angkordave

<p>I had a lot of fun recently by setting my Fuji XT-10 on timelapse and recorded a journey I have done many times where I live in Cambodia. I have some interesting random shots of crazy traffic. When I can find the time I could put 3 hours of images taken one every 60 secs as a video. <br />The Fuji is light enough to be attached to the dash using stick on velcro. this could be done with a gopro or other Compact camera which has timelapse facilty. Alternatively you could use a remote release if you dont have timelapse. Its necessary to set camera as close as possible to the glass, use to manual focus and use a polorizer to reduce reflections.</p>

<p>The 6d is fine for architecture; I used one (and 5dmk2) for this purpose. I do question the need for an F2.8 lens as you really need a small aperture F8-16. The 17-40 worked well for me and Sigmas 12-24 gave an incredibly useful wide angle; good for confined spaces like bathrooms. To get best results I used manual focus and a tripod; but with 6400 ISO a 6D can be used hand held in quite dark conditions.</p>

<p>Fuji Lenses are optimised for Fuji Cameras; which means that distortion and vignetting are corrected in camera. <br />Even the cheap 16-50 kit lens and 50-230 have remarkably low level of distortion and no vignetting that I can see. <br />The higher end Fuji lenses are a lot more expensive; so unless you are prepared for this; go for a cheaper Nikon or Canon DSLR. The 2 lenses mentioned above make a useful lightweight travel kit. I started with an XT-10 + 16-50 kit lens and 50-230 and soon realized that how good the system was so sold a lot of Canon gear to expand my Fuji kit.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Lr with Photoshop is so cheap now at $10 per month that its not worth using DNGs</p>

 

<p>If you get a mac ensure you have a mimimum of 16gb RAM For flexibilty (if you can afford it) a macbook Pro with external monitor. I used to have a 2011 15"MBP quad core i7, with 16 GB Ram which worked well. I bought a 2013, 13" Retina MBP which had 8GB Ram and 500GB SSD for travel. Its not so fast as I expected and cannot upgrade.</p>

<p> I know the XT-1 has been superseded by the XT-2 but I ended up buying an XT-1 as the replacement did not have enough befits to justify the expense. I already had an XT-10 which was impressive but the buffer at 8FPS was poor. The XT-1 can shoot 40 Raw files with fast card which is good as I would need.<br>

<br /> Now I have Lightroom and Photoshop updated I can now use the RAF files. These have a better dynamic range in the Highlights and significantly less shadow noise if pushed 2 or more stops as compared to my Canons. Even when shooting white birds against a dark background in harsh Australian light, a modest amount of highlight correction gave results that would be hard to achieve with my 6D.<br>

<br /> The Fuji 35mm 1.4 lens is superb, lightweight and discrete. <br /> I also picked up a cheap 50-230 lens. Its plastic build did not give much confidence and the 6.7 max aperture hardly impressive; but the IQ is sharp. Its a very light travel lens for daylight and no major shortcomings in sharpness. The 10-24 F4 is a good ultra wide which I use a lot. It’s quite a heavy lens and well made<br /> An XT-10 and XT-1 with, 16-50, 50-230 and 35 F1.4, makes for a useful lightweight travel kit.<br /> Battery life is a good for the battery size. I managed to get 325 jpegs over 6 hours the recently trying out the Interval shooting facility. Thats a nice trick!<br>

Overall</p>

<ul>

<li>IQ is very sharp and better than could be expected from 16mp</li>

<li>Dynamic range is better than my Canon 6D</li>

<li>Viewfinder is bigger</li>

<li>I like the ISO dial</li>

<li>8fps for over 40 RAW files; exceeded my best expectations</li>

<li>The focus system is quite good; but with the 50-230 I have a lot of missed shots when shooting flying birds (this could be the lens)</li>

<li>Weather sealing is an advantage</li>

</ul>

<p>Downsides</p>

<ul>

<li>The system is not cheap</li>

<li>No built in GPS</li>

</ul>

<p>Canon were too late with this; I'd been waiting for a few years for Canon to come out with a mirrorless with a viewfinder and to be compatible with other canon lenses. I jumped ship to Fuji XT-10 and XT-1 the latter outclasses all but the pro Canons. For travel the Fuji system is near ideal. </p>

 

