uckdie

Two streetportraits of a friendly man in Parma The old man and the bike I The old man and the bike II Regards, Dieter

Yes, I only have 16mm MCEX tube.

Hi Jan, I have added some other websites for your reference above? Maybe that helps. Have fun with yor X-Pro2. Dieter

Ok, no fisheye. So take the Zeiss Touit 12mm, or the Fuji 14mm, or the 16mm - they are all excellent. I have settled for the Zeiss and the 16mm, but the 14mm is an excellent lens in between. Take this lens, if you are shooting architecture. But try the sometimes loose focus ring of the 14mm before you buy. I have never had the Samyang 12mm. I'm not a fan of the 10-24mm. Try the later for a day or two, to see of it works for you.Some users seem to have an issue with CA on the 16-55mm f2.8. Mine is excellent, though. The problem with Fuji nowadays is, that you have too many excellent lenses to choose from. My current line-up is 8mm Samyang, 12mm Touit, 16mm, 23mm, 27mm, 56mm, 90mm, 16-55mm, 55-200mm, 100-400mm. Too many lenses by far. I have owned the 14mm, 18-55mm, 32mm Touit, 35mm f1.4, 50-140mm, 10-24mm. I am thinking of selling the excellent 55-200mm (overlap with other lenses) and a prime (16, or 23, or 56) or the 16-55mm, but I'll keep them as long as I am undecided. See some pics at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/votec/ For further imformation on Fuji lenses see: http://www.photozone.de/fuji_x And http://www.prophotonut.com/2015/04/30/zoom-or-prime-lenses-for-portraits-with-fuji-x/ Dieter

Have a look in the menu - you have to release the corresponding function to shoot without a (recognized) lens.

.... Which equals about 3,500 €. So with the the x-pro2 taking away 1,800 € this will leave you with 1,700 € for the lenses. My strategy would be: -take a used 27mm lens - it is a nobrainer for 200-250,- € and the most compact lens you can get. It is excellent for street and landscape. -take an 8mm Samyang / Rokinon / Walimex f2.8. It is sharp as anything, wider than anything, and there is an LR profile in between. (300,- €) -so we have left around 1,200,- € -take a 16-50mm f2,8 - make sure it is a good copy and you have a return policy. Ups, only 300 left. -steal another 200 from your wife and get the 55-200mm

This is exactly why I did choose the 27mm. The 35mm ist excellent, as is the Touit 32mm, but I don't know when to use it (except for the rare in studio situations).

The pics are SOOC. All shot at f8 and ISO3200 on a tripod. It was a quick test in remaining daylight. I did move the cactus and changed the angle of the camera to position the cactus in the picture. No post processing. AF was on the "white dot." In the EXIF you will see that the timing went down from 1/50s to 1/25s with MCEX and TC. I will probably do some more examples next weekend.

I have been thinking, if a combination of the MCEX16, the TC 1.4 and the 90mm would be usefull as a macro. I know that the TC will not fit the 90mm. Don't try it, it could damage the lens. With an MCEX16 inbetween it is a different story, though: MCEX16 and TC1,4 combined This is a sample of only the 90mm at shortest focus distance: 90mm by Cruiser223, on Flickr Now let's see a shot with the MCEX 16: 90mm plus MCEX16 And finally 90mm, MECEX16, TC1,4: 90mm, MCEX16 and TC1,4 I like the result. What do you think? The magnification should be 0.4 with the MCEX 16mm and 0,56 when adding the TC. It should probably work with other Fuji lenses as well. Regards, Dieter

Happened to me twice before the FW update. No more issues since then.

