Jump to content

Phiggys

Members
  • Posts

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Phiggys reacted to Rand47 in IBIS in Fuji X-H!   
    If you have a lens with OIS, then you turn the lens OIS AND body IBIS on and off with the switch on the lens.
    When a lens without OIS is mounted, then the camera’s IS menu will have the option for “OFF.” In the video above, he has an OIS lens mounted.
     
    In my screen shot below, I have a non-OIS lens mounted. I put IS mode in the “MY MENU” so that I can quickly turn it off when tripod mounted with a non-OIS lens mounted.
     
    The reason the menu is IS and not IBIS is because it is applicable to both OIS and IBIS and so is only labeled IS as a generic reference to “image stabilization.” It is even such w/ the X-T2 . . . The menu is just IS and not OIS (which is the only “applicable” kind of IS on that camera body). As mentioned above, I don’t think there is any mention of “IBIS” in the user manual at all. In fact, I just did a text search of the PDF manual and IBIS does not come up in the search.
     
    Rand

  2. Like
    Phiggys reacted to Safari in Am I the only one who likes the XC 16-50?   
    No pixel-peeping, but I don't see anything wrong with these.
    I got some great pictures with this lens (first edition, not II) on my X-M1.   Haven't used it much recently but might put it back in circulation to take advantage of its size and weight.
    I've seen some pretty good macro images in another forum using this lens with the MCEX-16 Extension Tube.
  3. Like
    Phiggys reacted to Sandro_gsp in Fuji XT-2 Raw : worm effect when photographing small leaves and flowers   
    I settled down with Irident X-transformer with these settings:
    RAW process : more detailed
    sharpening:none
    Luminance noise reduction: Low
    Color noise reduction : medium
    Dng baseline : adobe default
    Apply all corrections to the image. (all checked)
    All the turn off lightroom checkboxes checked.
     
    as for sharpening and further noise reduction I use NeatImage ( a Photoshop add-on)
  4. Like
    Phiggys reacted to yukosteel in 7artians 12mm F2.8 - lens review   
    I've recently borrowed this lens from Hamish Gill to try it on my Fuji X-E2s and write short review of 7artisans 12mm F2.8 lens on 35MMC
     
    Here's also related 7artisans 12mm F2.8 Flickr public group for lens samples
     
    I've purchased this lens after writing review, and now just waiting for better weather to make more live shots.
     
    Also the partial disassembly is planned soon : )
     
    Please let me know if you have any questions on this lens, will be happy to share more details.
     
    7artisans 12mm F2.8 shot with Fuji X-E2s

  5. Like
    Phiggys reacted to Yoan in Am I the only one who likes the XC 16-50?   
    I also like it. I found a great deal on it, got it for just about $90 used with no hood and with a bit of dust inside. It's pretty good optically, I love the OIS and the 16mm it provides.
    First shot is handheld, the second and third are on a tripod.
     
    Station by Yoan Mitov, on Flickr
     
    Reflecting Fountains by Yoan Mitov, on Flickr
     
    Lions' Bridge at Sunset by Yoan Mitov, on Flickr
  6. Like
    Phiggys reacted to MSW in Am I the only one who likes the XC 16-50?   
    I have 12x18 prints on my wall, one taken by an E-X1 + XC 16-50mm and one by a Nikon D7100 + Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 DX.  Both on a tripod with good lighting.  The subject is different but still with your nose close to the glass studying at the details the Nikon shows no advantage.   The XC series is highly under rated in my opinion.  I have a fantasy that Fuji will make a XC 16-105 someday.
  7. Like
    Phiggys reacted to benherrmann in Am I the only one who likes the XC 16-50?   
    Yes, I'm definitely with you with regards to the 16-50 XC lens.  All too often we become influenced by appearances - that is, feel and build quality - and that tends to cloud our perceptions (in advance) as to how a lens may perform.
     
    I received the 16-50 XC as part of both the XA-1 and X-M1 kits (yes, have 2 of 'em - one black and one in silver).  I was not prepared for the optical results I was achieving with this particular lens model.  And other than the plastic lens mount, the lens doesn't feel (look) bad at all.  It certainly is one of the finest kit lenses out there and the welcomed 24 MM equivalent wide end makes a world of difference.
     
    The best way to describe the IQ capabilities of this 16-50 XC lens is to first visit some of the other typical "cheaper" kit lenses. Their IQ capabilities may seem pleasant overall, but there often is something missing - that is, the ability to look through to the image and experience that certain (often elusive), "you are there" gut feeling.  Great glass, on the other hand, allows for the viewer to experience that palpable "you are there" feeling as you look at the images.  In a way, the 16-50 XC lens also allows for this - it's uncanny at times. It's kind of like lifting the last remaining veil between you and the image.  And that to me that is one measure of a great lens (regardless of cost).  A few other really nice entry level zoom lenses (great optical quality) are made by Panasonic (14-45 IS, 14-42 II IS, and the 12-32 IS), and by Samsung (their 16-50 PZ).
     
    Would I consider using this entry-evel 16-50 XC lens on higher end Fuji X cameras?  Hell yes, I would!  Without hesitation...
     
    I sooooooo wanted the more expensive 16-55 XF to have OIS, but when Fuji released it without that feature, I balked.  I need OS (plus great optical qualities of course), so the 16-50 XC will serve as the go-to lens within this genre.  I still don't understand how Fuji could justify putting IS on their high end wide angle XF zoom lens - but rationalized that having it on the 16-55 XF would hurt IQ or make it too large.
     
    I'd love to see Fuji release some other XC lenses to fill that gap, but I doubt that will happen.
     
     
     
  8. Like
    Phiggys reacted to Paulo 307 in Am I the only one who likes the XC 16-50?   
    Thanks for the post! I'm using the xc-16-50 with the same results as my prime lenses, and have the same conclusions as you.
    Now i'm trying to be a better photographer looking for better light and composition instead of buying lenses.
  9. Like
    Phiggys reacted to Paulo 307 in Am I the only one who likes the XC 16-50?   
    shot with XC-16-50  at  16mm,   f/3.5,   1/50s,   iso 3200.

  10. Like
    Phiggys reacted to tom burke in Am I the only one who likes the XC 16-50?   
    Walking around Hong Kong in the heat and humidity I certainly appreciated it light weight, and given the cramped conditions I also loved the abiltity to shoot at 16mm.

  11. Like
    Phiggys reacted to Rieke in Am I the only one who likes the XC 16-50?   
    I shot this photo on my first walk with X-T10 – the XC 16-50mm OIS II as a bundle, the exifs show „P“, as it was preset in the shop, where I have bought it.
    At 16 mm you may get close up to even 15 cm (0IS II)! For green landscape however I prefer the XF 18-55 OIS or even XF 16mm f1.4.
     

     
    Kind regards Rieke
  12. Like
    Phiggys reacted to Bobitybob in Am I the only one who likes the XC 16-50?   
    I like mine.  
     
    Brought it for my X-E1 originally, but still use it on my X-T1.  I use it in preferance to my 18-55 for landscapes where its slightly smaller aperture is less important and its light weight is an advantage.  Image quality seems very acceptable to me.
     

     
     
×
×
  • Create New...