<p>The spec of the new XT-2 lacks GPS but does have 4k video which is of no interest to me. The video on my XT-10 works well enough and the upgrade from 16mp to 24mp is not enough to encourage me to by one. GPS would have tipped the balance for me. I would not pay $1600 for the new camera without it, so have bought an XT-1 which has the same sensor as my XT-10<br />I have got amazing 1 metre wide enlargements from my 16mp XT-10. The dynamic range and lack of shadow noise blows away my FF and APS Canon DSLRS.<br>

The larger viewfinder, water resistance and buffer of the XT-1 at 8fps is a big improvement on my XT-10. I was able to buy the 10-24 F4 zoom with the XT-1 for much the same price as a new XT-2. I am very happy with my decision</p>

<p>After several months using my XT-10, I have been impressed and disappointed as well.<br />The Good Stuff.<br>

Now I have Lightroom and Photoshop updated I can now use the RAF files. These have a better dynamic range in the the Highlights and significantly less shadow noise if pushed 2 or more stops as compared to my Canons. Even when shooting white birds against a dark background in harsh Australian light, a modest amount of highlight correction gave results that would be hard to achieve with my 6D.<br>

The Fuji 35mm 1.4 lens is superb, lightweight and discrete. I also picked up a cheap 50-230 lens. Its plastic build did not give much confidence and the 6.7 max aperture hardly impressive; but the IQ is sharp. Its a very light travel lens for daylight and no major shortcomings in sharpness. <br />An XT-10, 16-50, 50-230 and 35 F1.4, makes for a useful lightweight travel kit for much the same weight as a 6D and 24-105 lens on its own.<br>

Battery life is a good for the battery size. I managed to get 325 jpegs over 6 hours the other day trying out the Interval shooting facility. Thats a nice trick! <br /><br />The Not so Good<br />I have had problems with the main switch jamming and odd glitches with the camera locking up. This was fixed by Fuji Australia. I had no proof of purchase as I was traveling but they fixed the switch. Days after I received it the camera started to lock up and after a week the camera failed again. Fuji Sent it to Sydney and I collected it there 2 weeks later. The Shutter was fixed I had my Canons with me so I could shoot).<br />Although the XT10 can shoot at 8FPS the Buffer is poor with at best a 1 second burst on a fast SD Card.<br />Good as the AF is in good light; its disappointing in very low light. Even with my 35mm F 1.4 wide Open I had a very low hit rate shooting musicians last week.</p>

<p>So The XT-10 is a good travel camera but its not yet there, so far as low light AF and shooting speed is concerned. It will be interesting to see whether the XT-1 performs better.<br /><br /></p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have both 6D and 70D. Unless you shoot in the dark (which I assume you don't) , keep the 70d. You will find the focusing on the 6D frustrating after the 70d. <br />Big plus with the 6D is in built GPS, for travel photography that's useful to me.<br />If shallow depth of field and bokeh is important; the Sigma 18-35 F1.8 is stellar I bought my 70D with the Sig lens and its a great combination. Bokeh is as good as a 24-70 F2.8 in full frame in my opinion.<br />Also the Video Focus on the 70D is excellent.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Good for Sony I hope they can do the same for Fuji as I have a lot of Canon mount Sigmas esp the 18-35 F1.8 which I'd live to use with my Fuji XT10</p>

 

<p>Image from 6D at 25600 ISO</p><div></div>

<p>One big advantage with the 6D is low light performance at high ISOs. With the F2.8 lens you can capture action in very low light. It amazed me when I got mine; how I could shoot at musicians on stage at 6400ISO or sometimes more and get surprisingly good results.<br />I've added this shot of a guitarist shot with 6D at 25600 ISO 1/125th sec at F4 using a 24-105 F4 lens. its a little grainy in the background but its clear on the guitar and strings.<br />So it you are shooting street shots at night 6D is excellent and the centre focus is very sensitive too. The outer Focus Points are not so good so be aware of that in low light.</p>

<p>Having used an XT-10 for several months now I am now using it for general photography much more than I ever expected. its so much lighter and with an excellent Digital Viewfinder that my Canon DSLRs seem antiquated now.<br>

IQ of JPGs is good enough and Video is usable especially as you can use the Viewfinder, the mic socket is a pain as it wont accept my Rode mics. So for quality Video I'll still be using my 70D or 6D with an add on viewfinder.<br>

The biggest limitation is not the camera but Adobe who refuse to sell me an upgrade to Lightroom and wont sell CC in in my location I really hate Adobe for this as I cannot use the RAW files without the additional process of converting to DNG which I am sure is not so effective.<br /><br /></p>

 

