mervyn_wilmington

<p>I am very grateful for the quick responses. It makes you think! We bought our first home - a small brick-built country cottage in good order - in 1970. It cost £1,000.</p> <p>There are certainly plenty of F2s for sale for little money, even in the UK, but many seem 'well used'.</p> <p>I had been looking for one with the plain prism, but good ones seem few and far between and more money. Then, yesterday, I found a plain prism, described as exc++ for £75. It arrived this morning and I think it a bit better than that. Seems remarkable to pay £98 for a complete cameras, and that much for just the prism, but I'm happy.</p>

<p>I've just bought a 1972 Photomic with 50mm f2 lens and erc. Apart from a couple of rubs on the head, it is in very nice condition, and seems to be 'low mileage'. So far as I can tell, everything works. I hope to put a film through in the next day or two.</p> <p>It was the grand sum of £98 on the auction site. I wondered how much it might have been when new?</p>

<p>I think that I had made it clear that my experience was with a D700 only. That said, I never had sharpness problems be they focussing or otherwise. I have to admit that very occasionally the lens could be subject to hunting.</p> <p>I have now moved over, after 30 years with Nikons, to a Fuji XT1 so I am not in a position to try the lens with a higher pixel camera. The move to Fuji has caused no anguish....</p>

<p>I had d and pre-d lenses - 50mm, 60mm, and 35-70mm - at the same time and used them on my D700. I could never see one jot of difference in performance, including when flash was in use. I thought the d was supposed to help with the latter.</p>

<p>There have been a lot of views on the f4 constant over the years. If you did a search you might well find them. It became something of a cult lens.</p> <p>I thought it superb. I used it with film Nikons and then my D700. I thought it so good I finished up with three! They all performed very well, although there was a batch that had problems in actually achieving focus - at the long end I think. None of mine had that problem.</p> <p>One downside is slowish focussing. However, if you can cope with that, you might find it provides very good results. </p> <p>It was only in production for about 18 months. There was a view that is was very expensive and that put off amateurs. There was another view that its plastic appearance put off professionals. It was replaced by non-constants: nowhere near as good in my opinion.</p>

<p>Nikon should look at my Fuji XT1 -and I'm sure they will have already looked at the model - and improve on it without increasing the size and weight. They should produce lenses of Fuji quality at Fuji prices.</p> <p>I might then go back to Nikon, which I recently left after 30 years.</p>

<p>I have now been able to give the 'mended' 18-55 a thorough trial. The image quality is very good, regardless of whether ois is on or not, and regardless of shutter speed.</p> <p>Many people, other than myself, suffered from the same sort of problems of soft images. Bearing in mind it was a brand new lens, is there any explanation other than poor quality control at Fuji?</p>

<p>I bought an XE2. For someone who wears glasses, the viewfinder is poor. I then bought an XT1 - much, much better. The XE2 is now a back-up, but I may sell it.</p>

<p>I posted recently on this in relation to my Fuji 18-55. In essence, most of my images were soft with the ois on. On this forum and others, it was acknowledged there could be this problem with ois, and it was not confined to Fuji lenses. It usually happened at higher shutter speeds. Some said above 1/300, others above 1/70, the latter being my experience. Other users said they had no such problems with the lens.</p> <p>I returned my lens to Fuji UK under warranty. It came back yesterday. They say they have replaced the lens group.</p> <p>I've had two short sessions with it. It now seems fine. Even at high shutter speeds, sharpness is very good with ois on. I haven't had the chance yet to duplicate shots with ois off at high shutter speeds to see if there is an improvement. I will do that in the next day or two.</p> <p>The short point is that it is now a totally different lens.</p>

<p>Just an update. Yesterday I received packaging from Fuji UK to send the lens to them. It has gone. I await the outcome.</p>

