|
POKEMAN SAM posted:Now I have to figure out this new camera (though thanks to Wirecutter I also picked up the 35mm f/2 while I was at the store, I think that'll be more fun than the bundled lens.) Battery is charging now, and I only have my lovely old SD card until Friday, but I'm hoping to get some shots in tomorrow to figure out this crazy box of knobs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9AS__60t2I
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 03:10 |
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:This is a decent overview if you just want an introduction to the camera/system, especially if you're not coming from a Fujifilm X camera before. Thanks for this, I'll need as well come next week 
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 04:37
|
|
|
one of us one of us
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 04:40
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:one of us Gooble gobble. There is no turning back - welcome to the club! I don't know if it is just because there are more Canon users in general but the majority of people I know or read about switching to Fuji are moving from Canon (as did I).
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 05:09
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Curious if direct printing from X-T2 works for you. I've only ever gotten it to work X-T2 -> iPhone -> Instax. I just got around to trying it and, although I found no info on how to do it, it does work for me. And well! I am impressed. They really need to put up some info on their website on how to do it. First I found that there was a firmware update for the printer, but after checking it I was up to date. "Instax printer print" was greyed out and I didn't know what to do. So after digging around the camera menus, I found set up (wrench)>connection setting>instax printer connection setting. There it asks for an SSID - that was on the back of the printer so I put in the number and then after that "instax printer print" was no longer grey when looking at the menu of a photo in the camera. So I tried it and it connected and film came out. At first I was like fuuuck because it was white and I read that before the firmware update it would just spit out white film prints and waste it, but because I am an idiot I started looking for more info and while I was doing that the picture started to appear as it should. It is really cool! I am going to have fun with this thing. So first check that your firmware is up to date through the instax share app (because it will not work if you are not on the most recent Aug. 31 firmware), and then do the menu stuff and it will hopefully work for you. edit: sorry, I just realized I double posted. I forgot I was the last person to reply before posting rio fucked around with this message at 06:27 on Nov 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 06:12
|
|
|
Yeah I'm on latest firmware for camera and Instax. No dice. Maybe next firmware.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 06:51
|
|
|
I have the instax and it works like a dream. There's a guy who figured out the print parameters so if you're really feeling  you can crop and adjust your photos in LR/C1 and print those files. Thoren posted:Any Fuji shooters use the EF-X20? I want a simple flash for street portraits but I'm worried it's not powerful enough. I have this with an x100t and it rules. It's surprisingly powerful, but it's not like you'll be lighting up an entire street, I use it mainly as a fill flash and up close for the Juergen Teller look. It's a fixed width at 35mm or so. It can also be used off camera as an optical slave and can communicate with fuji's TTL system. I'll post examples when I get to my computer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 08:49
|
|
|
underage at the vape shop posted:Any ausposters know of chains thatd have xt2s i can hold? I played around with one in Ted's a few weeks ago.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 11:00
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:This is a decent overview if you just want an introduction to the camera/system, especially if you're not coming from a Fujifilm X camera before. Thanks! It's a bit long, and I've already read through the whole manual, is this tutorial somehow more practical than that? Also, add me to the bucket of former Canon DSLR users who switched to Fuji!
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
rio posted:Gooble gobble. There is no turning back - welcome to the club! It's because Canon hasn't innovated since the 5DMk2, at least in my mind... and their pricing is not competitive at all. They're really not doing much to help themselves in a saturated market. Annnnyyyway, I'm pumped. For any of you who use the 35mm, which one did you get? F2 or 1.4, and if you've used both, which would you consider buying (based on price vs performance). ianskate fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Nov 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
Depends on shooting style. As I see itheir strengths: f/1.4: -magic inside -one more stop for more bokeh -built like a tank (but every XF lens seems to have fantastic build quality) f/2: -weather resistant -faster AF -smaller and less bulky -slightly less expensive The former seems more conducive to methodical shooting, studio work, landscapes, etc. while the f/2 seems more suited to impromptu candids, street shooting, etc. That's not saying one can't perform in the other's arenas: they're both well-rounded lenses. I'm just sharing the strengths as I see them. I have the f/2 variants of the 23 and 35 since they seems better at chasing my 8 year old brother around, but still useful for landscapes. The 90 is my go-to portrait lens. Star War Sex Parrot fucked around with this message at 18:39 on Nov 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 18:34
|
|
|
I went with the f2 for faster AF (kids) and price. The ISO performance is so good on the X-T2 that I find I don't need anything faster. I actually shoot the f2 at 2.8 most of the time anyway. Also if you look at the bokeh comparisons between 1.4 and 2 it's really negligible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
