|
I've been mulling over buying an a6000 but I think I convinced myself to save a little more and just get an X-T1.
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 01:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 03:02 |
|
|
I love my x100, but if I wanted to step into a Fuji with interchangeable lenses, what model should I go for? Once I bought my x100 I stopped paying attention to the many bodies Fuji has put out and now I'm behind the times.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
If you have the money, the X-T1 is the best in the line right now, then then X-E1/2 are also pretty popular and cheaper. I think someone is selling a X-E1 in the buy sell thread right now even. If you are short on money, there's the X-A1 without the trans sensor or neat retro body styling.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
Rontalvos posted:I love my x100, but if I wanted to step into a Fuji with interchangeable lenses, what model should I go for? If you love everything about the OVF get an Xpro-1, if you don't care about it get an XE-2 or XT-1 depending on your budget.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:Along with the still kinda weak E-mount line up, the A6000's viewfinder is supposed to be noticeably worse than the older NEX one and other mirrorless viewfinders. I didn't handle it long in the store, but it actually seemed a little better than the GH3's to me. No experience with the previous NEX viewfinders. I did handle an XT-1 while I was there. Definitely a nice camera. Too bad Fuji's video is so poor, but it probably does make the most sense for them to focus on stills.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
I will say that I love the hell out of my NEX, even though I entirely use it manual focus with all sorts of adapted lenses. Remember to look at Sigma's lenses, since their 30mm and 60mm are supposed to be fantastic in E mount.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
I really like my NEX-5N with the Sigma 19mm Art as a complement to my X-T1 for video. I can get usable stills out of it even at 12600 ISO, and the lack of viewfinder isn't terribly bothersome for me. If it's good enough for Philip Bloom it's good enough for me.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 05:19
|
|
|
Geektox posted:I really like my NEX-5N with the Sigma 19mm Art as a complement to my X-T1 for video. I can get usable stills out of it even at 12600 ISO, and the lack of viewfinder isn't terribly bothersome for me. If it's good enough for Philip Bloom it's good enough for me. I've read now he uses an A7R with the 35/1.4 Sigma ART, seems like a cool setup. Now very compact, because of the lens, when compared to the 35/2.8 but definitely sharper and faster.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 10:54
|
|
|
I am considering the XT-1. It looks like it'll cost: $1300 body only $600 Fujinon XF 35mm F1.4R Whatever else I need  God damnit fujifilm.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 12:33
|
|
|
You could always wait for a sale, or buy your stuff in Canada. I did both of those things and paid USD $1922 for the X-T1 and 23mm f1.4, which wasn't even available to buy anywhere online in the US and would have cost me $2300+ even if I could have bought it.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 12:37
|
|
|
Yeah for the love of god don't pay full price for that stuff. Have some patience, Fuji's stuff goes on sale constantly (especially body+lens combos).
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 14:37
|
|
|
That's the canadian price, since I live in Canada. Basically what I need to do is win the lottery and also wait for it to go on sale.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
You will be able to pick up a XT1 for cheap when the XPro2 is out. Also new version of 35mm is coming out too.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 17:13
|
|
|
Personally, I'm banking on the XT1 early adoption crowd to get bored with their toys before going for one. It's too new for the prices to drop right now, but come September...