<p>I don't want to make a 'thing' of this, but I am now satisfied that a good number of people are experiencing this problem, mainly, it seems with the 18-55. There was, for example, a long thread on DP Review starting Aug 25 2013: <em>18-55 with OIS on = blurred images.</em></p> <p>Whether some examples of this lens are affected more than others is not clear.</p> <p>There are also suggestions that if you put the camera on a tripod, the softness will be even worse!</p> <p>I'm afraid these optical and mechanical inter-relationships in lenses are well beyond my expertise. However, it would be useful if someone with that expertise could furnish a paper on the subject. It would be even more useful if lens manufacturers acknowledged there can be this problem, and advise better on how and when OIS should be used. </p> <p>At the moment, I only feel comfortable with its use at very slow speeds. I took another series of images yesterday at 'normal' speeds. Sometimes the softness - comparing with OIS on and off - was obvious. On others it was detectable on enlargement, but certainly there. Having said all that, it seems to work wonders at very slow shutter speeds!</p>

<p>Barry - that is interesting. Where did you find this, please?</p> <p>Sometimes it is said to be shutter shock, sometimes ois interfering with the af. Other members have understandably said that problems of this sort are usually attributable to 'normal' focus issues. That may be so, but how might one know? Could the problem I am experiencing be more widespread than thought? I say that bearing in mind that it does not happen on every shot.</p> <p>Regarding the electronic shutter, I thought that was only available on some cameras, and operated at very high shutter speeds?</p>

<p>Further to my last posting, 'out of interest', I have now found what is said in the XT1 book.</p> <p><em>Please note that the OIS can also introduce camera shake especially at high shutter speeds. This adverse effect is more likely to occur in OIS mode 1 than 2. However, OIS mode 1 is more effective when used at very slow shutter speeds, such as 1/15th, 1/8th, or even 1/4.</em></p> <p>He recommends -</p> <p><em>Only use OIS when necessary. When you are using fast shutter speeds that don't require image stabilization, you can safely turn the OIS off to eliminate it as a potential interference.</em></p> <p>My point is that I am getting this problem at below fast shutter speeds, but, seemingly, not at very slow ones!</p> <p>Fascinating or what!</p>

<p>Barry and George; thanks for your further comments.</p> <p>Barry - none of the shots look as though the camera had moved. They are simply out of focus. It happens where the characteristics of the subject should create no difficulty in achieving focus.<br> George - I do not think it is the body. I also have an XE2, and it was on that where I first experienced the problem. The problem has been recorded elsewhere, including on the Fuji part of this forum. It is also mentioned in the rockynook book on the XT1. The difference is though that in those cases it is said that it happens at above 1/300. Mention is also made of it happening with some Nikons at above 1/500.</p> <p>Thanks again.</p>

<p>Thanks for your further comments Barry.</p> <p>In your original posting, you asked about <em>subject matter and data were perfect.</em> Can I first explain that what I meant was that I was stationary and so was the subject matter. That was well illuminated, and had the characteristics that finding focus should have been easy. An iso in the 400/800 range would have been used; the aperture would be around f8; the shutter speed would have been such that, even without ois, there should have been no 'shake' issues.</p> <p>Let me get further up-to-date. Near to us there is a stone building with a burglar alarm on the gable. It has lettering on it. I took two pictures. ISO 400; 55mm; f8. On one the shutter speed was recorded as 1/210, the other 1/200. They were taken within seconds of each other from exactly the same spot, ie without moving. One had ois on, the other not.</p> <p>Apart from substantial cropping, I have done no post processing. The lettering on the one with ois on, is decidedly soft/blurred. The one with it off is clear, bearing in mind the degree of cropping/enlargement.</p> <p>Perhaps further experiment is needed, but I am getting the impression that at really low shutter speeds ois works. At what might be 'medium' shutter speeds - rather than high which has been mentioned by some people - the image is very soft.</p> <p>I have already made arrangements for the lens to go back to Fuji. I have been trying to narrow the issue about the cause of the softness before I did so.</p> <p>Thanks again.</p>

