Izel_Photography

If you mean, have any the shots in my port had the colour balance altered to bring it in line with the opposing half, then no. The WB for the sky is the same for the ground, i.e. the only effect the filter has is to restrain the amount of light. Personally, I would use any filter that altered the actual colour. When processing 100's - 1000's of shots a month you need to be able to get through the work as quickly as possible. Having to balance WB between sky and land would make it more cost efficient to buy Lee Filters due to time saved. I don't have actual examples of a shot with and without filters.... if I notice a cast I don't use them, if I don't, I do :-)

That red on the left reminds me of Cokin filters, I've certainly never experienced that colour shift. That was the reason I binned the Cokin filters i had, naff.

I can only speak from experience and that is, not once have I had to remove a colour cast from a landscape shot taken when using Hitech filters. That's not to say you haven't had a problem... duff set maybe?!?! I'm onto my third set now.... tend to mistreat them a little when out in the mountains unfortunately. You'll see a few landscape shots here that I've taken while using Hitech filters. Both controlling sky and foreground in snow

Renaming won't make a difference. Version number will be embeded A very basic description of what you'd need to do. Hack encryption, be good with assembler language to decompile the app (not many good decompiler apps), find location of version data (sometimes easier said than done), make sure there are no links / references to the Version data that could screw other functions up that reference it, recompile it. Then, pray to god it doesn't screw your camera up. Seriously, don't go there.... unless of course you are a top rate programmer (but I doubt you'd be asking this if that were true). The chances are you'll brick your camera... it's not worth the risk.

Surprise Bonus! If they hung on to every camera because they had an idea that a new feature may work but needed developing first, they'd never release any camera's. As long as the new camera's have sufficient upgrades to them to warrant being a "New Camera" then great. Depending on the target audience, I'd expect a new release between 1 - 3 years (consumer being 1 & Pro being 3). I'd love to see Fuji release a high resolution studio version of an X-T1, one that doesn't need to perform at high ISO but gives you 36mp with solid image performance between 200 & 1600 ISO. Then I could have one for low light work and the other for studio. Dreaming I know!

From my 2 years experience with Fuji, X-Pro1, X-E1 & now a couple of T1's, I've never had a problem that that was connected to suspect FW. That is, a bug and not something that was working as intended but didn't like. I guess there will have been the odd bug or two but probably so insignificant I never noticed them.

I find this fact quite sad really. They are producing fantastic kit and should be praised, respected and feel good about what they do. Instead, it sounds like they are treading on eggshells worrying about how a large bunch of over demanding customers will react like. Some of them remind me of you spoilt brats that got everything they asked for from their parents and if they didn't get it, they'd scream and scream and scream until they were sick The self-entitled brigade do tend to wind me up a little

3-4 hours in crappy high up in the mountain typical British weather type of conditions. Camera attached to backback via Capture Clip with lens pointing down. Just seemed to run off with no misting, well, the gales probably blew a lot off as well! It was a bit annoying looking through a wet view finder though! I have the camera to hand waiting for breaks in the cloud etc. Got some great snow storm shots of the Torridon mountains this way, 12 shots stitched together. Good fun! Before risking it though and Knowing what could happen in the mountains, I tested it out by placing the camera in the shower while switched on for 5-10 mins..... gave the bugga a socking it would truly remember. When it survived that, I knew I could take it out and not give a flying F..... whether the heavens opened or not. Don't have time to pack and unpack gear every 5 mins, besides, by the time you get it out the opportunity has often gone. Edit. Just to point out, with the lens pointing down, the lens mount is more or less completely sheltered from the rain. I'd consider this being the weakest link in the damp proofing chain!

Interesting point that he's making, I've never experienced anything like that happening myself. I originally bought the Lee Filter holder when I had my Canon 5d mkii and used it with the 17-40L and tamron 28-75 f/2.8. And I used to really throw that thing around. The HiTech one also looks really strong but you may need to remove one of the layers on the filter holder as It has quite a deep profile, it looks like it will cause vignetting with UWA lenses. I stacked .6 & .9 Hitech grads on top of each over with no colour shift at all. Overall, they seem to offer a very good system!

For ND grads I would use Lee Filters 100mm Foundation Kit holder. There is no better holder. The Cokin one I had fell to bits easily. As far as the filters themselves go, Cokin = colour tint and Lee Filters = perfection, at a price. But there is another option. Hitech. I've used these filters for some years now and they are a lot cheaper than Lee Filters but they have zero tint, even when stacked. Well worth considering! I buy them from Teamworks, a very good company with excellent customer service etc,

Bloody hell man, how did I miss that?!!?!? It's also there on the X-T1 I hate menu diving for settings I have to change frequently, now just need it as an option for the Custom Setting modes! Thanks for the heads up, much appreciated!!!

I wish you could select / set "Preview Exp. /WB" etc in custom settings so you could flip from a studio "Strobe" setup to an outdoor "No Flash" setup. Or at least have it as an option in the Q menu.

