liveimpressionphoto

...cologne with FUJI XF16 on X-T1
 
 
Gesendet von iPad mit Tapatalk

walking on sunshine x-pro 1
 
 
Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

now with the capture
 
 
Liveimpression
 
https://500px.com/liveimpression

...cologne with FUJI XF16 on X-T1
 
 
Gesendet von iPad mit Tapatalk

...cologne with FUJI XF16 on X-T1
 
 
Gesendet von iPad mit Tapatalk

walking on sunshine x-pro 1
 
 
Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

Sunset
Frankfurt
 

Dark FM
Frankfurt Germany

Great shot!
 
I'll also add one from Frankfurt, my hometown.
It was actually one of my first tries with the Fuji X-T1
 
 

Fuji X-T1| ISO 200 | 12 sec. | ƒ/10 | XF 23mm 1.4

The new library in Stuttgart, Germany, X-Pro1, 18-55mm
 

Stuttgart library 2 by Roman Gellmann
 

Stuttgart library by Roman Gellmann
 

Stuttgart library 3 (explored) by Roman Gellmann
 
Flickr / 500px
 

Amazing how often we're hearing this same story ;  I have the 5DIII (with expensive L glass)  but rarely use it anymore in favor of the X100S and X-T1.  I rented the X100S in 2013 and, after sixty years of film and digital photography, found the jpeg quality, especially with film simulation,  to be outstanding.  With the Canon, I shoot RAW and post process but with the Fujis, the jpeg images right of the camera are amazing. And I've enlarged the X100S jpegs to 20X30 and they are sharp corner to corner. So much easier to work with jpegs. Fuji has designed the X-Trans CMOS sensor, EXR Processor II and various Fujinon lenses to work together including lens corrections right in the camera.  Truly amazing - and I'm a Leicaphile who still has his original 1950 Leica IIIf in perfect operating condition. Fuji is leading the way.

I bought an X100T as a complement to my 5DIII a few months ago. At first, I struggled with the slower AF and lack of functions compared to my 5D. But now it has been weeks since I've even touched the Canon. Every time I want to shoot I find myself reaching for the X100T. 
 
Why? In part because it's just so much more fun to use. And because of that, I find myself making better pictures with it. Here are just a few situations recently when I chose the X100T instead of the 5D:
Outside in bright, mid-day sunlight. I find the built-in ND filter, leaf shutter, and built-in flash (for fill) to be indispensable in these conditions. Anytime I was going to be walking or out and about for a long period. For example, we rented some kayaks and paddled a couple of miles to a beach. I didn't want to lug my 5D in the kayak, but the X100T with OEM leather case attached to Luma shoulder strap was perfect. Another example was on a relatively long hike. Inside in poor light. Again, having a built-in flash was really helpful. At my daughter's friend's birthday party. This was both indoor and outdoor, a combination of several challenging lighting conditions, and a group of people I didn't know super well. I knew the X100T sensor would handle the light better, and I didn't want to bring a big, bulky camera to a gathering like that. I wanted to use the X100T's silent shutter as well. But of course it isn't just the user experience that makes the X100T so great. The image files it produces have a distinct look that strongly appeals to me. The natural colors (especially skin tones, which is crucial for my subject matter), the subtle tonal transitions, the "film-like" quality (yes, I know that phrase is overused but I struggle to describe it any other way). What's interesting is that other people that don't know much about photography also notice these qualities. They may have a hard time putting them into words, but they notice.
 
There are other features I love, and have a hard time living without now, such as the ability to spot meter on any selected AF point. This is a game changer for me, as I often shoot moving subjects in manual and this makes it practical to properly expose the subject without recomposing and losing the shot. And the added bonus is that with the EVF, I can see the exposure changing in real time. 
 
I still have the 5DIII plus 24-70 II and 70-200 IS, as well as a Sigma 50A. I love the fast AF (especially continuous) and shallow DOF this system affords me. But I just don't find myself using it much anymore. So I've taken the plunge and have ordered an X-T1 + 35/1.4. I'm going to use it for a while along with the X100T. If I like it, next step will be getting an f/2.8 24-70 equivalent. If I shoot with all of that for a few months and never find myself going for the 5DIII, I may switch over completely. 
 
Of course, a lot of the things I love about the X100T are unique to it, not general to Fuji, so it will be interesting to see how I like the X-T1. 

...XC 50-230
 
 
Liveimpression
 
https://500px.com/liveimpression

walking on sunshine x-pro 1
 
 
Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

summer flowers:
 
 
1 .


2.


3.


4.


6.


7.


8.

XF56 1.2 f1.2 ooc Astia
 
 
Liveimpression
 
https://500px.com/liveimpression

...XC 50-230
 
 
Liveimpression
 
https://500px.com/liveimpression

X-E1 + Voigtländer 75/2.5 (M39) ...
 

XE111330 by Enzio Harpaintner, auf Flickr

X-T1, Jupiter 9 (85mm f/2) wide open. Look ma, no noodling!  
 

