|
A full frame X100 successor was heavily rumored though, right? Gotta be honest, I'd be all over something like that. Sony's RX1R is currently uncontested in this area, I'm sure Fuji could make a competing model that's more pleasing to use. That might just make me ditch my GR. Unless Ricoh make a pocketable FF successor to the GR...
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 21:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 00:39 |
|
|
I am pretty happy with the Fuji X-E1. I can see myself using it until it breaks. The only criticism I have is that it is not weather sealed so I can keep it longer. Not that it has been an issue with any other camera I have had.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 22:21
|
|
|
I feel like a Fuji FF would be the king of IQ so I would really love to see that exist. On the other hand, Fuji seems to be providing exactly the type of gear the enthusiast-but-can't-afford-a-Leica crowd has wished for so if a FF Fuji body not existing means that Fuji keeps nurturing that market then that's ok by me. By not branching into FF Fuji is avoiding segmenting their lens lineup the way that Canikon have, which seems to be allowing them to make really great crop lenses at good prices, something that Canikon have not or cannot do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 23:08
|
|
|
I just hope they refresh the X-Pro 1 with weather sealing 
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 23:12
|
|
|
It will take me 2 years to save up 2k toy money to buy the FF x100 anyway. I am fine with Fuji releasing it in 2015. BELIEVE!
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 23:29
|
|
|
Speaking of full frames and Fujifilm... I'm finally getting to shoot regularly with my a7. I never even unpacked the kit lens, it looks like people are buying them for $500 so I can make a little back. I got the 35/2.8 and it's amazing. Sure, I wish it was a stop or two faster but otherwise I have no complaints. I'm finding the focus to be snappy and accurate. I have been using some manual glass on it now that I have adapters. I'm not surprised by what LensRentals.com is reporting. One other thing I'm impressed with is the colors in the raw files. The blues are the best I've had in any digital camera so far. I've only needed to tweak the exposure a bit when I use manual glass, possibly because I use ND filters to fight the Florida sun. Some random shots of greenery today brought me back to the last time I shot Velvia on a medium format camera. Raw file converted to jpeg and brightened a bit to counteract what Flickr does. (OM 50/3.5 Zuiko MC Auto Macro lens)  So far, no buyers remorse.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 01:23
|
|
|
daspope posted:I am pretty happy with the Fuji X-E1. I can see myself using it until it breaks. The only criticism I have is that it is not weather sealed so I can keep it longer. Not that it has been an issue with any other camera I have had. Ive been out in pretty crappy weather. Mist, rain, very dense heavy fog that is almost like rain, and heavy rain. My XE1 is sealed pretty drat good for not having any sealing. Dont worry so much about weather. Use your judgement, get gear insurance via your renters/homeowners and go take some loving pictures. This is a tool, not a newborn.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 16:51
|
|
|
I have only been photodad'ing but I really like the 25mm ƒ/1.4 c-mount lens on the nikon 1. The dof effect is nice. Also, ƒ/1.4 makes the 400 fps stuff usable indoors @ ISO1600 which is a neat trick but not really a selling point. However, there is a laundry list of things that must be overlooked:
This duder has a blogpost about how he is thinking of using the nikon 1 + c-mount glass to make a low budget thriller and it is an idea that totally makes sense to me. http://www.eoshd.com/content/6997/playing-with-hitchcock-and-the-nikon-j1-with-16mm-c-mount-lenses
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 21:56
|
|
|
Fuji 10-24 formally announced... keeping in line with previous lenses that are priced somewhat high, with a retail of $1000: http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?newsID=5471&news=fuji+10-24mm+f/4+lens More exciting to me are the new grips. Aluminum and allows battery/sd card access without removing the tripod mount (finally): http://www.fujifilm.com/news/n131218_01.html edit: well, I kind of take that back about the lens price. The Canon 17-40L retails for $850, and the Fuji has OIS and probably has nicer optics. It's still hard to pony up that kind of cash for something that isn't at least f2.8. luchadornado fucked around with this message at 02:56 on Dec 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 02:52
