The "hunting" noise is due to the lens continuously trying to focus .
If PRE-AF is set to ON (in AF/MF >PRE-AF ), the lens will keep focusing CONTINUOUSLY in S and C modes (even when the shutter is not pressed)
Turn it OFF , and see if that solves the issue
I had the X-E2 and traded up to the X-E3 . The X-E3 comes with an external flash( included with the camera )which attaches to the flash shoe when needed and is MUCH better than the built in flash of the X-E2 , which was pretty much useless.
I also use glasses and I can't say that I noticed any difference when using the viewfinder . And I use it almost exclusively .
As far as other differences : the new larger sensor and processor produce noticeably better pictures and the X-E3 has HDMI live view output ( which I really like because now I can plug in an external monitor for focusing when using my old manual lenses )
well, all the other improvements/differences are easy enough to get from the spec sheets ,so there is no point to list them here.
All in all, I liked the X-E2 but am very happy that I made the upgrade .
Hi all, I recently bought the 100-400 with the 1.4 TC .
Since I am really impressed with it, I was thinking of also adding the 2X TC .But since the reviews by others were not exactly stellar ,I decided to check it out before buying it.
Well the great folks at my local photo store were kind enough to open a brand new box and let me take a few shots with it . And since I was there , I thought I might as well also see how my 18-55 and 55-200 Fuji Zooms would compare .
It was ~ 11AM and overcast sky . All shots were taken from a tripod ,with remote electronic shutter release (to eliminate any human shaking ). The camera (X-E3 )was set at ISO 400 and all lenses with OIS off and auto Aperture on.
1. 18-55 vs. 55-200 :
Just for fun, I wanted to find out how the 18-55 would compare with the 55-200 , both at 55mm( the only focal length they have in common ) Let me just say that I am very happy with the results I always get from both and I will definitely keep them due to their size, weight and versatility. And since the 18-55 is probably the most commonly included "kit" lens, I thought others might find it interesting as well. I took 3 shots ,at different subjects and distances .
Results: the 55-200 (with both lenses at 55mm) is the better lens
2. 55-200 vs. 100-400 :
With both , I took shots at 100, 150 and 200
Results: at 100-150 mm it's close , but at 200mm the 100-400 is definitely the better lens
3. 100-400 with and without the 1.4 and 2X TC's :
First : without any TC at 100, 140, 200, 280 , 300 and 400mm
Second : with 1.4X TC at 100(140 eq.) 200 (280 eq.) 300( 420eq.) and 400(560eq.)mm
Third: with 2X TC at 100 (200eq) , 200 (400eq,) and 400(800eq) mm
Results with the 1.4X TC :
when comparing the results at each matching focal length ( w/and without the TC ), they were ALL very, very close, up to ~300mm, even when enlarging the non TC images to the 1.4 X , with just a tad in favor of the lens without the TC .
And at max. 400mm , the difference in quality only starts to show up when cropping both images to well over at least DOUBLE their size (up in 800mm territory ) at which point the 1.4 X starts to earn it's keep .
Results with the 2X TC :
long story short , at ALL focal lengths( even at max. 400mm ) the results taken with just the basic lens and then cropped to match the size taken with the 2X converter were all sharper ( I was very disappointed because I really wanted it for the occasional extra reach )
Conclusion : I am extremely satisfied with this lens and the 1.4 X TC .