|
Ashex posted:I have a Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR that I've been reluctant to give up after switching to mirrorless and I want to try using it with my XT20. Yes. The throw is really short but they generally work fine.
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2020 02:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 00:39 |
|
|
Easychair Bootson posted:Yep, don’t pay $300 for it though. You can get a mint used one for like $150. Great, small, lightweight lens. My only complaint about it is the “power” zoom ring. The 18-55/2.8-4 would also be a good choice. Under $300 used. The 18-55 will be a much much better investment than the XC zooms.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2020 02:25
|
|
|
powderific posted:Yes. The throw is really short but they generally work fine. Awesome, ordered the k&f. I realised how much I missed it while trying to photograph the supermoon, won't be the same if it was on a nikon but definitely better than my current lenses. Ashex fucked around with this message at 12:55 on Apr 9, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2020 12:27
|
|
|
I was thinking about finding a Nikon to Sony adapter for my 80-200 but I feel like I rely on autofocus too much to give that up. Just saving for the Sony equivalent now and whoo boy.. I might tap out at the f/4 instead  Also going back to screw-drive AF after experiencing what I can only describe as "magic" autofocus of my 24-105 f/4 is... something else.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2020 14:13
|
|
|
I had the rokkor 70-210 f/4 for a while and used it on my a7ii. It was okay and all, but my pea brain really didn't enjoy manually focusing with a zoom. Think I'll stick to old primes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2020 15:14
|
|
|
I think the only reason (besides how sharp it is) I kept it is that the zoom and focus was so smooth even in manual. If it doesn't work out I've still got an adapter I can use with old nikon g lenses.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2020 18:49
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I was thinking about finding a Nikon to Sony adapter for my 80-200 but I feel like I rely on autofocus too much to give that up. Just saving for the Sony equivalent now and whoo boy.. I might tap out at the f/4 instead You could get the new Tamron 70-180.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2020 19:42
|
|
|
Wow, didn't realize they'd announced that. I'm plenty happy with the reach of my 24-105 for MOST things so probably not enough to double-up on 70% of the zoom range tbh. My next buy will probably be an ultrawide, or just a nice nifty-fifty equivalent for some good ole fashioned smaller-lens street.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2020 19:47
|
|
|
sigma 6 posted:Also - why, seemingly, are only the Panasonic cameras really rated as dustproof / weatherproof? Just noticed the Panasonic Lumix 80 mp (?!?) high res mode and seemingly decent image stabilization stuff now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2020 15:00
|
|
|
Olympus lists IP ratings for at least some of their cameras: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_Code but if you read what the definitions are it certainly doesn't sound that impressive. Like, their flagship is IPX1 which is water dripping on it for 10 minutes. Woohoo. But I'm sure it can handle way more than that. And the dust prevention ratings for the IP thing don't seem that useful in the context of cameras. My anecdotal evidence is that Canon/Nikon/Olympus/Pentax all have good weather sealing. Not sure on Fuji or Panasonic, and Sony's early weather sealed MILCs were not very well sealed, but I think they got better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2020 17:01
|
|
|
My experiences is Fuji and Nikon are both great. Last winter, I accidentally dropped my Z6 into about two feet of snow. Practically buried with snow packed into the EVF and all around dials and lens mount. Worked without issue. Got rained on plenty of times with my previous X-H1, and that didn’t miss a beat either.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2020 17:06
|
|
|
powderific posted:Olympus lists IP ratings for at least some of their cameras: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_Code but if you read what the definitions are it certainly doesn't sound that impressive. Like, their flagship is IPX1 which is water dripping on it for 10 minutes. Woohoo. But I'm sure it can handle way more than that. And the dust prevention ratings for the IP thing don't seem that useful in the context of cameras. My anecdotal evidence is that Canon/Nikon/Olympus/Pentax all have good weather sealing. Not sure on Fuji or Panasonic, and Sony's early weather sealed MILCs were not very well sealed, but I think they got better. If you've ever got some grit in the spinny bits of a lens, I'd say dust sealing is actually a lot more important than water sealing. My partner's canon 70d isn't anything proof, nor is her 400mm f5.6 and they've been rain-soaked a ton and it was only a flooded backpack that finally killed the body.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2020 18:54
|
|
|
I meant the dust sealing IP ratings, not dust sealing in and of itself. The first few IP dust ratings are about whether you can stick like a whole hand or just a finger inside the thing, and the only two ratings for dust are “some can get in” and “none can get in.”
