Sella174

Try the Super-Takumar lenses, as they all have character (instead of flaws). The Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR and (K-mount) SMC lenses are boring, as the coatings are too scientifically perfect. Also, don't worry about the radio-active thorium coated lenses. The levels are lower than those emitted by a marble kitchen counter and the yellowing acts as a nice "warming" filter, that AutoWB compensates for rather well.

To the OP: The reason I left Canon was because of their emphasis on video, instead of stills photography. In terms of me and myself, Canon thus ignored their current market, went after another market and lost a customer. Probably no big deal to them and I'm sure, just like Canon, FUJIFILM won't fold if I stop being a customer when they make video cameras that can also do stills.

Is it too late to ask for a square sensor?

How about a manual focus tilt & shift lens for architecture? Related question, but also not quite: Does anyone have any experience regarding those T&S adapters available on eBay?

Whenever this subject comes to the fore, I tell the following story: Many years ago when I bought my first DSLR - a secondhand Canon EOS 30D - I was told to also purchase a copy of PhotoShop. However, browsing through the local camera shops website, I noticed that an EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM lens cost exactly the same as PhotoShop. I went with the lens, as it gave me a level of quality that PhotoShop could never fix that was lacking on my EF 75-300mm lens. Afterwards, the JPEG's were so good I never felt the need for post-processing. Moral of my story, excellent lenses trump PhotoShop. However, I can see the value of PhotoShop for people who are constantly "upgrading" their cameras, or switching brands. In this regard they never quite learn all the ins and outs of the camera in the same way that we used to with film, and PhotoShop thus provides the constant on which they build their photography.

If you want something to fail, then you can setup the parameters so that the test gives a negative result. That said, I've used the ES on many occasions when I do not want the sound of the shutter distracting the subject(s) and have never experienced any problems with it. Photo below was taken with an X-T1 & 55-200mm at 1/2400 of a second.

Photography is an art, not an exact science. Thus the white balance can be whatever the photographer feels like at that time. Of course, it is within your right not to like it, but then the inverse is also my right not to like a "scientifically accurate" white balance.

I think FUJIFILM is doing this lens because the optical formula is super-easy, which means very little R&D cost. Thus it is another product on the shelf that can be sold for a profit. Plus WR'ing it will be an added attraction.

Perhaps it uses better optical glass that is multi-coated? Only then you lose all the charm of the original, don't you? I think I'll buy the FUJIFILM 90mm instead.

Because the X-Pro1 was a phenomenal camera when it came out and thus also when Rockwell wrote his review of said camera. However, like most people with a website consisting of hundreds of pages, he probably doesn't keep revisiting and updating the content already posted, but continually moves ahead with new stuff. This said, there is nothing weird about "loving" the X-Pro1 (when it was released) and now being "unimpressed" with the replacement camera, now. It is probably his opinion that the X-Pro2, apart from the more megapixels of the sensor, is not really that much of an advance over the X-Pro1, as a lot of the old niggles are still there. And similarly I won't be much impressed by the X-T2 sufficiently to entice upgrading from the X-T1.

Seeing as I have only bought the 35mm f/2 and the 55-200mm after nearly three years, one could say that I either don't have a least used lens or that all the others are in that category. As for the rumoured 50mm f/2, I most definitely won't even give that lens even a first look.

The problem with these types of "weathering" is that although it looks good to the amateur, most seasoned photographers can immediately see that it is fake because there are "weathering" marks where there should not be if from normal usage.

I must agree with milandro on this subject. And just to add, most of my cameras and lenses eventually look rather the worse for wear, simply because I use them for years and years. I prefer spending the dough on trips, instead of sitting at home with brand-new gear. I must also add that I am kind of disappointed at how fast my X-T1 has started to show wear marks.

Having used AGFA film almost exclusively for decades, I'd really love those simulations. But understandably it'll never happen from FUJIFILM.

Criticising government and politicians is not just because they're violating "civil rights", but also about non-delivery of essential services, .e.g health care, clean drinking water and sweeping the streets. Plus, my post in that regard was not directed at the OP and his pimped camera, but at the others suffering from social media syndrome.

1. The "weathering" is fake and looks fake. 2a. Over here in Africa, we steal anything and everything; so nothing gained. 2b. Being obsessed about scratching the camera is rather counter-intuitive to what was done to it.

Well, I for one never liked FUJIFILM's films, so that a big yes in that I don't use the film simulations apart from the "Standard" one.

When you pay for a camera what you pay for an X-Pro2, then some of us darn well expect it to create excellent images straight out of the camera; otherwise then just buy an entry-level DSLR and use top-tier lenses. Every considered the possibility that a manufacturer might make an excellent product and a real piece of dung at the same time or as a follow-up product? Rockwell apparently isn't a brand fanatic, but appears to evaluate each product on its own merit.

It is that type of reasoning that is the primary cause for all the troubles in the world today. For example, if your government isn't doing what it should be doing, then you as a citizen should darn well make it known to them. Or on another side, how do you expect to learn photography if your teacher cannot criticise your work? Frankly, you don't and that is why most "pros" suck at photography.

In support of milandro, over here in South Africa we have the right to return any product that is either defective or doesn't perform as expected to the shop where it was bought within a period of six months for either repair, replacement or full refund at the discretion of the purchaser.

Typical ... when I said the same many years ago, I was branded an idiot; but now when The Phoblographer says the same, he's a genius! Mind you, he added some fancy triangles, whereas I only used words and photographs ... so maybe that's it.

I once did a comparison between upscaling an image from a Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L lens to the equivalent taken with various old manual focus 400mm and 500mm lenses. The Canon lens produced better images. I suspect the same will be when comparing the FUJINON 55-200mm with old lenses.

For rule #5, is using an X-System camera enough? I tend to use old manual focus lenses sometimes for the whole day. Double posts on the blog for the days we miss? Does taking photographs of photographs (e.g. digitizing slides with a macro lens) count? Is there a maximum number of days that can consecutively feature the cat, dog, horse and/or view from my window? Whatever, 'cause this challenge is incentive enough to get my old website going again.

Super-Takumar 55mm f/1.8 lens:

Fun stuff is when you take a RICOH 55mm f/2.2 lens and flip the rear element.