Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

johnortt's Achievements

  1. Apologies Paul, I should have been clearer. I am in no way doubting my decision. I bought the X-Pro1 during the Amazon Black Friday deals so for £500 I got the camera and the 18 & 27mm lenses! I have also purchased the 35mm on top so I have no doubt that I will have an incredible experience. All for less than the cost of the T1 body alone (well almost)... I have to confess that until I saw the Pro on sale I was planning to buy the X-T1 so hence a lot of the reviews and spec lists I looked at were not for the X-Pro1 and I am now a little confused as to which features are unique to the newer cameras. My question related purely to making the most of what I will have available and to save me time looking for features which haven't yet (or wont ever) make it onto the pro. In the fullness of time I am certain I will but a T1 or T10 (just after the T2 or T20 comes out ) but in the meantime I will be delighted with the Pro. Thanks for the reply though Paul.
  2. Okay everyone, I have recently purchased an X-Pro1 which I am yet to get my hands on but I am just wanting to know what features the XT-1/XT-10 have which the Pro doesn't (due to firmware or hardware). Some are obvious such as the weather sealing on the XT-1, no firmware upgrade is going to fix that. Another is the focussing as I understand the XT-1 has both contrast and phase detection while the Pro has only contrast. Apologies if this has been asked before, but one of the very few downsides of all of the firmware updates fuji releases is that the reviews are out of date almost as soon as they are released. Thanks for your time, Regards, John
  3. According http://improvephotography.com/34818/iso-invariance/ the Fujis already are isoless, never mind the X-Pro2. But thankyou for giving me another technological term to look UP
  4. Thanks for all of the replies guys. I really appreciate everyone's input. On the subject of full frame and comparing it to medium and large format film, I do not think the full frame title is a direct reference to to quality. The only reason why digital cameras didn't just replace the 35mm format in sensor size was the very high cost of the early sensors. Meanwhile the 35mm lenses were used as the professional photographers (who were the only ones who could afford the early digital SLR's) already had a large collection of lenses. To the best of my knowledge all cameras prior to digital made use of the full frame that was available to them - It would be wasteful to build cameras with larger and heavier lenses than were needed. For this reason the reference to full frame is only because it differentiates between the two formats which otherwise look the same. Please feel free to correct me if I have misinterpreted anything.
  5. Thanks Black Pearl. I think I understand it about as much as I am going to I'll have to get my hands on a FF Camera and Lens to fully figure it out so I can do some side by side comparisons and compare. Thanks again, John
  6. Thanks for that explanation Black Pearl. So would I be right in saying an 85mm f1.8 lens on a full-frame camera should get very close to the same result as a 56mm f1.8 cropped lens on a cropped sensor? Apologies for labouring the issue but I want to make sure I have understood correctly.
  7. Thanks very much guys, I really appreciate you taking the time to explain that to me. So if I understand correctly... Using a lens designed for a full frame 35mm camera on a crop sensor is effectively like reducing the lens opening size as you are utilising less of the glass at the front of the lens. However that may not (should not) be the case for lenses designed for the smaller sensors as hopefully the lens has been optimised for the size of the sensor. Please correct me if I have misunderstood and thanks again for your help. Regards, John
  8. Hi Everyone, I am hoping for a little help with something that has been confusing me recently. I have seen a lot of posts in the forums where people are saying things along the lines of the 56mm f1.2 Fuji lens should really be considered as a f1.8 when compared to lenses on a full frame camera? Is this correct? The thread I saw it in most recently was: http://prometheus.med.utah.edu/~bwjones/2014/08/fuji-56mm-f1-2/ specifically the following post: I understand the theory, (ie bigger lenses mean more light) but surely this has all been factored into the Fuji lens calculations to ensure the comparisons are accurate. There are also factors such as the sensors proximity to the back of the lens on mirrorless cameras that to some extent must cancel the size issue out. I would really appreciate some help understanding this one. Thanks John
  9. I actually think it's a great idea as long as it doesn't remove the focus from the current af range. The only reason I would expect they haven't done so yet is because they may be leaving that market to the likes of Rokinon and Carl Zeiss (even though the current Zeiss lenses are AF).
  10. If you are a pro I think the X-Pro2 is likely to be the one to go for as you will already have a complement of lenses and one missed oportunity could be worth thousands. On the flip side for amateurs the Pro1 is a far better buy at current prices (especially Black Friday prices). You will save at least $1000 at current prices and that can go towards some lovely Fuji glass.
  11. I have just bought myself an X-pro1 today on offer for £499 with the 27 & 18 lenses and the Fuji Leather case. Needless to say it will be a long while before I will be considering the X-Pro2! I have to confess it was the XT1 which drew me into the Fuji world coming from a Canon 60D but the price of the Pro1 was too good to pass up on. At this price I have two lenses I wasn't expecting and I can still afford another really nice lens. I expect my next Fuji body will be an XT1 once the XT2 comes out and the price drops but we'll see.
  • Create New...