f__eight

I kept the 18-55mm and got my hands on a 35mm f1.4. The 35 is like the perfect people / event lens. It allows getting close to people without entering their personal space. The zoom, although a bit big (especially when extended), is a useful outdoor lens. Together with the 14mm, I'm settled. So the lens set compromises of 14mm 18-55mm 35mm. For now, I'll get by without an 18 or 23.

Well, I got my hands on the 18mm f2. I wanted to like it but I didn't. The aperture ring is so stiff that it's almost unusable. This alone is reason enough not to like the lens. There are several other minor issues. Nothing terrible but they all do add up. AF produces a buzz which is a bit disturbing. It makes the lens feel cheap and clunky. And there's more distortion than what the zoom produces. In the end, the lens is OK but nothing extraordinary. It certainly doesn't take better images than the zoom. And the handling is ... not inviting. So I sold the lens as soon as I got it. What's left to try is 23mm f2, 23mm f1.4 or stick to the zoom and get a 35mm f1.4.

The zoom is big compared to the camera it's attached to. XE2 is a small camera, it needs small lenses. This might not be apparent on paper but it is very tangible when you actually hold the camera.

What is your experience with a lens for casual handling on a small body? I have the xe2s and 18-55mm. The lens is certainly decent but because of its size on such a small body, it's easy to bump into all kinds of things. And indoors, you need a flash which makes the package even bigger than what I consider 'casual use'. Thus, I'm thinking of adding the xf18mm f2 for snapshots, mainly because of its small size. The xf23mm f2 is another option (f1.4 is too big). Between these three, what do you think?

Time for mirrorless? Not as a replacement for the 5D, but a low-weight option Beware, I've had the same camera you do and after getting a Fuji XE2S I'm not touching the dslr anymore. You get the same image quality in a compact body with better control. I can only suggest to get the same thing. On a bike trip, you might only fit an X100. The dynamic range of 5Dmkii is quite limited. Fuji's range is broader, so if on your dslr you run short of only 1 or 2 stops, you might not need to merge files at all. More reading: I jumped ship : Fuji XE2S

It certainly is a "redefining of the Photographic experience" and technology has advanced indeed. However, mirrorless only makes sense with appropriate lenses. If you're trying to mimick a dslr by attaching zooms the size of a bazooka, you might as well keep shooting with your dslr. Fuji works best with compact zooms the sort of 18-55mm and with small primes.

After several months of contemplation, I sold a lens or two and jumped ship. Got myself a nice Fuji XE2S with a 18-55mm f2.8-4 lens. Coming from full frame dslr, I had high expections. I haven't read through the entire manual and haven't tried out every function but the camera and lens don't dissappoint. Quite the contrary. If you're wondering why XE2S: a) I didn't need an optical viewfinder (If I did, I would have stayed with a dslr) so no X Pro and no X100. b) I didn't like the feel of the XT10 and XT20. With the central viewfinder, everything is too crowded. The XE2S was about right. c) I didn't see the XT1 or XT2 adding much value. The viewfinder is bigger but the one on the XE2s is big enough. XT is supposed to be a bit faster but XE2S is fast enough. There's a dedicated ISO dial on the XT but it's fiddly imo. First, you need to press and dial, secondly you need to press and dial with your left hand, which is even more awkward. Thirdly, you can simply change ISO on the XE2S with the Fn key, which works better than a dedicated dial in the wrong spot. -> By way of elimination I ended up with XE2S. First impressions: - It's much lighter than an FX body. Even with the lens attached, it's still lighter than an FX body without lens. - It's much smaller. Buttons and dials are smaller and need some getting used to, but everything works out fine. I would have preferred the shutter speed dial to be less recessed though, so you could turn it with your thumb. - It's quite sophisticated. The electronic viewfinder, live histogram... Looking back, the dslr looks like a dinosaur. - Direct control through buttons and dials, no deep digging into menus. Everything you need is at the top of your fingers. - White balance works well. I didn't need to fine tune WB at all (I have only shot in daylight). - I haven't tried all the JPG settings but out of camera results are pleasing. Colors are a bit subdued (didn't try Velvia yet), film-like, which appeals to me. Contrast in B&W was flat so I had to increase it in ACR, but possibly I can solve this in camera. - Very little post processing was needed. No blown out highlights and no clipped shadows. I have the impression the dynamic range is massive. Colors were right. - The electronic viewfinder doesn't show signs of delay. So far, it works well in backlight. In darkness, it becomes grainy, which doesn't bother me however. - Autofocus is fast and silent. Unlike a dslr where all focus points are cramped into the center, the entire sensor is being used. Haven't tried focussing in darkness. More importantly, autofocus is precise and dead-on. No focus shift and no finetuning. - Results are sharp. No need for stopping down and no need for extra sharpening. - Unlike my dslr lenses which often need to be stopped down 1 stop, the lens can be used wide open with good to excellent results (I have the impression it's suffering a bit at close focus). Depth of field is deeper than FX but the character of out of focus is pleasing. At first sight (without testing so to speak) I haven't noticed any disturbing aberrations. - I haven't suffered from battery drain so far. This Fuji works well and feels nimble in hand. Results are satisfactory and the camera/lens is pleasant to operate. On several grounds it's a step up from dslr. In the coming weeks, I will dig deeper but so far the results are promising. Furthermore, I'm wondering what to get next: a prime lens or a nissin i40 flash for indoor shooting.