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
When the XT-2 comes out, XT-1 prices will tank. Wait on that if you really want to save money. Or just get what you can afford and get your moneys worth out of it by using and enjoying it.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
Or, you know, buy the camera you want now because the X-Pro 2 and X-T2 are at least a year out, if nor more for the X-T2. Fuji's said multiple times now they are cutting back the body-rush.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:I am considering the XT-1. What else do you need? Seriously with my XPro1 I had the 35mm as my only lens for about 6 months, it's a pretty lovely lens.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 00:19
|
|
|
Since I'm going to start working again soon, I picked up a used XF 18-55 on the cheap. For me the X-T1+18-55mm will be the real test of the system's workability at the professional level. As long as it is on-par with the 5D2+24-70 2.8L (which I expect it to be), it should be plenty. On one hand, variable aperture is bleh. On the other: OIS.feigning interest posted:The upcoming 16-55 2.8 will be fuji's 24-70 2.8L. Constant 2.8 aperture, IS, Weather Sealed, gently caress-off huge, and expensive as hell. Yeah but that poo poo is at least 5-6 months away, and I can't wait that long 
Fart Car '97 fucked around with this message at 21:39 on May 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
The upcoming 16-55 2.8 will be fuji's 24-70 2.8L. Constant 2.8 aperture, IS, Weather Sealed, gently caress-off huge, and expensive as hell. 
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
Every time I think about how great it would be to have the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 in X mount, I cry, because I know the Fuji 16-55 will cost over a grand.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
Fuji's new marketing slogan should be "Imagine if Leica gear was actually worth the money. It's kinda like that."
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:Fuji's new marketing slogan should be "Imagine if Leica gear was actually worth the money. It's kinda like that."
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
bobfather posted:Every time I think about how great it would be to have the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 in X mount, I cry, because I know the Fuji 16-55 will cost over a grand. Meh. Putting the 18/2.0 and 35/1.4 on 2 X bodies are lighter than a Sigma 18-35 on a SLR body. Wait for the 16/1.4 if you don't like the 18mm.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 00:22
|
|
|
Fuji X-T1: Buy with the lens kit or purchase a lens separately?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 04:18
|
|
|
Bag of Sun Chips posted:Fuji X-T1: Buy with the lens kit or purchase a lens separately? I did both! Kit lens and the 35mm to give myself a couple of options.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
Looks like I picked a good page to ask for advice since I'm looking at Fuji bodies. I used to have a Canon 350D a few years back, but I was broke and had to pay this thing called "rent" and I sold it. I've been interested in the mirrorless cameras since the footprint is significantly smaller but there are no real compromises when it comes to controls, etc. After only having various smartphones with dubious quality at times, I want to be able to take decent pictures again. I'm by no means a pro, but I can bluff my way into coming off like I know more about the fundamentals of photography if the occasion arises. I'm in a rough spot and I have some money burning a hole in my pocket (because spending money makes me feel better), so I've decided to look at mirrorless cameras again. Last time I looked, the Panasonic/Olympus bodies seemed like a good compromise and the X100 was just released and was the bee's knees. It doesn't look like the Canon/Nikon mirrorless options are all too great, so I'm thinking of picking up a Fuji X body of some sort. Sooooooo... What sort of body/kit/package should I be looking at?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
What kind of budget are you looking at? I'm no mirrorless expert but from what I can tell: Canon and Nikon ones are a joke, and not a particularly funny one at that Samsung isn't really popular in North America Olympus and Panasonic are pretty good if you like micro 4/3 Fujifilm makes the fantastic x100s, xpro1, xe1, xt1, etc and they are great. Sony makes some decent aps-c sensor sized cameras but they like to make kit lenses and more bodies than lenses. Don't buy the pentax.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 15:49
|
|
|
You can get a M43 one-before-latest gen body and kit for like $250. Do that.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 15:52
|
|
|
Budget is sub-$2k for the body, a kit lens, a prime lens (or two), and then like a quick holster so I can be That Guy.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
