Aswald

Wow...that looks scary.

In some countries, Fujifilm bundles the X-Pro2 with Sandisk. Says something I guess....

Ah...no apologies needed. You had me going for a while and thought I missed out on a crucial update Kaizen update! Now I'm just piqued with the acros on the x-Pro2.

23mm if you love some street photography too. It's a little wide for typical portrait but has a certain effect which is nice for portrait too. Otherwise the 35 is a very good portrait and all rounder lens.

Thx. This is good info.

X-Pro1 has Classic Chrome? Mine doesn't.

No. The pics from the X-T1 and X-Pro1 are very similar.

It happens to all of us. It's just impossible to pack for every occasion sometimes. There was a suggestion to reset your camera to factory default. Maybe a good idea. CUG pointed out that the shot may have been shot on DR400 which is unnecessary. From the post edits samples, I'm glad that your shot is useable.

Nice.

Try using a UV filter.. there is haze and UV all over on a day like this. Try a polarizer too to saturate colors. I'd try to avoid large amount of reflective surfaces like the road at the foreground. It will cause stray reflection into yr lens if you're not using a hood. You have 2 exif data. Both are F16 but on one, 1/250 sec and the other 1/1000 sec iso800. Almost noon lighting. I would have started with F8, ISO200 and as high a shutter as possible. More about technique than gear.

1/800, F5.6, ISO200, Daylight. This is a stitched (2) shot with the XF18mm F2 @ F5.6, X-Pro1. Sorry for the poor stitched results but I wanted to show that on the 18mm, at F5.6 it was very sharp with enough dof to carry the pic all the way to the mountain top.

1/100, F8, ISO100, Auto WB On both these shots I employed the use of hyperfocal distance to help with the DOF.

1/250, F8, ISO100, Daylight

The X70 F2.8 looks the "clearest" on my monitor.

Both of the examples you've posted looks severely "back lit" or with non ideal/harsh lighting. If you want to continue to shoot without timing your shots or considering the quality of available light, some sort of reflector may be good to light the subject up to even things out. Blue cast or auto WB results will depend largely on the overall background, incident and reflected light the camera sees. So, some post processing tweaking may be in order. Under some circumstances and depending on the lens used, I too find the Fujifilm to shoot slightly blue. I'm assuming that you are using the xf27 F2.8 lens. This lens is pretty sharp with good dof. For most of your shots, I don't think you'd need to get past F8 to F11.

Thanks Patrick! It's now making the wait even more painful! :lol:

xf14 F2.8 - streetscapes, landscapes and architectural landscapes xf16 F1.4 - streetscapes, landscapes, architectural landscapes, people portraits and close up wide angle shots. I went for the xf16 as I shoot some people close up in tight spots. Needed some subject isolation so the added 2 stops helped greatly. Otherwise, I'd recommend the xf14. Excellent all round and cheaper.

Highly possible. I actually gave myself till june 2016 before I get my pre-order delivered. That way, I don't get stressed out. Hopefully nothing goes wrong with 1st batches.

It will probably need a FW update on the Nissin i40.

Excellent!

I often wondered if the market still equate larger size to higher value or higher end product or has the industry managed to debunked that completely. There's a segment of the market that can't really afford to get caught in a size vs. performance race. I'm thinking Phase One mf cameras. Having seen for myself and worked with the files from these beasts, it's hard to deny that they really are much, much better than any compact mf system. Yes, I know there is a great price disparity but really, if there's any system a compact mf camera system has to beat, it would be one of these monsters.

My bet is the TX-1. There is virtually no benefit making a slr medium format camera. The TX-1 is simply too gorgeous.

Thanks. This is what I read from the specs. Viewfinder size, x-pro1 - 0.47 inch, x-pro2 - 0.48 inch and x-t1 - 0.50 inch.

11% physically bigger or visually bigger?

It's probably due to the slightly longer eye point distance of 16mm on the X-Pro2....