CRAusmus

Ahh. I see. Everything I hear about the A7II is good. I think if you want to go to Sony, then the A7II is where to go. They are about to release the A7rII though I believe. I actually heavily considered the A7 series of cameras before I chose Fuji instead. I went with Fuji mainly because they had a more populated lens line up then Sony did. Of course Sony has a lot of third party lenses, and mounts for legacy glass. I was starting from scratch, so I went Fuji and I plan to grow with Fuji. I don't think you can go wrong with the A7II though at all. It's an excellent camera. Any reason you can't hang on to the Pro 1 just to shoot when you can slow down and do some personal projects and still get the Sony? If the price is right, maybe I can help relieve you of that Pro 1, if you decide to go that route...

Which new Sony are you buying that is a RF type?

Dallas Street Tunnel Vision by Clint Ausmus, on Flickr

LOL. Free-Lensing makes me nervous as well. I am going to play around with this effect though. I do believe we have a member here that has quite a collection of Tilt Shift adapters, perhaps they will chime in..

LOL. That' pretty funny. Hadn't considered that at all, as I was also confused when you said it was the only true prime.

I've always loved this effect, and although the Lensbaby doesn't do it quite as well as some of the tilt shift options out there, it is a cool effect. I was just reading an article about free-lensing yesterday and how you can use that to achieve this effect also, however that makes me nervous, especially on our mirrorless cameras where the sensor is exposed the entire time you are working the lens. Thanks for pointing this out...

The left side I just see more blue in the whites and the blacks. That's what was pulling me toward the left, as I felt it had been processed less then the right. Guess I was right on that part, but not on the fact that it was the RAW. At any rate, the jpegs are good. the color is good, the files are nice, but I choose to shoot both, and process the RAW files. I am however fairly new to shooting RAW, so the novelty of it may wear off soon and I may be in your camp as well, but I still feel as though I would shoot both.

I'd go with the left side, but they look like they have been processed differently. If you chose a film setting for the jpeg, why didn't you process the RAW to look as close to that setting as you could? Have you ever seen those contests that one of the preset companies puts on? I think it's Mastin, where they post an image and you are supposed to guess which one is film, and which one is processed? And this still doesn't address my statement. I never said the jpegs were bad. I said you shoot RAW so you don't get the compression of the jpeg, and you have more latitude with processing. However I also shoot RAW+Jpeg.

The Jpeg's are good, but it's my understanding that RAW shooters don't shoot RAW because the Jpeg's are bad. They shoot RAW because they don't want the compression, and the settings locked into the file like the Jpeg's are. Or am I just missing something?

I can help with your problem by taking some of this off your hands. I see a couple there that could really benefit you by letting them go. PM for further assistance...

Just my opinion, but if this were my kit, I'd buy the 35. I have one on my X-T1 and absolutely love it on the street. If you like to shoot wider on the street with your Canons, then try the 14 or 16 which will bring you to that 24mm length. I haven't spent much time at all at the 135 mark, so I can't comment on that, but I know a lot of folks love it for portraiture work, not sure how well it would work on the street. I'm struggling with the same thing you are right now as to what my next prime will be. Right now I'm flopping back and forth between the 16 and 56, but it depends on which way I want to go with my kit as it grows. I know eventually I will wind up with both though so it's just which comes first. Like you though, I want a X100 series to fill that 35mm gap I have in my kit. I'm lusting after a T right now, but if an S came along at the right price I'd snatch it up in a heart beat.

Are you registered with Lenstag?

There is kind of a thread already going on this over here (http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/77-underwater-housing-or-bags/). Might look there at what folks are saying...

Honestly I think it's important to have a BST (Buy, Sell, Trade) Board. I'd be on board with anything that got it up and running. Things change with updates as you learn how the community uses the forum. If it's easier to post different regions, I'm good with that. If it's easier to have just one BST board, I'm good there too..

Nope. I haven't come across that issue at all. Once I put it on it's stayed put and hasn't given me any issues at all.

I love it. Wouldn't put on the original eye cup if my life depended on it... It does get dusty though. I assume this is something that will dissipate as it ages a little. I just use some scotch tape to clean it though...Takes just a few seconds...

My every day carry bag is my Timbuk2 Commute 2.0 (med) with an Ape Case insert. Since I carry my laptop and lots of other essentials to work everyday it works perfectly. I'm able to carry my X-T1 with 35 attached, my 18-55, and my 55-200 as well as an extra battery and some cleaning cloths. Since I ride the motorcycle most days this is the best solution I've found for daily carry. On weekends I carry the Ona Bowery. Small, but holds my whole camera kit I listed plus a few extras not with me everyday.

That's how forums I'm on do it as well. They simply list in the title what the product is and "CONUS" or whatever their shipping preferences are. If the buyer really thinks it's a good deal on a hard to find item where they are, I've seen them pay the extra shipping charges to get the items... Keeps it simple and it's very effective...

I guess this is where my disconnect was coming from because I'm in manual already. I shot Aperture Priority for about the first week I had the X-T1, then quickly abandoned it for full manual. I did however run into an issue on Saturday where I realized I need to bump my ISO up to at least 1600 though because when I entered the tunnels under the train station 800 just wasn't cutting it. At any rate, we can get back to the discussion at hand. I've been using the 35 for the past three weeks and loving it on the street. I think the 27 would be awesome because it's just a tad bit wider, but the profile of the camera is shrunk quite a bit.

The firmware is easy to check on your lens, and you have nothing to lose by just checking to see if they are current. Like Milandro's friend, I discovered that my 18-55 was in an older firmware as well when I upgraded to the 3.0 FW. Never know how long that box with your lens was sitting on their shelf.

When I'm walking around I'm always in Auto ISO. I am curious though as to why you need two Auto ISO Presets? The camera is always going to pick the lowest ISO possible, so why is 1600 ok for certain situations, but not others? I don't see the point in needing two ISO Presets. Set it as high as you are willing to go and just be done with it.

Kodak had every opportunity to take the lead in digital photography. They used to manufacture the digital backs for all the camera manufacturers. They opted out of the digital market. The first digital I ever shot with said Nikon on the front, and Kodak on the back. The thing weighed a ton, but it was a revelation at the time in photography.

One of the best street photographers around, and shoots almost exclusively with the X-Pro 1. Check out his stuff... http://fujixfiles.blogspot.com

To my understanding you have to update them separately. At least I had to when I updated to 3.0 FW because I also had to update my lens FW to it's current version after doing so.

You still have all these, but now you have options. Nothing wrong with options.