It's really tough to go wrong with the X-E1 and 18-55 kit right now. Adorama has it for $699: http://www.adorama.com/IFJXE1SK.html The 18-55 kit lens is superlative, and if you back it up with a nice prime like the 23 f/1.4 or 35 f/1.4, you'd be in business for way less than $2k. In the mirrorless game, MFT is the only real competitor to Fuji in my opinion. I would not even consider Sony for how they've mishandled their system. I do think the pro-level MFT bodies are really nice (the Olympus EM-5 and EM-1, most notably), but the thing that rubs me the wrong way about MFT is that they charge an arm and a leg for their lenses, when in reality your average MFT lens is way smaller and physically has much less glass than other lenses. Case in point: the $1000 Panasonic 12-35 f/2.8 OIS is $130 more expensive than the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS, and is about double the price of the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS. The Panasonic is literally half the weight of the Canon lens, indicating it has way less glass. Yet costs over 10% more. Unfortunately, inflated glass prices are the big gotcha of MFT, as well as the issues that arise from having a very small sensor. I guess what I'm saying is, Fuji is the best.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
A couple months ago I picked up a Fuji X-E2 and Fujinon 35mm f1.4 for ~$1300 and it has been great. Context: I was someone who read my friend's/family's camera manuals but never actually owned a camera. The X-E2 has been great to learn on but I wouldn't recommend it to someone who doesn't want to learn aperture/shutter/iso. P mode, at least for me, has been less than stellar. e: ^^^ that price is crazy, they have the XF 18-55 lens for 694.99 or the X-E1 + 18-55 for 699.00. seems too good to be true. CRAYON fucked around with this message at 16:35 on May 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
CRAYON posted:A couple months ago I picked up a Fuji X-E2 and Fujinon 35mm f1.4 for ~$1300 and it has been great. The MSRP on the 18-55 is way too high. It ought to be a $400-$450 lens. Tops.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:13
|
|
|
I picked up the X-E1, that price was too good versus paying double for a 1 year newer CMOS and a slightly larger screen. I'm familiar with crop bodies and the multiplier to get the "actual" focal length, is there any of that with the Fuji X frames? I know that there's a bunch of goofy poo poo with the MFT and pancake lenses and stuff, but if I get a 35mm, it's just 35mm? So so so what else should I pick up? Thanks for pointing out the X-E1, goons are the best. 
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 18:00
|
|
|
Since it's an APS-C only system, all the lenses should be labeled with the focal length you get, yeah. If you ever decide to mess with adapters from full frame mounts, Fuji is 1.5x.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
Yes. It's an APS-C sensor so it's 1.5x. And MFT isn't goofy? It's just 2x. And it's the same crop factor no matter how panacakey or penile the lens is. edit: who labels their lenses with an "equivalent" focal length? I see it for P&S stuff where the small chips can make it hard to compare, but MFT and APS-C always has the real focal length in my experience, so you do need to multiply it by the crop factor if you want to know what the FOV is like compared to on a full frame system. powderific fucked around with this message at 18:11 on May 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
Phone posted:I picked up the X-E1, that price was too good versus paying double for a 1 year newer CMOS and a slightly larger screen. Yes, you will have a crop multiplier for your field of view. Fuji lenses tend to be in focal lengths that translate to popular full frame equivalents though. The 35mm is pretty close to a 50mm, the 56mm is pretty close to an 85mm, the 18-55 is pretty close to 24-70, etc. Phone posted:So so so what else should I pick up? The 35mm 1.4 is baller as gently caress. Its permanently attached to my XE-1. Depending on what kind of shooting you do, the 56mm 1.2 for portraits or the 14mm for wide both look rad as hell if a bit spendy. Maybe get a wrist strap. Some people really like these metal thumb rests although I don't find it necessary.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 18:12
|
|
|
But I'm used to a Canon crop factor of 1.6!  Cool, thanks for the info. Can't wait to get back to shooting. E: poo poo, looks like the 35mm is out of stock everywhere
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
Is this real life? 
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
It seems to be, it was up briefly on some Sony sites. When the price drops, I may finally upgrade from my RX100. It's been the best pocket camera I've owned. I'll take the wider and shorter zoom for the speed and EVF.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 03:02 |
|
|
The RX100 III is basically a tricked out 30 grand Mini Cooper. I look forward a lot of people pay $800 for this sucker instead of $150 for a Nikon 1 lol.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 19:50
|
|