jlmphotos

X-T2 for me, BUT NOT FOR A WHILE! Yes, I can pre-order but I think I'll wait. All the reviews seem very positive and the reviewers are wearing their rose colored glasses. I think I'll wait until the actual production models hit the market and the real life reviews start to pour onto the web. Not that anything is wrong with the mass of reviews out there now, just that I have a small problem with folks who get their equipment FROM the company they are reviewing. So, as I've said for a long, long time I learned my lesson by being an early adopter of the Nikon D800 and I'll never do that again. The actual delivery of the X-T2 starts in September(?) so I think I can wait until next spring... Hopefully by then all the bugs (if any, as I'm not saying there are any) will have been worked out, the furor will have died down a bit, and maybe, juuuust maybe, prices will have either come down, or their may be some incentives to purchase the X-T2. If no incentives or price breaks I'll probably buy one anyway, but let's see what the pioneers think of it first. I'm very curious...

My two cents: K.I.S.S. Keep It Simple Silly. Why go through the freakin' hassle of adapters, adopting, blah blah blah. Why? just so you can say you did it? So you can say you can? Screw that. Give me auto focus, 1.4 aperture anyway. Dude, you will NOT be able to tell the difference between this Voightblowhard lens, and the Fuji 23 1.4 in a PRINT at ANY SIZE, anyway of the week and I don't care what anyone says here. Stop trying to impress others. Period. Come on folks. Are we here to take pictures, or be equipment masterbators?

Gorgeous images! Thank you for sharing! When I saw the title "Midnight Sun" I thought we were going to see images of Alaska. Now there I've lived. But these are just amazing. Iceland is on my bucket/stock list....

Aaaah the age old debate since Mr Knoll photoshopped the first ever image of his girlfriend on a beach... I use LR and quite frankly the only time I go into PS is when I need to do more dust cleanup than LR allows. The little spot removal tool in LR sucks. I really don't know how to use PS that well and even if I did I kinda like to keep it real. However, I do admire some of the work out there even though much of it is over the top. When does it become an illustration and not a photograph? But, to each his own. I believe in you do your thing, and I'll do mine.

I too had the 56 1.2 but wound up returning it as I didn't like it due to lack of focus lock. I don't find any problems when heading out on a trip. I pretty much have a shot list ready either on paper or in my head so I know what I'm looking fork and what I'll need. I haven't used the 90 but the 135mm (FF) coverage was very, very nice range when i used older Minolta gear way back in the day. I just don't want to add any more lenses. Also, since a possible MF FuJi may be on the horizon I need to see what that brings. I was waiting for the X-T2 but now I'm not so sure. Should I go for it and relegate my X-T1 to backup? or just wait a while longer and go for MF? Weight? Lenses? Price? Oh the decisions..... But I digress.

Per my LR library Smart Collection my least used lens is the 55-200 @ 1725 images in my library. Now keep in mind these are just the "keepers" not taken and thrown out. This lens, my least used, is amazing and will remain in my inventory. 23mm 1.4 at only 2531 keepers. MOST USED, or at least MOST KEEPERS: The 18-55 has created 31,752 "keepers" alone for me. Yeah... Not bad for what many consider a crappy kit lens right? And the FABULOUS 16 1.4: 9,123 images -- Three, of them taken just yesterday here... Of my new grandson and newest addition to the force. Here is the link to the Flickr Page. The three images here are with the 16 1.4

Beautiful images here to illustrate but the fisheye is just not for me....

I LOVE my 55-200. Even though it does not come out to play very often, I do take it with me. Know it is there is good enough. This lens, at least my copy is tack sharp across the focal range, and at each aperture. I have no complaints. I hate the "are you happy to see me" extension at long end but that's a price to be paid. It's lightweight compared to it's big brother the 50-140 2.8 which, after unloading myself of my Nikon gear which included the Nikon 70-200 F2.8, I do not ever want to carry around again. So, there are a few drawbacks, but the 55-200 is a magnificent lens and one I will not give up.

I don't know why you would think the 14 has better resolution than the 16. But, I do know, as I own the 16 that it focus's so darn close I have to remove the lens hood so it doesn't interfere with the subject. There. Take that! LOL J

Thanks but I'll stick with LR. As some of you who've read my posts I shoot travel and landscape. I find that Lightroom, 99% of the time, does me good! Honest. I use Pete Bridgewoods sharpening methodology which you'll find on his blog - and which I started using I guess two years ago when it first appeared and I couldn't be happier. As a matter of fact, it's a preset upon my importing into LR. I also have Silkypix, and Iridient Developer and these two also work wonders. They are both amazing, but they do take me out of LR even though they are setup to "right click, edit in" I've tried C1 and find it too confusing and I don't have the time to learn another piece of software. I've also tried Affinity back when it was free and it was ok but I really didn't put it through it's paces as I should have. I will say, that even though I'm a LR believer, if Adobe EVER switches to a total subscription based version I'm out. I'll find something else such as photo mechanic, and ON1 Raw or something. But I will never, ever, ever pay Adobe a monthly fee as I, quite frankly, despise that company. Right now, using LR is to MY benefit; so I'll just keep tooling along. Hope that helps.

16, 23, 35. Owned the 56 and returned it. Never owned the 14. My "don't leave home without kit" is the 18-55 and the 16mm 1.4 Everything else, is built around those two. Please note I don't do "street" shooting. At all. I hate people... LOL I'm landscape, nature, travel for stock and personal.