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2020 20:09
|
|
|
I’ve been pretty impressed by my X-T2’s ability to withstand rain, as well as the 35 & 23mm f/2s’ invulnerability to dust intrusion. Every other lens that I’ve carried everywhere and not kept in a sealed bag has ended up with lots of internal dust on the glass, but those two still pass the pen light test after like three years.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2020 21:35
|
|
|
Oly misses the boat on quite a few things but the torture tests of their bodies and pro lenses is impressive as hell. I've run their stuff through hell at those spartan races and none of them skipped a beat. The 40-150mm f/2.8 is drat near bulletproof. And yeah I think we're at the point that anything past the standard cheap kit lenses can stand up to rain fine, but you really don't want a bunch of grit and dust in there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2020 00:15
|
|
|
So I have a Fuji XT-10 with the XF 35mm 1.4, and while I love the lens, i'm always wishing it was a little wider. There's kind of a ton of lens options in the 18 to 23mm range for Fuji, so it's been difficult to decide. Am I a dummy for not just picking up an XF 18-55 2.8-4 ? It's like 1/2 the cost of going with the 23mm 1.4, which would be my ideal choice, but is' spendy and a heck of a lot bigger. Here's everything i've been considering: 18-55MM F/2.8-4 XF R - By all accounts very good, cheapest option - $280 XF 18mm f2 - Super small, but I haven't heard good things. ~$340 XF 23mm 1.4 - Very well regarded, expensive, heavy - $600 XF 23mm f2 - Also well regarded. Light weight - $340
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2020 22:41
|
|
|
What about the 16mm F2.8? I feel like 23mm will only be one "step" wider as it were at 35mm equivalent where the 16 is 24mm equivalent which will give you a lot more. The 18-55 might be a good choice to figure out what your favorite FoV is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2020 23:08
|
|
|
qirex posted:What about the 16mm F2.8? I feel like 23mm will only be one "step" wider as it were at 35mm equivalent where the 16 is 24mm equivalent which will give you a lot more. The 18-55 might be a good choice to figure out what your favorite FoV is. Oooh, that looks nice too. I didn’t realize Fuji had released another wide prime recently. I’ll give it a look, thank you!
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2020 00:00
|
|
|
frogbs posted:Oooh, that looks nice too. I didn’t realize Fuji had released another wide prime recently. I’ll give it a look, thank you! I would give it a look — it’s in the same price range as the 23 f/2, same sort of qualities (sharp across the range, fast the focus, weatherproof and very small) while being appreciably wide. sample image I took, 16 f/2.8 on an X-T20 I would also strongly consider a used 18-55. It doesn’t sound super sexy but it just works.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2020 00:10
|
|
|
Has anyone had problems with dead pixels on their Fuji X-T20? Mine had one last year and it was sent in to Fuji who did a "Sensor re-calibration", and now I just discovered another one in a new spot. They're fairly large, not just 1 or 2, but a cluster of 10 or so in either a line or a square.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2020 10:59
|
|
|
frogbs posted:So I have a Fuji XT-10 with the XF 35mm 1.4, and while I love the lens, i'm always wishing it was a little wider. There's kind of a ton of lens options in the 18 to 23mm range for Fuji, so it's been difficult to decide. Am I a dummy for not just picking up an XF 18-55 2.8-4 ? It's like 1/2 the cost of going with the 23mm 1.4, which would be my ideal choice, but is' spendy and a heck of a lot bigger. 16mm 1.4. Every time. 16-55 2.8 or 16-80 f4 if you need a zoom. If those are out of your budget and don’t mind manual, the Rokinon 12/2 is a smash. Those are my preference, but the 18-55 is still a great lens.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2020 14:43
|
|
|
the dude said $600 was expensive and you suggested those three lenses?  I think the important thing to remember is that so long as you stick to XF lenses and not the XC ones, there are very few Legit Duds in the Fujifilm lineup. Some don't have the Magic, some have a little Magic, some are nothing but Magic, but they're all generally Pretty Good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2020 14:57
|
|
|
harperdc posted:the dude said $600 was expensive and you suggested those three lenses? I did offer the Roki! Also the 14 2.8. Those can be had for $300-400 usually.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2020 16:33
|
|
|
Copped a Sigma 56mm 1.4 and it's good as hell if you're looking for a cheap gem. It seems as sharp as the Canon L's I've used and it's a steal for under $400.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2020 21:15
|
|
|
