Fujifilm X-mount Image Thread
/forum/topic/1097477/96

1       2       3              96      
97
       98              299       300       end

Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 10491
Country: United States

cputeq wrote:
Very nice Jordan. Did you drop m43 or keep it?


I have both. I use the Fuji a lot, but I reach for the OM-D when I need to get the shot. For instance, when my son was born last week, I took 5 pics with the Fuji and over 100 with the OM-D.



CVickery
Registered: May 14, 2004
Total Posts: 2573
Country: Canada

Jman13 wrote:
cputeq wrote:
Very nice Jordan. Did you drop m43 or keep it?


I have both. I use the Fuji a lot, but I reach for the OM-D when I need to get the shot. For instance, when my son was born last week, I took 5 pics with the Fuji and over 100 with the OM-D.


Interesting comment Jordan. Why is that? I have the OM-D and just picked up a Fuji X-E1 and my sense so far is that the Fuji would perform better in uncertain (low) lighting, although the AF would be slower.



itai195
Registered: Aug 08, 2011
Total Posts: 1181
Country: United States

Congrats, Jordan!

When my daughter was born, I broke out the D800. In some situations, you just have to have a camera that you know will get the shot and perform how you expect when you need it to.



johnahill
Registered: Jan 08, 2006
Total Posts: 2470
Country: United Kingdom

Some great images here.
Jordan, how did you manage to get that chicago shot without perspective distortion/converging verticals?

Here'a a few more from my walk around the Temple area of London.
All 14mm



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

xenor wrote:
Lupine







Xenor,

Is this shot straight out of the camera ? If so, I'm thrilled! Fuji's colors are really distinctive.


xenor
Registered: Dec 06, 2012
Total Posts: 111
Country: N/A

umsl12 wrote:
xenor wrote:
Lupine







Xenor,

Is this shot straight out of the camera ? If so, I'm thrilled! Fuji's colors are really distinctive.


Hi. No, it was shot in RAW. This is a tweaked Astia emulation.


Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 10491
Country: United States

CVickery wrote:
Interesting comment Jordan. Why is that? I have the OM-D and just picked up a Fuji X-E1 and my sense so far is that the Fuji would perform better in uncertain (low) lighting, although the AF would be slower.


Wow. I can't even comprehend that. The Fuji is tremendously unreliable in lower light...often failing to find focus at all unless you're shooting very high contrast subjects. Unfortunately, people's eyes don't qualify often. It's good in decent and medium lighting situations, but I can't rely on it and have missed MANY shots in lower light. If I have time to set up a shot, it's just fine, but for 'quick must have shots'...no way. The OM-D, on the other hand, locks nearly instantly in the vast majority of lighting situations. Only in really, really dim light does it have any issues. I love the image quality for the Fuji, and I find myself carrying it very often for daily shooting...but it's not my go to for the must have shots.



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 10491
Country: United States

johnahill wrote:
Some great images here.
Jordan, how did you manage to get that chicago shot without perspective distortion/converging verticals?


Correction in post. In this case, the Upright tool in Lightroom 5 nailed it perfectly.



CVickery
Registered: May 14, 2004
Total Posts: 2573
Country: Canada

Jman13 wrote:
CVickery wrote:
Interesting comment Jordan. Why is that? I have the OM-D and just picked up a Fuji X-E1 and my sense so far is that the Fuji would perform better in uncertain (low) lighting, although the AF would be slower.


Wow. I can't even comprehend that. The Fuji is tremendously unreliable in lower light...often failing to find focus at all unless you're shooting very high contrast subjects. Unfortunately, people's eyes don't qualify often. It's good in decent and medium lighting situations, but I can't rely on it and have missed MANY shots in lower light. If I have time to set up a shot, it's just fine, but for 'quick must have shots'...no way. The OM-D, on the other hand, locks nearly instantly in the vast majority of lighting situations. Only in really, really dim light does it have any issues. I love the image quality for the Fuji, and I find myself carrying it very often for daily shooting...but it's not my go to for the must have shots.


I did say I just picked up the X-E1 My comments were thinking that the high ISO performance of the X-E1 would be better than the OM-D in terms of IQ...I haven't had the body long enough to form an opinion of the AF accuracy in poor conditions. Your answer saved me the trouble. Thanks.



cputeq
Registered: Jun 25, 2008
Total Posts: 4703
Country: United States

If it's must-have, I use my 5D3



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 10491
Country: United States

CVickery wrote:
Jman13 wrote:
CVickery wrote:
Interesting comment Jordan. Why is that? I have the OM-D and just picked up a Fuji X-E1 and my sense so far is that the Fuji would perform better in uncertain (low) lighting, although the AF would be slower.


Wow. I can't even comprehend that. The Fuji is tremendously unreliable in lower light...often failing to find focus at all unless you're shooting very high contrast subjects. Unfortunately, people's eyes don't qualify often. It's good in decent and medium lighting situations, but I can't rely on it and have missed MANY shots in lower light. If I have time to set up a shot, it's just fine, but for 'quick must have shots'...no way. The OM-D, on the other hand, locks nearly instantly in the vast majority of lighting situations. Only in really, really dim light does it have any issues. I love the image quality for the Fuji, and I find myself carrying it very often for daily shooting...but it's not my go to for the must have shots.


I did say I just picked up the X-E1 My comments were thinking that the high ISO performance of the X-E1 would be better than the OM-D in terms of IQ...I haven't had the body long enough to form an opinion of the AF accuracy in poor conditions. Your answer saved me the trouble. Thanks.


Yeah, it's a mixed bag. The high ISO performance of the X-E1 is superior to the OM-D (about a stop), though often times, the OM-D's IBIS makes up that stop easily, especially for longer lenses. I love the skin tones of the Fuji, and the general gradation of tones, which are really deep and rich. I also love how incredibly clean the files are at base ISO. I own three lenses for the Fuji right now...the 60/2.4, which is very good, with great bokeh, sharp and good macro. It's not quite as good optically as the Oly 60/2.8 Macro or 75/1.8, but few lenses for any system are; the 35/1.4, which is not as sharp as the PanaLeica 25/1.4, but has such a gorgeous rendering that I don't care. Beautiful falloff to blur with that lens, and I just love the images I get out of it; and the 14mm f/2.8, which is the best ultra-wide lens I've ever used. (I have not used the Zeiss 21/2.8) It's phenomenally sharp to the extreme corners, and has great contrast and color. I carry these three for a lot of day shooting.

However, if I need to capture quick action, or need fast response, or even just a wider capability kit, I grab the OM-D. Image quality is still excellent, and the lenses are so darn good. I have been shooting with my OM-D a lot these past few days, mostly with the 25/1.4, 45/1.8 and 75/1.8, but some with the 14/2.5 and 60/2.8, and I've just been getting such great results. I also absolutely LOVE the Panny 35-100/2.8, so it's going to be hard to replace the OM-D plus the 35-100 for me any time soon.



joekraft
Registered: Apr 19, 2006
Total Posts: 3105
Country: United States

Jman13 wrote:
CVickery wrote:
Interesting comment Jordan. Why is that? I have the OM-D and just picked up a Fuji X-E1 and my sense so far is that the Fuji would perform better in uncertain (low) lighting, although the AF would be slower.


Wow. I can't even comprehend that. The Fuji is tremendously unreliable in lower light...often failing to find focus at all unless you're shooting very high contrast subjects...


Do others share this opinion? Looking through this thread the system seems capable of taking good action shots (by action, I am looking for kids in the backyard kinds of things), but this lower light aspect makes me question if it is appropriate for around-the-house/family get-togethers type of candids.

Jordan, since everything is relative, would a 1DsMkii user find it frustratingly inaccurate, or are you talking in comparison to the newer models with better AF?



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 10491
Country: United States

Yes, I think that if you are planning on shooting action, the X-E1 is a rather large step behind pretty much any other major camera on the market right now in AF speed and responsiveness. Now, accuracy is a different story...it's extremely accurate. When it locks on, it's dead on in focus...it's just that in lower light with some lower contrast stuff, it can be VERY slow to focus, and will often fail to lock at all.