You know that there are usually differences between as-planned and as-is. You should't be to upset if you end up with more lenses... The 16-23-56-90 combination is a fast high-end lens setup. The 14-27-60 combination is an excellent low cost and weight combination. The 55-200mm is lovely and produces a lot of keepers (much more than the 100-400mm, which still is a must-have for wildlife). A good copy of the 16-55mm f2.8 will open the question, if you should keep the primes. I don't care for the 10-24mm or the 50-140mm. But I would like to add the Samyang 8mm f2.8 and the Touit 12mm which are both excellent. So if you want to limit yourself to 3-4 lenses my suggestion is to add "per year" and you are set ;-) Regards, Dieter

...so I guess there is no write or wrong in choosing between the M1 and E1. It comes down to personal preferences. One thing we should not forget is that the M1 uses a P-A-S dial. The learning curve will be faster for the M1. I have owned the E1, E2, Pro1, T1. Currently I'm using an Pro2, Pro1 (IR) and M1. Playing with adapted lenses can be fun, but using Fujis excellent lenses will produce far more keepers. And not everyone is into manual focusing ... Regards, Dieter

...except for the articulated screen, WiFi-capability and smaller form factor.

Hi, I have an M1 with the excellent 27mm as a compact backup camera. This combo will produce excellent results. Regards, Dieter

Rushhour in Venice ... Rushhour by Cruiser223, on Flickr Regards, Dieter

One of the still missing secrets is the specification of the viewfinder. -What will be the magnification for the EVF? (Hope it will be close to the x0.77 of the T1) -Will the OVF cover a wider area (16mm) and offer three steps of automatic magnification, e.g. an extra tele magnification for the 56mm/90mm? It seems strange that so many specs have been leaked, but the viewfinder characteristics remain secret. Is this good or bad news?

I can also recommend the Zeiss Touit 12mm for IR. Best regards, Dieter

I'll keep it - it is already converted to infrared (see e.g. here)

This has no effect on the humming noise for this lens.

Yes, the sound is there - you can listen to it on this website (scroll down to OIS). I just did a small test with the 55-200mm and 50-140mm at 140mm and f5,6/6,4. The 50-140mm has more contrast and saturation OOC, but sharpness is pretty much the same. After adjusting the 55-200mm picture in LR, I don`t see a difference between the pictures anymore.

I own the 56mm, 90mm and 55-200mm. Yesterday I have received a 50-140mm for testing. Here are my findings so far: @ 56mm: I think the 56mm is a bit sharper at f2.8 and has the opportunity to generate better bokeh at smaller aperture settings (f1.2...), the OIS of the 50-140mm however allows to shoot at around 1/20s vs. 1/100 for the 56mm. @ 90mm: The 90mm offers better sharpness, bokeh and subject separation at f2. But again it lacks OIS. @ 140mm (vs. 55-200mm): Minimum aperture for the 55-200mm at 140mm is around f4.4 vs. f2.8. The 50-140m is a sharper, but the out-of-focus areas are smoother with the 55-200mm. I will return the 50-140mm without regrets. It is a great lens over all, but I prefer primes. And the 55-200mm still is an excellent choice, especially when stopped down a bit. You may also want to check this test from Damien at Prophotonut which includes the 55-200mm and the 50-140mm.

Sunset at Costa de la Luz shot with the Fujifilm XF 90mm at f2 Sunset at the beach by Cruiser223, on Flickr

I have owned the Novoflex 400mm/600mm. They are not well usable on a tripod as they are made for handheld shooting. You need at least to stop down to F8/F11 to get acceptable results. At the same time you need speeds of at least 1/1000s. As the Fujis are missing an inbody stabilization I don`t think they make any sense. I have sold my Novoflex set (400mm, 600mm, grip C, case, ...) in very good condition again for about 300,- €. I still have the Samyang 300mm which is light and small. However, it is quite difficult to get pictures in focus. It has a very thin depth of field. The slightest turn on the focus ring will spoil the image. Here are some samples I have shot with the 300mm Samyang: Baling Hay by Cruiser223, on Flickr see more examples here. I have been trying to sell the lens at 160,- € with no success, so I just keep it for the fun of it. I guess for now the best option are the long XF/XC zooms. Looking forward to the XF 100-400mm ...

Yes, I considered to zoom in a little closer. This is just the kind a freedom a zoom lens offers.

I guess the bokeh depends largely on the distance to the subject. Here is an example of the 90mm @5,6 with beautiful bokeh: Wilhelma by Cruiser223, on Flickr Whereas in the following picture @f2 I would have liked to see more subject separation: Cadiz by Cruiser223, on Flickr I guess the 50-140mm @140mm would have been better in this case.