Will the XE2S benefit from a UHS-I type U3 card compared with UHS-I type U1 ? Is the difference in speed noticeable? By how much? Does XE2S support UHS-I type U3 and what about UHS-II type U3 ?

Which bounce flash for xe2 is comfortable (not too big)? I have a nikon sb700... will that work in ttl mode with fuji (I've heard there's some kind of converter avaiable) ? Why would one choose fuji flash system over nissin? What's the deal with fuji ef42? What's the difference between nissin i40, i60, i700...?

Too crowded for me. 23-35, always found those too close to own both, yet not interchangeable. I much prefer 23 for landscapes and 35 for people. If fuji had a fast 27mm (f/2 or faster) I would try that, as it cuts 23 & 35 in the middle. But the f2.8 aperture doesn't cut it for me.

Hi, I'm looking for a new set of lenses for an xe2(s). I like to combine 14 with 23 for landscapes, and I like 18 with 35 for people. However, buying all four is out of the question. So I am wondering: 14mm + 18mm + 35mm 14mm + 18-55mm +35mm With three primes, I might need a second body. With the zoom, a faster prime is probably needed when shooting in low light (indoors). PS: I do not like 14mm + 23mm + 56mm.

<p>XT2 is not necesarrily my goal as I like the design of the XE2.<br> XT2 would be a forced choice because of tougher built and bigger VF.<br> Still, XT2 is more than I need (I have no need for an ISO dial as I can access ISO by Fn keyt, which is probably quicker than a left hand dial, and don't see the point of a fake prism) and 2K for a crop body and kit lens is way too much.<br> XE3 would be ideal :D but there isn't any.</p> <p>After experiencing the disappointing dials of the XT1, I have no interest at all in the XT1</p> <p> </p>

<p>It's either xe2 now or xt2 next year when price drops. The difference in price between those two is 2.5x today. I don't want to spend that amount on an apsc body. </p> <p>Not sure about the VF lag... does the xt2 have one? XE2 has some lag, but so does xt1.</p> <p> </p>

<p>I've briefly tried the xe2s and xt1.</p> <p>Besides the bigger VF and firmer grip, what immediately struck me is the wheel locks on the shutter and iso dials. Impossible to set shutter speed and iso using one finger, which is a serious flaw. You have to press with one finger while turning with the other! I could swiftly set shutter speed on the xe2 without performing the sort of finger acrobatics the xt1 asks for.</p> <p>Have these locks been removed on the iso and shutter dials on the xt2 ?</p> <p>I don't see myself paying more for clumsier controls, even though the VF is an improvement.</p> <p> </p>

