gordonrussell76

Lulian, You kind of made his point for him, your arguments are based on specs not image quality, a myopic viewpoint I see so many people these days focused on objective analysis of camera rather than Subjective. Objective analysis is best suited to technical and scientific pursuits. Subjective is suited more to the Arts which as technical as photography can become it is still an art. Put another way I never hear art historians saying that Van Gogh's work is better than Da Vincis because he used a higher quality of beeswax when he made his oil paints. " Hmm Van Gogh is clearly better, his oil paints were 24ml beeswax not 16 ml beeswax". How pathetic does that sound. Now replace ml with Mp and you realize how stupid all this is. G

Tenba DNA 8 and 11 DNA 8 - I have got the X-T1 and 10-24/35mm/56mm or 18/27/35/18-135 or 10-14/18-135/35/27 10-24/18-55/55-200 etc, so basically any camera and 3 lens comfortably (apart from 50-140mm and 100-400mm) and sometimes 4 if you are going mainly primes. DNA 11, you can fit camera in middle section width ways and get 4 lens on either side, it has depth to accomodate 50-140 so you could happily get 4-5 lens in here or 4 lens a flash/microtripod/gorilla etc. Its much less subtle. The DNA 8 for small and discreet is great and in the graphite or other colours looks more like a cycle messenger bag than a camera bag. DNA 8 has served me exceptionally well, I have not bought the DNA11 yet, but if I owned a 50-140mm it would become a neccessity

Get the 10-24mm hugely versatile lens. Great for street, great ofr video.

Maybe teh 35 1.4 has its AF issues, but some of my best/favorite photo's have come from that lens. and when it nails focus boy does it nail focus. I have found on my X-T1 since version 4 firmware came out that the Zone focus mode is your friend with this lens for everything apart from Blured DOF style portraits. For street F1.4-4 and ZF is very fast and get you there no problems for portraits where you want the eye in focus Single AF plus AF+MF mode and MF if you have the chance to really nail it is the way forward. Mixture of these techniques gives me AF I am happy with

Milandro I was just pulling your leg, I don't want to convince you, just giving my thoughts. In terms of buggyness, my other hobby is music and I have my own home studio, photography has been like a balmy summer holiday of bugs in comparison. I have a PC and mixing desk various peripherals and software and plugins, and everything has to work well together or it goes pear shaped. In adidition when somethign does not work the troublshooting is extremely complicated. The last Fuji firmware bug was miniscule in comparison and in terms of its impact to me. Why becuase I had not ugraded yet, I read about it and then waited. Not being bleeding edge is a lesson I learned a long time ago in IT. N-1 is the way forward.

addicted2light Your quote below is bang on with the especially an Adobe rae converter. However in my experience with Capture 1 the demosaicing algo's do a much better job and I find that the default sharpening amount is usually enough with a well focused shot. I add more mainly for effect, although the clarity slider is usually best for this. I have no complaints about sharpness, in fact sometimes I am moving the slider the other way with the 56mm and 90mm becuase they are sometimes unflatteringly sharp.

Jump I had a GH1, and I loved that camera, but the depth you get with Fuji is great plus its flexible, you can do OOC JPegs with the FUji colour profiles. IN addition LR has them built in so if you want to post process RAW's you can play with the Simulation at the same time you are deciding on Dynamic range and other factors, you can really go to town. (This also works with C1 and other editors that allow you to import your own .icc files, these are available from a thread on DPReview search .icc Fuji X-E1 and Scottie wang, the thread has profiles fro the X-E1 and X-T1 which covers of both Xtrans sensors 1 and 2, i am sure 3 will be forthcoming. G

