Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by quincy

  1. I bought a Samyang 135/2, and I can use the Fuji 1.4x TC with it. The front part of the 2x TC looks the same, so it should also work. However, with the 1.4x TC, I see a slight reduction in sharpness. I guess the 2x TC will be worse. The same 1.4x TC on the Fuji 80/2.8 Macro causes no visible degradation of the image, so I think it's the Samyang 135/2 at its limit.
  2. Ok, so when you close the aperture while keeping ISO and shutter speed the same, the live view image in your viewfinder should get darker. You can use that information (or the live histogram) to adapt shutter speed or ISO yourself. (Or you let the camera do the job with one of the auto-settings)
  3. If you turn the aperture ring on the lens (when it is attached to the adapter & camera), does the aperture change size?
  4. FD lenses don't transfer aperture information to the camera. The aperture coupling in the FD bayonet was completely manual. If you look at the back of your lens, there is a lever that runs on a circular track. This lever, if moved all the way to the other side, stops your lens down until it reaches the value you set at the aperture ring. This means you need an adapter with a built in mechanical coupler. The simplest ones just have a pin which moves the lever all the way down while you attach the lens to the adapter, and then you can simply adjust the aperture by turning the aperture ring. More fancy ones have an additional ring on the adapter, to simulate the camera stopping down the lens. I have one of those: https://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_SPFD-X-BM2 You can see the (movable) pin inside the adapter, at the bottom. If your adapter does not have a pin / ring etc., your lens can't stop down. However, even if it does, your camera does not know the aperture setting. Good thing is, the camera does the metering (for exposure) without knowing the aperture setting, by just simply evaluating the live feed off the sensor, and can adjust ISO / shutter speed accordingly.
  5. With Canon FD lenses, two things will not work automatically anymore: focus and aperture setting. Everything else on your camera still works in auto-mode, if you wish so. Especially automatic ISO as well as automatic shutter speed. If your viewfinder is set to "preview exposure and white balance", then what you see is what you get. If you want your camera to evaluate and set your exposure for you, just dial in the aperture you want to have on your lens, and let the camera do the rest (auto-ISO, auto-shutterspeed). You can even chose one of those (e.g. the shutterspeed) yourself, and let the camera set the right exposure via the other one (ISO in this example). If you want to use the camera fully manual (set aperture, shutter speed and ISO yourself), then you can either use the EV meter or the histogram in your viewfinder, or the viewfinder image itself to set the exposure as you want. Just a small hint: use the aperture to define your depth of field, use the shutterspeed to freeze motion (or to allow movement, if you wish), and then use your ISO to compensate for the correct brightness of your image. And have fun!
  6. Depending on the distance between camera and subject, your lenses might change focal length. This is also called focus breathing. Try both lenses focused at infinity.
  7. that adapter is too short (as written in the description). Try to find a "PK-FX" or "K-mount - FX" adapter. You need a correction of the flange distance from Fuji X-Mount (17,7 mm) to Pentax K-Mount (45,46 mm), so the adapter should be 27,76 mm long.
  8. The old one does, but I'm not sure about the new one that comes with the 200/2.
  9. As lens&body have the newest firmware installed, I think the rotary encoder telling your lens at what focal lenght it is, is either broken or unattached to the mainboard, hence not communicating. If you stop the aperture down yourself to f/8 or something, while at 55 mm, this will probably show as 18 mm f/8. Anyway, your lens needs to be serviced.
  10. if you take a picture at 55 mm, what focal length does the lens report to the camera (what does the exif data say) ?
  11. I've added the neewer and lensbaby lenses and removed Meyer Optik Görlitz completely due to the Net SE bankruptcy. I'll add them again if they find a way to deliver what has already been paid and was promised to their (kickstarter) customers and stay alive as a company. The Samyang 85 will follow when it is released. By the way, something is wrong with the upload function. My (new) lens chart needs ~ 228 kB, but i get an error message that i'm not allowed to upload more than 512 kB.
  12. 1. My 27/2.8 seems to be sharp at any aperture and any focus distance. However, the X100F focuses closer (10 cm vs 34 cm), and that's the range where softness will probably creep in. On the other side, while this close, you should stop the lens down anyway. 2. No, but close. 23 blurs more, but is obviously wider, so in the end the images might be comparable. For Portraits, out of those two, I'd chose the 27 to have more distance to the subject. For a Headshot of the same magnification, at 60 cm distance to subject with the 27/2.8 and 50 cm distance to subject with the 23/2.0, you'll have ~ 5 cm DOF with the 27 and ~ 3.5 cm DOF with the 23. 3. 27/2.8 is very sharp, but has no "magic dust". That "magic" comes from optical imperfections in the corners of both the 35 and 18 (and probably the 23/2 on the X100F). By the way, I think the X100F might be bulkier than the X-E3 with the 27.
  13. Thanks Patrick, that's nice to hear! however... I can't edit the OP anymore since we got the new forum software?
  14. If you are shooting big animals and you know what you do, the 55-200 might be the perfect lens for you if you don't want to buy the 100-400, which is also much heavier. My 55-200 is almost as sharp as my 80 macro, and definitely sharper than my 100-400. I like the oof-rendering, you can use it wide open at the long end with no drawbacks, it is small and lightweight, so what's not to like about it. On the wide end, however, i think you need to buy both. The 16 is really bad for astro, but nearly perfect for everything else you want. The close focusing capability is great for environmental flower shots. The 12 is absolutely great for astro, (and not bad in all other disciplines), but it is so wide, it will distort your image as soon as the horizon is not in the center of your frame. If you have specific questions, I think i might have all the lenses you are considering.
  15. - Update body - Update lens (without tc attached) - Update tc if available If it still does not work, the tc is probably defective
  16. quincy