<p>With the launch of XT2, price drops have made the XT1 attractive. After some investigation, I stumbled upon the XE2. With the latest firmware, it looks like its major drawbacks (AF speed and EVF lag) have been taken care of. XE2 looks like a cleaner and more compact design and I'm wondering if I should get the XT1 at all.</p> <p>I don't really have a preference between a viewfinder that is centered or is at the side. Should I? I'm shooting right eye now even though my left is dominant; will I be using my left eye with the XE2?</p> <p>I've heard the viewfinder of the XT1 is bigger but XE2 VF is good too. How how good is the XE2 VF really?</p> <p>I haven't tried the XE2 but I did hold an XT10 and XT1 and the XT10 was too small. I couldn't reach the buttons. Does the XE2 feel in hand more like a XT10 or XT1 in terms of button / wheel access?</p> <p>I don't care for a flip screen or for weather sealing.</p> <p>I don't really care for the ISO wheel if you can assign a Fn key to toggle between auto ISO and set ISO. Can the XE2 do that?</p> <p>I don't much care for a seperate wheel for metering mode and drive mode because I don't change these often.<br /> Can an XE2 Fn key be assigned to switch to spot metering and back?</p> <p><br />What else am I missing?</p> <p> </p>

<blockquote> <p>Fuji has superior lenses.</p> </blockquote> <p>I happen to have taken a few shots this weekend with a 'crappy' nikon lens:</p> <p><a href=" </a><br /> <a href=" /> <a href=" <p>How exactly does a fuji lens deliver better results (assuming nikon has better glass than this one)?</p> <p> </p>

<blockquote> <p>I don't see a better camera than the X-T2 IMO</p> </blockquote> <p>Price is one thing. It equals the price of full frame. And equivalent lenses aren't cheaper at all.</p> <p>Another thing I'm hesitant to give up is a fast wide angle zoom. Such lens is a great tool for every kind of reportage, including travel documentary, news, pics around the house, weddings, corporate events... The fuji zoom is only f4, which is very restricted when shooting anything that moves (i.e. people).</p> <p>I've been hearing that the X trans sensor has some issues with RAW converters. Will I need to upgrade / update from photoshop cs6 and ACR?</p> <p>I've also heard fuji colors aren't as good for landscapes as the colors coming out from nikon & canon. How is that?</p>

<p>Hi,</p> <p>I am considering one of these packages. What are the key differences, which package is better in which domain? What would you favor?</p> <p>In order to obtain an objective response, I am posting this in both the mirrorless and nikon forum (posting in only one forum will most likely furnish a biased reply).</p> <ul> <li>Fuji XT1 or XT2<br />Fuji 18-55mm f2.8-4 lens<br /><br /></li> <li>Nikon D7200 or D500<br />Nikon 16-80mm f2.8-4 VR</li> </ul>

<p>Hi,</p> <p>I am considering one of these packages. What are the key differences, which package is better in which domain? What would you favor?</p> <p>In order to obtain an objective response, I am posting this in both the mirrorless and nikon forum (posting in only one forum will most likely furnish a biased reply).</p> <ul> <li>Fuji XT1 or XT2<br />Fuji 18-55mm f2.8-4 lens<br /><br /></li> <li>Nikon D7200 or D500<br />Nikon 16-80mm f2.8-4 VR</li> </ul>

<p>You don't want to go to Amalfi by car, there's no place to park.</p> <p>Fly to Napoli or take the train, then take the bus or taxi and make sure you're travelling light because you'll be climbing stairways on foot!</p> <p>Avoid july-august. It's too hot and too busy. It's best to go in may-june. April and september are pleasant too.</p> <p> </p> <blockquote> <p>hire a driver/van?</p> </blockquote> <p>How much are you willing to spend? </p> <p> </p>

<blockquote> <p>I cannot get excited about the 20-35 for what you describe. It is a fine lens, but if you have 28-105 with you, it is easier to carry a 20mm in your pocket than it is the 20-35.</p> </blockquote> <p>If you're in the middle of something, like photojournalism, landscape or interior photography (all of which can be part of travel), you don't want to be switching between lenses. In these settings, 20-35mm is the 'normal' lens.</p> <p>Besides, the 20mm prime has considerably more fall off than the zoom, making it more an f4 lens than f2.8. </p> <p> </p>

