Jump to content

Xpro-2 & 27 f2.8 Vs X100ZT IQ

Morgo

By Morgo
in General Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Morgo Contributor

Morgo

Posted
Posted

Hi all,

 

Just curious if anyone has compared the two above. I have the Xpro2 and 100T and find I don't opt for the 100T anymore as I like the Xpro2  sensor so much more but I'd still like a compact setup like the X100T which is where the 27 2.8 comes in.

I plan to sell the X100T as I need some cash and have been offered a 27 2.8 from a mate for cheap, how does the IQ compare between the two systems?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Morgo Contributor

Morgo

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks but I assumed the new 23 f2 would be better than the X100T lens. The 23 is, while still small, much bigger than the 27 2.8 which is a nice compact size getting the xpro2 as close to the x100T as possible at similar FL's

Link to post
Share on other sites
wmiller549 Rookie

wmiller549

Posted
Posted

I love the 40mm (FF) FOV, but have resisted the 27, mainly because of the lack of an aperture ring. It bugs me enough that my primes and zoom work differently; the 27 would add yet another style of UI.  This one you turn the ring, that one you flip a switch and then turn the ring, with the other one you have to spin the control wheel. (STOP ALREADY!   i'm getting confused  :wacko:) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
mdm Experienced

mdm

Posted
Posted

This one you turn the ring, that one you flip a switch and then turn the ring, with the other one you have to spin the control wheel. (STOP ALREADY!   i'm getting confused  :wacko:) 

 

I see... it's like to try driving a car with manual transmission after fifty years of driving automatic. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
lauriebrett Explorer

lauriebrett

Posted
Posted

Thanks but I assumed the new 23 f2 would be better than the X100T lens. The 23 is, while still small, much bigger than the 27 2.8 which is a nice compact size getting the xpro2 as close to the x100T as possible at similar FL's

Yes I too had hoped the new 23mm would be more pancake sized. I'd rather have an f2.8 version similar in size to the 27mm or 18mm.

Link to post
Share on other sites
johant Mentor

johant

Posted
Posted

Yes I too had hoped the new 23mm would be more pancake sized. I'd rather have an f2.8 version similar in size to the 27mm or 18mm.

Me too. The 23mm f2 is larger than I had hoped or expected. I even could have lived with not having an aperture ring, if that would have made the lens smaller.
Link to post
Share on other sites
asathor Enthusiast

asathor

Posted
Posted (edited)

The 27 is lacking a lens hood and it shows at times that the lens as designed is not well protected from "Cross Light" - it handles head on flare much better than expected however. Because the only hood attachment option is the 43mm filter I made a prototype "slip-cover" lens hood. The final will be black felt or better yet, something similar that does not shed.

 

Another lesser issue is curvature of field - you can see it in Fuji's MTF chart ( http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujinon_lens_xf27mmf28/specifications/ ) at 45 degrees as a wave. This means that you have to move the Focus Point in the camera if you want very precise focusing or at least be at some distance and stopped down accordingly, you can't just "Lock and Re-Frame" if you target is off center.

 

Overall it is a LOVELY lens - I just shot this Across Cowboy Shot (through the windows - it is Zero degrees out there).

 

DSCF0101 1000

DSF3036 1200

XF27 HoodProto

Edited by asathor
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • thelostkiwi
      Looking for Full Frame lenses to adapt to GFX

      By thelostkiwi · Posted

      I also use a Nikon to GFX Fringer and it works very well.  24mm f/1.8 vignettes so best used on 35mm mode.  50mm f/1.8 covers the entire frame very well with no issues and is a superb little lens. 105mm Sigma vignettes slightly but is perfectly usable. 300 f/4 likewise the 105.  I have a 70-200 f/20+.8 incoming to test so will report back but I'm expecting a little vignetting.  Even in 35mm mode the image is still 60MP and if you're prepared to manually crop and correct you can get 80-90 MP images.  I also have a C/Y to GFX adapter.  The 24mm Sigma Superwide vignettes strongly. Ditto 28-80 Zeiss Sonnar. 80-200 f/4 Sonnar is perfectly usable. All work fine as 35mm mode lenses.  I also have an M42 adapter which I tried with the Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f/3.5 with good results. 
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Thank you. I will research it.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Jerry Thank you very much. That is extremely helpful. It seems that the camera and the lens have the latest firmware update, so it appears that the corrections should be applied automatically. The lens arrived this afternoon and I took some quick test shots, in which the correct lens information appeared in the EXIF files, so that sounds good. I used Adobe DNG converter to convert the Raw (RAF) files, and then opened the DNG files and saved them in PSD format. However, with a beautiful, clear, cloudless blue sky, there were no lines near the edges to check if distortion had been corrected. Another day I plan to photograph a brick wall. Thank you for your help.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Typically you need to make sure the lens is compatible with the camera, i.e. check the lens compatibility charts for your camera, then make sure the respective firmwares are updated so older issues are resolved. After that, each lens has a manufacturer’s profile which will be embedded into the raw file meta data for the images captured using that lens. From there, it is up to the raw conversion software to apply the lens correction to the image. Different converters do that differently, some automatically, some only if a setting is turned on. For in-camera jpegs, the on-board converter does the corrections automatically, assuming the camera recognizes the lens, it applies a generic profile otherwise. I do not know if that can be turned off or not.
×
×
  • Create New...