persco

is it possible that something activates the sensor which toggles between LCD and EVF (if you’ve set the camera to work with this?).
 
http://fujifilm-dsc.com/en-int/manual/x-e2s/menu_setup/evf_lcd/index.html
 
“....The eye sensor turns the viewfinder on when you put your eye to the viewfinder and turns it off when you take your eye away (note that the eye sensor may respond to objects other than your eye or to light shining directly on the sensor). If automatic display selection is enabled, the LCD monitor will turn on when the viewfinder turns off...."

Awesome! I can tell you the 16-55 is awful for hiking. It's just so damn heavy. I use the peak designs capture clip and it's too heavy to rest on my shoulder all day. I have many Fuji lenses and it's the first I would get rid of if/when needed. The image quality isn't close enough to the primes to justify the weight of the fixed f/2.8 zoom.

Shot a short video of the noisy little thing. Tom H.--same noise as yours? 
 

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

X-T1. 23mm f 1.4 (NON WR)
 
I was photographing in the rain in Washington DC.
 
I had been warned of an approaching thunderstorm. I'm not from the east coast and didn't realize how suddenly and violent these things can be. In a matter of seconds it was suddenly like standing under the shower with a 50 MPH wind. Even dropping to my knees under the umbrella did nothing.
 
However, I was having a fun time. All excited. I was only 100 feet from the hotel lobby (DuPont Circle).
 
I knew my camera was getting soaked but I thought it would be ok.
 
In two seconds I was totally soaked. I stayed out shooting for another five minutes.
 
In the hotel I noticed the viewfinder display had condensation on it.
 
At this point I should have REMOVED THE BATTERY.
 
I did not.
 
The camera functioned for the next few minutes as I chimped pictures. Then it died. It never came on again. I tried drying it in rice etc. No good.
 
In the end it was "beyond economical repair" and I got an insurance payment from my camera homeowners "rider policy".
 
(FYI normal homeowners insurance doesn't cover loss outside of the home. Go figure. Outside of the home is extra $$$).
 
In the end I got a shot I like a lot. I got insurance money for my X-T1. I learned to adjust to life with a single X-T10. I learned non WR lenses are NON WR. It was my own fault. Fuji never claimed the X-T1 and 23 f1.4 are WR.
 
I want the 23 f2 WR.
 
Peter
 

Here's one from a few weeks back whilst in Zimbabwe...
 
 

The lens is also suitable for street photography
 

and off you go by gurkendoktor, on Flickr

Spent some time today playing with Fuji XF 27mm 2.8 lens. Disassembly went well, and I was able to remove one very big and annoying dust particle.
 
Sharing these photos just to show how this nice tiny pancake lens is constructed inside.
I was not able to disassemble main front lens module thought. Probably the front plate can be unscrewed/removed somehow, but it can be also put on glue. At least the rear lens group was secured with tiny glue applications in.
 
 
Fuji XF 27mm 2.8 - mount parts

 
Fuji XF 27mm 2.8 - main lens frame with autofocus drive and focus ring

 
Fuji XF 27mm 2.8 - inner lens module where all glass is located

 
Fuji XF 27mm 2.8 - rear lens module is secured with square glue applications

 

To me the question of Image Quality is simply answered by the XPro2 images.  The Sensor and processor in the two cameras are the same so I would expect the Image Quality of the two to be VERY similar if not the same.  My pre-order was based on the new sensor and other new features that provide what I really see as an improvement on a camera that i didn't think could be improved (XT-1).  
 
Based on the rumors I knew what I was looking for so 7/7 early morning I put my order in.  I've never pre-ordered anything before - this wait is killing me!!!!  

There is no crop factor on Fujifilm XF lenses, because these lenses have been designed for X-Mount and APS-C. So they are perfectly "full-frame". You'd have to adapt XF lenses to MFT cameras (or smaller) in order to achieve any crop. The new Hasselblad lenses for the new Hasselblad medium format camera are full-frame, too, as they are specifically designed for the 44x33mm sensor inside this camera. However, adapting Hasselblad H series lenses on this camera will result in a crop factor, because the H series covers a larger image circle.
 
So crop factors become relevant in systems that support more than one sensor size (like the mentioned Hasselblads, pretty much all legacy (D)SLR systems, but also Sony's new mirrorless system that features a mount that's used for APS-C and 24x36mm sensors).
 
