KwyjiboVanDeKamp

Here are two further examples of the Fujinon EBC 135mm f/2.5 @ f/~3.0. The shots are crops (1080) of the SOOC jpeg. NR -2, high tones -2, shadows -1, rest default. 1/200s hand-held. ISO 2500. DR400%. Distance: 1,5m.

Thanks for your appreciation!!! If you think that all/most FR readers are interested in such an article then do so. Thanks.

Great black & white shot! Here is an example of the CA creating PORST Tele MC Auto D 135mm f/2.8 M42. It's a cheap lens but it creates many CAs. Just look around the fur of the cat. This shot isn't SOOC but I just did some colour and contrast edits. No CA corrections. I think it was shot wide open at f/2.8. Falcon by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr

Sorry, thought posting night photographs is what this topic is all about!!! But obviously I missunderstood Trenton Talbot's post:

Some general thoughts of adapting old lenses to a mirrorless camera (Sony): https://youtu.be/fTyUmWN8KiA

Don't know if this helps: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flange_focal_distance M42 has a flange focal distance of 45,46mm. The Fuji-X of 17,7mm. So the difference is 27,76mm. An adapter (M42 to Fuji-X) always has to have this thickness.

@ Citral If it's technical possible why not asking for!?! (Don't compare it with things which can't be updated because it isn't technical possible!) Formerly technical things was build for a lifetime. Why not today? Some people don't want to buy the newest stuff year after yaer after year... So an update (within the realms of possibility) is a good thing I think! You can keep your old gear and also keep it to the highest, possible standard. (I know that this isn't in mind of a profit making company) At the X-E2 there aren't only AF issues when shooting sport. There are also these AF issues when it comes to low light situations. And that is where the camera shines!!! The low light performance is amazing (except the AF). So maybe with the new AF update this could get fixed.

For me adapting (old) lenses makes totally sense!!! I'm no portrait, model etc. shooter so about 1000 € for the XF56 or the XF90 is too much for me (because I use that focal length too rarely). I shoot everything like many others here. If I want good quality shots I use the XF35 or the XF18-55 which are great! And if I ever take a portrait of a person (and SOMEtimes I actually do) then I use a cheap old lens that gives the pictures a very special character especially cause of a nice bokeh. The old Fujinon 50mm f/1.4 is very sharp I think even wide open. Like Casa mentioned before sharpness isn't everything!!! I take pictures cause of the picture itself. I will never say: "Look at this totally ugly photo it is sooooo incredible sharp! Sharper than in real! Wow!" It's the same like the megapixel war! But that's a different kettle of fish. Here are three pictures (click to enlarge) taken with different lenses and I think they are all very sharp (enough sharp). The first one was taken with a 135mm at 1/80s. Look at the micro (focus point) it's sharp (and it isn't even the full resolution)! And that with a 40€ lens! Up by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr Bright-eyed contentment by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr Whistle by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr

Frozen Desert by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr L = fuLL impact by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr Through the flames by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr Black & white night snack by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr TAXI by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr Raining colours by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and pic! Just ordered a like new Helios 44M-6 for 60 €. I am totally curious how good it will be!!

I also want an updated X-E2! Or better: X-T10 specs + X-E body = X-E3!!! It's so simple

Hiding the wide-angle? Failed! by KwyjiboVanDeKamp Oh sorry, this isn't a Fuji cam shot. Hope you still like it. Black & white night snack by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr Tomatoes by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr Roaring by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr Through the flames by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr Workin' by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr

Bright-eyed contentment by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr

Because I've never used the XF56 so far (unfortunately) my choice would be 16 / 27 / 35

I would (and actually did) sell the XF23. (Great lens!!!! but...) For me it was too big for an all time carry around lens (on X-E2). My plans now are grabbing the XF16 for kinda "special" needs and also purchase the X100T (for all time carrying around). I think, that's a good compromise. If you just want to carry around one camera then think of combining the X100T (or S) with the WLC-X100 so you're coming close to 16mm. But in the end it's all according to your personal needs as Don said before.

For all of you who want a 135mm lens for good value maybe I could help http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/317-135mm-lens-comparison/

Really love your pics dv. Here's another but similar topic with a nice comparison test: http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/317-135mm-lens-comparison/

Focus was set on the flower left-most position. Sorry for my none mother tongue english

