David_miller70

… if so, what for, Xt5? I like the form factor of the Xt’s Not sure about the XH’s. Quite like the xe4, but have an x100v already! I shoot landscape (country and city), dogs, family etc Thanks, David

Not really comparing anymore because I’m happy with the 8 f3.5 but here are some more shots from said lens last night and early this morning from Thornham and Wells, Norfolk, UK …. Comments welcome! Best, David

I have both now and started some comparisons on the « Bets on when the 8 mm f/3.5 will be delivered » thread. Head over there is your interested. Best, David

Here’s the first comparison. I forgot to set the same aperture - does that matter? These are jpegs sooc onto my iPad then onto Flickr. Anyway, what I see is that there is very little distortion of the lines of bricks / cement around the edges of 8mm f3.5 but the colours are n’t quite as punchy. With the 8-16 set at 8 mm in the second photo whilst the picture on my iPad, although I’m not sure it recreates here, had a little more punch / saturation / contrast but what’s going on the bottom? It’s clear from the top of the picture that I did set it exactly horizontal but at the bottom it falls off towards the right quite significantly. Anyway, the 8mm passed the first test of edge distortion and maybe made it’s more expensive brother look a bit poor! So I certainly won’t be sending it back today (which I would have if there was significant distortion), needs further real world testing and the forecast is for a sunny end of today and sunny start to tomorrow so I’ll try to do some more. 8 mm f3.5 8-16 mm at 8 mm

Mines not arriving until between 4 and 5 pm. A shame as I took the day off, thank you Parcel Force! Still, at least it is the weekend by then 🙂

Tomorrow apparently, from WEX in the UK. Look forward to putting it up against my 8-16 over the weekend. One of them could well be for sale soon!

I recently decided I was a prime guy so sold my 16-55 f2.8 because I had already bought the new 18 and 33 1.4’s and they are both really excellent. But if you prefer the flexibility the 16-55 is it a great lens, rather large and heavy though.

Could n’t wait so pre-ordered. I’ll let you know the answer to my question when it arrives 🙂🙂🙂

Would love to see some comparison shots and discussion of relative quality as soon as someone has both please 🙂 Adore my 8-16 but mostly using it at the wide end so can I save some space and weight in my bag? Many thanks, David

This is a very good question and one that I wrestle with a lot, partly because I like lenses a lot and like to buy them but I like to go ut with a small bag. Let’s try with three ……. If you like zooms and are rich 8-16 f2.8 (love it), 16-55 2.8, 50-150. If you like zooms and not so rich 10-24 (which one depends on richness and if you need WR), the 16-50 3.5 to 5.6 and the relatively inexpensive 55-200 seem to get a lot of love. If you prefer primes then it gets harder, again depending on how big your wallet is and where in the range you spend most time. I’m really looking forward to seeing some comparison shots from the new 8mm f3.5 vs the 8-16. As much as I love 8-16 I find myself mostly using it at the wide end and the 8mm f3.5 is tiny and light in comparison. I have the new 18 1.4 and 33 1.4 the first of those, in particular, is spectacular. The 90 f2 might not be new but it stellar. I have the new 56 as well and although it does seem really good, I’ve not yet used it enough to decide. P.s. I left Fuji for a while to get Leica M10-R and bought four lenses so I have some idea of what really good lenses are like and just how good some of hôtesse Fuji offerings are. So good in fact, I’ve just decided not to buy a Q3 🙂 apples and pears I know but what I’m saying is that the Fuji lenses are certainly worth the money! Next let’s do bags!!!!!

So, it’s never been great, always worse than my xt-2 / xt-4 but this weekend in Florence I just cannot get my x100v to connect with either my iPad or iPhone, any ideas? Many thanks, David

So, I used to have an X-t2, 10-24, 23 and 35 1.4 and 56 1.2. Then I had an unsavoury rush of blood to the head and traded it all in to enter another marque. Some 9 months later and it is not working out for me so I’ve just agreed a deal to sell the other kit, which will allow me to start again from scratch with a reasonable sum of money in hand. I need a system for my landscapes, cityscapes, dog photography and pictures of the wife and kids when they occasionally agree. I think I’m decided on the x-t4, given that I did really like my x-t2. I think my only complaints was in the focusing department. For my landscape stuff, I loved the old 10-24 I had before so it would be easy to just get the new WR version. But watching a few reviews it seems that the much larger, heavier, more expensive, unable to use filters, 8-16 is significantly sharper, which I like. The 14 and 16 are not wide or flexible enough. The WA zoom will get the most use. The next most use will likely come from the mid-focal length. Both the 23 and 35 f1.4 I had before were good. I liked the 56 1.2 when it achieved focus so could go for that or the APD version? How about the 16-55 f2.8 though. For the longer ranger stuff I could go 50-2140 2.8, the cheaper, slower 55-200, or the seemingly excellent 90 f2. Sooo many choices and once again, I’ve told myself I want to stick with a max of three lenses if possible. Any thoughts? Best, David