XE111755 by Enzio Harpaintner, auf Flickr
 
X-E1 + Nikkor AI-S 200/4.0 (non Micro)

now with the capture
 
 
Liveimpression
 
https://500px.com/liveimpression

Im not quite sure that I agree with these statements in their totality. Are there problems with some legacy lenses? Of course...no system is going to be able to use every old lens available with complete compatibility. But as mdecorte said, most problems lie with wide angle lenses, especially those made for rangefinders due to theirs short flange distance and inherent lens design. The vast majority of SLR lenses should have little to no issue.
 
As for 'you cannot have the maximum possible IQ with an adapted lens", well this is a very open ended and unprovable statement. Define maximum IQ. I have never seen a maximum IQ rating for any lens I have ever used, either new or legacy. What I have seen is some AMAZING IMAGERY on flickr and other photo sites from users across the world using old legacy lenses. Go look up some photo examples of old Leica R lenses on any of the Sony A7's or Fuji cameras and tell me that they are not at maximum IQ, whatever that is.
 
I think the problem here is one that has bothered me for a long time now and is one of the reasons I don't post to forums as much as I used to. To often the discussion on these boards turns to lens sharpness, or quality of bokeh, or corner to corner sharpness, or chromatic aberrations or any number of things that mean absolutely nothing to image creation. 
 
Now don't get me wrong, you should always be aware of the limits of what your gear can do. A good artists should always pick his tools wisely. And again, if you are a paid professional shooting for a client the by all means you better have the right tool for the job. But for the most part in enthusiast circles way to much time and effort is spent discussing the technical specifications of lenses or bodies and the merits thereof and very little time is spent talking about things like compelling subject matter or interesting composition. The skill and knowledge and artistic vision of a photographer can overcome gear limitations any day of the week. I know this because of the simple fact that a great photographer can take a great photograph with crappy equipment. Just go look at some of the Pro Photog/Crappy Gear segments they do over at DigitalRev.
 
Here is a favorite saying of mine....There is no Pulitzer Prize for sharpness.
 
The majority of the great photographs of the 20th century, right up until the 80's when autofocus was introduced, were shot with manual focus lenses on film cameras. This is including all the great works from the great masters. I have seen plenty of work shot with the same old lenses on modern digital cameras that meet or exceed the vision and power of those old great photographers.
 
Photography is about image creation. Preferably the creation of a compelling image that can move the human soul. Or at least make you look at it and think. For the enthusiast photographer there is a incredible treasure trove of lenses from the film era out there just waiting to be picked up by you and used to create your artistic vision. Usually at much cheaper prices then modern lenses. Are these old lenses computer/CAD created with updated electronics and super cool coatings made from the rarest moon minerals? No, of course not. But I will be the first to admit that most of them (at least from the major manufacturers) are better lenses then I am a photographer. The day I can outshoot my FD 50/1.4 is the day I will have succeeded at Life.
 
Shoot more. Create more. Love light, not gear.
 
All of the images in these two albums were shot on old film lenses. I guess they aren't at maximum IQ.
 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/8539414@N07/sets/72157641534772013
https://www.flickr.com/photos/8539414@N07/sets/72157629936411965

Ah, well now you bring up some interesting things not mentioned in your first post.
 
You are entirely correct, there is a phenomenon occurring for the first time in photographic history (as far as I can tell) concerning a merging of old and new technology. There has been widespread acceptance of mounting old glass on the newest modern digital cameras. This started with DSLR's and has propagated even more with mirrorless cameras due to the ease with which such a merging can be accomplished.
 
As for many being younger photographers? I could easily see that. Younger generations are always willing to embrace newer ideas faster and with more enthusiasm then their elders. Older photographers learned how to perfect their craft in a certain way so when changes in technology open up new and sometimes radically different ways of doing things they are not as quick to accept them. Why learn a new way with a new system when my old way with my old gear works fine? A younger photographer will be more excited and see more possibilities since he is not tied to years of past experience. Having said that, Im over 40 and I have been adapting lenses for years, even back to my Canon DSLR's.
 
I personally think the advancement in mirrorless cameras, from the quality of the imagery, the maturing of the format, and advancements in things like EVF and focus peaking, have opened up an incredibly creative world for enthusiast photographers. To have immediate access to some of the best lenses ever made in the world and to be able to use them with almost full functionality (at least in aperture priority mode) and at usually reduced cost is a huge boon to the world of photography.
 
To be honest, I think we are in the Golden Age of photography that Henri Cartier Bresson once talked about. We are at a time and place now where almost all people in developed countries walk around with a camera on their person at all times. However these cellphone cameras, while capable of producing stunning imagery, are mostly used to document the most mundane of daily occurrences. So maybe the golden age isn't so golden as we are inundated with gig after gig of food pics and selfies.
 
All the more reason to bring back cheap, high quality lenses and put them on amazing little digital image creation boxes and put them in as many enthusiasts hands as possible.