jlmphotos

Ha! Well, don't expect any help here!!! Just Kidding. Welcome.. And BTW: In my previous life, 30+ years ago I owned a 70 Chevelle, AFTER I sold my 68, Convertible, 327, 4-speed Corvette.... Call me stupid. Welcome to the Forum!! J

I've always been a zoom shooter but I have to say the Fuji primes are amazing. With that having been said I do own the 18-55 (never leave home without it) and the 55-200 (almost never leave home with out it) In order not to be redundant, in my signature block below you can see what other Fooj lenses I own. Anyway, I considered the 16-55 2.8, and I also considered the 10-24 F4 but in the end they were too large, and too heavy for me. After shooting for years with Nikon gear, and carrying around the Nikon trinity of lenses and some medium format gear, my personal choice was go stay light. and that is a promise I made to myself and one I intend on keeping. So far, it has worked out tremendously for me!!!! I am having more fun than ever! My images are more fluid. Yes, I gather a ton more dust and dirt but who cares? Nothing a good Giotto blower, or a wet cleaning can't take care of! And knock on wood, I've yet to drop a lens so I'm not going to worry about that. Though, with that being said on a destination wedding I shot in San Juan Puerto Rico I did manage to drop not once, but twice my D700 with the Nikon 24-70 F2.8; Once inside the El Morro Fort on solid concrete (camera and lens still worked fine but destroyed my grip) and the second time, the next morning, shooting the "trash the dress" on the beach in wet sand (camera still worked fine). That just happened to be the last wedding I photographed, destination or local. Two days, 19.5 hours, heat, humidity. Done. Retired. Been doing weddings since the mid-eighties and I literally and figuratively retired. Now I just shoot stock for travel and magazines/books. Anyway, I like to keep it light now. My two cents my friend. Good luck on your decision.

And ignored.

Done.

Do yourself a Favor: Go on eBay. Find one. I do and I did for all my Fuji lenses. I love Fuji, but come on!! 69.95 for a LENS HOOD!? Seriously? I've got aftermarket lenshoods for my 16, 23, 18-55, 55-200, and 35 on eBay and I probably paid LESS FOR ALL OF THEM than 69.95. Jeez Fuji.

Wonderful fluorescent lighting strikes again!

I have a 10-day travel/stock shooting trip scheduled July 2 to July 13th. Does anyone know if the X-T2 will be available by then? I'd love to have it with me, but I don't relish taking a new, untested camera with me on an important trip. Though, I'll have my existing X-T1 as a backup if things go bad. Anyone? Patrick?

I would appreciate an ISO 100 with both JPEG + RAW support.

Looks beautiful but I would prefer it in color, and without humans mucking up the beauty. But, that's just me.

Holy Smokes Max. Apparently you were NOT the last person in the world to know this, I was! Many Thanks. I had no idea all the profiles I had in LR, and used upon import would work inn ID. I'll have to try that. Thank you.

As a travel and stock shooter my mainstay bread winners are the 18-55, and the 16mm 1.4 I also own the Zeiss 12mm 2.8, 23 and 35 1.4, and the 55-200 which is an amazing piece of glass. However, the first two -- the 18-55 and the 16 1.4 are my "never leave home without them" lenses. As a matter of fact in six weeks I head out for ten-day stock shooting trip and those are the first two lenses I will pack even though I told myself I would try to shoot this trip with primes only. Ha! How'd that work out??? Anyway, that's my story, and I'm sticking to it. Good Luck.

Hey, it's your camera. I think it looks awesome. I also wish it came from long-term use. But thats neither here nor there. In today's "buy new" world, most of our gear will never look like that. I shoot with an X-T1. I've owned it since February 2014; It's worn a bit, some brass is showing, i've used it literally IN saltwater, wet sand, mud, rain, sleet and snow, but it still looks new. And trust me it is NOT attributed to any of my housekeeping attributes. Now, my 1978 Minolta X-E7 which I still own, that thing looks worse than your camera does -- and it still functions!! And if you think that would like bad, the prism, where the word "Minolta" is printed, is held in place by black electrical tape with a small cutout for the light meter. If you take the tape off, the entire meter, prism, and wires just dangle outwards. The results of four very rough and tumble years in Alaska from Valdez to North of Fairbanks!!! Anyway, to each his own. I like the look; I prefer it were natural, but either way, it's rocks. Best. J

Man you didn't just open Pandora's box, you set it on a stump, took a 20lb sledgehammer, and slammed the sh*t out of it. That's a touchy subject for many. IMHO, I would rather take it in camera, than have to fix it later. Though I find each image takes some very minor tweaking in LR. I don't do cloning in and out. I don't swap skies between images, I try to keep it as natural as possible whenever possible. That's just my take.