Just won an eBay auction for an XT2 to replace my Xpro1. Going to be interesting to see how it is especially focussing the 35 1.4.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2020 03:08
|
|
|
refleks posted:Has anyone had problems with dead pixels on their Fuji X-T20? Mine had one last year and it was sent in to Fuji who did a "Sensor re-calibration", and now I just discovered another one in a new spot. I’ve noticed them on my x-t2 and just done the automatic remapping. There were definitely more than I would’ve expected or liked to see on a new camera but once they disappeared I stopped caring.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2020 13:27
|
|
|
Yeah, I had one on my XT-20 show up as well, but I only found it after pixel peeping and didn't know how long it had been there. Pixel mapping fixed it for me as well. I also had it happen on my X-H1, same deal. I'm assuming it has something to do with that particular sensor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2020 15:14
|
|
|
Just treated myself to a used X100F - first new camera body in 6 years (have been using an OG Sony A7 since it came out, which is on its last legs)  I have been a bit of a skeptic of the X100 series since launch (mostly on the basis of cost, and not using the 35mm focal length much), but have found myself almost completely uninspired to go out and take photos the last few years. Not sure if it's because of being busy with my job, tired of my janky A7, or just placated with my OK smartphone camera, but I seldom pick up my camera and actually go out to deliberately take photos anymore. When I do, like for a friend's wedding, I get really into it again and remember how much I enjoy shooting, but it's hard to make myself take that first step of actually taking my camera out. Since I know the X100's have a reputation in particular for being a "photographer's camera" and enjoyable to use, I thought I ought to give it a try - worst case I can sell it at a modest loss in a few months. My initial impressions are pretty positive as far as handling, although I do find it annoying I can't seem to get thumbnails for RAF's in Win 10 unless I pay US$10 for some third party software. At the moment I don't know how likely I am to use the OVF much because I'm finding I'm missing focus a lot, but probably need to play around with the setting a bit more and figure things out properly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2020 04:07
|
|
|
In two years I’ve used the OVF maybe three times just to try it out. People who like it talk about being able to see stuff coming into frame and it feeling more “live” but I have a feeling that’s mostly film idolatry.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2020 04:59
|
|
|
On the X100T it’s good for panning shots and some low light stuff but I imagine the newer models with updated EVF’s perform well enough for that
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2020 05:15
|
|
|
qirex posted:In two years I’ve used the OVF maybe three times just to try it out. People who like it talk about being able to see stuff coming into frame and it feeling more “live” but I have a feeling that’s mostly film idolatry. Animal posted:On the X100T it’s good for panning shots and some low light stuff but I imagine the newer models with updated EVF’s perform well enough for that The camera seems to be defaulting to it (full disclosure: I have not read the manual or looked anything up yet) so I'll have to look into finding ways to get it default more to the EVF. Maybe it's a battery saving thing? Personally I do see the appeal - I shot a lot with a Bessa rangefinder in my early 20s and the overlay is really slick. And as you say, it's nice to be able to see the stuff outside the frame - lets you reframe without having to move the camera around exploratively, or wait for a subject to enter the sensor's FoV. But without having an actual RF patch or some other way to confirm focus I'm not confident in what I shoot with it. It's a really cool, futuristic design though - is the X-Pro1 hybrid EVF/OVF similar? (I assume the EVF is not as nice given its age.) The tilting LCD of the X100V really appeals to me coming from Sony as I found I used it a tonne, but the price of a new one of those (AU$2200) versus the AU$800 for my secondhand X100F made it an easy decision. I forgot to mention: the leaf shutter on this thing is unbelievably quiet. It makes the A7 sound like a bloody freight train. Having no luck connecting it to my phone with the Fuji app but from lurking this thread that's not entirely surprising lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2020 07:38
|
|
|
Ethics_Gradient posted:My initial impressions are pretty positive as far as handling, although I do find it annoying I can't seem to get thumbnails for RAF's in Win 10 unless I pay US$10 for some third party software. I use Irfanview to get RAF thumbnails for free but be warned that if you make it the default application for opening images files all the icons become a stupid red cartoon cat.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2020 12:29