<p>I am grateful for the helpful comments. Perhaps I can make some general observations.</p> <p>I bought my first 'proper' camera in 1958. It was 35mm with an uncoupled rangefinder. Since then I have had/used Nikon/Canon/Minolta/Fuji 35mm film cameras, and Hasselblad, Rollei, Mamiya, Bronica medium format.</p> <p>For the last 30 years I have mainly used 'big' Nikons, during the last 12 being digital.</p> <p>Of course, anyone who assumes they can go out and take 100 shots and find everyone perfect will be in cloud cuckoo land. There will always be an odd technical or user error. I had a few with my Nikons, but a very low proportion.</p> <p>Let me give some more recent examples. We live in the country. I go out of our front door and I am in the fields. I have a short walk, about half a mile out and back over the same route. A couple of weeks ago, I took the Fuji with the 18-55. On the outward journey, the lens had the ois off. On the return it was on. Otherwise, all settings were the same. The shots I took were essentially the same, as were the lighting conditions. I invariably use aperture priority in a range that should give quality images, always checking the shutter speed - for obvious reasons.</p> <p>Of those taken on the outward journey, everyone one was sharp or very sharp. Of those on the return journey, about 30% were showing softness.</p> <p>A couple of days ago, we went to the Bishop's Palace at Bishop Auckland. I took around 70 pictures, nearly all inside in poor light. No flash used. The camera had essentially the same settings as before, except the ois was on and iso was 1600 or 3200. Even though the conditions were difficult, the resultant pictures were very good.</p> <p>Yesterday, we went for a walk round the gardens of Constable Burton Hall. I took about 30 shots. Some were of the garden, some the hall, some people. Lighting conditions were good or better: ois was on.. Around a third of the images were soft. <br> Let me make a couple of final observations.</p> <p>If I were to go back, say, 15 years when I was still using film Nikons, I had my films developed and printed at the same time, the prints being 18"x12". At that size and cost, you have to be confident that you will get proportion of quality results. I rarely got more than a couple of 'duds'.</p> <p>I also, currently, have a couple of Fuji compacts. I have one in my pocket when out and about. The settings are essentially the same as with my other cameras. I rarely get soft shots, the usual problem being noise. I am 73, but, lest anyone might think otherwise, I don't shake or twitch!</p> <p>Any further views, please?</p>

<p>A little while ago, I posted about some soft images I was getting with my new Fuji camera and 18-55 lens. These were occasional, but had been taken in 'perfect' lighting and with settings that should have produced first class images.</p> <p>The responses were to the effect that (1) some members had never had this sort of problem, and (2) that others had had this problem and it happened when ois was on and a high shutter speed was used (above 1/300). One member also said that there was a similar issue with some Nikon lenses, but at even higher shutter speeds. I then found other advice concerning this lens that it was better to shut off the ois above 1/300, because the ois and auto focus 'conflicted'.</p> <p>I have had no such problems with my two prime lens - without ois.</p> <p>I have arranged for my 18-55 lens to go back to Fuji UK to be checked.</p> <p>A friend visited this weekend. He had just got a Panasonic GX7 with the 14-42 lens. We went out to try it. It was a bright morning. The settings were aperture, iso800, f6.3, jpg. He took about 30 images of a variety of subjects. </p> <p>We returned and loaded the images. We were remarking on the high quality for the 'kit' lens, when we got to one with exactly the soft image issue I had been experiencing with the Fuji lens. There were a couple more. The subject matter and the data suggested they should have been perfect. Indeed, other images with identical data were perfect.</p> <p>Is this 'soft image' issue, in truth, erratic but quite wide spread? </p> <p>Comments, etc would be welcomed.</p>

<p>I, too, tried keeping the f90 in the open air for a couple of weeks. It did improve, but was still unpleasant in use.</p>

<p>It is a chronic 'condition' of some Nikons of this period. It happened to one of my f90s, but not the other. To use the camera with this condition is very unpleasant. I, too, got it off with alcohol and careful scraping. It didn't actually take too long. I think I put a little polish on the resultant plastic. It looked fine then.</p> <p>I'm sure this has been examined on the web before!</p>

