Fujifilm X-mount Image Thread
/forum/topic/1097477/171

1       2       3              171      
172
       173              577       578       end

Mike Elfner
Registered: Mar 01, 2003
Total Posts: 319
Country: Switzerland

Netherlands without Windmills would not be Netherlands ...



















michael49
Registered: Jun 09, 2006
Total Posts: 5748
Country: United States

Jman13 wrote:
My last night with the 23/1.4. Have to send my review sample back tomorrow. May have to save up for this one. (my review should be done later this evening). All on the X-E2. Edit: My review of the 23/1.4 is now up for those interested: http://admiringlight.com/blog/review-fujifilm-fujinon-xf-23mm-f1-4-r/
.....


I'm really itching for this lens. 35-40mm is my favorite FL.



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 13003
Country: United States

Three from tonight. First with 60/2.4 Macro, next two with Canon FL 55/1.2 + Speed Booster, all on X-E2.



















absolutic
Registered: Nov 04, 2008
Total Posts: 2228
Country: United States

XE1 with various lenses



















Mike Elfner
Registered: Mar 01, 2003
Total Posts: 319
Country: Switzerland

as always with the X-Pro1







Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 13003
Country: United States

A bunch from walking around town tonight with the X-E2 and the Canon FL 55/1.2 and Speed Booster. All are at 39mm, f/0.85.











































kwoodard
Registered: Aug 04, 2012
Total Posts: 4677
Country: United States

Jman13 wrote:
A bunch from walking around town tonight with the X-E2 and the Canon FL 55/1.2 and Speed Booster. All are at 39mm, f/0.85.


Great set! I really need a 55/1.2, but I prefer the Nikon flavor.

When using glass with adapters like this, is there any value in getting the XE2 over the XE1? The only thing I can think of that is really different is the faster EVF and bigger rear screen. Am I missing anything? Why should I try and get an XE2 if I am only using alt glass on my XE1?



millsart
Registered: Apr 29, 2009
Total Posts: 6115
Country: N/A

kwoodard wrote:
Jman13 wrote:
A bunch from walking around town tonight with the X-E2 and the Canon FL 55/1.2 and Speed Booster. All are at 39mm, f/0.85.


Great set! I really need a 55/1.2, but I prefer the Nikon flavor.

When using glass with adapters like this, is there any value in getting the XE2 over the XE1? The only thing I can think of that is really different is the faster EVF and bigger rear screen. Am I missing anything? Why should I try and get an XE2 if I am only using alt glass on my XE1?



Better EVF, larger LCD, Focus Peaking options; all seem like things that would make using alt glass a bit more enjoyable



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 13003
Country: United States

Aside from what's mentioned above, the biggest thing aside from the much better EVF refresh, which was huge tonight in low light, is that the E2 can continue to zoom in while it's writing images to the card. The E1 can't. You have to wait until the buffer is flushed before magnifying the view again. The rear LCD is also much higher res in addition to being larger.

Tonight was the first time I used the digital split prism focusing. While peaking is better for most things, the bike shots were really hard to nail with the focus peaking, but super easy with the split image focus.



georgms
Registered: Jan 08, 2009
Total Posts: 4045
Country: Germany

kwoodard wrote:
Jman13 wrote:
A bunch from walking around town tonight with the X-E2 and the Canon FL 55/1.2 and Speed Booster. All are at 39mm, f/0.85.


Great set! I really need a 55/1.2, but I prefer the Nikon flavor.

When using glass with adapters like this, is there any value in getting the XE2 over the XE1? The only thing I can think of that is really different is the faster EVF and bigger rear screen. Am I missing anything? Why should I try and get an XE2 if I am only using alt glass on my XE1?


Kevin, I've shot just a couple of frames with the 55/1.2 (Metabones standard-adapter) on the X-Pro, but in my opinion it's not a very good combo. A speed-booster might change this, but a nice 55/1.2 and the speedbooster together are not cheap and might make the native Fujinons look even more attractive.



curious80
Registered: Jun 18, 2010
Total Posts: 1902
Country: United States

Rob_O wrote:
Jman13 wrote:
Well, just need to keep your eye on it. When you half press the shutter, it shows you all the exposure parameters it's using in the viewfinder. Also, if you don't mind a 2 stop underexposure, why did you have ISO 3200 set as the limit? If you wanted shutter speed above all else, I'd think you'd select to max out the ISO.

Also, if you don't mind correcting for underexposure and such in post, you can use Auto ISO in manual mode and select the shutter speed to be 1/100s and it'll never deviate from that. Of course, you lose exposure compensation there, but in situations where you absolutely need the shutter speed, that function exists.

I for one am very glad it prioritizes exposure.


