I know there are loads of adaptors for the ex-2 but I want advice on the best one for m42 lenses as love the quirks and affordability of these old lenses.
Would be nice also to hear from people who use m42 screw fit lenses with the camera and the results they get please.
Would prefer not to spend a fortune.
Couldn't not take a photo of this little one. (X-T1 and 50-140)
Help! I'm having a problem with my shutter appearing to freeze and the camera saying ' turn off and try again'- this does not rectify problem and it keeps freezing intermittently. I used a Remote shutter control and had camera shutter speed set to T last night and it is since doing that I have had trouble. I have reset whole camera to factory settings but problem continues. Have I broken the camera or is there something I could try before returning to the camera shop? Thanks. Ita
It will only focus with lens set at 112mm and only if object is within aprox.7 feet
anyone know the fix.?
Thanks in advance
Help in selection please:
I have the X-E2 and very happy but:
1) Went jungle trekking in Uganda and will again. The camera was not happy with the humidity. i.e., want a 2nd camera with weather proofing. (camera would lock up and have to be turned on and off several times)
2) Shot lots of video, some great and some very very slow focus. Would like better focus controls on video.
3) I love having the flash on board.
Using 18-55 stock lens and the awesome 50-140 2.8
So two questions:
a) Looking to improve #1 and #2, I think this is impossible if I also want to keep #3?
b) If I accept no on board flash, do I need to jump all the way to the X-T2 for improved focus on movies? Not so professional that I need 4k.
Thanks for any help and direction on this.
So it seems a number of folks seem to think THE alternative for running Contax CY glass is to hang it on a Sony A7 of some variety for the FF IBIS experience (rather than Fuji). I'm wondering whether any have given thought to the Pentax K-1 as well... and if not, why not. Is it a sticking with mirrorless vs. a DSLR thing, or what? I the ex-Sony crowd seems to be vocal about Sony not really understanding photographers... or don't like the "service". Sure there's no holy grail, but in terms of service, I give Sony huge credit for transfering all my 8mm video to DVD in there Houston service bureau. Not speedy, yes, but that's commitment. I've had Pentax and they're fine. I left their DSLR's for Fuji mirrorless, and like mirrorless, but the Sony user base seems ...far less enthusiastic than our Fuji group.
For a while I have been toying with the idea of selling my 35mm f1.4 in favor of getting the X100-TCL. The only reason I got the 35mm was for the ~50mm focal length. I do not really need the wider aperture of the F1.4 and thought the TCL lens on my X100S would provide the 50mm that I want. One of the reasons I am looking at the TCL is because of the ND filter that is part of the X100S giving me the ability to shoot wide open on bright days. I would probably keep the X-E1 for a while paired with my Nikkor 85mm f1.8 for my granddaughters' volleyball games.
Anyone have any thoughts, positive or negative, for this approach? I am a retired news shooter and looking to keep my kit as small as possible. The reason I went with the Fuji over my Nikons was weight. No longer needed 8fps or extreme wide or tele lenses. Just looking to try and see the world the way Cartier-Bresson did - as the viewer of ordinary happenings.
I've got the Adobe subscription to LR and PS. I've used PS for 10+ years and LR for about 3 or 4. Pretty comfortable with both and they work great with my Nikon. When I got the Fuji X E-1 I tried Capture One and thought it gave better RAW conversions than LR. Still prefer it. I recently got Iridient and that, combined with LR, seems to be the best choice. I do the basic RAW conversion in Iridient, usually just changing the default sharpening to R-L Deconvolution, occasionally doing highlight and shadow adjustment and save the result as a TIFF. Any further work is done in LR or PS. The only downside to this is the large files. TIFFs from the X E-1 are 96MB. Since I have an X T-2 on order those will be even bigger. I'm thinking of giving up my subscription to Capture One, as it's $150/year. But before I do, I'd like to make sure that I'm seeing the best that it's capable of doing to compare with Iridient. Can anyone suggest optimal sharpening for Fuji RAFs? Also, if there is any Fuji-specific training. Any additional comments are also welcome. As with some other posts, money is not the primary concern, but Capture One would have to be clearly superior for me to justify paying a double yearly subscription. I have purchased Iridient, but don't know how often it is upgraded and at when cost If anyone knows this history, that would also be a valuable piece of information. I paid $99.00 for the original license. Sorry for the long post, but I've spent lots of time already figuring out the glitches in Cap. One and comparing results.
Can I use a piece of male threaded pipe to restore the threads? If so, what dimensions?
This is not meant to be a scientifically made measurement, however Theoria Apophasis has just posted a Youtube video about the latest firmware for the XT2, which he reckons feels to have faster AF than the Nikon D500! Way to go!
It just arrived today and I'm quite amazed. It's sharp even with the 1.4 converter. I shouldn't be surprised but I'm a bit skeptical on Fuji reviews. I do wonder how it is with the 2.0 converter.
As the XM! does not work with the Fuji app for remote shutter is there a way to operate the camera with a remote shutter? I would like to do some time lapses and was curious.
Example: Energizer Multi-Fit LCD Timed Remote (ENS-LCDU)
Been tough getting over 'street lag' after my trip to Israel. More here.
Is anybody else getting this from time to time. I have been having issues accessing the site on various occasions in the past few days. I checked on several systems and two different broadband connections and my cell phone and they all seem to have the same issue.
Hi all -
The better half volunteered me as a photographer for a charity event tonight. Should be fun - I know a fair amount of the people in the organization.
It'll be a casual affair so I'm not feeling pressure.
