nzeeman
Well-known
i dont know if someone responded to this because that LC something guy made hell (please admins remove the junk he wrote)
but yes there is a little wheel on fuji-on press it enters 3x zoom and have focus peaking and if you roll it again it goes into 10x zoom.. half press shutter and you are back into real size. its very easy and fast and same speed as any rf. but maybe best to just find rff members nearby and borrow their cameras to try out. if you need any help ill gladly share my experience with you...
Puggie
Established
Well that escalated!
So stuff is on eBay ready for payday, I should be shopping next week! I have found a colleague of mine with an X-E1, I know this will be slow, but I can grab it for a play tomorrow and get an idea of the form factor of the X-E series. I'm looking for someone with an X-Pro to try as a comparison, I think i may steer towards the X-Pro, I could just be being a tart wanting the 'more pro' camera.
For the record (as the OP). I was looking to replace my finely crafted mechanical rangefinder film camera and prosumer 'SLR styled' mirrorless digital (are these descriptions sufficiently adequate for the thread pedants) with a single digital system with a broadly 'rangefinder styled' body (one with a viewfinder in the corner and no elevated prism housing). I like optical viewfinders, but the sony A7 has shown me EVFs are fine too. I like full frame, but looking back at my old pics with a Canon 20D crop is perfectly good too. I liked the simplicity and intuitive nature of my Contax G2 wit 35mm f2 planar on the front, I found the film aspect a bit of a faff. I believe the fuji X-Pro2 would give me the digital G2 which is honestly more what I need than a digital leica (I have a family and you can give a G2 to a 3 year old and get good pics back).
So I will update the thread when I have played with a couple of Fuji cameras. Is there anything other than the X-Series worth a look?
nzeeman, thanks for the input, that sounds functionally like the A7, one button push on your thumb gives you zoom, more zoom and back to full frame, or shutter half press goes back to full frame. the Ricoh would flick between zoom and full frame just on the shutter half press, it was so stupidly simple to use I'm amazed no other manufacturer has tried it as a system.
So stuff is on eBay ready for payday, I should be shopping next week! I have found a colleague of mine with an X-E1, I know this will be slow, but I can grab it for a play tomorrow and get an idea of the form factor of the X-E series. I'm looking for someone with an X-Pro to try as a comparison, I think i may steer towards the X-Pro, I could just be being a tart wanting the 'more pro' camera.
For the record (as the OP). I was looking to replace my finely crafted mechanical rangefinder film camera and prosumer 'SLR styled' mirrorless digital (are these descriptions sufficiently adequate for the thread pedants) with a single digital system with a broadly 'rangefinder styled' body (one with a viewfinder in the corner and no elevated prism housing). I like optical viewfinders, but the sony A7 has shown me EVFs are fine too. I like full frame, but looking back at my old pics with a Canon 20D crop is perfectly good too. I liked the simplicity and intuitive nature of my Contax G2 wit 35mm f2 planar on the front, I found the film aspect a bit of a faff. I believe the fuji X-Pro2 would give me the digital G2 which is honestly more what I need than a digital leica (I have a family and you can give a G2 to a 3 year old and get good pics back).
So I will update the thread when I have played with a couple of Fuji cameras. Is there anything other than the X-Series worth a look?
nzeeman, thanks for the input, that sounds functionally like the A7, one button push on your thumb gives you zoom, more zoom and back to full frame, or shutter half press goes back to full frame. the Ricoh would flick between zoom and full frame just on the shutter half press, it was so stupidly simple to use I'm amazed no other manufacturer has tried it as a system.
nightfly
Well-known
One thing I will say is that I bought a used XE-2 at one point for a trip to Peru. I wanted to try a Fuji and liked the color output. But I found it didn't really handle high contrast scenes all that well and I was constantly fighting with the meter and eventually ended up using it in manual mode as I wasn't getting what I wanted exposure wise.
Ended up selling it and going back to a Ricoh GR for that use (small travel camera with one lens) the GR met my needs better.