Yeah, I just didn't think to monitor shutter speed after setting the Min value, figuring it wouldn't go below what I set (even if it meant improper exposure). Now I know.

And I didn't have time to 'chimp' so didn't catch it until reviewing them at home later.

As for why I didn't raise the ISO limit, it's mostly because I didn't know the camera was programmed to override settings. I'd have been okay at ISO 6400. My comment about the 2-stop underexposure related to how *I'd* prefer the camera handled things in this situation -- i.e., have the camera say "Hey, dummy, you set Minimum Shutter Speed to 1/100 sec but that's not fast enough so here's your underexposed shot" versus "Hey, dipshit, 1/100 sec minimum shutter is too fast so I've corrected it for you ... you're welcome!" I appreciate Fuji engineers have the shooter in mind. However, with an underexposed image file I can do something about it in post. With the blur created by simply giving me a "proper" exposure, I can't do much about that later.

Ideally, there would either be a user-selectable "Override Minimum Shutter Speed if Necessary" option *or* a simple warning on screen to indicate that a camera-defined proper exposure is outside selected ISO and Shutter values; at least then the user knows it's occurring and can either dial in EC or bump the ISO or go manual or whatever.

It should also be noted that I knew from sample shots before the performances began that 1/100 sec was likely a stop too fast for some shots, but I chose it anyway with this notion of preference for underexposed files (without knowing how the X-E2 would handle it). Shadow detail is so much easier to recover/manage than blown highlights, which are pretty much unrecoverable when the histogram gets that far to the right.


It makes sense why you want it to behave the way you want. It also makes sense why Fuji implemented it the way they did. Really it is coming out to a point where users are looking for more and more control over how the "auto modes" behave. At the end of the day it will not do what you want in all the situations. Looking forward to the day when camera vendors open their software platforms so you could write your own little snippet to decide how you want the damn thing to behave



millsart
Registered: Apr 29, 2009
Total Posts: 6115
Country: N/A

Good news from Adorama, Black only bodies appear to be shipping, and B&H had the black kit w/ 18-55 listed as in stock today

Hopefully X-E2's should be getting into the hands of everyone who placed orders soon



kwoodard
Registered: Aug 04, 2012
Total Posts: 4677
Country: United States

Jman13 wrote:
Aside from what's mentioned above, the biggest thing aside from the much better EVF refresh, which was huge tonight in low light, is that the E2 can continue to zoom in while it's writing images to the card. The E1 can't. You have to wait until the buffer is flushed before magnifying the view again. The rear LCD is also much higher res in addition to being larger.

Tonight was the first time I used the digital split prism focusing. While peaking is better for most things, the bike shots were really hard to nail with the focus peaking, but super easy with the split image focus.


I didn't know about the split-prism focusing... If its software driven, I wonder if we will see that trickle down into the XE1? Of all the updates, I would like to have the faster refresh rate and the split prism. All the rest is moot for me. Will hang onto the XE1 for a while. Thanks for the tangent.



corposant
Registered: Jul 14, 2010
Total Posts: 2960
Country: United States

Heading out to sea…



W.T. Jones
Registered: Jan 03, 2009
Total Posts: 177
Country: United States

kwoodard wrote:
I didn't know about the split-prism focusing... If its software driven, I wonder if we will see that trickle down into the XE1? Of all the updates, I would like to have the faster refresh rate and the split prism. All the rest is moot for me. Will hang onto the XE1 for a while. Thanks for the tangent.


From what I have read, the X-E1 & any camera with the first generation X-Trans sensor cannot have split image. It is dependent on the PDAF pixels on the Xtrans II sensor or some perhaps some other Hardware that is not present in the X-E1. That is why you only see it in the X-Trans II censored cameras, X100S & X-E2



adrianb
Registered: Jun 28, 2010
Total Posts: 714
Country: Romania

Hi all
Don't know if this is the best place to post this, but...

I m tempted to get a X-M1...

I currently have 2 x Canon 5Dc, a 24mm 1.4 L II, a 50mm Yashica ML 50mm 1.7 & Tair 300 mm f4.5 (m42).

I was tempted by the 6D, but it's too expensive and I don't want to sell 2 bodies + add money to get just one body (even though the 6D is the perfect body for me,for what I do).

So after reconsidering, I realize that I need a very compact & potent body for travelling with the motorcycle (and not only) but also a a body that can cope with shooting @ events, not just a gizmo to use on the bike.

So i've thought I'd sell one of the two 5Dc and put some money and get a mirrorless.

The mirrorless will be perfect for landscape/stationary subjects, photo sessions, etc..

I was thinking about Nex-5N ,since it's decent enough and cheap.

Then I thought since i'm getting a mirrorless, i'd like one with good IQ & wi fi.

