petergabriel

Can you upload an example? @aswald

The 56 seems to be more dreamy whereas the 50 seems more saturated and contrasty. I believe the 56 is more flattering for portraits.

Lack of sharpness is not really the issue for me. I find it plenty sharp. Its the lack of character that leaves the lens on the shelf for me.

That's what she said ;-)

I think the 18-55 is fine for what it is, but it is my least used lens as it doesn't have any exceptional skills/characteristics. I mostly use it for its fast auto focus during my daugthers soccer practice. With an x-pro 1! Actually works quite well.

Or I could rephrase, which of the two has the most soul? As a reference I find the 35mm f1.4 to have more soul than the f2 version which apparently blows the f1.4 away in MTF charts, but sharpness isn't everything.

I don't care about looks and own the f1.4 myself, as stated, I'm interested in their image characteristics. How they differ.

I own the f1.4 and love the image quality. But what are the differences between the two lenses if only judged by image characteristics? I find the f1.4 very neutral. What is the image character of the f2. Warm, cold, neutral, magical?

The 14mm is superb. Super sharp, contrasty, distortion free and most importantly it has that Fujifilm character.

Really odd omissions from the x-pro 2 firmware compared to x-t2. Why? - no differentiation of focus point based on camera orientation. - no iso front command dial option The argument usually is that Fujifilm want to differentiate their two pro cameras with the x-pro 2 being the stills camera, but if those two features are not usefull for stills, I don't know what is. And, why oh why not 4k like the x-t20 has?

Quite simple. An x-pro 2 without OVF. Preferably OLED evf with higher magnification. And please, the joystick!, not touch screen.

Awesome. Thanks. Helps a lot. Seems like the hole is actually smaller on the x pro 2. Weird. If you say there is no real issues in real life use, that sounds great. I see you have the same issue as me with the rubber being a dirt, dust magnet :-) Really difficult to clean.

Ahh, now I get it. Thanks. So it has nothing to do with the size of the hole you look through. Can anyone who owns or have had both cameras tell me whether the hole you look through is bigger or smaller on the xpro2? On pictures with the cameras side by side it actually looks smaller. I hope not.

So 2mm more to look through compared to x-pro1?

I get conflicting info online. I am trying to figure out whether the hole for the EVF/OVF is bigger on the xpro2 vs xpro1. Some say 16mm vs 14mm. Which is it? Also, some claim the magnification is larger on the xpro2 vs xpro1, and then some spec lists claim that it is actually smaller. Which is it? My only local camera store closed last year so I have no way of finding out for my self unless I order online. Thanks.

@Phil You are probably right. I actually completly forgot about that little AF screw on the Nikons.

But still, a FX Nikkor is smaller than a slower DX Fujinon, and the Nikkor is optically just as superb. Perhaps the quad LM AF system in the Fujinon is the culprit?

Well yeah, but that doesn't explain the reason

I used to have a Nikkor 85mm f1.8 AF-D which is a full frame lens, and it was way smaller than the Fujinon. How is that possible?

Would love a 16-35mm f2.8 with internal focusing. I find the protuding focus elements on the 16-55 rather obnoxious.

I have tried to make stop motion videos on my iPhone with the Stop Motion app, and while fun it is also frustrating with my iPhone moving around and AF/AE never constant. So I was thinking about the remote app for the x-t1. I know it won't be able to superimpose the previous image for precise placement as in the app, but still it should be possible. However can the camera gather the images into a movie afterwards?

Thanks all. I will go hunting for the mentioned lenses :-)

I'm looking into buying a vintage MF lens (brand not important) for my x-t1. I would prefer a lens with some character. Preferably a fast one. Anyone care to recommend some? I have heard about som of the old 70's Canon lenses that are good. My main reason for wanting this is hopefully a cheaper price.

If the 8-16 is small, then maybe, just maybe.

The x-t2 and pro 2 has the half press feature. About time! Coming from Nikon I really miss it on my x-t1.