When you adapt a lens that was made for 24x36 film on APS-C, you only use a cropped portion of the actual image circle, so there is a crop factor to describe that portion and the resulting image impression based on the larger (aka full-frame, uncropped) image circle. That's why we have focal reducers like Speed Booster Ultra or Lens Turbo II, which let us use 24x36mm lenses on APS-C in a way like they would perform on a full-frame camera (and with one stop of additional brightness, hence the Speed Booster name).
 
Referring to "full-frame" as a synonym to 24x36mm cameras is basically a lazy relict of the past, based on the fact that many legacy users only know and used that format. That's why they use it as a reference point for everything, which results in crazy stuff like "crop factors" below 1 for medium format lenses. All this will probably vanish when the current regime of "old farts" will be replaced by the "smartphone generation" who couldn't care less about such relicts. 

You are aware that in the long history of photography, the "standard" 35mm film format makes no sense right ?
 
It was mostly marketing that pushed it to be the currently known "standard" format. For a long time it was mostly large and medium format. The 35mm format was considered something silly and utterly small compared to the larger brethren.
 
And if you are wondering why not FF Fuji, I am simply going to repost a video of Zack Arias:

 
He pretty much sums it up for a lot of APS-C users. Another point for APS-C, at least for me, focal reducers. Agreed, it adds some softness but getting about a stop worth of light it's just plain great.

That's the great idea for travel use.
More scratches = less chances to be stolen.

Writing this with a smile I thank everyone of you for their non sugar coated comments on my latest "crazy act".
Pierre comments is no surprise and understandable , my dad actually act the same way, slapping on my 40 years old head when he saw what I did.
But let me explain why I did it beside the fact that I like to do it. I'm a modeler, scale car modeler that is. Replicate the old worn out look of old cars on to 1/10 scale. When I was young I was fascinated with old cameras especially those from war photographers. So yes you're right that what I did is not real and fake but I know for sure being just a enthusiasts, my gear won't look like that even when I'm dead. So I replicated to my taste. I loved I even more now and it's a keeper.
Digital cameras comes and goes, I'm not destroying it just cosmetic enhancements, every scratch I have made is well thought and calculated.
Writing this is by no means to win Pierre or anybody over to like what I did. You don't like? Me happy Meaning there won't be any other like mine.
 
Here's a picture of my other hobby beside taking pictures.
Thanks for watching and feel free free to comment.

Wow. I'm new to this forum, but I'm on a few other hobby related ones. I'm always amazed by people's negativity. Photography is an art, and the camera is the tool. If someone chooses to personalize their tool and share it, let them. If you don't care for it, then keep your snippy little comments to yourself.
 
If you don't have anything nice to say, than don't say it all. Something we all should have learned in kindergarten.

I have owned the MeFoto Backpacker for a few months now and it's really compact - 12.7" and just over 2 lbs. I considered the RRS TQC-14, but it's $1000+ CAD, and it's still quite bulky at 17" folded up. I don't like the ballhead on the MeFoto, though. So I just ordered a RRS BH-30 for it. I think this will be a fairly stable, compact combo.

The 12mm f2.0 ROKINON (Samyang) is the ideal lens for astro-photography.
With large open aperture and shutter speeds between 25-30 seconds at ISO 1600 you achieve great results.
I like the lens and bought it specially for the night and astrophotography.
 
Moon light

Flickr   Volcano Teide, Tenerife

Wall watching for peace. by Begi Nabara, on Flickr

both passions combined...
 
X-T1 & Samyang 12mm f2 <-> Kawasaki Z1000
 

 

Lucky day in Scotland

One of my first HDRs.

Fairytale

12mm and Lee Big stopper 4.3 sec exposure
 

Hi there. Just got my Fuji X-T1 about 4 months ago and I've been learning to use it. I have traveled extensively with my wife on a couple of extended sabbaticals and we're planning to leave again in a year for several years. We always took a point and shoot with us, but have decided to get more serious about our photography after I started an Instagram feed that has become fairly popular (@persco_).
 
We did not want to carry around a full DSLR and lenses with us, so I found my way to the X-T1 and I LOVE this camera. I'm having a blast learning to shoot with a real camera. Looking forward to learning lots more here.
 
Thanks for having me...

Fuji X is great for landscape. Don't let all the megapixels guys fool you. I get very acceptable 20x30 prints from my XT-1 - such as this... with 18-55mm @ ISO 200.

Issyk-Kol lake, Kyrgyzstan: early morning (XP-1 + Jupiter 37A)