If one of you have a 135mm lens feel free to share some samples with us. This is the right place for it. Hey to everybody, this topic is for all of you who don't have the money for the XF 50-140 and for all who love the 135mm (203mm) focal length. It is inspired by this little test: http://forum.mflenses.com/twelve-2-8-135mm-lenses-compared-on-5dmkii-t39463.html and by the beautiful images of dv. http://ourphoto.org/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=6101 who also shared a similar topic: http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/71-ebc-fujinon-t-135mm-25-m42/ I've owned some M42 135mm lenses. If you're ever researching for such a lens there are at least three you can't ignore. 1 - Tair 11A 135mm f/2.8 with 20!!! aperture blades, 150-250 €. I've never tried the Tair because I read that it isn't as good as it seems. Just the Bokeh shall be gorgeous! 2 - Fujinon EBC 135mm f/2.5 with 6 aperture blades, 250-350 € 3 - Pentacon 135mm f/2.8 with 15 aperture blades, 40-100 € I've also owned a Fujinon 135mm f/3.5 M42. Good and compact lens for about 30 €. And I've owned a PORST Tele MC Auto D 135mm f/2.8 M42. Many CAs for about 20 €. Lens 2 and 3 I still own. I will compare them now side by side. Figure out which you like more. I do love both lenses very much and will keep them. I did some test shots with my beloved X-E2. I wanted to compare sharpness, colour, contrast and bokeh. All shots are taken on a tripod at ISO200. WB was set to auto (missed to set it manually). I set the focus when lens was open wide and then I stoped down. Didn't use focus peaking (because I don't trust it). All pics are SOOC jpegs with default settings except NR. NR was -2. Subject distance: 3m to the clown and about 13-15m to the background. Something else? Mmmmh... I think that's all. Hope you like it. Here's a link to the Flickr set: https://www.flickr.com/gp/93978937@N07/3M354q. For further questions feel free to ask! At the following pics the focus was set on the outline of the right eye.

At the pool by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, X-E2 + Takumar 50/1.4 M42 Nugget by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, X-E2 + Fujinon 55/1.8 M42 Photograph of a Fotograf by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, X-E2 + Takumar 50/1.4 M42 TAXI by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, X-E2 + XF 35/1.4 Smiling brick by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, X-E2 + XF 18-55/2.8-4 Next STOP: Bokeh! by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, X-E2 + XF 35/1.4 Season has just started - 2014 by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, X-E2 + XF 18-55/2.8-4 Falcon by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, X-E2 + Porst Tele MC Auto D 135/2.8 M42 Blue but not sad by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, X-E2 + XF 35/1.4

The following is just my personal and subjective opinion. I'm no tech geek or something. I've tried different M42 50/55mm lenses: Fujinon 55mm f/1.8 Fujinon 55mm f/2.2 Fujinon 50mm f/1.4 Asahi SMC Takumar 50mm f/1.4 M42 Fujinon 55/1.8: Great lens!!! Nothing to complain on. Sharp even wide open. And you get it for 20 - 40 €. Here are some examples from a not so good photographer: https://www.flickr.com/photos/93978937@N07/tags/fujinon55mmf18m42/ Fujinon 55/2.2: Even cheaper than the f/1.8 but not that good. Very soft wide open. Also ugly CAs in some situations. Save your money by not buying this one. Takumar 50/1.4: Seeams to be a great lens. And yes it is and also it isn't. Cause very soft wide open, good at f/2.8, great from f/4. Unfortunately it also shows some ugly CAs wide open in some situations. BUT (and that's a huge but): The BOKEH is gorgeous!!! Very creamy and harmonic!!! Also you can create some nice lens flare with this lens. If you're looking for a great bokeh lens the winner (of these four lenses) is definitely the Takumar!!! Price about 150 €. Whistle by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, auf Flickr Some other examples here: https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=93978937%40N07&tags=takumar&view_all=1 In the end I gave my Takumar to a friend of mine cause of purchasing the following lens. Fujinon 50/1.4: That's my personal winner! Also about 150 €. But you get a sharp image even wide open. Also you have this extra speed towards the Fujinon 55/1.8. Image quality is similar to the 55/1.8 I think. Couldn't test it side by side cause I don't have the 55/1.8 anymore. Bokeh is quite nice but not as great as the Takumar. Bright-eyed contentment by KwyjiboVanDeKamp, on Flickr By the way if you're looking for a 135mm lens it's the same as with the 50/55mm lenses. The old Fujinons are the best choice. I also tried different of these lenses and Fujinon always did the best job!! See my test here: http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/317-135mm-lens-comparison/ Like nowadays Fuji is and was the best lens manufacturer!!! IMHO Here's a link to a M42 database http://m42lens.com/ Hope I could help a little bit. Have a nice day.

Great images!! I have this lens too but still hadn't the need to use it. But it's good to see what results it creates. If there was in body IS the sharpness would be even slightly better I think.

Think so too. I have no problems with the distance marks on the lens. You should remember that it's the subject-sensor distance not the the subject-lens front distance.

Really love the 35mm too but I'm also unsatisfied with the autofocus when it comes to moving subjects or when light is gone. The 27mm and the 18mm work better I think.

I would grab the 16mm! I (just) own the 12mm Walimex Pro and since I have it I do like (ultra) wide-angle shots more than ever. You get so much into the frame although you're being fairly close to the subject. It's amazing!!! And yes, if you are really (really) close to the subject it offers distortion. But I think (without being an expert) that's cause of the physics of an (ultra) wide-angle lens. Here you can see some sample shots of the 12mm http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/169-samyang-12mm-f20-ncs-cs-x-mount/. Mine are not corrected in perspective or so. I just did some colour edits. I think the 16mm will even do a better job (cause of being a Fuji ) but without being that wide (like the 12mm). If I have enough money I will purchase the 16mm too. The 10-24mm might be a good choice too but cause of lower speed not the best for indoor shots of moving subjects. And here's another point for the 16mm: If you're willing to update your X-E1 to a X-T1 you'll still have a WR lens. Hope I could help. Have a nice day.