JaapD

... and here is the link for Fuji's RFC: http://www.fujifilm.com/support/digital_cameras/software/myfinepix_studio/rfc/

Not for Fuji. The lens correction parameters are really built in the EXIF data itself. With CaptureOne you can clearly see this when under lens correction "manufacturer Profile" is displayed. But with the other ones (LR...) that I mentioned it is also obvious when looking at the results. I think this is the same as with all kinds of mirrorless cameras and lenses. You do NOT need to select from a list of supported lenses such as with Nikon.

“If you have an old one you may not have any of the Fuji lenses in there” is not correct. Reason for this is that the Fuji lens correction parameters are built in the EXIF data of the RAF files themselves. With this you always get lens corrections, whether or not it’s an old lens. So Adobe, CaptureOne (from v.8 onwards), Fuji RFC and Silky all recognize every Fuji lens and its required lens corrections.

For RAW conversion you could use Fuji's free RFC converter, creating a 16 bit TIF. Then you could apply the NIK effects.

I am not impressed at all with this so called test. Iridient does not have automatic lens corrections, something Lightroom and CaptureOne both have. With Iridient omitting the lens correction functionality you can in many cases never compete on image quality, leaving in all kinds of chromatic, geometric, and vignetting distortions. For instance the 16-55 f/2.8 is heavily relying on these lens corrections. From looking at the so called test results I also get the idea that the tests have been carried out with the default sharpness settings, not optimized per app. These test results do not say anything about the final end result one could achieve with the individual app. In the past I have evaluated many different RAW converters and with Fuji RAF’s I’ll get the best results with CaptureOne, SilkyPix in second place.

Aping Leica design? I don’t think so and I’m glad for that, otherwise the Fuji cameras and lenses weren’t such top of the line products. Fuji is miles ahead of Leica design in almost every aspect. Keep in mind that product design is the combination of optics-, mechanics-, electronics-, and software design altogether.

Since you want to start and improve over time, if I were you I would continue to use your current equipment for about half a year and start your Fuji system with a fresh X-T2. I have the X-T1 and while it is a great camera I think it is in need for an upgrade.

I don't know why you find it ludicrous but I certainly don't. Even the best jpg with the least compression still has only 8 bit color where the RAW file has 14 bit color. That is reduction of a factor of 64 per color or a factor of 262144 for the complete color map. So per R,G,B color you only use 1/64th of what the camera captures and throw away the rest, being 98%. To me jpg is extremely lossy, maybe nice for pictures from your phone but not for serious camera work.

It has nothing to do with GPS. It's the Wifi funcion that's been activated.

The 50-140 is incredibly sharp. I don’t think you’ll see any differences from the print when using a fixed lens such as the 90mm. On the same time the zoom gives you the opportunity on maximizing the scene on the sensor, i.e. not needing to crop during post. I could not recommend the 10-24 though. The center of the image may be good but the edges end corners are not. There are many tests showing this. In the end I have settled with 14mm / 16-55mm / 50-140mm (in the near future also a 1.4x TC).

You are of course right prefering something smaller. However the image quality is significantly better and you also get the 16mm. 16 mm versus 18mm (24mm vs. 28mm on FF) is for me still a big step. I have the 18-55 and 16-55 but I never use the 18-55mm anymore. Bye the way, there is not much image quality difference between the 16mm and the 16-55mm from f/4 onwards. In some aspects the 16-55 mm @16mm is even better! My proposal: get the 16-55 and the 50-140.

I have seen this on many other lenses, including my Canon 70-200 f/2.8. This has to do with tolerances in the design, mostly temperature related aspects. You always need to be able to focus at infinity, over the complete temperature range between the extreme cold and heat. In order to guarantee this the lens is designed in such a way to mechanically focus beyond infinity. So there is nothing wrong with your lens.

What's the position of the aperture ring on the lens? Is it on "A"? If it's not on "A" you'll get the efffect that you'll describe.

I also think that AF-L should just lock, independant of any precondition such as face detection, eye focus or whatever.

I also find the Photozone’s 16-55mm lens test results disappointing. However I do not immediately think that this is related to a bad copy or something. It might have something to do with field curvature. Photozone is testing with a flat surface on a relatively short distance. Any field curvature could easily result is lesser performance at the edges and in the corners. This differs from Fuji vs Fuji lens tests as they test against ‘real world’ situations. I don’t photograph test charts myself therefore I take such kinds of tests with a grain of salt. They are by no means irrelevant though…… It is always best to judge lens performance on several test sites and check out ‘how’ the lens test is performed.

I think the looseness of the aperture ring is a design failure on all Fuji lenses. There should be a locking mechanism for the aperture ring's "A" position. The Canon FD lenses are a good example for this. I had numerous times where unwantedly the aperture ring moved away from the "A" position, for instance to f/22, resulting is a faulty picture. Sounds familiar? What's your idea on this?

For me 24Mpix is a mandatory requirement to upgrade. If not, then I don't see any added value in an X-T2 and I will continue to use my X-T1.

The new model shall most certainly be more expensive, that's what we already know when compairing XPRO2 vs. XPRO1. Another thing to consider is: how large do you want to print? Will 16Mpix be sufficient for this, independant of availability of an 24Mpix X-T2?

“Just avoid the air vents”. Not completely true. The largest risk for your lenses is the built up fungus. Because of this I would never store my lenses in a wooden (microorganisms!) and/or air tight box. I think a general camera bag is a good solution for storing your equipment. It’s free from dust and microorganisms, not air tight and still breathable. Then store at a relatively dry location.

I think it’s a good idea to read the complete Lenstip review instead of only looking at these two MTF plots. There is also another interesting comparison at: http://www.fujivsfuji.com/10-24mm-f4-vs-primes/ Have fun!

+1. I also see no added value to use UHS-2 cards for Photography. For several years I use the Extreme Pro 95Mb/s version, recently the 64Gb type. I have never had any failures with the Sandisk cards and can highly recommend them!

I can highly recommend the 16-55, it’s a great performer. I use it myself for landscape photography together with a 14mm and a 50-140mm. In the near future I will add a 1.4 TC and with this I have a complete package with top performing glass that it still of moderate size.

I find the 10-24 lacking in the corners and edges. The 14mm that I have is a much, much better performer here. Because of this I would not recommend the 10-24, especially not for architecture where you not only need to have a sharp image in the center. I don’t have the 16mm but I have the 16-55 f/2.8. This is a stellar performer overall. Since 16Mpix is not that much therse days I need to crop as much as possible in-camera and for this I choose the 16-55 zoom over the 16mm.

Yes, I will going to buy the 1.4x TC, to accompany my 50-140mm. I will trade in my 55-200mm which is a 'good' lens but not a 'great' lens in my opinion.

I also have a X-T1 and a 50-140mm, amongst other stuff. Everything works flawlessly, zero problems with all my Fuji cameras and lenses.