I have an M9 but was looking for a smaller/lighter package. The photos it output were good once I got the exposure how I like, but I do regret not just bringing the M9 or a GR on that trip as the experience was frustrating overall. Not sure if the newer Fuji's might have better dynamic range or work better in contrasty light.
Your mileage may vary...
Ended up selling it and going back to a Ricoh GR for that use (small travel camera with one lens) the GR met my needs better.
I have an M9 but was looking for a smaller/lighter package. The photos it output were good once I got the exposure how I like, but I do regret not just bringing the M9 or a GR on that trip as the experience was frustrating overall. Not sure if the newer Fuji's might have better dynamic range or work better in contrasty light.
Your mileage may vary...
nzeeman
Well-known
also xe1 will have only white edge focus peaking... later ones have some sort of split screen like in old slr prisms.
but i rarely missed focus-even with chinese lenses, laggy evf in dark and taking photos of my ever moving kid... so i think nothing to worry about... xe2 now can be found dirt cheap-i saw here in Netherlands for under 200eur. after selling m4 it will leave you with enough budget to get af fuji lenses - get 18/2 and 35/2 or 35/1.4 and you don't need anything more-for portrait lengths get just some cheap m42 manual focus ones or some fd canon lenses..
but i rarely missed focus-even with chinese lenses, laggy evf in dark and taking photos of my ever moving kid... so i think nothing to worry about... xe2 now can be found dirt cheap-i saw here in Netherlands for under 200eur. after selling m4 it will leave you with enough budget to get af fuji lenses - get 18/2 and 35/2 or 35/1.4 and you don't need anything more-for portrait lengths get just some cheap m42 manual focus ones or some fd canon lenses..
LCSmith
Well-known
Thanks for ganging up on me folks. Classy.
Puggie
Established
Bit dramatic!
I appreciate the input but you kinda missed the point of the thread and repeatedly attempted to drag in kicking and screaming in the direction of 'Fuji don't make anything equivalent to an Leica M'. I said I was replacing a Leica M with something different, I wanted a different functionality but similar form factor (i.e shaped like a typical rangefinder viewfinder in the body corner, rather than a typical SLR with the viewfinder in a central raised housing). I didn't think I was that unclear, and I don't think 'rangefinder shaped' or 'SLR shaped' are inaccurate descriptions of what I was trying to describe. To say a digital Contax M2 or Konica Hexar equivalent, may have been a closer description of the camera I'm looking for functionally, but I have an M4 here with a 50mm Elmar on, and that is the form factor I want to replicate, as it shoots nice and fits in my pocket. I don't want to keep a film M in my photo arsenal, we all have our reasons some people would rather keep a film M in their possession even if they are not shooting it regularly, the reason I'm not shooting it regularly is the exact reason I want rid of it.
I think your missing the point completely, but honestly I'm quite happy for you to add your thoughts to the thread.
LCSmith
Well-known
No, but thank you. It is apparent to me that ideas and observations, when not in support of the "home team", are not always welcome. Basically, I wore a Red Sox hat to a Yankees game, and a crowd of rowdies threw nuts at me.
I have no doubt that I have missed the point of this thread. I do apologize again for stepping on anyone's Fuji.
I think you are dead-on here... the X-Pro series was definitely inspired by the Contax G. The X-Pro2 is worth the extra cash over the X-Pro1. You should be happy with this...
Yes, the newer ones are better... more accurate meter and a more modern sensor help a lot.
nightfly
Well-known
Does the X Pro 2 have the more accurate meter and more modern sensor or do you need to go to the X Pro 3 for this?
I'd say that any 24mp model will be better in this area than the 16mp models. So yes, the X-Pro2 is included.
willie_901
Veteran
Don't Worry About Meter Accuracy
Don't Worry About Meter Accuracy
With the X100, X-100T, X-Pro 1, XT-1 and the X-Pro 2 I have not noticed significant metering differences when I use the Multi setting in the Photometry menu.
I have not found meter accuracy to be important except for action photography where subject movements in a scene are very dynamic.