Compared to a modern PDAF system or something like the AF in the NEX line or micro 4/3, it's a pretty big step back. That's why reviews all over the place (including mine) often refer to the Fuji cameras a 'deliberate' cams....they are wonderful when you have time to set up a shot...but if you need a camera that will respond quickly and surely in any situation, these are not the cams for you right now. AF in good light with the 35/1.4, 14/2.8 and 18-55 (and probably the 55-200) is pretty quick, and certainly fast enough for most types of shooting...and in dim light when there's enough contrast, they do an OK job too. It's just that I've found the AF to fail at the most inopportune times, when trying to get one quick shot, that I just don't use the X-E1 for those types of shooting. The OM-D does a fantastic job in that regard, so I just use that...plus the IBIS often comes in handy in these situations.

I LOVE the X-E1 for outdoor shooting and for the great look I get. I've taken a lot of good portraits indoors in lower light, but I've missed a lot of shots as well.



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

Hi Xenor, I'm still impressed. Thanks for your reply!



sky_barker
Registered: Aug 03, 2005
Total Posts: 526
Country: United States

I have found the XE-1(with the 35) very accurate when using continuous focus to lock-on and holding with a half press and then recomposing.



cputeq
Registered: Jun 25, 2008
Total Posts: 4703
Country: United States

@Joe - The XE1 low-light focus is probably the worst I've ever used (see my profile for current and past cameras) except for maybe the Pentax K200D or K20D. I mean, I've hit focus once in lower light with the XE1, not change orientation of the camera or subject, moved the AF box either 1 click larger or smaller and failed to focus again! Fuji needs to work on the camera.

That said, it's still a great camera, but not really for poor indoor lighting, and the OMD (and actually my Pany GX1) lock on much better than the Fuji ever has in those conditions.

In good light, with a bit of practice, it's possible to get action-y shots (I use AFS, haven't tried a lot of AF-C in good light), but it's nothing like tracking movement with a good DSLR rig. Do note my action-tracking attempts with the OMD also (mostly) failed, so it's mostly a CDAF thing.


In lower light, I typically just change the XE1 over to MF and go from there - if I think I can get a shot using AF, I will hit the "one-touch AF" or whatever and try, but then I'll spin the lens and just try to MF manually. Fuji's low-refresh EVF doesn't help matters much, but I've gotten better with practice.



joekraft
Registered: Apr 19, 2006
Total Posts: 3105
Country: United States

Thanks cputeq. I did just start using MF more even with my 1DsMkii and got ok with it, so could probably adapt - does the viewfinder/screen allow you to focus ok with the Fuji? I have next to zero experience with the rangefinder styles.



cputeq
Registered: Jun 25, 2008
Total Posts: 4703
Country: United States

joekraft wrote:
Thanks cputeq. I did just start using MF more even with my 1DsMkii and got ok with it, so could probably adapt - does the viewfinder/screen allow you to focus ok with the Fuji? I have next to zero experience with the rangefinder styles.


It's serviceable but nothing to write home about. Note I'm talking the XE1, as I haven't used the XPro1.

With the EVF, the refresh is a bit slow, and with native lenses you're using focus-by-wire...a double whammy.

Since the EVF refresh is slow, it's quite possible to focus past your intended point and not realize it until the refresh catches up a microsecond later...it's just a bit slower than with an optical or faster EVF. The 3x magnification you can easily get to with the XE1 helps, but again you're hounded by the slower refresh of the screen and then on longer lenses, the lack of IBIS can sometimes be a hurdle.

Then you have focus by wire. Even though I hate focus by wire, with practice it's at least serviceable. It's by no means the best way at all, and I'd rank it worse than an AF lens in MF mode, but at least it's there.



I hate to sound like a Debbie Downer, so don't take these are horrible criticisms (I mean, I DID keep the camera and bought my 2nd lens for it), but if you're expecting great AF or MF performance in lower light, you might want to look elsewhere because the Fuji just doesn't have it. Doable, yeah, but probably the worst performance area for the system.

For most of my other shooting situations, though, I really like it.



mfoto
Registered: Sep 19, 2002
Total Posts: 2328
Country: Canada

X-Pro1, ISO 200, XF 35 1.4R @ f/5.6 and some VSCO 03 sprinkled on top






cputeq
Registered: Jun 25, 2008
Total Posts: 4703
Country: United States


DSCF6886-Edit by J L Smith, on Flickr


DSCF6890-Edit by J L Smith, on Flickr



1       2       3              96      
97
       98              299       300       end