Hi there So the Sony range of cameras have the following MP ratings. I am going to ignore the A7s mkI and II as they are aimed at lowlight and its unfair to make comparisons on resolution with them as that's not there bag. A7 - 24 MP A7R - 36Mp A7ii - 24MP A7Rii - 42MP Fuji claim that thanks to no AA filter and the nature of the X-Trans sensor that there sensors resolve to a higher equivalent than the MP rating suggests, this figure is in brackets. The Fuji X-Trans II sensor (X-T1/10/Pro1/ X-E2) = 16MP (24MP) The Fuji X-Trans III sensor (Xpro2 and future X-T2 ) = 24MP (36MP) So if you buy an X-Pro 2 even going by the lower rating it has an equivalent resolution to the A7I and II and can just about touch the A7R. All of this is not taking into account that these MP counts are spread over a much smaller surface so that does increase effective/percieved resolution (perhaps that is where Fuji are getting the figures in brackets. Bottom line the Sony A7RII is going to resolve more detail than the X-Pro 2, the A7R will resolve more detail than the rest of the Fuji bodies and the A7 is probably a tie. Another factor. Fuji lenses, Sony have some gems in their line up and some more coming, but as a balanced range of lens Fuji cannot be beaten, in every segment of the line up the lenses excel, there is not a bad lens in the bunch in terms of sharpenss. Some have slower than ideal AF with older bodies and that it in terms of criticism. Even the 'kit' lens is sharper than some primes I have used frmo other systems. the 18-135mm zoom normally a cheap throwaway affair in other lineups is still a very useable and sharp lens from Fuji. This will have a huge impact on your sharpness. A lot of the lens having Satbilization built in. No this is not IBIS, but IBIS is a one size fits all solutoin, the individual stabilization in the Fuji lens is designed specifically for that lens, the stabilization requirements of a 18-55mm are very different from a 100-400mm lens. I personally think this approach is superior, unless you are using legacy glass or primes. So can Fuji resolve as sharp as Sony. most of the time in normal use cases I would say yes. If you are a landscaper where its everything then maybe the A7Rii is the one to go for. Sports, buy a Nikon/Canon everythign else you will be more than happy wtih Fuji. OH and I forgot to mention colour, the colour and contrast and rendering from the Fuji has a look that is unique but present, and its very rare I get bum images. I get boring images becuase my composition is bad, but never because the camera has not rendered it well. IN fact this is why its such a great range for Street becuase it can turn the mundane into something beautiful. Its B&W rendering is pretty damn sweet as well. The Sony will have slightly better background blur/DOF effects, but again with the Fuji if portraiture is your thing if you pair the X-T1 or X-Pro 2 with any of the 35mm/56mm/90mm or 50-140mm you will have no problem achieving 'that' look. Go look on Flickr/500px compare contrast. Or hire an X-T1/Pro2 and i guarantee within a day you will be hooked. G

I think you are projecting your own suspicions there. Based on my experience this edited version of your sentence is way more likely in reality. I am sure they were more lucky with their first cameras, then success struck and they had more users meaning that issues pop up much quicker and there is a wider set of use cases to satisy because the diversity of the user base has increased with that success. Or your right a company that has waited 4 years to release a camera in todays market do seem to have let success go to their head

I just don't get all the people so chained to Bayer sensors. I have nothing against Bayer at all, have had and enjoyed a lot of cameras with them. However I love the Fuji cameras and the X-Trans is part of the individual parts that sum to create a great whole. Changing the X-Trans to Bayer could and probably would compromize that. Its like buying a Ford and then wishing it had a Opel engine. The only reason for the X-Trans hate is Lightroom, and again why are people so attached to it. Everything we use is just a tool if you are willing to switch camera system you should be willing to switch all your tools. Back to the car analogy, I have family who work in the auto trade and nowadays with cars being so computerized you have to buy different software and peripherals to allow you to service different makes of car. If you decide to become a ford dealer you will have to change add to your tools. I used LR till I got a Fuji, then I switched to Capture 1 it is what it is. I play a lot of music, over the years I have switched software many times depending on what best served my needs at the time. Is it expensive yes, but what cost more some additional software or a loss of productivity and quality in your output?