THe battle now is between Sony Nex-6 and Fuji X-E1/ X-A1 /X-M1.

I've seen that the Nex-6 has the better display, better video functions/controls, but in terms of pure IQ, the Fuji system is a bit better (at high ISO & dynamic range).

So it's gonna be a Fuji. The X-Pro 1 is too expensive, so we rule that one out.
Then we have the X-E1, X-A1 & X-M1.

From what I get, the X-E1 and X-M1 have the same senzor, the X TRANS (without the AA filter), and the X-A1 has the CMOS aps-c senzor.

Now I narrowed my choices between the X-E1 and X-M1.

I've seen the reviews & the specs but can somebody tell me, exactly, what sensor lies in X-Pro1, X-E1, X-A1, X-M1, X-E2 ? and what processor?

The X-E1 has an EVF, and those dials on top (for exposure compensation and ISO), the X-M1 has no viewfinder whatsoever (and has a more plastic feel) (i don't know exactly the build of the X-E1).

In terms of Image Quality, does the X-E1 & X-M1 have the same sensor & processor? are they the same in terms of ISO figures, noise at high ISO?

They're priced pretty close (body vs body), with the X-M1 being a bit cheaper.

I plan on using it (which ever I will get) with manual lenses (such as the Yashica ML 50mm 1.7, and other lenses) since MF lenses are far cheaper and provide very good IQ.

The 24m 1.4L II will remain glued to my remaining 5D, and I plan to shoot the Fuji X alongside the 5D.

I'd be tempted to get the Fuji X with a lens (kit lens perhaps), because if I want to use it as a travel body (with the bike), there would be no logic to attach to it a large / huge manual focus lens.... but I'm not sure about the IQ rendered by the Fuji X lenses. (perhaps one can suggest one or two fuji x lenses (not too expensive)).

Sorry about the long read, but who ever got this far with the read, perhaps can enlighten me
(thanks in advance :P )



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 13003
Country: United States

Xpro, E1 and M1 have the same sensor. E1 has EVF. M1 has cheaper build, is smaller and has no EVF. The M1 is faster to operate and has a better rear screen. Writes faster too and has WiFi. Otherwise is very similar to the E1.

The E2 is basically an M1 in an E1 body and the newer sensor with Phase detection AF and all the bells and whistles. I have the E1, M1 and E2. E1 will be sold soon since I got the E2 and the M1 will remain my second body.



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 13003
Country: United States


Correct. It uses the PDAF for the digital split image.

W.T. Jones wrote:
kwoodard wrote:
I didn't know about the split-prism focusing... If its software driven, I wonder if we will see that trickle down into the XE1? Of all the updates, I would like to have the faster refresh rate and the split prism. All the rest is moot for me. Will hang onto the XE1 for a while. Thanks for the tangent.


From what I have read, the X-E1 & any camera with the first generation X-Trans sensor cannot have split image. It is dependent on the PDAF pixels on the Xtrans II sensor or some perhaps some other Hardware that is not present in the X-E1. That is why you only see it in the X-Trans II censored cameras, X100S & X-E2



adrianb
Registered: Jun 28, 2010
Total Posts: 714
Country: Romania

Jman13 wrote:
Xpro, E1 and M1 have the same sensor. E1 has EVF. M1 has cheaper build, is smaller and has no EVF. The M1 is faster to operate and has a better rear screen. Writes faster too and has WiFi. Otherwise is very similar to the E1.

The E2 is basically an M1 in an E1 body and the newer sensor with Phase detection AF and all the bells and whistles. I have the E1, M1 and E2. E1 will be sold soon since I got the E2 and the M1 will remain my second body.


So can you tell me exactly what sensor & processor each of the 3 models have? (if i'm not being too annoying)?
From an IQ stand point of view, would I see any difference between X-E1 and X-M1? which would perform better in terms of IQ ( and high ISO)?

also how's the build quality between X-E1 and X-M1 (materials, etc) (i know they differ in functions & dials etc)



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 13003
Country: United States

Xpro, E1 and M1 have the original XTrans. E2 has Xtrans II. Image quality is identical between the first three and pretty darn close even with the newer sensor.

The E1 and XPro have the same original processor. The M1 and E2 share the same second gen processor which is about twice as fast and helps in responsiveness.

The E1 and E2 are built with lightweight metal on the tip and bottom. The M1 is all plastic. While the materials feel a lot cheaper in the m1, it is solidly constructed.

Here are my two in depth reviews of the E1 and M1. In working on my E2 review now and hope to have it done in the next few days.

X-E1: http://admiringlight.com/blog/review-fujifilm-x-e1/

X-M1: http://admiringlight.com/blog/review-fujifilm-x-m1/



1       2       3              171      
172
       173              577       578       end