Thanks, I think I'll pick one up while they're on sale. Wonder if there'll be a BF sale dropping even lower so I might give it a few more days... but boy, am I going all out 
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
ianskate posted:It's because Canon hasn't innovated since the 5DMk2, at least in my mind... and their pricing is not competitive at all. They're really not doing much to help themselves in a saturated market. I have the f2. I got it when I got my X-T1 when I first switched from Canon along with the 18-55 - I got it for 299 when I bought it because Best Buy didn't know how to price it for some reason so it was a no brainer. I recently had a chance to get the 1.4 used on the cheap but tried it and passed. The slightly larger aperture wasn't enough of a plus for me compared mainly to the weather resistance but also the size and af speed. I found that I hadn't been using it much so I went on a photo walk with my daughter and only brought that lens (and also forced myself to only convert raws in camera and shoot in black and white). I got some great shots and it was really enjoyable. The main reason I don't use it that often is because I usually have the 24 1.4 on the camera and if I want something longer than I want something longer than 35. But it is a great lens and for the price I would jump on it if I didn't have it already. The size of it is a great match for the X-T cameras without the grip. Star War Sex Parrot posted:Yeah I'm on latest firmware for camera and Instax. No dice. Maybe next firmware. Does it let you print and you just get a white sheet or is the option grayed out in the camera menu?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 01:17
|
|
|
I went from the f/1.4 to the f/2 back to the f/1.4. Sure the bokeh difference isn't that great, but there's something about the way the 1.4 renders backlit subjects that makes it simply amazing for the situations I use it in the most. My f/1.4 is also sharper than my f/2 at same apertures, but that may just be my sample, most reviews don't align with that observation. The rest of the pros/cons are listed above.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 01:35
|
|
|
Just want to thank the thread for helping with the decision of what camera to buy to replace a Powershot A710... I decided to get a X100T, lots of learning to do about how to take pictures and adjust them and such but looking forward to it! I know the camera won't make me a better photographer all by itself but still excited. But the info in this thread was very helpful. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 02:27
|
|
|
Tochiazuma posted:Just want to thank the thread for helping with the decision of what camera to buy to replace a Powershot A710... I decided to get a X100T, lots of learning to do about how to take pictures and adjust them and such but looking forward to it! I know the camera won't make me a better photographer all by itself but still excited. the next x100 is coming out soon..
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 02:35
|
|
|
Google Butt posted:the next x100 is coming out soon.. Soon = no one knows when.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
thetzar posted:Soon = no one knows when. lol ok
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 03:05
|
|
|
Need some suggestions on a Sony Alpha purchasing decision. I recently bought the a7ii (body only) for $1900 CAD. But now I'm torn between sticking with the a7ii, or just returning it and preordering the a6500 instead for $1750. I just got caught up in the full-frame goodness of the a7ii and have heard that the a6500's sensor gives better low-light performance than the a7ii. My needs: I need a B Cam for video shoots (mixed martial arts events), and occasional photography gigs. My wife also needs something for food photography and her blogging (she visits local business and takes photos for them). I do plan on getting an actual video camera at some point. melon cat fucked around with this message at 18:52 on Nov 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 18:46
|
|
|
melon cat posted:Need some suggestions on a Sony Alpha purchasing decision. First thought: How much do you care about depth of field, and do you want more or less? (This is the main sticking point beyond pricing differences in lenses.) If more, a6500. If less, a7ii.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
windex posted:First thought: How much do you care about depth of field, and do you want more or less? (This is the main sticking point beyond pricing differences in lenses.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
Fuji 23mm f/2 arrived today, so far it's cool.; Will extensively test it against the f/1.4 version this weekend. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
Now I'm torn between the Fuji 35mm and 23mm f2. My only other lens will be the 56. Decisions decisions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
ianskate posted:Now I'm torn between the Fuji 35mm and 23mm f2. My only other lens will be the 56. Decisions decisions. 23mm, hands down. I do 80% of my work with the 23 and 56. If I could only have two lenses they would be it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
What kind of shooting do you do? Don't know if I mentioned it, but I'm looking for mostly portraiture and occasional landscapes and travel street photography kinda work.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
It's worth thinking about too that the Fuji 35mm is closer to a 51mm and the 23 is actually like a 35mm. At least I'm pretty sure that's how it works out with the sensor.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
I sold my 23mm because I always put the 35 on instead. All about preference.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
LiquidRain posted:I sold my 23mm because I always put the 35 on instead. Agreed, maybe I'll rent them both before buying, and hope the sales last. particle9 posted:It's worth thinking about too that the Fuji 35mm is closer to a 51mm and the 23 is actually like a 35mm. At least I'm pretty sure that's how it works out with the sensor. Totally, and since I've never owned a 35mm with my 5D I have no real comparison from recent years, though I did use my 50mm often (what for?  ). I'm thinking that the Fuji 23mm will provide the opportunity to shoot landscape and full body portraits, or at least more "neutral" shots vs the 35mm (aka 50mm non-crop) being more oriented towards DoF artistic still life "table" photography.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 02:41
