Scott Grant

First i've ever heard of it.

I used a prototype 2X teleconverter with the 100-400 before the camera was even able to recognize that there was a teleconverter attached almost two years ago.  It functioned properly then.   

Or look at it at 33% considering that is what it will look like in print!  

If you have to zoom in to 100% to see the noise then there is no problem. The average monitor is about 100 pixels per inch so at 100% you are looking at an image that is five feet wide! Pixel peeping is bad for your health.

Given the structure of the X-Trans CFA I can imagine that you're looking at demosaicing artifacts in the squarish pattern that you're seeing. X-Trans is more prone to artifacts in the demosacing process than a Bayer array, but you must understand that all demosaicing of CFAs produces artifacts -- no option exists not to do that and at 527.3% magnification no option exists not to see them. Just remember that at 527.3% magnification you may also be seeing artifacts created by the software enlarging your image to that size and/or an interaction between those artifacts and the demosaicing artifacts that you can no longer really see because of that interaction. 
 
Look at the photo on screen at 100% magnification. Does it look OK?

Big focus square = speed of focus but less precision
Small focus square = precision but slower focusing

Big focus square = speed of focus but less precision
Small focus square = precision but slower focusing

Thank you! About the time I received your response, I was reading through the thread about this lens in this forum ( http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/1138-xf-50-140-f28-zoom/ ) and found answers to both of my questions.  True noob moment 
 
It's a cracking lens - as good as Canon's 70-200L II without the bulk and weight.  I know some Fuji users are small form-factor primes only but coming from FF DSLR, even the heftiest XF zooms are still of reasonable weight.

Lloyd always manages to find the end of the world with almost anything he writes about. This effect was mentioned on another forum and the example images there, like the one Lloyd posted, are frankly nothing I would ever expect to use to begin with. This problem (which I'm pretty certain is internal reflections) appears to only be seen in circumstances with horrible veiling flare that would itself render the images useless IMHO. 
 
Lloyd hates the X-TRANS sensors anyway and is using this as another reason to pile on. Using diglloyd as proof that a camera/lens is bad strikes me as just about as crazy as using Ken Rockwell as proof that something is wonderful.

holding down the playback button switches cards

The amount of shots per battery charge is dependent on so many parameters that it's IMO barely worth speculating about!
 
Extreme examples?
 
Put a fresh batter in your camera, set it to CH, press and hold the shutter until the battery dies... How many shots did you get? 2000 maybe!
 
Now put a fresh battery in your camera, take a shot.
 
Use the internal raw convertor to make a jpeg copy in every single film sim, with every combination of shad/tone sharp/nr setting.
 
Then go through your menus and toggle every single item off and on
 
Oh your battery just died, and you only took one shot...
 
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
I KNOW I AM BEING A BIT SILLY
 
But real world derivatives of the above 2 examples determine your shots per charge more than any other factor...

Had to split the post.
 
I didn't have much luck with wildlife in the woods, thus I decided to make a trip to a zoo to deliver at least some animal shots here. And guess what? They had free-flying wild egrets and cormorants because they drained a large pond to dig out the dirt.
 

 

 
 
And some zoo animals:
 

 

 
 
Action, OIS and panning detection also works pretty good:
 

 
 
 
All in all I can say at least my sample seems to be sharper when focussed close, but that's perfect for me.

I've done my writeup of the XF16mm f/1.4 lens and posted a gallery of images taken with that lens.
 
Take a look here..
 
http://photomadd.com/fujifilm-xf16mm-f1-4-review-and-images-camera-lens/
 
Matt

I really want a 33mmF1. 

Epic: I like the sound of that :-)
 
 

I completed my trinity a few weeks ago. It's, well, awesome...
 
- 14mm f2.8
- 35mm f1.4
- 90mm f2
 
Primary camera is an X-E2, complemented by an X-A1. Now I'm looking how to use my X-A1 in the best possible way. I could just use it with the 14 specifically for landscape (where faster AF is not necessary). Or I could add an 18 or 27 and turn it into a fixed focal length high IQ compact, mimicking the soon-to-be X70 or X100 series.

With time to spare today I wanted to see the real effects of adjusting these values in the menu to see the effect on the jpeg output. I think an image speaks a thousand words on this subject so please if you were interested/curious and don't have enough time to try yourself you can see the results here and download the jpegs as a reference:
 
Although tested on my X Pro 1 (odd I never pick up the X-T1 for this stuff) it will apply to the current crop of Fuji cameras. At least until tomorrow!

The X-T10 is more than capable of shooting a wedding.  Have fun!

indeed, there is no literature or test to substantiate an inherent sharpness difference from one 56mm over the other.
 
Again, in my mind, the only way to level the playing field is to shoot only with in-camera raw conversion and compare. 
 
If the image ending with 5 is converted by the camera I would seriously consider returning this copy.

Thanks for the reply, I guess its safe to say now I know why my 56mm APD struggled. I may have to pull the trigger this summer on the 90mm, hmm, or perhaps sell the 56mm APD for the 90mm. 
 
I have the 16-55mm 2.8 and its what stays on the camera, the focusing is pretty fast across the focal length. 

It's not the only lens that works for astrophotography, but it does indeed have some properties that make it, let's say, easier to get good results, depending on what you expect, of course.
 
I'll try to keep this short and simple, so there will be a few things I don't mention or won't go into great detail about. If I miss out on something that is of interest to you, please just mention it and I'll see if I can help.
 
In astrophotography, the subject is not very bright. In order to counter this, the gain (/amplification/ISO) as well as the exposure time need to be increased. With higher gain comes higher noise, but for starscapes, ISO-values between 3200 and 6400 will be needed anyway.
Instead of increasing the gain, the exposure time could be increased further. The problem with this is, the stars are moving. The longest exposure before the startrails become visible is approximately 500 seconds divided by the focal length (in 35mm-equivalent terms). Thus, it is beneficial if the lens that is used transmits a lot of light, has a low f-stop number. Depth of field is no concern, because the lens is focused at infinity.
 
And those two points are the reasons why the Samyang does fairly well with astrophotography: it is a very wide lens (18 mm in 35mm-equivalence), thus you can expose for 25 seconds before the stars start to form streaks, and it has a maximum aperture of f/2, which is one stop faster than the Zeiss and two stops faster than the XF10-24.
 
And finally, its optical characteristics are good for astrophotography: It has nearly no coma. Coma is an optical abberation that deforms points (stars) to slightly cross-shaped objects with a comet-like trail towards the corners.
 
 
Of course, all of this only helps if your goal are starscapes. If you want to take images of nebulae, you need a longer focal lenght. As said above, with a longer focal lenght star trails (and the movement of the sky in general) shows earlier. And longer focal lenghts often have a lower f-stop. therefore, you need a tracking device that moves your camera with the firmament.

One of my first HDRs.

Fairytale

The 36MP in the D800 is overkill for 99% of the people out there and that included me when i owned one.  

Thanks for the advice on continuous focus, clients loved the results, and the CL, and the zone focus worked great!. I am very pleased with the performance of the fuji system. 

Brilliant
Fast, sharp, great close focus ability, easy manual focus, a special lens.
Jonesy

Hey Scottie,
 
I don't think you will have aperture control on your PC-E lens due to it's electronically controlled aperture.