|
|
|
Helicity posted:edit: well, I kind of take that back about the lens price. The Canon 17-40L retails for $850, and the Fuji has OIS and probably has nicer optics. It's still hard to pony up that kind of cash for something that isn't at least f2.8.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 05:16
|
|
|
Bob Socko posted:Depends on how well corrected it is. I'll probably buy it either way, but I'll feel better about my purchase if it keeps distortion to a minimum along with nice sharpness wide open. It'll be interesting to see if the lens will be a bit better performing because of its small flange distance. I'm glad Fuji is so committed to having a great lens range though, and that they decided not to go full frame. I'm guessing they want people to be satisfied with their cameras and instead buy more lenses, not bodies. Their OMD E-1 look alike should be neat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 06:00
|
|
|
Re: Fuji full frame chat. I can see the X100-line of cameras going full frame at some point. I think one of the earlier rumors stated that it could potentially have the new sensor that's in the Sony A7 but really I can't see Fuji ditching Xtrans sensor in one their flagship cameras at this point. It would be crazy if Fuji isn't doing some kind of product development for some kind of FF Xtrans sensor camera though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 06:08
|
|
|
Re: Fuji in general -- I just installed the new firmware, and I want to double-check the Auto ISO works as I understand it to. Say I set the minimum ISO to 200, the max to 3200, and the minimum shutter speed to 1/160. So the camera starts by checking if ISO200 at any shutter speed down to 160 will expose correctly. If not, it will bump the ISO to 250 (or whatever) until it does. However, if it reaches 3200 without a correct exposure, it will then start lowering the shutter speed as a last resort. Is this right, assuming aperture priority? Also, as far as full-frame goes, they've said they don't want to build full-frame as it would require creating new lenses, and that would hurt their X-series lineup. I think that's more evidence toward a fixed-lens FF down the line, ala Sony's RX1. Their reasoning is too specific to rule out a non-interchangeable FF setup.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 11:41
|
|
|
Baron Dirigible posted:
Edit: I see the new interview, so they've re-backtracked to the original comment. Fart Car '97 fucked around with this message at 15:27 on Dec 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 15:22
|
|
|
Anyone using half-cases on their mirrorless? Why is it that leather cases/half-cases seem to be a thing for mirrorless cameras? Is it because of their smaller size, or is it because of the retro factor? I've never seen a DSLR with a half-case before. Sony has a whole line-up of full-cases and half-cases for their NEX cameras. I just received my leather full-case for the A7 (I only use the bottom half-case; wish it were available without the top case), and it improves the grip tremendously. My pinky has somewhere to rest, my entire palm is supporting the camera -- I cannot overstate how much better the camera feels in the hand with the case. However, the half-case blocks the memory card slot and the battery slot, as well as the USB port. Screwing and unscrewing the tripod mount every time I come home and want to get a picture is nuts. Wi-fi transfer helps, but not being able to charge the phone without disassembling the setup seems like an oversight. I believe Gariz is coming out with a A7/A7R half-case, but I hated the slick shiny leather on my friend's EM-5 Gariz case. That, and the bottom being of a really heavy metal piece with an uncomfortably sharp edge digging into my pinky. The reason I wanted the half-case (grip aside) is because last year I chaffed the bottom of my RX1, which is soft plastic, not long after I got one. Sure it's no big deal after the babying period, but I threw my D50 around and it never got as much as a scratch.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 15:30
|
|
|
dodob posted:Anyone using half-cases on their mirrorless? Why is it that leather cases/half-cases seem to be a thing for mirrorless cameras? Is it because of their smaller size, or is it because of the retro factor? I've never seen a DSLR with a half-case before. dodob posted:Sony has a whole line-up of full-cases and half-cases for their NEX cameras. I just received my leather full-case for the A7 (I only use the bottom half-case; wish it were available without the top case), and it improves the grip tremendously. My pinky has somewhere to rest, my entire palm is supporting the camera -- I cannot overstate how much better the camera feels in the hand with the case. However, the half-case blocks the memory card slot and the battery slot, as well as the USB port. Screwing and unscrewing the tripod mount every time I come home and want to get a picture is nuts. Wi-fi transfer helps, but not being able to charge the phone without disassembling the setup seems like an oversight. evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Dec 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 15:33
