CRAusmus

The picture doesn't take 40 minutes to develop, that's just how long it takes for the top layer of chemicals to completely dissipate. The reason for this is that when they started rebuilding the process from Polaroid, they lacked over 70 parts to make the process work. They had to start from the ground up and it took several years to get the process to where they could even release a film version. And their first version was really quite crappy. Their B&W 2.0 is really awesome though, and their new color will be better than the current version, but it will still take a long time for that top layer to dissipate. That's just gonna be the nature of their color film until they can come up with a new process from what I understand. Also Impossible is developing a new camera. The impression I got from them it that it would take a larger format film possibly larger, but not smaller than, the Spectra Film. That's all I could get out of them though. I would most definitely support this idea, and more expansion in to instant as well. I'm very excited about what Impossible is up to, and I'm hoping that it propels other companies, like Fuji, to look at expanding their instant offerings as well.

There are street photographers that shoot in 35 and even 50. You going to go tell them that they aren't street photographers? All the street photographers out there making a living with the X100 series, that aren't street photographers because they aren't shooting the right focal length. I don't understand the need to feel that you aren't shooting street if you aren't shooting wider than 35. That's a ridiculous and asinine statement if I've ever heard one. Street is subject, not focal length.

Thought these ran out on the 27th of June. Will have to look into this some more. I managed to grab the 35 1.4 before it shot back up to 600, and the 55-200 before it shot up as well, but not grab the 27 which was also on my list.

That should be a great workshop. Eric Kim has a great style and his personality seems really great. I've read his blog and watched his videos for years. Seems like you get a lot out of his workshops. Would love to take one some day.

A 12mm 2 or 2.8 in that great Fuji glass with the weather seal for landscape would be great.

Eric Kim said he got the 27 for 200. Wish I could find that deal, it'd be on my X-T1 right now if I could. The 27 has always been on my wish list. But so has the X100s/t as well.

Ona Bowery. I have this bag and it holds me X-T1 with 35, as well as my 18-55 and my 55-200 plus batteries, extra cards, lens cloths etc... It's also available in leather.

Certainly don't think you are unusual. Although they are inspired by the film cameras from the past, there is a reason they were laid out the way they were. They were easy to pick up and operate if you knew what the settings did. Which is what I suspect most folks love about Fuji's cameras now. You know what the dials mean (and anybody who's done any photography will), you can pick up this camera and operate it with very little fuss. It's certainly what I love most about them even if I do have a history in film.

It's Sony's sensor (their patent). They don't have to let anyone use it if they don't want.

I see what you were going for. Sorry. I thought you were talking about your own preferences. It would be nice if folks chimed in with, "I mainly shoot __________, so I prefer ___, ___, ___".

That's why the title is "your ideal setup". It's "your" ideal setup for what "you" shoot. For each member it's different. Our local nerd is just trying to fine the common favorites...

If you ever want to have a one lens travel solution go with the 18-135. Especially with the primes you already own, you could take that lens and your favorite prime for portraits and not need another lens. I went with the 18-55, and although it's a good lens, I have kicked myself repeatedly for not getting the 18-135. There have been too many times I needed the reach and I had to wait till I got the 55-200 just to have it. Go black...

I'd like to see different versions of it like the RX100 series by Sony. It could be an X70 with pop up flash. Than an X70ii with a pop up viewfinder, etc... But professional capabilities are a must like the GR and RX100 series cameras.

Bought the 35mm ƒ1.4 from B&H last night.. Should be here on Friday. Sadly it's supposed to really storm this weekend, but I wanted to grab it before the deals ran out on the 27th and I had the funds, so... I'm really looking forward to this lens. It'll be my first prime of the X-Mount. Trying to decide what is next...10-24, 12mm Sam, 27mm Fuji, or hold out for the 56 ƒ1.2...Decisions, decisions...

I don't think anyone is bashing those that don't enjoy film, don't have any desire to enjoy film again, or have any affinity to ever even try film if they never have. The point I'm making is that there is so much to photography than what just digital can offer you, and for me anyway, that is the draw of photography; and yes the aesthetic of the Fuji X-T1 is what brought me to it. I feels like I'm holding my old OM. It operates like it, it even emulates it with the sensor and film emulations. And no, my father never bought me a camera, I didn't throw papers all summer long so I could buy an instamatic or anything... Exploring the art of photography is to me the best part of photography. Everything from Pinhole to a Diana you dig out of a box at a garage sale to emulsion lifting and creating a one of a kind piece of art. And the chemicals are very easy to find to develop your own film, Ilford has even developed a one solution development process, so film is still very much alive and well, and with companies like Impossible Project, instant (polaroid type) is making a comeback. They are working on some very exciting projects. So in essence, I'm saying don't knock any form of photography as you can always learn more about the craft. If you think you know it all, if you think you've learned all there is to learn, you are sadly mistaken. No one form is more superior than the other and one photographer is not any better than another simply because they choose to focus on film. Photography is fun. Isn't that what we are all here to talk about?