I work in IT and the reality is that you can do absolutely exhaustive testing and you can still miss stuff that the minute you put it out there in the real world someone will find in about 2 seconds flat. The reset bug is a classic example. Most testing involves going through a set of pre designed tests, most testing is designed to be repeatable so they probably used the factory default settings as there starting point for all tests. Which meant that they were probably reseting the camera at the beginning of each test cycle. Its highly possible that they never noticed the reset issues because they never configured the cameras away from the default and they were reseting it so often themselves it would not show up. I am slightly more surprised that the Beta testers (actual photographers) never picked it up. But again I suspect that it only resets if you change one or two specfic options from the default and probably in combination. Again this may not have shown up depending on whether the user 'happened' upon this combination of options by chance. Sometimes the only way you are going to find these things it to let users find them (a much much higher number than you will ever be able to afford or organize at Beta level) and then respond to the issues that come out quickly and effectively with a fix. That is exactly what Fuji are doing, if they did not we would never get a new camera. G

You can only have one device paired with the camera at a time. if you want to connect to your iphone press on teh wifi button and then press the ok button this will tell camera to reset wifi connection, it will ask you to confirm, press ok again on the yes option in the popup window on the camera. The camera will then broadcast and be avialable to pair with a new device. In your case your iphone. Rince repeat everytime you wish to switch which device you wish to connect to. G

Flysurfer I stand corrected oscilik - The Exp comp dial will not always work depending on your settings. For example lets say you have ISO AUTO, SS at 1/4000 and Aperture of say F8, that its very dark so the likelyhood is the camera will be at 6400 (or 12800 on X-Pro2) already to compensate. If you try and push the exposure further via Exp Comp dial, the camera will have run out of ISO. Same at the other end of the spectrum, if you are at F1.2 and SS of 1/8th etc then its going to be very hard to make the image darker as the AUTO ISO will already be around 200. I like to think of the Exp Comp as a find tune device, it can't work miracles, but if you are in Auto ISO and have a reasonable SS and aperture selected it will give you the ability to tweak it a little without having to mess with your settings. I also tend to use it to personalize camera to myself I find when I am in average metering mode taht the X-T1 over exposes by a 1/3 to 2/3 of s astop for my pesronal subjective taste, so I tend to leave the Exp Comp dial at 1/3 stop below when I am in that metering mode and just shoot away trusting the camera to get on with it all at that point. FInal point I also seem to rememeber taht it might not work if you have Auto DR engaged. you need to pick 100/200 or 400 you can't have auto DR and Auto ISo and the exp comp working. G

LIttle point of note the X-T10 also works like this and I believe that the X-E2 with firmware 4 and X-E2s also work like this so there are now 5 cameras in the range that allow you to adjust exposure via comp wheel when in full manual A and SS but auto ISO. X-Pro-2 X-T1 X-T10 X-E2 (firmware 4.0) X-E2s