<p>I have both 6D and 7d and both are excellent cameras. I cannot differentiate between the IQ of either camera in general photography. Its only in Low light that the 6D is better. It you are used to the focusing of the 70D you might find the AF of 6D disappointing and for action it’s a bit slow.<br>

That is why I have both 70D for action and wildlife 6d for low light and portraiture . Other than that there is not much difference.<br>

Bokeh is better on the Full Frame but when I compared my Sigma 18-36 F1.8 on 70d against a borrowed 24-70 F2.8 with my 5d Mk 2 there was I could not say that the IQ of either were better; they are both great combinations.<br>

If you are considering a 6D I would hang on to the 70D as they compliment each other well.<br>

There is a cheaper option a 2^nd hand 5D Mk 2 IQ as good as the 6D up to 6400ISO otherwise both handle well.</p>

<p>If you are using Photoshop or Lightroom they work well enough on PC or Mac; its just a matter hardware and OS preference. Personally I prefer Mac; as Macs can be set up for Mac or windows. I did that first but dropped Windows as I did not have a use for it. Win 8 was a desktop disaster Win 10 has to be better but I'd have reservations about a new OS anyway. At least Mac OS works reliably.</p>

 

<p>I have used many camera systems over the last decades; I have been based towards Fuji for the Dynamic Range, the S2 and S5 Pro based on Nikon bodies were good in their time. If I compare the usability of the XT10 there is no question of the superiority of the latter. <br>

I'm using Canon DSLRs as well and looked upon the XT10 as a neat light compact with the versatility of changing lenses. When I bought it I never thought of the XT-10 as an alternative to a Full Frame DSLR; however its the one I tend to pick up first for casual use. I like the discrete size and I can see good possibilities using both XT1 and XT-10 when on the move.<br>

<br />I had an interesting discussion to day with a photojournalist friend who shoots Nikon and is keen to go the mirrorless route, like a lot of PJs who are now converting to Sony's. I know of a few Pros who are using X series cameras too. So I do see the demise of mirrored DSLRS as mainstream coming very quickly. Nikon and Canon will need to wake up for this very soon or they will lose out.</p>

 

<p>I recently bought the new Fuji XT10 as a replacement for my Canon G1X. The Fuji XT10; is a class act by Fujifilm. Mine was came in a kit with a 18-50 Zoom (more later). It’s a similar weight to a G1X with interchangeable lenses and an EVF for less than the price of a G1X2 + EVF. The retro looks with lots of knobs and buttons, harks back to the Fuji film SLR I had in the mid 1970s.<br /> The innovative Xtrans sensor is used on the XT1. With 16mp it might seem to some to be under specified; but IQ is very good indeed with vibrant colours and plenty of detail. IQ goes well beyond the point and shoot market and well into the full size DSLR league. Fuji's were never strong on AF or shooting speed; but this has a sophisticated multi-point AF system and a fast 8 frames per sec shooting speed.<br /> Low light performance is good, 6400 ISO is achievable when needed. There is surprisingly low noise at that point. Shadow noise is well controlled too even in JPEG mode. I did see some highlight burnout under high contrast lighting conditions; but to be fair Canons have never excelled in that area either. Its just disappointing that the new Xtrans sensor does not appear to have the Dynamic range of Fuji’s Nikon based DSLRs like the X5 Pro that I owned nearly a decade ago.<br /> The Kit lens 16-50 F 3.5 F5.6 is good for landscape and general photography. It had no shortcomings other than speed. Image Stabilization cannot make up for the lack of sensitivity in low light; but at least the XT10 can give acceptable results at 6400 ISO, so its some compensation.<br /> Lens choices from Fuji consist of some good fast primes and an expensive Fujinon 50-150 F2.8. Leica M series lenses can be used with an adapter. I'll probably expand my lens selection; to a smaller prime as the 16-50 is too bulky to put in pocket.<br /> The shutter is unusual in that it offers both focal plane and electric stutters. I’m not too convinced of the need for the Focal Plane shutter as the electronic works well and silently, at speeds in excess of 1/4000^{th sec}<br /> The Electronic Viewfinder was what finally sold the camera to me. It’s the best EVF I’ve ever come across. The resolution is so high that the dots are invisible and no lag if the camera is moved. The comprehensive viewfinder info can be set to rotate for a portrait shot and all settings; exposure comp and White Balance etc can be seen at eye level. It has the Eye Sensor option of auto selection of EVF and the tilting LCD display or either if required.<br /> The camera has an almost bewildering selection of menu options, with the Fuji Film Simulation modes and numerous Auto Modes.<br /> There is a small pop up flash which can only be used when Single Shot mode is enabled. That caught me out for a while as I shoot in Continuous Mode 90% of the time. With the 16-50 lens , the lens hood causes a shadow if not removed. It has wireless connectivity which I was unable to get to work with my aging Galaxy Tab; but its not important to me. A more disappointing omission is the lack of GPS Apparently it could work with the latest smartphones; but I’d willingly have paid more for GPS in camera.<br /> Video is possible and unlike conventional DSLRs you can use the EVF instead of the LCD. This does mean a more ergonomic way of shooting casual videos. The lightness of the camera makes camera shake when turning off the button. The audio quality is not great so it is an annoyance that the mic input will only accept a tiny 2.5 mm jack meaning that I cannot try it with my Rode Pro Shotgun mics, which have the standard 3.5mm jack.<br /> Overall having used the camera for several weeks I have grown to like the image quality and lightweight body. The retro controls and excellent EVF make it fun to use and there are Auto modes if required. I just wish that Canon would produce a decent mirrorless DLC camera to compete with this. <br /> With cameras like the Fuji’s and high end offerings from Sony, the days must be numbered by the old fashioned DSLRs which are heavy and have that ancient mirror box, optical Viewfinder and old world shutter. <br /> Dave Perkes<br /> 15^th Oct 2015</p>