Wedding photography is indeed a large business, but compared to Commercial Photography i.e. advertising, editorial, Landscape, food & product etc, it really isn't that huge. The professional photography industry is made up of many segments and many get by perfectly without IS never mind IBIS. I don't think Canon have had many issues finding people to buy the EF-24-70 f/2.8 II USM. For good reason, in most cases in Commercial Photography, it's not needed. In reality, Low light photography is actually a niche requirement, a specialist area. Later on Fuji will no doubt flesh out their range but they will cater for the biggest groups first, whether it includes us or not. Besides, take a look around (not just selectively looking for people who want IS in the 16-55) and you will see many examples & reviews of people using this lens in wedding photography and are perfectly happy with it. This guy managed ok. Some rather nice low light shots amongst them. And to quote another "One thing that might cause someone to pause, is that this lens does not have image stabilization. Unless you’re shooting a lot of video, in which case you probably don’t own the X-T1 anyway, the lack of image stabilization is practically a non issue." - from Here And this was from the top of the 1st page searching "fuji 16-55 f/2.8 for wedding photography". The reviews go and one and I did not find any that had a problem. But then again, I didn't search for the problem cases which of course are way out numbered by people who are happy with it. I have no doubt IBIS will arrive at some point. I just hope it doesn't detract to much for the many so a few can use non IS lenses. And third party lens use is a small segment of the overall market.

Yeah, spot on. No interest in returning to FF, could do with some extra resolution, 24mp should about do it. That said, if they brought out a high resolution version for lower ISO operation for studio work, I'd be up for one of those as well! I like the developments Sony are making, I just couldn't go back to them though. I've seen some of their test shots with lenses wide open and they don't really compare to Fuji. Stepped down a touch and they are awesome but the controls and menu diving..... no, just no!

I use a couple of X-T1's in studio with several strobes and up to 6 groups of flashes. All manual and controlled from the top of the camera. Personally, especially for studio work, I wouldn't use TTL, I want to manually balance the light from each source. Fuji do need to get their act together and come up with better flashes but that doesn't mean there isn't a solution at the moment. They also need to sort out video. For personal use I couldn't care less about video but, clients do want it and with high internet speeds and low cost storage, it's becoming more and more popular. There's a whole host of things that I would want Fuji to spend time on before IBIS.

Yes I can read, write and think logically, maybe you should try, it feels good! Did you ever stop to think that I may use the 16-55 & 50-140 when weight is not an issue? And, that when it is I pop on a 14mm f/2.8, 23 f/1.4 or 35mm f/1.4? You see, that's called flexibility unlike IBIS which has to stay on 100% of the time. I use Fuji for the day job because it's flexible, slap on the vertical grip + 50-140 or 56mm and take studio portraits. Take the grip off and pop on the 16-55 and head out into the mountains in crap weather looking for dramatic light. Use the T1 with a 10-24 or the 23mm prime to capture climbing action shots high up. If I need to take shots in low light, the 23 f/1.4, 35 f/1.4 or the 56 f/1.2 comes out to play. It's ALL about IQ & FLEXIBILITY. I've never once found myself feeling that I couldn't get that shot but I could if only I had IBIS. There seems to be a lot of irrational belief that this is the B all and end all in features. Especially when in a lot of cases the problems can be solved by picking up the right lens for the job, setting it correctly and using good technique. "You should drop the ad hominem attacks." That's rich coming from you, just look at the way you start your replies to people. You can't be surprised the way people respond back!

No not really. I manage to get by perfectly well, even when using the 16-55 f/2.8. The only time I want IS is for long lenses like the 50-140. The likes of the 10-24, I just switch it off. I'd much rather see improved high ISO handling than see IBIS which adds weight, reduces battery life and introduces potential for technical problems, i.e. more moving parts to go wrong. I know you can switch it off but that won't reduce the weight or bulk added by IBIS. Look at the Sony A7r (450g) and the A7r mkii (650g) 44% weight increase applied all the time wether you need it or not. The A7r mkii is only 120g lighter than a Canon 6d FF DSLR. Mirrorless will end up just as heavy as a DSLR at this rate, sort of defeats the point!

Provided the T2 has the 24mp sensor, it will be T2 over Pro2. That extra headroom for cropping etc while maintaining good resolution is the clincher. For me, the T1 just works better in the studio with and without the vertical grip, more flexibility. I did like the Pro1 but the OVF had limited use when you using anything over 60mm. The grip was not really flexible when going from landscape to portrait with larger lenses as well. Pro1 buttons were way better than the T1 though. If you shoot mainly street then a Pro2 would be the way to go. Neither option is the right or wrong choice, it just comes down to what you shoot.

No brainer for me, X-T2.... work before play. I like the OVF on my X100T (and previously X-Pro) but for work, the T1's are the best and a T2 with increased resolution would be great. Buy in an instant.

From a business perspective it makes sense. If you use too much available resource updating FW for older equipment, you have less resource to develop FW for current / Future equipment. The more and more cameras that are released, the harder it becomes to balance available resource without impacting on future development and expansion of the company. Slow / No development = drop in profits = potential end of department as R&D capital is moved to better performing teams that return more money for their shareholders. We don't have to like it but, that tends to be the way of business. If we don't want to be looking at our X Cams in the future and thinking, "My, didn't they produce great cameras, shame they had to stop". Then we have to accept we can't have FW updates for models that have been superseded (other than bugs). If they do give us them, then we should be thankful rather than expect / demand them. I remember when I first started out. I used Canon's EOS XXD range before moving to their 5D range. There seemed to be a new camera each year with minor upgrades. Some better than others but a lot of the time just evolution. I just made a point of upgrading my camera every 2nd - 3rd year. I don't recall many FW upgrades at all, other than very minor things but mainly bugs. In the end you accept that can't have everything that is on the new model and provided your camera does the job, great, keep it until it needs replacing. If something significant came out, then maybe trade in the old camera. I have the X100T at the moment but when the replacement comes out, I don't expect they will update it. Thankfully, the camera will be just as good as it is today.