I find the 18-135mm to be a very good lens there may be QC issues but some other things to consider with this lens. Firstly its an outside daylight lens if you take this you need to take something like the 35mm F1.4 as well. I generally follow these rules with this lens to get the best out of it 1) Set it to F5.6 and treat it as a fixed F5.6 lens at 18mm it sharpens up nicely at this aperture. 2) Use a high SS to freeze action if I can 1/250 and up is my preference, for static subjects you can go lower ie inside a cathedral. 3) Try not to go above ISO 800 which is hard given the above two criteria, hence my comment about it being a daylight lens. One thing I will say about this lens is that I love the colour from it, its a very very warm lens and I had great success with two friends weddings in Portugal and Italy it really captured the heat if you know what I mean. IF you can follow the above you will get sharp powerful images from the lens, in sub optimal light it will start to frustrate you. So pair it with a fast prime. I am heading to Canada this summer for a 3 week holiday that will include Vancouver, Vancouver island, the rockies, ferry rides, breath taking scenery and bears this is my planed lens line up. 1) 18-135mm - walkaround do it all lens for daytime saves constantly changing lenses important with 5 year old in tow, not only that I want to experience the country and not spend the entire time with my head buried in my camera bag. 2) 10-24mm - for the occasions where only super wide will do, and its also a great city lens as I find the 24mm end very useful for street, others will disagree but for me I am very happy with it. 3) 35mm F1.4 - do it all lens for indoors and nighttime, yes its not a zoom but personally for me this is the most versatile lens in the kit, I know it best and on days when I am feeling uninspired it will be on the camera to get me going again. 4) 50-230mm - This lens is in the kit purely for this holiday and may well get sold afterwards although considering the price I can live with it being a sit in a draw lens, I need some extra reach for some of the wildlife we will see, my normal travel line up i are the 3 lens above. Yes there are better options in the line up for reach, the 50-140 plus TC and 100-400mm both of which are massive lens that I don't want to carry and I don't want to buy and given that I picked up the 50-230mm for £115 on ebay (US $200ish) that is less than the cost of hiring one of those lens for the holiday. Oh and using simlar techniques i mentioned in relation to the 18-135mm i find this lens to actually be a great performer. I have owned the 55-200, yes it better but not by much and you lose 30mm/45mmFF eq at the long end which defeats the purpose. Honestly if this was a focal range I used more I would buy the 50-140mm and 2xTC when it comes out, the AF and image stabilization are far superior and take the TC off and you have a great portrait zoom. It was a very real consideration as I could have sold my 90mm and replaced it at the 50-230mm with this lens and the TC, but its huge and would have taken up the same space in my rucksack that my tripod and monopod occupy which are a far more useful addition to my kit in my opinion especially when it comes to solid landscape shots with the 10-24. All of this goes into a Manfrotto Advanced Tri medium backpack with space for a flash, a laptop and there is still room at the top for sandwiches/windbreaker I love Mirroless Weight of bag - laptop which will be left in hotel room 4.5 kilo's

Monstrously sharp lens and as you say I have discovered that people faces have pores the size of moon craters since i have started using it.

I think this debate can be summed up as what do you want to shoot with it. Single person/item with some environment in frame Portrait/low light concert work - get the 16mm Everything else - get the 10-24mm For me it comes down to DOF, the reality is for landscape,architecture and group shots you are going to be at F4-8 to ensure that more of the frame is in focus at which point the faster aperture of the 16mm is redundant and you are better of with the flexibility of the zoom range and the benefits that OIS bring. With the release of the X-Pro 2 and coming X-T2 and the increased performance at high ISO's the 10-24mm becomes even less of a compromise when it comes to low light, stick it at F4 set your shutter speed to your intended subject movement and use ISO to compensate for missing light.

HI there I love the 18-135mm its a great travel lens Where next really depends on what you like to shoot. If you shoot wildlife or want more reach then the 50-230/55-200/50-140(with TC) or 100-400. I don't get the impression thats what you are after but I mention if for completeness. For me there are two-3 lens you should think about next and these fall under two categories. 1) 35mm F1.4 you have all the versatility you could want with the 18-135 18mm is plenty wide enough for most situations you have a macro(ish) lens all you are missing is a low light monster and the 35mm is such a supremely versatile prime that will allow you to do so much and also if you were travelling with a 2 lens kit the 18-135 and 35mm is great little combo, add the 60mm in for a 3 lens kit and there is not much you can't shoot except very long or ultra wide. 2) 10-24mm or 14mm the 18mm of your 18-135mm is very useful (the 18mm on the 18-55 is slightly better but not by a huge factor) I would sell the 18-55mm and get the 10-24 or 14 depending on your budget/space consideration so you have an ultra wide option. Personally I find the 18-135mm plus 35mm and 10-24mm is my ultimate travel kit I can fit all 3 lens into a Tenba DNA 8 messenger bag, I have ultra wide covered, I have a fast normal prime and I have the 18-135mm as a walkaround lens and for portraits its a great lens in the 70-90mm range, sharp as thats the sweet spot of the zoom and while you don't get background blur from aperture at that zoom you start getting compression blur and so it works well for portraits at a pinch, Its never going to hang with the 56mm or 90mm primes but it does the job if you want to keep lens to a minimum. Swap the 10-24mm for the 14mm and its an even lighter and more portable kit. That is a great option. I only went for the 10-24 for two reasons flexibility and because I shoot video occasionally and I have high hopes for the next generations Fuji video capabilities and the 10-24mm is ironically hands down the best ultra wide for video in the mirrorless world. Why? 1) Threaded filter, most other ultra wides from other manufacturers don't have a filter ring so ND filters become a pain. 2) Constant aperture zoom. 3) Super flexible focal range 16mm - 35mm essentially and that is great for the video I shoot which is mainly bands in tight spaces. the 35mm for close up details shots compliments this lens very well. If you have not desire for video or for width below 14mm then get the prime. However conclusion the next lens I would buy would hands down be the 35mm F1.4 it is still the lens I judge all other in the range by. I still prefer the rendering of it to that of the 56mm and even the 90mm its an awesome lens. There is a lot of hype around the 35mm F2 as its weather sealed and slightly better built (focus ring smoother, aperture ring tighter) but no-one looks at a beautiful picture and says wow I bet that was taken with a lens that had a smooth focus ring. Give it a couple of years and the hype has died down and people will realize the F1.4 is the daddy and the F2 is a great lens if you value compactness and weather sealing highly due to the style of shooting you do. G Disclaimer - I have shot extensively with all the lens mentioned above except the 14mm/50-140mm/35mm F2 and 100-400mm, the first three I have used in a shop the other is too new for me to have got anywhere near.