|
|
|
qirex posted:In two years I’ve used the OVF maybe three times just to try it out. People who like it talk about being able to see stuff coming into frame and it feeling more “live” but I have a feeling that’s mostly film idolatry. The EVF on the XPro1 is horrible and I still prefer it to the OVF. When I have access to something that gives me near-WYSIWYG previewing, the OVF offers me very little. Part of it is psychological too. When I use the EVF I see the camera struggle to autofocus and can quantify the lag involved in taking the photo. When I'm on the OVF it feels very decoupled from the camera autofocusing and eventually triggering the shutter and makes the camera feel that much slower. I think I might use the OVF more if I just defaulted to sunny-16 and left my aperture wide enough for good no-focus street photography, which I might try this summer but I still doubt it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2020 12:59
|
|
|
Ethics_Gradient posted:The camera seems to be defaulting to it (full disclosure: I have not read the manual or looked anything up yet) so I'll have to look into finding ways to get it default more to the EVF. Maybe it's a battery saving thing?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2020 16:07
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:The EVF on the XPro1 is horrible and I still prefer it to the OVF. When I have access to something that gives me near-WYSIWYG previewing, the OVF offers me very little. It's also nigh on unusable for any focal length above 50mm, or zooms. It basically seems it was designed for the xt100 and the xpro1 with the 18, 35 or 60 primes that came out initially, any subsequent releases of zoom lenses or larger telephoto or even some of the superwide primes have rendered it useless. I'd go so far as to say that by the time the xpro3 was released the ovf was little more than a marketing gimmick.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2020 20:34
|
|
|
Are there any m43 bodies that are good for tethering to use more like a webcam? I still have lenses, but my OM-D E-M10 was never really intended for good video. Was thinking it might be fun to make use of the lenses since I mostly have been shooting with my X100F. Maybe I could find a deal on a used body or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
JHVH-1 posted:Are there any m43 bodies that are good for tethering to use more like a webcam? I still have lenses, but my OM-D E-M10 was never really intended for good video. Maybe something like the Blackmagic Pocket cinema cameras? In other news the XT2 that I bought on eBay finally showed up, thanks coronavirus for the 2 week shipping. The focus on this camera is so much nicer than on the Pro1, I can finally take action photos of my kids.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2020 07:38
|
|
|
Aargh posted:It's also nigh on unusable for any focal length above 50mm, or zooms. It basically seems it was designed for the xt100 and the xpro1 with the 18, 35 or 60 primes that came out initially, any subsequent releases of zoom lenses or larger telephoto or even some of the superwide primes have rendered it useless. I'd go so far as to say that by the time the xpro3 was released the ovf was little more than a marketing gimmick. It’s basically a discount Leica gimmick but I’m a sucker for that
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2020 08:05
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:I’ve noticed them on my x-t2 and just done the automatic remapping. There were definitely more than I would’ve expected or liked to see on a new camera but once they disappeared I stopped caring. Atlatl posted:Yeah, I had one on my XT-20 show up as well, but I only found it after pixel peeping and didn't know how long it had been there. Pixel mapping fixed it for me as well. I also had it happen on my X-H1, same deal. I'm assuming it has something to do with that particular sensor. Thanks. I wasn't really pixel-peeping, and it was fairly obvious in the middle of the sensor both times. They replaced the sensor this second time around.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 11:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 00:39 |
|
|
refleks posted:Thanks. I wasn't really pixel-peeping, and it was fairly obvious in the middle of the sensor both times. Got a question then since you’re noticing issues with your camera. (not being sarcastic here) Does it do C-AF with any realistic utility outside of the the central PDAF square? Does tracking work at all if you initiate from the left or right edge of the viewfinder frame? Or does the focus just wobble back and forth in both situations? I don’t know anyone else with an X-T2x to compare mine to, but have always wondered about that.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 13:31
|
|