Don't think anyone is saying you have to shoot film. But you should be able to. To say that the only artistic aspect of photography is composition is false. Sorry, but it just is. Do digital cameras do the technical work for you? Yeah. That's part of the problem. You should understand the technical aspects that make a good photograph, not just turn some dials until you like what you see in the EVF. A good photographer can pick up any camera and make images with it. Film, digital, tiny sensor, full frame, 35mm, medium format, large format, it shouldn't matter. If you don't want to know the technical aspects to making a photo fine, just stay in Program the whole time. Never expand your knowledge of the art. Never learn how an image is made and how understanding the exposure triangle and how using it to your advantage is just as much an art form as composition. If you don't want to know these things, then why do you have an X-T1? Why not just have an X20 or something? I'm sorry, I'm just really having a lot of trouble with the whole "the technical stuff is just BS". I can't believe I read that on a photography forum. The reason you should use film is to learn all these things and get to know the technical aspects in and out. Always letting the camera do your thinking is like taking a pill to look fit. Why should you work out if you can just take a pill to look like you do? And why post this opinion if you didn't want to hear opposing opinions?

Since hearing what folks are experiencing with the 4.0 FW, I'm even more excited about getting the 35. Just need a few more dollars..

If they want to hear what a modem used to sound like, we can get them a ring tone for that. I certainly wouldn't liken shooting film to experiencing dial up internet service, but to each his own. If you ever get a chance, maybe a friend or family member has an old camera they don't know what to do with, take it, try it; if you love taking pictures, you'll love film just as much as digital. I even use analog from time to time. Dug out my old polaroid one step just the other day... Photography is photography and can be enjoyed in every aspect of it...

I'd give the WeShootFuji Podcast a listen. Episode 3. Also keep your eye on Marco's Blog, http://fujixfiles.blogspot.com, as he's gonna be posting a review about it. He has stated that he is going to sell the 14 and keep the 16 though.

I would recommend a film camera too. I've shot film and worked in darkrooms large and small and there truly is something about developing your own images from concept, to shooting and getting right in camera, to developing your film and processing your photos. Then again you do all that in your digital darkroom already, but film is awesome. You definitely should try it. You can grab a good film camera with a lens for less than 150 bucks usually.

I've heard a lot of Fuji X Shooters say that the 35 ƒ1.4 is the absolute must own lens in the Fuji XF lenses. It will be my next lens, then I'll start saving my pennies for the 56...

I saw this video a while back and was wondering about the Formatt-HiTech system ever since. All he really talks about is the holder and how it attaches to the lens, but he makes a really good point.. https://youtu.be/tIsRkj0evQA Good to know that they don't have any shift in color.

Thank you for the honest and straight forward response. I'm glad that you have found a work around to meet your needs until Fuji has it's fully developed flash system implemented. You've found a way to make what you use work for you and that is what photographers all over the world do every day. I just tend to disagree that the 16-55 was a debacle because it doesn't offer OIS. I still shoot a lot of film and don't use my OIS a lot in my Fuji system as it is. In some cases it cause more problems then it solves. Perhaps for someone who knows how to use it effectively it can be a god send. Lets try and steer this conversation a different way... So perhaps we could look at situations where OIS is most effective, and I don't mean "slow shutter speed" "high ISO" situations. I mean situations where OIS can truly help the photographer make better, sharper pictures. One situation I could possibly think is Panning. Say high speed car racing. Could OIS be effective in this situation?

I'm wondering if we have given this section any more thought... Since some folks might be looking to dump the 14 and make the move to 16, it might be a good place to do it here on the Fuji X Forum...

You're missing my whole point. Fuji made the 16-55 to fill the missing gap of the 24-70 (which isn't stabilized). So why would they stabilize it? Not to mention it's what 800 bucks less than the 24-70? Oh and I know a lot of photographers who shoot it on a crop without flash. Not to mention most photographers I know are using primes during the reception. Once the dance floor is full they switch to a wider prime. But wait...I thought there was no flash solution with Fuji? I'm totally confused now. How can he use flash without TTL? Point is, there are solutions if needed, but in most cases, they aren't needed at all. Even though the X-T1 is a crop sensor, everyone I've ever heard talk about high ISO is very surprised by it's performance at high ISO. Have you pushed it? How far have you pushed it? I'm wondering if this is coming from speculation, or experience... Are you a wedding photographer? Most wedding photographers that I know only use the 24-70 when they are getting started, pretty soon they switch to primes, and use the 70-200 during ceremony.