Fujifilm X-mount Image Thread
/forum/topic/1097477/105

1       2       3              105      
106
       107              320       321       end

ssnap
Registered: Feb 14, 2005
Total Posts: 456
Country: United States

umsl12 wrote:
Ssnap,

How fast is AF 0f 55-200 relative to the kids? I have 2 toddlers and i'm wondering if it's fast enough to catch them. Thanks!

When I shoot photos of my toddler and his cousin I'm using either the X100s or NEX-5N. The XP1 (with 35 or 55-200) is too slow. I've used the 18mm before and had better success using a wider aperture. When the kids are running around it's simply frustrating. I may get a handful of photos but most are missed focus.

Here are photos I tried taking of my dogs running back to the house. These are OOC JPEG.










barisaxer
Registered: Feb 21, 2005
Total Posts: 504
Country: United States

55-200 first one. Very nice and sharp pretty slow focus. single focus good but tracking is not. I like it for stuff I shoot not moving.
Second is inside a silo at a friends 18-55 at 18mm. Love the kit zoom sharp and small.

Lat is market with 18-55



umsl12
Registered: Dec 09, 2012
Total Posts: 222
Country: United States

Thank you, Ssnap.

That's my concern. My kids never stay still for me to take pictures and that's the only reason I need to keep my DSLR. When they get older, then I will get 55-200.
thanks



Spyro P.
Registered: Mar 24, 2008
Total Posts: 2867
Country: Australia

meh
I always shoot my kids like I shoot street: wide, stopped down and prefocused



umsl12
Registered: Dec 09, 2012
Total Posts: 222
Country: United States

ceder wrote:
Umsl12, the 55-200 is the next slowest of them all, only the 60mm is slower. I was hoping for a firmware fix, but the up oming firmware is for all other lenses, 55-200 is excluded. So, the difference will be even more pronounced...



Oh noooo, 55-200 is event slower than 35mm?

Thanks for the information!



felixj
Registered: Nov 02, 2010
Total Posts: 85
Country: United Kingdom

Some great photos here.

I gotta say I love the new firmware for the new function button. It makes it twice as usable.

My selection of 'thrifty fifties'. Thrifty because they are cheap!



A couple taken from the Konica Hexanon 50mm f1.7 lens. Check out my flickr for more samples if you like.

This is a great lens. All metal built and it 'feels' the best compared to all the other vintage lens I have tried so far. It also looks really good on the X Pro 1. I love the rendering of this lens. Considering it cost me 17 from eBay, it is a no brainer. I am still deciding which of these legacy lens to keep but this Konica will definitely be making the list. The only downside is that it flares very easily so I will need to look for a cheap metal hood for it. I seen quite a few on eBay for 2-4 so it isn't a bank breaker.




millsart
Registered: Apr 29, 2009
Total Posts: 4880
Country: N/A

I think the issue isn't so much the 55-200, but rather the CDAF of the camera being an issue for any and all lenses. Just isn't a strength of it for tracking motion. Even what I consider the best CDAF camera on the market, the Olympus OM-D, the tracking focus was pretty poor, compared to even an entry level DSLR, and just night and day from the likes of my Nikon D3s which are unreal in their ability to lock and follow even the most random action.

Really rather than trying to treat the camera like a DSLR though and expecting it to track focus, I think its better to take on the mindset of working with a manual focus camera, where you have to anticipate and pre/zone focus. After all, people got plenty of great action shots in days gone past, but just not hundreds of frames of every step the kid takes around the yard motor driving at 10 fps like we can do today. Thing is though, do we really need dozens or hundreds of frames ? Probably not as we are only going to select a few to edit and post/share/print or whatever.

I've found that many times even with the best AF on my DSLR's I still often will prefocus on a given spot. Say I'm wanting to get the dogs running at me. Instead of leaving it to the AF, I'll pick a spot that has a nice background, light coming from the right direction, and focus on a given spot on the grass. Then I'll have someone toss a ball past me so the dogs run right towards me and snap some shots when they pass through the in focus zone. Maybe I'll have to do that more than once to get the perfect moment captured but the dogs (just as kids) seemingly have endless energy to do it over and over

Sometimes it even adds a bit of fun in that its a little more challenging IMHO



ssnap
Registered: Feb 14, 2005
Total Posts: 456
Country: United States

Spyro P. wrote:
meh
I always shoot my kids like I shoot street: wide, stopped down and prefocused


That what makes the 18mm usable with my kids, I can stop it down and get just about everything in focus (f/4 - 8). I like to shoot f1.4 - f4.0 with the 35mm and the 55-200 is more for portraits and less for candids. That's my blow out the background lens.

Even when I had my 7D and 70-200 2.8 IS II that camera was used more for portrait sessions. I used it once for candid shots at an outdoor birthday party. However, the focusing speed is much faster on the 7D / 70-200 combo.

Today I will be at another outdoor birthday and I'll see how the 55-200 performs. I'll report back on my finding later tonight ;-)



ssnap
Registered: Feb 14, 2005
Total Posts: 456
Country: United States

Well, I took the 55-200 out to my nephews birthday party and it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. It wasn't amazing, but I got some good images before the rain came

In all honesty, there wasn't a lot of running around today.