Personally I would get a seperate dedicated recorder with built in stereo microphones. It will handle noise levels better, record cleaner, has better gain than the X-T1 and generally will be easier. It very easy to sync up audio in most video editers becuase you still have the audio recorded on the X-T1 to match wave forms to. Just remember to record in 48Hz rather than the more usual musical application default of 44.1. Here is a video where I shot video on the X-T1 and used a Zoom H4 I think first gen, now available for peanuts on ebay. PLease note the grainyness is because I a) uploaded a 720 version by mistake and this was shot at 6400 as it was a very dark room. Its not super pro but as a capture of a rehearsal it worked very well, if I was doing it seriously I would have hired lights (and frankly another camera) but for my current purposes it works well, and I highly recomend external audio. Lens = XF 10-24 at F4 Note the rather horrific Moire on the amp grill, please let them have fixed that with the X-T2 G G

epscott I agree memories can be art, I have a picture that I took of my daughter with my X-T1 that I have printed at A3 and it probably my favourite picture so far both technically and in content. The point I was trying to make though its that there are 2 kinds of camera user (actually 3 if you include 'pros' but to be honest my definition of a pro is someone who is in catergory 2 but has got good enough at it that they earn their living from it). 1) Memory gatherer 2) Enthusiast/ Pro I am not for a moment saying that category 2 photograhpers don't gather memories as well, we are all humans, I want to shoot my family my holidays, gigs I play with my band. We are just lucky because of our hobby we have cameras at our disposal that hopefully! make our pictures better. My point is though that category 1 memory gathereres find it hard to justify dropping £1000 on a camera or in fact even £200-300 on a small compact to take pictures they could achieve with there mobile device, something that they have already paid for and received utility from. But I do agree memories can be art, and a good picture will always transcend the equipment used. However as a rule of thumb if I found myself in a situation where something I wanted to shoot happened I want to have a good camera in my hand, which is why i never leave the house without my X-T1 10-24/35 and 60mm in my bag. It the reason I went mirroless in the first place so I could have gear with me and not be overly encumbered. G G

XT-2 would get my vote, this is based on some massive assumptions. 1) SOrry about point 1, misread thought it said nature not humanity. Either camera will be good, but I still think the 4k features will be good to you. 2) That its coming out 6 months after the X-Pro2 which in Fuji world means it will actually be released in September and they will have built in tons of improvements over the X-Pro 2 becuase they jsut can't seem to help themselves, same as with first X-T1 , the X-Pro 1 was supposed to be flagship then along comes X-T1 and blows it out the water I think this time they will not quite blow X-Pro 2 out the water as I think they are basing both cameras on same platoform as opposed to X-Pro one bing on the X-Trans 1 and X-T1 being X-Trans II but still I think the X-T2 will be killer. I also think that Canon and Nikon should be getting really nervous right about now G