|
|
|
ianskate posted:Totally, and since I've never owned a 35mm with my 5D I have no real comparison from recent years, though I did use my 50mm often (what for? Depends on whether you want to shoot what you can with the lenses, or pick the lenses to shoot what you like to shoot. For me it's the 23 for the former and the 35 for the latter, which is why I have both hahaha
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
I like the 35 over the 23, but if I already had the 56 and didn't have anything wider I'd get the 23.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 03:38
|
|
|
melon cat posted:DOF is important to me ( <3 depthy shots), but above all I give priority to image/video sharpness. From everything I've seen, the video quality from the a7ii is vastly inferior to the a6300, and the 6500 is probably even better. This comes from the a7ii not having 4K. The a7ii's killer features (for me, if I was going to buy it, which I wouldn't irl, because I'm cheap) are the IBIS (for adapted lenses including a-mount lenses) and full frame sensor (for adapted lenses). I think the a6500 is supposed to have IBIS, right? If it does, you've probably got a better deals with it. Except Sony's lens selection is even worse in apsc than FF. And unless you like manual focusing telephoto lenses (which you might because the Sony mirrorless cameras have great manual focus aids) you're not going to get as much out of older adapted lenses as you would on a Sony FF mirrorless camera.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 03:50
|
|
|
Splinter posted:I like the 35 over the 23, but if I already had the 56 and didn't have anything wider I'd get the 23. I don't shoot Fuji but is the 18 a terrible lens? I normally float around 28mm FOV these days for general shooting on any sensor. Lots of recs for the 23mm which is a 35mmish, not much chat about the wider lenses. Ideal for me on Fuji's lineup would be an 18 and a 35, then the 90 for shooting people with fancy lights.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 03:51
|
|
|
ianskate posted:What kind of shooting do you do? Don't know if I mentioned it, but I'm looking for mostly portraiture and occasional landscapes and travel street photography kinda work. Mostly environmental portraits, urban landscape, and drunk bar pics. I do weddings as well. I used to loooove the 5omm fov and hate the 35mm's but over time I grew to really prefer the wider view. My suggestion is that you rent both for a week and take a bunch of shots between them then review and see which works better for you. windex posted:I don't shoot Fuji but is the 18 a terrible lens? I normally float around 28mm FOV these days for general shooting on any sensor. Lots of recs for the 23mm which is a 35mmish, not much chat about the wider lenses. The 18 is the worst fuji lens. I have owned 2 copies now and the corners were trash on both of them even stopped down to f/8. The 16 is amazing just kinda big because it's f/1.4.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 05:49
|
|
|
melon cat posted:Need some suggestions on a Sony Alpha purchasing decision. How about autofocus, how important is that to you? Because on the 6500 it is supposed to be blazing. Which, of course, won't matter if you are using old lenses since the lens lineup is such poo poo. ianskate posted:Now I'm torn between the Fuji 35mm and 23mm f2. My only other lens will be the 56. Decisions decisions. The 23 would certainly seem to make more sense if your only other lens is the 56. The last few days since I got the 56 I just walk around with that and the 23 1.4 and swap when needed. It is an awesome combo - two lenses with ground up fairy brains or magic or something inside - and for informal shooting the two cover pretty much every range of shooting that I need.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 05:59
|
|
|
When you mention the Fuji 56mm is it the APD one or the R version?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 06:14
|
|
|
mine is an R
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 06:35
|
|
|
I saw no real reason to get the APD, the trade off between bokey ball quality and being slower did not seem worth it to me but what do I know.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 06:42
|
|
|
rio posted:How about autofocus, how important is that to you? Because on the 6500 it is supposed to be blazing. Which, of course, won't matter if you are using old lenses since the lens lineup is such poo poo. I do a lot more manual focusing, so fast autofocus would be a nice-to-have. Not really essential. SMERSH Mouth posted:From everything I've seen, the video quality from the a7ii is vastly inferior to the a6300, and the 6500 is probably even better. This comes from the a7ii not having 4K. Thanks for your help on this, guys. It really helped me narrow things down. I've been obsessing over it for weeks! melon cat fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Nov 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 03:10 |
|
|
I think there are some apsc lenses for Sony a-mount that become much more usable with the laea4 adapter once you have them on a body with IBIS. Waiting for IBIS on apsc is why I ultimately ditched Sony and went for m43, but I had a specialty interest (adapting long lenses for wildlife photography- since there were no native superteles in e mount). There were a number of zeiss-branded Sony lenses for their A-mount SLTs that were said to work well on apsc cameras. Like the 16-35 2.8. now that Sony is giving us apsc cameras with IBIS, losing the 1/2 stop of light to the pellicle mirror in the laea4 adapter is not as bad of a price to pay for fast A-mount AF on the a6500 (and it is reasonably fast). Now the only bad price to pay is just... The price of good A-mount glass itself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 23:05
|
|