    XF 27mm error

    Mine was on my X-T1 on a tripod last winter when the whole thing fell over and hit the snow covered ground front-faced from approx. 1.5 meters. Lens is still working fine. I'd say get a replacement.
  17. I've eliminated some stupid errors and split the chart in lenses for stills and video.
  18. I've updated the OP, sorry for the delay. The chart still needs to be done, but adding 25(!) new lenses was a lot of work for now. The "upcoming lenses" category is gone now, I'm definitely not fast enough for that. With all that's going on (MOG for example seems to cancel and announce lenses on a weekly basis) this is useless. I'll add lenses to the list when they are being sold. Thanks everyone for your support!
  19. @Khechog: both, actually. In detail: While extension tubes simply do what they are named after (give more extension) and enable you to get closer to your subject, they won't let you focus to infinity anymore. Unlike extension tubes, teleconverters retain infinity focus by the optical elements they contain. So by combining a lens with a teleconverter, in total you get a lens with a longer focal length (times 1.4 or times 2.0, depending on the teleconverter), one or two stops less light (the physical aperture inside the lens does not change, of course, but since you have a longer focal length and the aperture value is calculated by 'focal length divided by physical aperture', it's one or two stops below the original lens' maximum aperture), but the same close focus distance. This means you get a higher magnification with the teleconverter (approximately 1.4:1 or 2:1 with the XF80), OR you can go to 1:1 with more working distance. I think that the increase in working distance at 1:1 magnification might even be more than the increase in focal length, since the focal length of the XF80 does decrease while focusing close (and you don't have to focus the lens that close with TC). @TomNeva: Yes. You can try both, but in my experience, Fujinon XF lenses do better with OIS off when fixed (on a tripod / stand / mount).
  20. There are many manual ring flashes (e.g. Viltrox JY-670). If you want TTL etc., you'll probably have to wait.
  21. I'd take the X-E3 + 27/2.8 and nothing else.
  22. Maybe the Samyang 135mm F2.0 ED UMC is the right lens for you then...
  23. First: Thank You for your detailed answer. I appreciate that, especially since it's not that common on the internet these days. So you say the focal length of the XF80 changes when adjusting focus? That's interesting, because I thought one of their development goals was exactly to avoid this behaviour (by using two floating focusing groups etc.). meh... The main reason I wanted a telemacro was working distance, and the 220 mm from front lens to subject the Sigma 180/2.8 gives you is unbeatable anyway. I guess I'll try the XF80 with teleconverter, but if it doesn't convince me completely I think it's time for a dedicated macro solution. About xtrans CFA: the obvious thing I like most about it is it's lack of aa-filter. That obviously also works with a classic bayer pattern, they simply don't do it (that often). But another point that's not so obvious is the lack of color noise in dark areas. I see that every time I work with files I got from friends (be it Nikon, Canon or Sony), they always have color patterns in dark areas of the image. My Fuji simply doesn't. And this also should be a result from the xtrans CFA, because it has each of the three color informations in each row and column, whereas in standard bayer pattern red and blue each are just in every second row and column. (by the way, I use Capture One anyway, so I never had problems with demosaicing)
  • Create New...