The meter accuracy is not important because one can auto-bracket exposure (i.e. either shutter time or aperture setting).
For raw files I typically record 0, +1/3 and -1/3 EV exposures. Sometimes I use 0, +2/3 and -2/3 EV bracket steps I use the lowest practical camera ISO setting.[1] I keep the raw file with the optimum exposure. The optimum exposure is the image where highlight regions important to the image are not overexposed (which implies highlight regions that are not important are intentionally overexposed).
About 75% of the ti I keep the 0 EV exposure. I almost never keep the -1/3 or -2/3 EV exposure.
For some scenes (candids of people in my work) raw-file exposure auto-bracketing offers another advantage. Sometimes one of the images will have a more interesting facial expression. In this case content become more important than optimum exposure.
Because these FUJIFILM cameras are approximately ISO invariant the electronic noise levels are lower than the photon noise levels. So, there is no significant IQ advantage with ISO greater than the native ISO(s). The noise in the signal-to-noise ratio is essentially constant and exposure alone determines image quality. This means the meter is only useful for avoiding sensor overexposure when there is very bright light.[2]
For in-camera JPEGs the camera ISO setting becomes important in order to produce images with appropriate brightness levels. Increasing JPEG brightness in post-production has limitations because information content is destroyed during lossy JPEG data compression. However, bracketing exposure still minimizes concerns about meter accuracy.
1. With the X100T this is almost always ISO 200 - the native sensor sensitivity. The X-Pro 2 has a dual conversion-gain sensor. This means there are two different native sensor ISO settings - 200 and 800. I alway use ISO 200 for high dynamic range scenes and ISO 800 for low light scenes. I rarely use other camera ISO settings.
2. Blown image highlights can result from two different errors. In one case the maximum electrical charge capacities some sensor photosites is exceeded. This occurs because of inappropriate shutter and, or aperture settings. The other case is using excessive camera ISO settings. This increases the photo sites' DC voltage levels above the analog-to digital converter's maximum input voltage threshold. In extreme cases these errors occur simultaneously.
Don't Worry About Meter Accuracy
With the X100, X-100T, X-Pro 1, XT-1 and the X-Pro 2 I have not noticed significant metering differences when I use the Multi setting in the Photometry menu.
I have not found meter accuracy to be important except for action photography where subject movements in a scene are very dynamic.
The meter accuracy is not important because one can auto-bracket exposure (i.e. either shutter time or aperture setting).
For raw files I typically record 0, +1/3 and -1/3 EV exposures. Sometimes I use 0, +2/3 and -2/3 EV bracket steps I use the lowest practical camera ISO setting.[1] I keep the raw file with the optimum exposure. The optimum exposure is the image where highlight regions important to the image are not overexposed (which implies highlight regions that are not important are intentionally overexposed).
About 75% of the ti I keep the 0 EV exposure. I almost never keep the -1/3 or -2/3 EV exposure.
For some scenes (candids of people in my work) raw-file exposure auto-bracketing offers another advantage. Sometimes one of the images will have a more interesting facial expression. In this case content become more important than optimum exposure.
Because these FUJIFILM cameras are approximately ISO invariant the electronic noise levels are lower than the photon noise levels. So, there is no significant IQ advantage with ISO greater than the native ISO(s). The noise in the signal-to-noise ratio is essentially constant and exposure alone determines image quality. This means the meter is only useful for avoiding sensor overexposure when there is very bright light.[2]
For in-camera JPEGs the camera ISO setting becomes important in order to produce images with appropriate brightness levels. Increasing JPEG brightness in post-production has limitations because information content is destroyed during lossy JPEG data compression. However, bracketing exposure still minimizes concerns about meter accuracy.
1. With the X100T this is almost always ISO 200 - the native sensor sensitivity. The X-Pro 2 has a dual conversion-gain sensor. This means there are two different native sensor ISO settings - 200 and 800. I alway use ISO 200 for high dynamic range scenes and ISO 800 for low light scenes. I rarely use other camera ISO settings.
2. Blown image highlights can result from two different errors. In one case the maximum electrical charge capacities some sensor photosites is exceeded. This occurs because of inappropriate shutter and, or aperture settings. The other case is using excessive camera ISO settings. This increases the photo sites' DC voltage levels above the analog-to digital converter's maximum input voltage threshold. In extreme cases these errors occur simultaneously.
Orthogonal
Established
The XP2 is significantly better than XP1 but XP3 has very minimal (if any) improvement over the XP2. Depending on who you ask some say that it actually has slightly worse high ISO performance in raw.
Puggie
Established
Bought an X-Pro2. Now need to consider lenses, thinking the 23 f2 and 18-135 for starters.
Evergreen States
Francine Pierre Saget (they/them)
You should consider the 16-80 zoom.
My most-used lens is the 1.4/35mm but I love the 2/23mm on my X-Pro1. Quiet, smooth haptics. Lovely rendering, even if it isn't quite as sharp as some of Fuji's other lenses.
My most-used lens is the 1.4/35mm but I love the 2/23mm on my X-Pro1. Quiet, smooth haptics. Lovely rendering, even if it isn't quite as sharp as some of Fuji's other lenses.
kshapero
South Florida Man
I am intrigued by the Fuji X100t with its 35-50-75 crop. Seems all a street shooter would need. But for reasons unknown, I have never tried it. I guess the X100V is even better.
Puggie
Established
The 16-80 looks very nice. I'm borrowing the 18-135 off a friend for the weekend, that should give me a good idea of what range I really want and then I'll go from there. The 35mm f1.4 seems to be the definitive X series prime from everything i've read. At some point I suspect I will own one, hopefully the zoom will give me an idea for which to start with, the compact 23 or the faster 35.
Puggie
Established
So, I have been out with the X-Pro2 for the first time chasing the kids about, I was using the 18-135mm. These are my thoughts:
It's not a small camera or lens, but I find the size and handling very comfortable.
Very intuitive, I have found an online manual but not needed it yet.
AF is a bit slow, a smaller faster prime should sort this, i need to check firmware too.
The optical VF rocks for me, the EVF is still respectable next to my sony, and is handy in poor light. But I much prefer the OVF with the little magnified focus confirm in the bottom right corner.
Most of my shots are around 30mm, this doesn't help my decision of 23 or 35mm f2 as my faster prime.
My Jupiter-12 doesn't fit... bummer. My canon 50mm f1.2 does and handles as nicely if not better than it did on the a7... yay!
Is it a digital-M, no definitely not as suggested before it's more a digital Contax-G, and it is definitely a better suited camera to my current position than the M4.
Happy Chap!
It's not a small camera or lens, but I find the size and handling very comfortable.
Very intuitive, I have found an online manual but not needed it yet.
AF is a bit slow, a smaller faster prime should sort this, i need to check firmware too.
The optical VF rocks for me, the EVF is still respectable next to my sony, and is handy in poor light. But I much prefer the OVF with the little magnified focus confirm in the bottom right corner.
Most of my shots are around 30mm, this doesn't help my decision of 23 or 35mm f2 as my faster prime.
My Jupiter-12 doesn't fit... bummer. My canon 50mm f1.2 does and handles as nicely if not better than it did on the a7... yay!
Is it a digital-M, no definitely not as suggested before it's more a digital Contax-G, and it is definitely a better suited camera to my current position than the M4.
Happy Chap!
nzeeman
Well-known
if yiu are around 30mm let me suggest you something... go for a 35/2 fuji and some of super cheap chinese manual ones like zonlai 22mm or 7 artisans 25mm..
or if you need some lens that is really fast maybe then 23/2 fuji and 7artisans 35/1.2 so you will be covered on both sides and just with additional 100$ or even less if you wait a bit for used ones...
or if you need some lens that is really fast maybe then 23/2 fuji and 7artisans 35/1.2 so you will be covered on both sides and just with additional 100$ or even less if you wait a bit for used ones...
Don’t forget the 27mm pancake as well...but 30mm is closer to 35mm in real use than 23mm.