Here's an indoor with the 55-200 of my newborn.


DSCF9268 by snappshotk1000, on Flickr

Here's a photo taken with the 35mm f1.4 that I simply loved!


DSCF9327 by snappshotk1000, on Flickr



Jeffrey
Registered: Nov 12, 2002
Total Posts: 9829
Country: United States

For a break from people's endless babies and other kids you don't know, here are some industrial images I made of machined parts that we make at my company. Just a quick setup using white paper on a table with existing window light and some impromptu foam core reflectors. XPro1 with 60mm macro lens, tripod. f16.









justruss
Registered: Jul 05, 2004
Total Posts: 4509
Country: United States

One complaint I have is that adapting Canon and OM lenses to FX requires a relatively deep adapter. So, for instance, my lovely OM 24mm-- which renders nicely on the X-E1-- requires an adapter that's almost the same length as the lens itself.

It looks like the Contax G lenses use a tiny adapter.

Are there any other reasonably priced alts that adapt to FX with short adapters?



you2
Registered: Nov 06, 2005
Total Posts: 741
Country: United States

The lens wasn't amazing or the birthday party wasn't amazing ?

ssnap wrote:
Well, I took the 55-200 out to my nephews birthday party and it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. It wasn't amazing, but I got some good images before the rain came

In all honesty, there wasn't a lot of running around today.








sebboh
Registered: Nov 02, 2009
Total Posts: 10680
Country: United States

justruss wrote:
One complaint I have is that adapting Canon and OM lenses to FX requires a relatively deep adapter. So, for instance, my lovely OM 24mm-- which renders nicely on the X-E1-- requires an adapter that's almost the same length as the lens itself.

It looks like the Contax G lenses use a tiny adapter.

Are there any other reasonably priced alts that adapt to FX with short adapters?


rangefinder lenses are the only ones with short adapters. this means contax g and voigtlander m-mount lenses are pretty much the only reasonably priced lenses with short adapters.

oops, nearly forgot olympus pen f lenses have a short adapter and some (ok just 2 or 3) are pretty cheap. they won't work on any future FF camera though since they are half frame lenses.



millsart
Registered: Apr 29, 2009
Total Posts: 4880
Country: N/A

Haven't tried any Contax G's on the X ever, but on my NEX's the wider ones had some issues with smearing and color shifts in the corners.

With mirrorless I've found that most compact sized wides, sans, retrofocus 35mm SLR lenses which are always going to be bigger/bulkier, will have some corner issues, save for the Voigtlander 15mm which strangely worked pretty well.

It was a shame too because there are so many great (and in some cases affordable) M, LTD and Contax wides that would be a great size



Jeffrey
Registered: Nov 12, 2002
Total Posts: 9829
Country: United States

Someone really ought to start a new thread just to yak about adapting alt lenses to their cameras and let this thread return to being the IMAGE thread that it is supposed to be.



itai195
Registered: Aug 08, 2011
Total Posts: 1200
Country: United States

Yeah, lets get back to the endless babies and other kids you don't know



felixj
Registered: Nov 02, 2010
Total Posts: 85
Country: United Kingdom

More adapted lens...With photo!

Minolta MD 50mm f/1.4 + X Pro 1 via cheap adapter.



Fverburg
Registered: Jul 13, 2011
Total Posts: 52
Country: United States

Fuji got another one.....

I have been looking at getting something a little more portable for those times that I don't want to lug a DSLR around. I got the X Pro-1 and the 18-55 zoom.

The Camera arrived on Friday and I have been shooting around for the last two days. While it has its quirks and is not a substitute for a DSLR in a lot of cases, it's a lot of fun.

And I love those Fuji files............





































Regards,

Frank



ssnap
Registered: Feb 14, 2005
Total Posts: 456
Country: United States

you2 wrote:
The lens wasn't amazing or the birthday party wasn't amazing ?

ssnap wrote:
Well, I took the 55-200 out to my nephews birthday party and it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. It wasn't amazing, but I got some good images before the rain came

In all honesty, there wasn't a lot of running around today.



, sorry for the confusion. The party was great. The lens was good, I just had to anticipate my shots. It was no Canon 70-200 but it wasn't horrible (relative to focus speed). The XP1 can be a tricky camera. Sometimes AF speed will be frustrating and other times it's not an issue. Anyway, for my needs I feel fine using the 55-200 outdoors with my kiddos.

Unfortunately, heavy rains came halfway through the party. We were forced inside and I used my X100s going forward. Like I said in the previous post the kids weren't running around very much. They didn't get a sugar rush from cake until the party was moved inside.



umsl12
Registered: Dec 09, 2012
Total Posts: 222
Country: United States

Fuji Xe1, 35mm1.4, SOOC JPEG ( first outing after i have had the new set for 2 weeks. )

Untitled by nht800, on Flickr



1       2       3              105      
106
       107              320       321       end