Fujifilm X100T and new XF lenses announced

Yup, I know. The worst you have EVER seen. Amazing that people can shoot with it at all :rolleyes: Nothing divides the community on this forum like the X100, doesn't it?

YYV_146 said:
Coming into this argument as a previous X100 and X100S user, the X100 lens flare is indeed the worst I've seen on any 35mm lens, and much, much more worse then your average modern prime.

It really is horribly bad. Any sort of light source, even in broad daylight that is at a specific distance from the edge of the frame will cause horrible streaks across the entire photo, just as the images above show. This is one of the reasons I never kept both of the cameras, I like to shoot into the light and had too much trouble with flare.

Anyways, none of my Sony/Canon/Minolta/Pentax/Leica/Zeiss/Voigtlander lenses are nearly as bad as the X100 lens when it comes to flare, and the problem did not improve from the X100 to the X100S.
Click to expand...
 
archeophoto said:
Yup, I know. The worst you have EVER seen. Amazing that people can shoot with it at all :rolleyes: Nothing divides the community on this forum like the X100, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

An awful camera... wonder how Fuji can still be in business...

But seriously, I do wonder why nobody is reporting that they have it and if they like it... plenty of folks on other sites that have received their T's this week and sharing their experiences.
I'll have to wait until December until I can get mine.:bang:

And o yes... at times the flare, ghosting and whatever my recently sold X100 would throw at me was utterly charming and what made the picture interesting.
 
I love my X100 but agree the flare is bad from lighting coming from the edge of the frame. In those situations I have been known to pull out my iPhone 5s and get better photos with much less flare.
 
remphoto said:
I love my X100 but agree the flare is bad from lighting coming from the edge of the frame. In those situations I have been known to pull out my iPhone 5s and get better photos with much less flare.
Click to expand...

Seconded. Mine gives worse flare than most other cameras I've used; but a hand, in line with the hood, minimises it 90 per cent of the time, and of course you can monitor exactly what's happening with the EVF. In some situations I personally like it, after all that '70s flare is pretty trendy, ain't it?
 
remphoto said:
I love my X100 but agree the flare is bad from lighting coming from the edge of the frame.
Click to expand...

That problem has wrecked the "money shot" for me on several occasions. You can't be shading the lens with your hand in a fast moving, fluid shooting situation. If they had redesigned the lens to address this, I might have considered upgrading from my x100S to the T. The only lens hood that makes the slightest difference is the extended dome type. The Pentax dome type is useless as is the original and the copies of the original.
 
YYV_146 said:
the X100 lens flare is indeed the worst I've seen on any 35mm lens, and much, much more worse then your average modern prime.

It really is horribly bad. Any sort of light source, even in broad daylight that is at a specific distance from the edge of the frame will cause horrible streaks across the entire photo, just as the images above show.
Click to expand...

I agree with this statement. This is a known issue with a lot of discussion on various forums.
 
the lens flare sucks big time. it is one of the few weak points of the X100 series. Ive used a generic hood and it doesnt make ANY difference at all... and I see that the original is the same thing. Ive tried using a black paper with a rectangular window over the filter I use on my X100s and it does minimise a bit the problem, but does not eliminate it. I sometimes cup my hand to block the light source... and sadly it probably is an issue that wont be addressed on the X100T.

granted, I love the camera.
 
@Pablito I had seen this one around but never tried it. Well, might be worth a shot! Did you do any direct comparision etc in loco?
 
My original X100 must be special then. After thousands of shots (Including money shots) I just don't see it. But then I didn't have the sticky aperture problem either.

And if it's discussed on a lot of forums it MUST be true. :D

Pablito said:
That problem has wrecked the "money shot" for me on several occasions. You can't be shading the lens with your hand in a fast moving, fluid shooting situation. If they had redesigned the lens to address this, I might have considered upgrading from my x100S to the T. The only lens hood that makes the slightest difference is the extended dome type. The Pentax dome type is useless as is the original and the copies of the original.
Click to expand...
 
archeophoto said:
My original X100 must be special then. After thousands of shots (Including money shots) I just don't see it. But then I didn't have the sticky aperture problem either.

And if it's discussed on a lot of forums it MUST be true. :D
Click to expand...

It is true. And the flare/ghosting is extremely sensitive to the angle of the light. If the 27/2.8 lens didn't exist, I would still be using a X100 instead of the X-Pro 1. I really like everything else about the camera.

During the two years I used the X100 didn't have the sticky aperture problem either. Since Fujifilm acknowledged the defect and replaced the lens assembly for free, those forum discussions were true too.
 
I would love to see a 28mm version of this camera. I find 35mm too confining. I love the look of the X100 series, but I have to keep reminding myself that I have the Ricoh GR which is superb and pocketable...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom