addicted2light

Given that Irident is free to try, why don't you see for yourself? The "painterly" effect comes up mostly with foliage and very fine detail. Personally I am reasonably happy with Lightroom most of the time for relatively small prints (at least up to A3+). But for A1 and maybe even A2 Irident (especially disabling noise reduction and distortion correction) and the free/donation-ware RawTherapee* both extract IMHO a huge amount of fine detail more than Lightroom, even using in LR the Bridgwood sharpening method(s): SHARPENING X-TRANS FILES IN ADOBE LIGHTROOM *In RawTherapee for the best results you'll have to use "Deconvolution Sharpening" and "Microcontrast" sharpening at the same time

+1 on the free Nik / Google plugin. It does the job and all it requires to know is the kind of medium you're printing on and the size of the print. Basically, for printing you have to sharpen the files so much that they start to look awfully oversharpened on screen, but no more than that. Besides the fact that the amount of sharpening needed will depend by the intended size, no camera software will sharpen that much the pictures.

Sorry for the short rant, but why Fuji (and most other manufacturers, for that matter) had to reinvent the wheel? The film camera era screw in eyepiece that even Fuji used on most of their medium format cameras worked a threat, was consistent across the line and you could easily interchange it for a bigger eyepiece or for correction lenses (for example if you had some peculiar eye defect not covered by the integrated diopter, if present) if you wished so. Now every friggin' camera has its own special eyepiece, assuming you can interchange it at all. Super annoying and unprofessional. End rant. Anyway, at this point I would use a thin layer of either Sugru, liquid rubber or black silicon-based sealant (the one used for bathrooms and windows panes) on the outside of the ring, where it joins the camera. The products I've recommended should all be rubber-friendly, but check the label first just to be sure.

Try leaving the camera without the battery, and with the battery door open, for 15-20 days sealed in a Tupperware or similar container on top of 1/2 Kg of rice (not necessary but recommended: rest the camera on a piece of cellophane or aluminum foil so that rice powder doesn't enter in it). Rice absorb humidity like crazy, and some of your problems might be humidity-related. If this doesn't work then I'm afraid you will have to send it off for repair. Good luck!

Now I'm confused: isn't the threaded part of the eyepiece made of metal? All it takes is a drop or two, so if you're worried from the possible consequences of the contact between the Loctite and the rubber part you can be careful and just "paint" a bit of the metal thread on the far side, avoiding the rubbery section. If instead the thread itself is made of rubber, or rubberized, than sorry but I've no experience in this regard. Maybe you could ask Loctite's (or one of the other manufacturers) customer service directly? I use this kind of product in situations where vibrations can unscrew a piece, mostly on bicycles or on the screws that keeps my tripod locks together*. *Not necessary for general use, but I keep an heavy tripod in the trunk of my car at all times, and the vibrations tend to unscrew the locks with time.

If I were you I wouldn't use hot glue, but a bit of thread locking adhesive: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thread-locking_fluid It will hold better, even in hot conditions, and with a bit of force you will still be able to unscrew the eyepiece should you want to (for example if an extended one shoul become available).

I don't shoot that much macro, but this is something it would be absolutely indispensable on a full frame camera even for landscape shots. On the A7r is impossible to have everything in focus even at f/16 with an 18mm lens, and in the process you loose a ton of resolution due diffraction anyway. This is one of the reasons I'm moving to Fuji, actually. You can't really see the difference between 36 and 24 - or even 16 - megapixels in reasonably sized prints (let's say under 60x90cm) unless you really stick your nose on the print itself or compare one made with an APS-c and one made with the A7r side by side. But you CAN see fairly easily that your foreground or background are blurry with the A7r shots, that is unless you - as I do - focus stack a lot. And focus stacking is a MAJOR pain, much more prone to stitching/combining (what's the right term?) software errors than HDR, at least with natural subjects (grass, trees etc.) using Enfuse or Photoshop CS6.

Nice! Another reason to add that to my shopping list (like I said, I want just try the X-T2 first, given it's almost here).

You're right, it would fit perfectly as another option past the DR ones. I'm not an engineer, so I might be sorely mistaken, but I don't think that should be hard to pull off. After all the camera always "knows" what values its pixels are registering, so it should be easy to just nudge the exposure in a way that avoids saturating them.

Yep, I've got an E-M10 (for the times I'm around on the bike, mostly because how small the lenses are) and you can select up to 7 shots for the HDR function. And as for customizable curves, if memory serves me right once upon a time, when dinosaurs still roamed the Earth, there was a third party software for the Nikon D70 that let you do exactly this. Like I said, though, I'd even settle for the possibility to "design" a curve directly in camera, as long as we can input several points and modify the different color channels separately.

Good to know, especially because I guess this means XPro2 and X-T2 as well will not have this limitation.

First of all: the following list might give someone the impression I'm disappointed with Fuji. I'm not. Quite the opposite, I'm slowly making a full switch from a Sony A7r based setup, building up my lens collection.* *Yes, the A7r is quite sharper, but you can see this only in VERY big prints. While it takes a lot less post processing to get the right colors with the Fuji, and this shows even in postage stamp sized prints... I'm waiting to be able to try in person the X-T2 against the X-Pro2 before making a final decision on the camera body, but in the meantime even my X-T10 is giving me superb results. But this doesn't mean that Fuji can't improve! So here we are, the list, in no particular order. FIRMWARE IMPROVEMENTS 1) Long term request of every Fuji user I know: we need a bracketing on at the very least 3, but better 5 shots with a 2 stop intervals. The existing one of 3 shots at 1 stop is useless 2) We need the ability to move the magnified area when checking the focus without the need to zoom out and move the focus point. On other cameras you can, and especially in landscape shots when you're checking the focus on the entire scene is mighty useful and way faster to be able to do it this way 3) Do you shoot landscapes yourselves? If so you should know too well that having a self timer that gets canceled every time you turn the camera off to preserve power during long hikes is a major pain. Please, make the self timer sticky 4) I prefer the aperture ring on the lens, but all the same many users have other preferences so let us use the rear dial to set the aperture on the lenses (even the ones with their own aperture ring) if we so wish 5) This is major, and it would set you apart for every other camera brand: let us upload, in camera, our own Lightroom or Photoshop curves ON TOP of the existing film simulations (not in alternative). Or at the very least we need the ability to create a curve with multiple points of our liking in camera.This would cut my post processing time a lot because at that point I'd have to do mostly localized adjustment, and it would make easier to be sure to have nailed the shot already in the field 6) I only shoot in manual mode. But I'd very much like a new kind of A mode (or, better, an option in the menu) where I can specifically tell the camera NOT to blow any highlight regardless how insignificantly small (without me having to constantly check the histogram). Basically an automatic ETTR 7) Switching white balance or film simulations in the Q menu should give us a preview of the change, like it already does if you do this via the general menu 8) Why can't we use the flash in continuous shooting??? If the problem is that it would be unable to keep up, give us at least the choice to abilitate the flash so it will fire as long as it can; after all few of us use continuous shooting for more than a short 3 or 4 frame burst just to nail the moment 9) I find them perfect for my tastes, but it sure would be nice for users coming from other brands to be able to change the direction of the dials, much like you already permit with the focus ring BODY IMPROVEMENTS 10) A proper eyepiece shielding the eye from extraneous light is a must for a camera, so please no more screw ups like the one on the X-T10; pick a standard, like the screw in ones of the pro Nikon bodies that you used on your medium format cameras, for example, and stick with it for all your models 11) It sure would be nice to have an Arca-Swiss compatible base (and left side...L bracket style) instead of a "plain" camera base Here you have it, and I'd be happy to discuss it further if you just send me a complimentary X-T2

True. In this regards, I wish Fuji gave us more freedom to reassign buttons etc., a bit like Olympus does (but not is such a messy way...).

You could always carry one USB charger (they go for 7/8$ on ebay or amazon) plus one of those USB batteries made to recharge laptops and cellphones. There are models that will let you charge a camera battery 4 to 10 times (depending on how much power they hold to begin with). They are fairly small and light, they hold the charge very well (so you can charge them at home before even leaving for Peru), and they do not depend on the presence of the sun.

At least on the X-T10 (I don't own an X-Pro1) when you shoot this way you don't loose the possibility to lock the exposure. AE-L gets simply reassigned to the shutter button, meaning that an half press will lock the exposure (that, btw, is the way I've set all my cameras during the years anyway).

I don't generally carry the Fuji when cycling, but a smaller Olympus Em-10 (and before that a really compact Sony Nex-7 plus a Sigma 35 Art). The Olympus plus its sharp 14-42 kit zoom (28-85mm eq.) and a Panasonic 35-100 (70-200 eq.) fit (barely, a Panasonic GM5 plus the 12-32 pancake would be a better choice) into a top tube bag like this one: http://www.roswheel.eu/phonebag/ As an added bonus I can keep my phone with the GPS running in the central pocket to see where I'm going. If I'm carrying more stuff or the Fuji kit: - for one day rides, I just strap a small Lowepro fannypack on the rear rack; in that I can carry one camera and up to 3/4 lenses - for tours I stick all the kit in an handlebar bag or in the pannier farthest from traffic (so the right one unless you live in the UK or the like, where they drive on the left) If at all possible I avoid though putting the camera: - in a backpack, because you never know when you're gonna kiss the asphalt, and because on the uphills that here range generally from 15 to 24% I sweat like a race horse... - or in the left side pannier, because you never know when some idiot driver is gonna smack the panniers with his car trying to pass you.

Whichever of the two will come down to a reasonable price first (reasonable for an APS-c, considering the price point the competitors are selling their cameras). I'd love to use the OVF for human subjects (EVF in low light has too much lag for my taste, at least on the X-T10), and the tilt screen for landscapes (I'm not fond anymore of having to crawl in the mud to frame a shot). In the end I might well end up with an old XPro1 for reportage/street and the X-T2 for landscape work.

The OP is talking about the 16-55, but I was answering to Hugh that I think was referring to the 16-50 given he qualifies it as a lens "economical by Fuji standards". But in the end I too got my lenses mixed up

The 16-55 might be cheap, but it is so only in price.* *A bit of background: during the last 20/30 years I've shot mostly landscapes and street with everything from 35mm with pro glass (Canon L, Leica, Zeiss etc.) to a Linhof Technica 5x7" / 13x18cm; so I know a sharp lens when I see one, or through one I was "forced" to buy the 16-55 in kit with the X-T10, because the other kit with the 18-55 wasn't available at the brick-and-mortar shop where I found the camera with a nice discount (cheaper than online, strangely enough). I planned to sell the lens straight out of the bat and replace it with the 18-55, but luckily I tried it first. My guess - but I have no data to support this - is that with such a cheap lens there might be more sample variation than with a more expensive piece of glass. If so I got lucky: at least my sample is really sharp, keeping its own against my adapted Contax Zeiss and MInolta M-Rokkor glass. And I've seen several head-to-head reviews agains the 18-55 where the differences where all but negligible. Sure, most of the primes I have are sharper, especially at the borders, but at least on the (not so exigent) 16Mp sensor the differences in real use are small enough to be often overcome by the convenience of the OIS alone. And even if I have the lens only from a few months, it has already contributed several images to my portfolios.

Ok, you shoot street and landscapes, but to suggest you another lens we'd have to know how you like to shoot, your "style" so to speak. For example I find myself shooting many landscapes at 85mm (on full frame), and very rarely taking out the 18mm (again, on full frame). On the other hand I seem to "see" like a 24mm ff lens when I 'm shooting street. YMMV. Anyway, considering that landscapes don't generally go anywhere you could always stitch should you need something wider than the 16mm you already have. But there is no substitute for a longer lens, so if I were you I'd buy: - the 18/2 (or the 27/2.8 if its focal length suits your style better) for street - both sharp, compact and unobtrusive - the 50-230 for landscapes - lighter to carry around than the 55-200 and with a smidge more reach

Another thing: do you happen to have the spot metering linked to the focus point and maybe you're shooting in Auto? If so what you experience in such cases might be the camera simply trying to render as a 18% tone whatever object the focus point happens to be pointed at.

Well, considering nobody seem to have a clue I'll chime in even if I'm not sure my suspicion is actually correct. When you half-press the shutter the camera closes the aperture on the lens at the selected value. Normally the aperture is kept fully open to avoid hindering AF speed, and if the light on the scene is too much for the EVF to "electronically" compensate then the image in the viewfinder, before you half-press the shutter causing the aperture to close, will look too bright. I see this happening sometimes even on my X-T10. What I'm not sure is why the final image does look bright, instead of darker. Try two things to narrow down the problem (if it is a problem at all): - set the aperture fully open, and see if this still happens; if it doesn't then it is something aperture-related - switch "Preview exp. in manual mode" (on the X-T10 is in the 1st setup menu > screen set-up > Preview exp. in manual mode) on or off (depending its current status) and see if it makes a difference Hope this helps.