Just to jump in on the 35mm F2 vs F1.4 issue. The old lens is still superior in my opinion. Its fast enough on an X-T1 and I imagine will be pretty fast on a X-Pro2. So its weather sealed and a bit less noisy and the aperture ring is better built. SOOOOO The 1.4 renders like nothing else. Honestly I judge every other Fuji to how close it is to the 35mm 1.4, still even the 90mm whcih is a ridiculous lens and renders beautifully, I still prefer the rendering out of the 35mm 1.4. I think the novelty of the F2 is playing a part here, I think in about 2 years when dust is settled the concensus will land back on the 35mm 1.4 I also think that the lack of Weather Sealling and fast AF are problems, but in my opinion this lens will be the first to get a Mkii in the line up, keep the glass and optical formula the same, put in a better motor and a few rubber rings, done. Also shoot the 1.4 at 2 its so sharp, you still get nice out of focus areas and its just gorgeous. ALso shoot it at 5.6 on the street, its such an amazingly versatile lens. You can use it at 5.6 to 8 and its fantastic sharp deep DOF street lens, or crank it to 1.4 to 2 and its an amazing portrait lens. G

I tried all that with Lightroom and got very respectable results, then I tried Capture One, and went OMG So fair point about getting the most from the tools you have, but there is no point being blind to there failings either. G

The 90mm lens is an absolutely stunning lens, but its not the first prime to buy unless you are 100% a portrait guy, and even then I would buy the 35mm first as it does a good job at portraiture but its versatile as you can use it for street. Its also a great indoor lens. The 90 is bright enough for indoors but unless you regularly hang out with people who own mansions you are never go to have enough space for it to be working at its best. Even if you manage to not crop someones face, you are not going to have enough depth to get the compression and bokeh that makes that lens so outstanding. Outdoors is where that lens belongs (or in a big studio) I would buy the 35mm 1.4 no questions, its a bit older, but on a X-Trans 2 sensor (X-E2/T1/T10) its plenty fast enough. Its a magical do everything lens and if I had to sell all my lens and only keep one it would be the 35mm 1.4 ps although on reflection I have high hopes for the 33 F1.0 lens, we will see, but if that is coming out this year ,mayb that is the only reason to buy the 90mm because you are waiting for the 33, but to my mind thats just another good reason to buy the 35mm F1.4 first you can get used to it, and second hand its very reasonable and you will probably shift it for what you paid. The F2 version not so much as it has not market corrected yet and is still enjoying new kid on the block status.

Personally the main thing I am interseted in with turning video button to function button is will they make Video and assignable mode that can be put on any button or at the very least swap buttons but have it work the same way (less ideal) We will call these option 1 and 2. I hate the location of that button and have many videos that start with camera shake and other issues as I have to move my hand to an awkward position. If Fuji go with option 2 I can move the wifi button to the video record button as I use that quite infrequently and it would be good to have it in a place I find hard to activate I would then move video button to another assignable button. probably the one on the front of the camera. In option 1 I am even happier, video becomes a selectable mode same way as on X-E2 and one that you can assign to a function button. (the x-e2 even though video mode was selectable from the Drive menu, you could also shortcut it by adding it as a direct access function to one of the button) I would love this and have it assigned to wifi or front button. The ideal would be a press of this button takes you into video ready mode, aspect view changes you can set Exposure and SS settings etc and then depress shutter when you are ready to record. Here is another idea for Fuji that would improve life for those of us who are hybrid users. Have a video menu much like the Auto ISO menu that allows us to set some standard settings for video. I shoot mainly stills and I often use a SS of 125 and up to freeze action, which is totally unsuitable for video. It would be great to be able to set and forget SS for video to 50 or 60 depending on what FPS i am shooting at and know that as soon as I activate Video mode I am in my predefined SS, this would mean that I only have to focus on A which would probably be the same or similar to what I was shooting stills, and then it would just be a quick turn of the ISO wheel to set correct exposure. The above may not be a professional workflow, but it is a workflow that would work well for me in the way that I find myself often using video which is in the middle of shooting stills. G