Interesting. Reminds me of the old Pentax Asahi 6 x 7 look

I think we worry too much about this crap. From 1976-1980 I photographed Alaska, from pump station 6, just north of the Yukon river, all the way down to the terminus of the Alaska Pipeline in Valdez. In all kinds of weather. Summer, Rain, heat (yes, 100 degree heat) snow, sleet, ice you name it. I also photographed everything in between. This was with film Minolta cameras. My biggest worry: batteries. That's it. Stop fussing over the gear. Go read Dan Bailey's blog. He lives in Anchorage and shoots out there. He shoots Fuji. Seriously, we need to get over this stuff and JUST GO SHOOT.

Hear!! Hear!!! I don't care if they do include touch screen (except for the incremental price creep) but I MUST BE ABLE TO TURN IT OFF. I personally WILL NEVER use a touch screen on a camera. Leave that for phones. It's bad enough there.

As I've mentioned before here there are two lenses that are my "never leave home without". They are the 18-55, and my 16 1.4 The 16 is truly amazing. Fantastic bokeh and shallow DOF, can work wonders as a make shift macro, lovely wide, balances nicely on myX-T1, And just FEELS GOOD. I have many other lenses, but those two are my staple lenses. Happy Travels

THANK YOU so very much for this concise update! As an X-T1 shooter I'm very excited to hear the X-T2 is just around the corner --- though I am not an early adopter of things. I learned my lesson very painfully back with the Nikon D800 debacle in 2012. Anyway, I will be purchasing the X-T2 probably in the new tax year of 2017 as a deductible business expense and I can't wait. As usual, any issues will be well vetted out between now and then on oh so many review sites and critiques. But, overall, if it quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck, it's for me. Again, thank you! Well done. And well done protecting your friends anonymity.

I own the 23 and the 35, as well as the 16. I find myself reaching for the 35, or the 16 much more than the 23 1.4 It does have it's uses, but for some reason it is not my go-to lens. My "never leave home without" kit always includes my 18-55, and my 16mm when I know I'll be shooting landscapes. Family and portraits, it'll be the 35 1.4

Once upon a time, in a land far far away, (Northern Alaska) my wife hit a huge rut and I spilled a can of Pepsi on my Minolta X-E7. It was a sticky, gooey mess for months, and months. Everything stuck, on/off, shutter button, lens aperture rings, you name it, it was coated with pepsi. A few months later, and several rainfalls later, it cleared up all by itself.

1000% disagree. If you want to justify the purchase of your fancy Billingham go for it, but don't try to justify it here. I'm glad you are happy with it. Quite frankly, I would feel terrible owning something like that, though beautiful as they are, with the amount of use and abuse (at times) my bags take. The most I've ever paid for a bag was for a Thinktank Retrospective 10 and that was a bit over 110.00 US. and I thought that was a bit much --- especially as I was on the shores of the Atlantic Ocean as a wave tried to take it away from me as it lay in the sand. Yes, that's what I do. For me, a bag is a tool to be used. Not a fashion accessory to look cool. I've owned many, many bags and have yet found "the one" so spending hundreds on bag, that may or may not be the right one is just not right for me. If it's ok for you, then so be it.

First of all I hope your cute little child is up for sale now, or has already been sold to the lowest bidder. 2nd, Why was your sensor facing upwards? into the sun, or at the very least, not facing downward. And I'm sure there is an excellent reason why the shutter doesn't cover the sensor but I have no clue. Oh, and I'm sorta joking about selling the child. Good thing you were near a Fuji center and it all worked out!!!!

I don't think you can be both, stylish and discreet. You want to stand out and show off your stylish charm and debonaire flair, or you want to be discreet?

The X-E1 was my first venture into the Fuji Mirrorless system and I LOVED IT!!! Nothing wrong with it as a daily carry. I can't tell you the thousands of images I created, and sell with that camera....

That's on my to-do list. I will most definitely use my 55-200 on my X-T1. And if per chance the X-T2 comes out by the time I go on this trip, then the 18-55 will be on it. This way I've got a great wide range covered, OIS on both, and i don't have to worry about changing lenses on a boat.

Wow! That is fancy Schmancy. Damn. Too fancy for me. I'm usually in mud, dirt, sand, wet sand, saltwater, freshwater, and oh, dirt. This is very pretty though. I prefer cheap. The cheaper, the better as long as I can fit what I need. Photo looks awesome though!!

I'd fling the 56 off with zero hesitation. I owned it. Wound up returning it. Maybe I had a bad copy, but waaaaay too much hunting in rather good light. Afraid to try it in lower light. The 18-55, is my "don't leave home without it lens". The 16mm is my other "don't leave home without it lens" The 35 F2 I do not own, but I do own the 35 1.4 and the only way I will let that go is if St Peter refuses to let me in the gates of Heaven without it. The 55-200 is my go-to long lens. ULTRA sharp, and oh so much nicer, lighter than the 50-140, not as fast, but longer reach. Would never get rid of it. The 10-24 F4? Have looked at it and it's too heavy and bulky (for my taste). I have the Zeiss 12, 2.8, 16 1.4, 23 1.4 which fills the gaps nicely. So, I guess if I had to choose, I would still go with the 56, in my left hand, and the 10-24 in my right (oh, BTW: I'm a LEFTY). Good Luck on your decision.