<p>I installed Adobe CC 2 years ago and still have CS5 Working normally.<br>

Thats a godsend as CC Bridge has been a problem with cache which Ive not been able to resolve. So I use CS5 Bridge instead. </p>

 

<p>I have the 17-40 Canon and Sigma 12-24. For critical use with architectural photography the Sigma is better as 17mm is in the middle of the focal length range so vignetting and distortion on full frame is virtually non-excistant. The field of view at 12mm is spectacular. <br />The Canon does have significant barrel distortion at 17mm and is a good general purpose wide angle. The F4 aperture makes it useful as a walk around lens. I would not say one is better than the other in terms of sharpness; but at 12 mm you can get some very creative results and get into tight spaces that a longer lens would not allow</p>

<p>No doubt in my mind the 70-200 F4 IS is a good lightweight lens which works well with a 1.4 Extender. Its as perfect a lens as I could ask for with no shortcomings and IQ is so close to the F2.8 version as to make no real difference. You would probably want to sell your 70-200 F2.8 after using the F4. Bokeh is nice on full frame, 6D and much better than the 24-105 which never liked much. I sold it to get the Sigma version which is much the same IQ but better bokeh and is my most used lens for travel. If bokeh is not so important the Canon 24-105 is good for general purpose and landscapes. but like most do-it-all lenses wide angle distortion is noticeable for buildings .</p>

<p>When you add $100 for the Adapter the Sigma 24-105 for Sony makes more sense than crippling the good a/f performance of the Canon 24-105 using a slow a/f performing adapter.<br />To do this on The Tamron 70-200 F2.8 would be even worse; faster aperture but slow focus does not make any sense to me. Can't you buy a Tamron or Sigma 70-200 F2.8 in a Sony mount?</p>

<p>Maybe I'm not familiar with Mirror less; but I do know that the Sony A7 is a stellar camera. I've handled one and it would offer a lighter weight alternative to the lumpy Canon Full Frame cameras.<br />How does the Converter work, Does it keep all the a/f functions? and how expensive is the converter? I might even consider doing the "mad thing" and buying an A7 if I get full functionality with Canon mount lenses with it.<br>

I am suprised that the Sigma is more expensive than the Canon. The retail price of $900 approx is slightly cheaper than the Canon 24-105L.</p>

 

<p>Putting a Canon Lens on a Sony is a bit mad; Look at Sigmas 24-105 F4 ART. if you can get one in a Sony Mount that will be better. I have had both lenses and I reckon the Sigma is better built and in my opinion IQ is a little improved too. I think the Sony Version does not have IS. Also its compatible with the Sigma USB dock and can may be convertible to Canon or Nikon Mount if you change systems.<br>

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1009624-REG/sigma_635_205_24_105mm_f4_dg_os.html</p>

<p>External mics are infinitely better than those on camera. If you are looking for high end audio quality an external recorder is best.<br>

Not everyone needs a professional level setup with mic stands etc. I have been using Rode Mic for several years for travel videos and works pretty well with Canon. Most people view video on laptops now anyway so the sound from them are poor anyway and any subtleties are lost for most people. </p>