-T1 because of so many comments on how good their JPEG processing was and hated it. I started regretting the camera purchase because it seemed that the images lacked any real detail. Nice color but everything was "smudged". Then I remembered I had switched to JPEG's, switched back and have not noticed any problems since. It might have been that I was shooting a lot of high ISO stuff during the JPEG dissatisfaction period. Have you changed any settings regarding how the JPEGs are rendered? Mike

and... 5) It is the photographer, not the camera This seems to be brought up in every conversation about camera features so should be on the poll for the people that feel obligated to reiterate it I have not used IBIS and admit that initially I was opposed (in lens stabilization made more sense to me in theory), but even though I wouldn't actively seek out a camera with it, I would not be opposed to having it. Mike

Our local "animal park" is not photography friendly but does seem to be animal friendly. Since there is not generally a good way to avoid the fencing in the images I tried to get some shots that at least integrated it. The guy in most of these images was our tour guide and had climbed a barrier fence to close enough to offer the residents some food. Laughing Hyenas DSCF7768 by Michael Mount, on Flickr Bear DSCF7779 by Michael Mount, on Flickr Lemurs DSCF7789 by Michael Mount, on Flickr Feeding a tiger costs extra DSCF7875 by Michael Mount, on Flickr A tiger waiting room DSCF7840 by Michael Mount, on Flickr Not as impressive as the other images on this thread, I know, but I do think they show the experience fairly well. Edit: These are all taken with an X-T1 and 18-135mm Thanks for looking, Mike

I also like the Watson dual charger and have a couple three of the Watson batteries that seem to be doing just fine. I thought the dual charger was overpriced (I think usually around $80). However, I found one new (on Amazon) at less than half that price set up for GoPro Hero 2 (or some oddball discontinued battery), bought it and a couple charger plates (usually < $2 each). Much better deal that way I also have the little Watson charger that takes the same plates. Handy to also charge my daughter Nik*n batteries.

Personally, I like your metering suggestion, though I do think for it to be truly useful it there would need to be a touch screen and the metering should be disconnected from the focus point. It would be great for me to pick "Zone System" from the metering options, tap the white and black points on the screen and have the camera pick the exposure from there. That would be awesome and I would think simple enough to implement. I have wondered for a while why I have never seen it. Speaking of touch screens, I miss the touch to set focus point. I don't miss the scads of touch to change setting options. I would love to see Fuji implement a touch screen that was fully customizable. I could turn it completely off if I wanted or could just turn on touch focus, metering, and pinch to zoom along with select settings changes (like the various AF modes). Let me decide what stuff I use enough to justify touch screen access and what stuff can just stay hidden in the menu system. I don't have a particular opinion about the rest of your points. Better flash would be nice and I would expect it to come along at some point. I do not have an issue with the lens lineup or road map. I think they are brilliantly offering a great fast prime selection and keeping the quality way up there to entice people over. I suspect that if I found the 56 to be too short then the 90 would be the perfect next step - don't see an overall advantage to sticking another prime in the middle. A flash that used the camera battery would be great - I hate having to have AA's floating around. Then again I rarely use flash and going out once a year to buy a monster pack of AA's to shoot all day flash would certainly be cheaper than having a stack of mostly unused camera batteries laying around. Mike

I have the 14 and 56 now. I'd like to add the 23 next (I think). If cost were no object I'd trade the 14 for the 16 for the extra couple of stops and toss a 10-24 in the bag for those times I'm digging the super wide vibe. Speaking of the 23, the guy I bought my 56 from has (or perhaps had) one that he'd sell me for $600USD - am I likely to see one cheaper somewhere (I haven't yet but I don't check too often either)? I ask because I paid $550 for an 18-135 then a week later Fuji put it on sale for $599. Mike

Well I don't use the quick release out of the fear of becoming caught in a wood chipper and needing to get free, I just don't like shooting with a camera strap on. I only use the strap to carry the camera so my hands are free. But I do understand your points. You're a real tie kind of guy and I'm a clip-on I figure for the way I shoot I would not have the strap around my neck and the chances of catching the dangling strap on something and having the camera ripped from my hands to plunge to it's demise is actually higher than the chances of the quick release clips failing Now the parachute cord wrist strap looks interesting except I'd still have to carry the camera or leave it dangling from my wrist. Mike

Just a note, I don't see the attach files section when replying unless I first click the "More Reply Options" button under the editor. Edit: Oh, I see that it is there when I start a new topic or click the Reply to this Topic button - just not when I start typing down at the bottom.

They are listed in their PDF (http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/accessories/pdf/mcex_01.pdf) Mike

Interesting. I have been using straps with quick release buckles for many years (I'd guess at least 20) and have never had one fail for any reason. What caused the failures in your case? Did the camera get caught on something? Did they just not get snapped closed properly? What do you mean by "Fortunately, all camera-specific quick release systems nowadays are designed with a very high probability of a disastrous event"? Mike

Nice. Very nice. I love the background effect. Mike