No 1 favorite legacy lens for me; Nikkor 85mm f2. So small and light, dream to focus, sharp as all-get-out. I'm liking Nikon glass better on the Sony A7R. None of the legacy lenses did it for me on the Fuji - which surprised me, I expected to have much better results, but the Fuji lenses are just so damn nice! I suspect it's down to my eyesight, and that APS-C is a bit less forgiving of focus errors. The Fuji is my go to camera for my work...
Here's my housemate Bill, on the left is Fuji 56mm @ f2, and on the right is the Nikkor 85mm @ f2. It's certainly not as sharp, but you can get a feel for the look...both OOC jpgs.
My personal preference is for the image on the right - the color is truer and there's more contrast in the facial features (though, I think that's just the shadow from his hand, maybe).
Here are the eyes at 100% - you really see the extra pixels of the Sony here! But the Fuji still beats it for detail (just - this is pretty close considering they're both at f2; the Nikkor is wide open!)
A few pics of the qualification and trial runs from the Red Bull Crashed Ice competition held in Québec City over the week-end. Shot with a X-T1 + XF50-140mm combo
Flickr photo set at: Crashed Ice 2015, Québec City
Crahsed Ice 2015 #17 by Gilles Baribeau, on Flickr
Crahsed Ice 2015 #33 by Gilles Baribeau, on Flickr
Crahsed Ice 2015 #2 by Gilles Baribeau, on Flickr
Crahsed Ice 2015 #1 by Gilles Baribeau, on Flickr
So, the family decided to take a trip to the SEA Aquarium this morning. On our way out, we passed a neighbour's African grey parrot, which we missed completely until it called out 'Hello!' in an uncannily accurate voice.
And at the aquarium, found this brilliant shaft of light; B&W because the lighting was pretty weird:
And always my favourite, the sea jellies:
All photos taken with the Zeiss 32. With all the attention the XF35 ƒ/2 was getting recently, I decided to take out my Z32 just to get a sense of the focal length. I realised I don't bring it out often enough, which is a shame because the images do look special (to me). Not saying anything at all about the 35 ƒ/2, which I am sure is excellent, but as a prime lens only user, I think I really should use the 30ish mm FL more often.
Not sure what's wrong here. There's a kind of greenish tinge to the file that's not there on my computer. I'd delete the entire post but I can't see how to do that.
View attachment 69342
Looks like an interesting offering from Pentax. The focus ring is incredibly narrow...has anyone tried it with a K adapter?
I just bought a 50-140 lens for my X-T1. When I put the new lens on the camera it (view finder) informed me I needed to down load the latest firmware. OK. I go the the Fujifilm USA website, and after some difficulty find the firmware update section. Once I sort out the whole business about having a Mac computer it tells me to click on "Download" and save the file to my desktop. I do that. Then looking about I find…NO further instruction. I last did this over a year ago. I don't remember the procedure, largely because there were step by step instructions on the Fujifilm web site. What the heck happened to that user friendly approach?
Went exploring around Death Valley this weekend. Here are some shots on an XP1 using the Rokinon 12mm
Bad water Basin
Mesquite sand dunes at night
(that's the moon)
Mesquite sand dunes at sunrise
I have started using my flash xf-42 and I hope someone can help me with a couple of things. I don't really understand how it works with live view. When I am looking through the camera, should I just meter as I usually do and try to get the best exposure then just shoot? If I do this, I have to raise my ISO very high. If I don't do this, then I can see my subject. I know it's a very beginner question, but hopefully someone has the patience to help me.
You get wonderful pictures of their world. from Al Jazeera English
Each image and story is worth a glance. Please enjoy their stories.
I'm ready to buy a trigger/remote and possibly a strobe but really need guidance.
I have a fuji ef-42 flash but wouldn't mind buying a strobe. I'm confused about the TTL issue and the Fuji. Do I wait for this robotshoot product or do I go ahead and buy the affordable Yongnuos? How hard is it to learn to manually set my flash for a beginner like me? At this point, when I have my flash attached to my camera, I have no idea how I'm working it. I just meter and shoot and it seems to work out.
If I buy a strobe, will I have the same non-TTL issues? I want to buy something this weekend with the sales, but this TTL thing is making it hard for me. Help please.
I have been shooting Olympus m43 for 3 years now. I have an E-M5 with 14, 17, 45, and 40-150 lenses. Got it initially for the small size, including small lenses. I like the IBIS, tilting screen, and touch screen controls w/the Super Control Panel.
However, I picked up a Fuji X100 and love it - especially the smooth, pleasing colors (I thought Olympus jpegs were good), white balance, built-in flash and small form factor. So I'm thinking of getting rid of my m43 gear and getting an XE-2 and maybe the 18mm and 60mm lenses (I know the 60 is larger). Except for the 60, this will be about the same size as my setup now. I do like the rangefinder style.
Has anyone compared the two systems - X-trans sensor versus Olympus; lenses; easy-of use? I'm not a pixel-peeper, but good white balance and pleasing colors are important to me.
I appreciate great optics, high resolution and technical perfection as much as the next person, but when it comes to judging images I often find that when images are too perfect they leave me cold. This is an entirely subjective thing. Does anyone else feel this way?
I like to see a bit of grime, or blur, or LDR, or some blocked shadows or maybe a blown highlight or acne, or grain, or SOMETHING anyhow that brings the image down to earth a bit. Without some sort of technical imperfection an image is in danger of becoming so antiseptic that it looses any connection to the real, imperfect, word we actually live in. There are certainly some technically perfect images that I like in spite of this preference that I have, perhaps those are images where the technical perfection paradoxically becomes the one fault in the image that brings it's meaning home. And of course, if an image becomes too darn grubby and low-fi that can easily become an annoying affectation as well.
Where do you draw the line between "Just Right" and "Too Perfect to Stomach"? Post examples.
This was shot with the XF18mm on the XE2 (200 ISO, f8, 1/200). The 18mm is not the sharpest lens I own. I left in some shadows, didn't sharpen too much, and tried to give it the real feel the place had when I was there. I like this kind of image better than those too-perfect images that one sees in a certain kind of magazine or web gallery, polished to the nth degree.