|
|
|
I think it's mostly because DSLR's are weird lumpy shapes and also tend to have clear grips built into them, while basically every mirrorless is some form of a small rectangle. I was interested in getting a half-case for my F3, but I had trouble finding places online that still carry them, and the 3N changed the shape enough that they case won't work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 15:34
|
|
|
Baron Dirigible posted:[...] I'm fine with Fuji focusing on their current sensor size and lenses. Sony is taking the envelope-pushing approach, and they will be facing some major issues: 1) Large NEX following feeling abandoned. Especially with Sony lumping NEX with Alpha, hinting at an all Alpha line-up going forward. 2) Lenses of the same mount getting mixed together, like Canon's and Nikon's have been for so long between APS-C and full-frame lenses. Remember when NEX was a fresh new beginning to get AWAY from these sort of problems? 3) Full-frame lenses are just too big. You can shrink the body all you want, but lenses stay the same size. Look at the upcoming 24-70 f/4 E-mount. Any faster and you might as well just go 24-70 f/2.8 A-mount with an adapter. Sony's own words. So in the spirit of portability, lenses have to be made slower. Sony is a huge company, so they can take the possible marketshare hit that is restructuring their entire camera line-up. Fuji is playing it safer, and possibly waiting for a sensor technology breakthrough that will allow lenses to be smaller, before tearing down the following they've built so far. Do I sound bitter about what Sony has done with the NEX? Because I am. dodob fucked around with this message at 17:04 on Dec 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 15:45
|
|
|
Full frame is a nice thing, but honestly when I see the photos coming out of the Xpro1 and XE1 and such, I really stop caring whether it's 1.5x or 1.3x or FF. They just look so pretty 
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 15:50
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Size, looks, and small DSLRs have such low clearance between lens and grip that a half case bottom would make them impractical. In my defense, I bought the case to protect the bottom of the camera, without being aware how much better the extra half an inch added by the case made in the overall handling of the camera. It almost seemed as if it the camera was designed with the case in mind. I might return the case and gaff tape the bottom.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 15:51
|
|
|
Picked up the Canon EF 40mm pancake for 129 from adorama. I keep buying cheap Canon parts to boil on the EOSM even though I want to get rid of it. Sooner or later I will have a whole system. Sigh.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 16:03
|
|
|
Has anyone seen pricing for these new Fuji grips? I have cash burning a hole in my pocket and a new grip would go well with a 35mm 
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 16:40
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:I keep buying cheap Canon parts to boil on the EOSM even though I want to get rid of it. Sooner or later I will have a whole system. Sigh. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 16:45
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:in 3 years I'm sure they'll have good AF I may keep it around and pick up a Canon mount Tokina 11-16mm later. Since the Fuji 10-24mm is so big and expensive I don't see myself getting it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:27
|
|
|
Baron Dirigible posted:Re: Fuji in general -- If you set auto everything with ISO and shutter limiters, it may behave on a lens to lens basis. With the new firmware the 55-200 seem to focus faster on the easy targets and hunt just as much on the hard to focus targets. The new firmware (XE1) put the highest ISO/lowest ISO/slowest shutter into a sub menu. I wish the quick button(s) can get to it directly. I think I will have to use the custom setting a lot more now that the automatic functions are more powerful. I really wish there is a way to rename the custom settings. You hear me Fuji!? I want rename custom settings and change color on MF peaking!