The two lenses I purchased back in 2013 with my X-E1 was the 18-55 (Amazing lens) and the 35 1.4 (also amazing). Since then, I've added several others, but the 18-55 and my 16 1.4 are the two lenses I would pack if told I could only take a couple of lenses. If I had to choose ONE only, it would have to be the 18-55.

Personally. Speaking JUST FOR MYSELF. The 10-24, though an extremely versatile and beautiful lens, is way too heavy to carry around. With that having been said, I have the Zeiss 12 2.8, and th 16 1.4 and I absolutely LOVE LOVE LOVE my 16 1.4 It is the most versatile of the primes. Does Macro work (at least for me), does the landscape well. It's crystal clear, sharp, fast, and the contrast is amazing. And, it's also a beautifully designed lens. I know that shouldn't count for much but hey, I gotta look at it too you know...

I do not. If i want to protect the lens I use the lens hood. That's it. I usually use polarizers and ND filters but even then I take them off as soon as possible. The smallest filter i own is 77mm size. All left over from my Nikon days. I have step up rings for all my lenses. When I do use the step up rings I cannot use a lens hood, but that's ok. There is a filter attached -- either a polarizer or a ND. Once the filters and step-up rings come off the lens hood snaps or screws back on.

I do not. If i want to protect the lens I use the lens hood. That's it. I usually use polarizers and ND filters but even then I take them off as soon as possible.

Hi, Welcome. I'll make real short and sweet. See my signature below? Take a look at those lenses. It has taken me 3 years to acquire them over time for use on my X-E1, and X-T1 but now you could only pry them from my cold, dead hands. Enjoy the adventure.

X-T1, waiting on the X-T2... patiently.

Since i don't use macro to often I bought on Amazon a 10mm and 16mm set of extensions for about @25.00 (?) and when needed, they work GREAT! They do not have any glass, so image quality is not affected, at least to my eyes.

I lost that little dinky thing. I actually sealed the Sync terminal with some sugaru. Problem solved.

Here are my two cents. Nondescript, extremely light. ZERO padding. PLENTY of pockets. Nice zippered compartment inside for important papers, phone etc. I normally use a Jill-E insert inside for some padding. Holds my X-T1 with mounted 18-55 in the center, 16mm and 23 on either side. The two end pockets, which close securely, I keep my 35 1.4. If I'm packing the 55-200 then either the 16 or the 23 go at the other end. It is totally non-descript. No labels or markings, looks like an old military bag. This is the link I gave up my Retrospective 7 and 10 for this bag.

I don't understand why some are sayng the 35 1.4 is soft, etc. I've owned the 1.4 since February 2013 and use it all the time. Is it a bit soft in the corners, yeah, up to F4-5.6. But who cares when it's wide open? That's what I'm lookinng for. sharp center... I'm very happy with my 35 1.4

My three primes (even though I have the OUTSTANDING 18-55 and the 55-200 as well) would be the 16 1.4, the 23 1.4 and the 35 1.4. I own these as well as the Zeiss 12mm 2/8 which I only use under rare circumstances. But those three above do a magnificent job. I also owned the 56 1.2 for about a week. It was horribly slow at focusing if it focused at all during two christenings I was shooting back to back. The lighting was PERFECT inside the church. Bright skylights over the altar, huge windows down the both sides. Absolutely no reason why that 56 should not have focused on my X-T1. I wound up switching out to th 35 1.4 and th 18-55 and it was smooth-sailing after that. Over the last few days I've been considering giving the 56 1.2 a second chance. I have a job coming up where I'll need a portrait lens so I might just get another copy and see. Hope that helps. J

Personally I'm waiting. It looks like if they port over the improvements from the X_Po 2 then I'm in for the X-T1