<p>Andrew - there is no need for an apology. I've been a member of this forum for long enough to recognise that tangential caprices are quite normal.<br> To move away from Nikon has been a great wrench, but I will keep my D300 and a couple of lenses for now. I've just ordered the Fuji 56mm f1.2 for my XT1. It is said to be superb in image quality terms, and at a fraction of the price of a Nikon 'equivalent'. Fuji products have also a very nice 'feel' to them. The sort of attribute that Nikon had some years ago. However, I have to admit that my big fingers and small tight controls are something of a challenge. But at least I can put two bodies, three lenses and a flash gun in quite a small bag and not droop at one shoulder!</p>

<p>I am grateful for the comments and advice, although the later ones might be something of tangential caprice! Obviously though, whether a particular camera feels 'right' in the hand is important. My D700 and D300 always felt right.</p> <p>What I didn't say in my first posting was that I have bought into the Fuji X series. The XT1 is a delightful camera, although I am having to adapt to using it. The simply fact that it is much smaller (and lighter) than my Nikons with the consequent 'tightening' of controls, does not make life easier for someone with big hands and fingers - I have.</p> <p>But it can produce some extremely good images. Yesterday, I used it indoors, poor available light, with the 35mm f1.4 at full aperture and a very high iso. I couldn't fault the results. Certainly as good as anything my Nikon 50mm 1.4 ever produced in similar circumstances, and that produced some superb images! I suspect that the XT1 will do at least as good, and perhaps better, than the D7100 in the iso stakes.</p> <p>I will now ponder about getting a D7100.</p> <p>Thanks to everyone for the help.</p>

<p>Many thanks for the help and advice.</p> <p>Shun - perhaps I should have said that I recently sold my much loved D700 and quite a lot of glass that went with it. Age and health problems are such that I was having difficulty in humping it all around. Going FX again would involve weight and more cost than I would prefer.</p> <p>I had the D300 as a back-up camera, and decided to keep it for the time being. It is also heavy and has limited iso performance. Still a lovely camera!</p>

<p>My D300 remains the delightful camera it has always been, but not without shortcomings, especially the iso range. I work on the basis that its upper limit for quality is 800, bearing in mind that I often crop and enlarge substantially.</p> <p>A D7100 would be within my budget. There have been numerous reviews and comments on that model, including its iso limitations. However, perhaps as always, there are different opinions about that. Since the model has now been in use for quite a time, I would welcome 'mature' views about its limitations in that regard. I use Lightroom as a matter of course, but don't want to rely on that to try to recover quality.</p> <p>Can I also say that I don't want to go full frame. </p> <p>Advice/help would be appreciated.</p>

<p>Thanks Gregory for your comments.</p> <p>My XT1 is actually very good. I've probably built up a bit of a phobia caused by the XE2 because of soft images. Just occasionally - in the middle of many perfect shots - I get a crazy one with the XT1, when that, too, should have been perfect.</p> <p>I don't shoot things on the move - or very rarely - and almost always have the camera set to s. Historically, ie with Nikons, I almost always used spot focussing. With the XE2, I've tried what is available without obvious improvement. One of my sons, he uses pro Canon equipment, took the XE2 out a week or two ago. While the images were not dreadful, they simply were not as crisp as they should have been, bearing in mind the conditions were near perfect.</p> <p>I will have to try some more disciplined experiments. Otherwise, there is a danger I might put the XE2 into a box.</p>

<p>Many thanks for these comments. Here are mine in response.</p> <p>1. I doubt whether many people are selling XE2s simply because of new models.</p> <p>2. My XT1 is performing very well, with the occasional poor frame - for no explicable reason.</p> <p>3. It is the XE2 that is giving me problems: soft, soft, soft.</p> <p>4. What is the latest update for the XE2, please? It seems to be 3.0, while the XT1 is 4.0.</p> <p>Thank you for your help.</p>