<p>Hi,</p> <p>I have been considering what travel kit to take with me and here's what has turned out to be a successful set.</p> <p>I had to build a set around a <strong>Nikon d700</strong>, beause that's the body I own and I wasn't getting another one. It's not the lightest nor smallest but it's a very capable camera and the encumbrance can be offset by thoughtful selection of lenses.</p> <p> </p> <ul> <li><strong>Nikon 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 D</strong><br />This one's a neat surprise. Unlike the newer 24-85G and 24-120G, it's undistorted, light and cheap. It's also sharp wide open. Covers a useful range for casual shooting. Even though the aperture is variable, it's relatively fast and doesn't need to be stopped down. <br /><br />Negative points: zooming is unevenly distributed between wide and tele, the ring rotates with zoom and the 1:2 macro function, while striking, is clunky. Getting the PS/LR profile can be hard.<br /><br /></li> <li><strong>Nikon 20-35mm f2.8 D</strong><br />What I appreciate most about this lens:<br />- Just the right range. Wider lenses all get bigger and more distorted.<br />- Sharp where it needs to be: very sharp wide open when the subject is close and centered (think 'journalism') and overall very sharp stopped down for distant subjects (think 'landscapes'). Just don't expect sharp corners at f2.8 (they will be out of focus anyway).<br />- Unlike the newer 18-35G and 16-35G, this one is pretty undistorted, bright and relatively small.<br />- I have used a 20mm f2.8 D before, which is smaller, but the zoom is actually sharper and has less fall off. <br /><br />Negative points: zoom ring feels too close to the body. While not as expensive as some of the AFS lenses, it isn't cheap either. Nikon doesn't support this lens any longer so when it breaks down, you lose the lens. Getting the PS/LR profile can be hard.<br /><br /></li> <li><strong>Nikon 50mm f1.8 D</strong> <br />Small enough to carry as a companion for either zoom. <br /><br />Negative points: hazy wide open, better at f2.2 and excellent from f2.8. Getting focus right at f1.8 isn't easy, especially up close with moving subjects (think anything people-related). If you have a capable zoom, this lens becomes a bit redundant. <br /><br /></li> </ul> <p>There is some focal overlap but I have experienced this as a positive point. Previously I travelled with a wide zoom, tele zoom and fixed 50 and didn't enjoy constantly switching lenses. I also noticed I was shooting more wide and normal than tele (this might be different if you're on a safari).</p> <p>I have been considering a Fuji XT with 18-55 f2.8-4, 35mm f1.4 and either 14mm or 10-24mm wide angle. However, the Fuji set would cost me more than the Nikon and I question the optical improvement. IMO, the only significant change would be paying more in order to carry less.</p> <p> </p>

<blockquote> <p>In the latest cameras, AF-ON does activate VR.</p> </blockquote> <p>This is an important point.<br /> So VR activation is totally dependent on camera, not on the lens?</p> <p> </p> <blockquote> <p>In any case pressing the shutter button will activate VR</p> </blockquote> <p>How long do you need to press the shutter to activate VR? Another important point. Will VR work instantly? What's the delay?</p> <p> </p> <blockquote> <p>If on your camera, AF-ON does not activate VR...</p> </blockquote> <p>How can I find this out? I can't, without buying the lens first, and then realising it doesn't stabilise :-/</p> <p> </p> <blockquote> <p>If you let go of the AF-ON button, keep depressing the shutter button half-way so that the VR stays on (it will otherwise stop after a moment)</p> </blockquote> <p>How long does VR work after activation? What if I release the shutter once and keep it pressed in in continuous drive, will only the first shot be stabilised? Do I need to take my finger off the release for each consecutive shot? That would be really daft and offset the purpose of a high frame rate.</p> <p> </p> <blockquote> <p>If I recall correctly, with the D700, the AF-ON button by itself does not activate VR.</p> </blockquote> <p>What <em>does</em> activate it? And for how long?</p> <p> </p>

<p>I have the AF function disconnected from the shutter release. I'm using back button AF in Single mode AFS. I don't hold the AF-on button, I just press it once in order to focus and then release it. Then I press the shutter release. I don't <em>half</em> press the shutter, I immediately take the picture.<br> With this technique, will VR function properly?</p> <p>When is VR being activated in AFS mode:</p> <ul> <li>upon pressing and releasing the AF-on button, </li> <li>upon pressing and holding the AF-on button,</li> <li>upon pressing the shutter release</li> <li>or upon half pressing and holding the shutter release?</li> </ul> <p>Is activation of VR camera-dependent? I'm using a d700.<br> Does VR work differently on different lenses? I'm mostly interested in 70-200mm f4. </p> <p> </p>