Was thinking 35mm for faces and perhaps the 16mm for groups. Will toss the 56mm in the bag just in case.
There will be a presentation of a trophy for a golf tournament earlier in the day.
I would probably bring the X-P2 and X-T10 and + Nissin i40.
Anyone think that is overkill? Should I just use the 18-55 with flash and leave it at that?
Any and all tips/tricks appreciated!
Thanks in advance, all.
I just picked one of these up, checked it out and then prepared to sell it as it was too close to both the 56mm f1.2 and the Zeiss 50mm macro that I own. However, after playing around a little bit, I think I'll keep it.
The six shots in the next reply are, in order, f1.6-f2-f2.8-f4-f5.6-f8.
I think F1.6 is somewhere I won't often go. The range between f2 and f4 looks promising and when you get to F8 it looks pretty sharp. Plus it has 1:2 macro.
Perhaps I've been spoilt by the price of refurbished bodies and the availability of second hand Fuji lenses but I did splash out on a new 35mm f2 and I've been very pleased.
This new 23mm f2 would be ideal for me but it's being launched at £419 here in the UK.
Perhaps we get blinded by the love of all things Fuji but by any standards is that not an awful lot of cash for a 35mm equiv lens of moderate aperture?
Just making a comment really, I'd love this lens but I run with a bit of a self imposed budget.
Please all go out and buy one so I can pick one up on ebay in a year or so. Thanks
I am mostly a film shooter but the chance to buy a very cheap X-Pro has come up and I want to jump on it as I've had the x100s in the past and loved it.
I am wondering if anyone has more detailed information about leica glass compatibility as the chart here: Fujifilm M Mount Adapter - Compatibility Chart | Lens Accessories | Digital Cameras | Fujifilm Canada
Is very out of date and I don't think it's 100% accurate.
The two lenses specifically that I want to mount are:
Leica SUMMICRON-M 50mm f/2 Lens (Black)
Leica SUMMICRON-M 35mm f/2 Lens (Black)
The catch is that these are the short period "made in Canada" versions so they are slightly varied from the general Summicron-M. These are both technically "version 3" lenses, which according to the above charge the 35mm should be non-compatible; however the "version 3" lens noted in the chart is specifically the ones made in Germany in the 80's vs. these which were made in Canada in the 70's.
Any insight would be great!
Does any one know the Metabones speed booster available for M42 mount to our Fujifilm XT-1. I check their site and I don't see it. How you people connect it to our Fuji cameras.
My firesale of all my FX Nikon is going reasonably well and I am eagerly waiting for the arrival of the X-T2.
However the cash is burning a hole in my pocket! GAS is raising its ugly head and I was thinking that the 18-135mm (roughly equal to 28-200mm on FX) would be a good addition to my arsenal for a walk about in bad weather, lens. Aside from the obvious WR aspect, I was however wondering if the walk about would be better served by an 18-55mm plus 55-200mm combo. Body with lens plus 1 extra lens, fits nicely in my Domke man bag.
On the other hand, when I might want to frequently jump between wide and tele, the convenience of a general purpose "super" zoom seems attractive.
Other attractions are the 35mm f2 WR and the not-yet-here 23mm f2 WR. I already have the f1.4 of both of those focal lengths.
So what would be a better to get???
I'm just in the process of switching to the Fuji X system, waiting for my X-E1 to arrive. Previously I've mostly used PSP to catalogue and process. My copy is a couple of generations old now.
I'm considering updating to the latest release but was wondering what your experiences have been processing Fuji files with PSP.
Or should I change to an unfamiliar package? I've steered away from Adobe products as it appears that you wind up with your raw files converted to DNG format. I'm intested Capture One but at 3 times the price of PSP is it 3 times better?
anyone that has both could please chime in commenting about difference in sharpness?
Even people shooting with other brands are welcome (I've been a Nikon shooter for a decade, and a Canon one for another decade).
I have a pretty complete Contax setup, and I'm not sure if buying Fuji glass would make a meaningful difference in sharpness.
A few details:
- I shoot landscapes, mostly, and I need the ability to print on matt and semi-matt paper up to 120cm / 47"
- my Contax setup (for reference): 18, 35, 50/1.7, 60 Makro, 28-85, 100-300
- Fuji setup I plan to buy: 14, 23/1.4, 56/1.2, 18-55, 55-200
Thanks in advance!
Finally managed to wake up in time to take it!
I recently purchased a Fuji 55-200mm and tested against my legacy Nikkor his 200 f4 at that focal length on my X-T1. The Nikkor seems a bit sharper and more contrasty at that focal length and seems to be slightly longer in reach. But for a zoom, I am pleased with the Fuji. It was interesting to see the variation in color between the two: the Nikkor showed a slight magenta cast while the Fuji veered toward green slightly. Both images were shot on a tripod at 1/500, f8, ISO 800. The first image is the Fuji, the second the Nikkor. I also shot the peeling paint house at 57.8mm with the Fuji and was pleased with the color and relative sharpness.
I have sold off all my Canon gear and am all in with Fuji. Thus far I am pleased with all the lenses I have added to my kit and am looking forward to using them for more serious work. I now have two zooms, the 18-55 and the 55-200, and three primes, the 14mm, 23 f1.4 and the 60mm. In addition, I have the ais Nikkor 55mm f2.8 macro, 105mm f2.5 and 200mm f4. These manual lenses take me back to my days as a photojournalist. The familiar smooth focusing suits me in many situations although at the longer end, OIS will certainly be welcomed.