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:47
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:I may keep it around and pick up a Canon mount Tokina 11-16mm later. Since the Fuji 10-24mm is so big and expensive I don't see myself getting it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:57
|
|
|
dodob posted:
Honestly this is pure bullshit at this point. Not directed at you, directed at Sony and every other manufacturer. In the 70's, when the mainstream (your mother) actually bought lenses for their SLRs, the market spoke and said "we want smaller cameras". The money was flowing and the R&D dollars were spent, and companies like Pentax and Olympus developed near pocket-able SLR/lens systems that sold like crazy. Then came the 80's when the attitudes shifted to technology and ease of use. Zooms and point-and shoots meant family users bought less lenses, or skipped SLRs altogether. The bulky SLR was forgiven, as it was no longer a necessity, it was a tool for ~serious users~. Now it's time for R&D to shift again. The technology exists to make these lenses smaller. We know this for a fact because they used to be goddamned minuscule. However it's expensive to further miniaturize AF motors. It's expensive to use better glass and develop new designs then just tinker with your coatings and add more elements and keep everything telenormal. Then you get into the problem of Digital Is Not Film. It doesn't play nicely with short flange distances, needs different coatings etc etc. My point is that most of these issues can be overcome if it were made a priority. The challenge is (I believe) that the interchangeable lens camera market is shrinking in general, along with the margins etc. It's kind of infuriating because when I see lenses like the 24-70F4 for NEX, it's so blatantly obvious that at this point it's about saving as much as you can on lens design, protecting your margins, etc etc. People cite the laws of physics as a reason we can't shrink lenses. gently caress that, look at every film p&s, look at rangefinder lenses. Industry could have started work on this nearly two decades ago. Standard digital sensor size is (arguably) APS-C, yet CaNikon and friends were basically unwilling to design and release lenses that played to the strengths of a smaller imaging circle. The reasoning was pretty simple: the R&D and tooling on these old film lens designs has already been paid for many times over. Finally Olympus and Fuji come along and show that they "get it". It's about the lenses stupid! Anyways poo poo's got me heated, and I should probably get back to work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 19:10
|
|
|
Baron Dirigible posted:I just installed the new firmware, and I want to double-check the Auto ISO works as I understand it to. Say I set the minimum ISO to 200, the max to 3200, and the minimum shutter speed to 1/160. So the camera starts by checking if ISO200 at any shutter speed down to 160 will expose correctly. If not, it will bump the ISO to 250 (or whatever) until it does. However, if it reaches 3200 without a correct exposure, it will then start lowering the shutter speed as a last resort. Is this right, assuming aperture priority? I don't have a Fuji, but that's exactly how Auto-ISO works on my cameras.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 19:53
|
|
|
Mightaswell posted:It's kind of infuriating because when I see lenses like the 24-70F4 for NEX, it's so blatantly obvious that at this point it's about saving as much as you can on lens design, protecting your margins, etc etc. People cite the laws of physics as a reason we can't shrink lenses. gently caress that, look at every film p&s, look at rangefinder lenses. This is pretty much exactly right. Someone posted in one of the other threads that they had a Canon 40D and jumped to the NEX because it was totally clear that Canon didn't give a poo poo about actually building the best camera they could, only making a slight (cheap) refresh and incrementing the model number by one. That exactly describes me as well - I had a 40D and sold it for a 5N for those exact reasons. Canon hadn't really offered anything compelling and their sensor tech was falling way behind. And their lens selection was really pitiful, in the five years I owned the system the only interesting lenses to be released were the 40mm pancake (which is still too long especially on Canon's lame 1.6x crop factor) and third party lenses, and I can get the third-party lenses on whatever system. In particular the lack of a 35/1.8 DX equivalent was one of the things that really pushed me over the edge - it's just a scaled-down 50mm lens, the cheapest normal prime being a 25 year old dinosaur that cost twice as much as the 35/1.8 DX was just wildly unacceptable. They absolutely refused to refresh their lens designs for anyone except the ultra-high-end customers. The lack of good first-party lenses ended up leading me to adapting all kinds of alt glass instead, so the NEX was a pretty natural move from there. Plus you got access to the Sigma 30/2.8, which is more or less what I wanted Canon to release in the first place. Sony's first-party lens lineup is tragically bad as well apart from a few places (stabilized fast primes are nice). Fuji is clearly doing it right and it's really embarrassing to see the excuses that get put out by the other manufacturers. "Laws of physics" my rear end, it's not slowing Fuji down one bit. Sigma is also pushing new designs out the door and they're all pretty amazing too. It's as embarrassing as Pentax claiming there's no market for downmarket full frame cameras while Canon is a year into selling the 6D and Sony is selling out of A7s. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Dec 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 19:57
|
|
|
I'm curious how Voigtlander packed such awesome quality into their 15mm f4.5 and why no one else can come close to it in size. Granted there's no AF, but do you really need AF on an UWA, and does it really add that much bulk? I mean look how tiny this thing is, even with the adapter: 
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 20:08
|
|
|
It was snowing pretty heavily last week so I cut some holes in a ziplock and put my X100 in it. It is very ghetto and not that water tight. Anyone have any suggestions about buying/making something either built to last or disposable that minimally weather seals an X100? I made holes for the lens and the front and back if the viewfinder and would like that if not a couple extra holes for control - doesn't need to be a water tight seal but enough to use it without worry in the wet snow would be awesome.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 20:15
|
|
|
Helicity posted:I'm curious how Voigtlander packed such awesome quality into their 15mm f4.5 and why no one else can come close to it in size. Granted there's no AF, but do you really need AF on an UWA, and does it really add that much bulk? I mean look how tiny this thing is, even with the adapter: Well, the answer to that is that it's a slow, manual focus prime. But I agree with you that with modern systems we aren't given the choice between "slow, good, and small" or "fast, good, and big". It's always "slow, lovely, and big" or "fast, amazing, lolhuge"
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 20:19
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZrjXSsfxMQ NeverWet maybe? Let us know how well it works on your $1000 camera (actually kind of serious)
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 20:19
|
|
|
Mightaswell posted:Well, the answer to that is that it's a slow, manual focus prime. But I agree with you that with modern systems we aren't given the choice between "slow, good, and small" or "fast, good, and big". It's always "slow, lovely, and big" or "fast, amazing, lolhuge" A bunch of m4/3 lenses are small, fast, and have great AF, notably the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, Oly 45mm f/1.8 and Oly's 12mm... I think it's an f/2.0. Unless I'm being wooshed here or something, it can be done.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 20:31
|
|
|
DJExile posted:A bunch of m4/3 lenses are small, fast, and have great AF, notably the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, Oly 45mm f/1.8 and Oly's 12mm... I think it's an f/2.0. Apologies, I tend to forget Olympus when 'spergin out about this because I've never been a 4/3's shooter. But in the last few years their lens lineup has become pretty impressive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 20:38
|
|
|
Mightaswell posted:Apologies, I tend to forget Olympus when 'spergin out about this because I've never been a 4/3's shooter. But in the last few years their lens lineup has become pretty impressive. Tiny lens posting  also voigtlander 15/4.5 posting 
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 20:46
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Tiny lens posting That's not tiny, it takes up about 4 screens on my laptop.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
You had really bad timing then, I fixed it withing a minute of posting it 
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 21:09
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Tiny lens posting woooooo  
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 21:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 00:39 |
|
|
rio posted:It was snowing pretty heavily last week so I cut some holes in a ziplock and put my X100 in it. It is very ghetto and not that water tight. You have 3 choices. Skip the whole thing and not really worry about mist/rain/snow using judgement. The camera while not weather sealed isnt gonna die if you get it wet out in the rain. Second choice is to keep doing what your doing. Third is to buy http://optechusa.com/rainsleeve.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 22:04
|
|