Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9]   Go Down

Author Topic: Fuji X Lenses  (Read 50589 times)

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2604
Re: Fuji X Lenses
« Reply #160 on: February 28, 2016, 06:12:54 PM »


I have not yet found any X-Pro2 files (raw downloads) to look at in LR to see if anything was improved over past processing.

Paul C

The latest Lr works well for me but I don't try sharpening the files like they're from a Bayer sensor.

Anyway, here's a link if you want an X-Pro 2 RAW file to try.

http://petebridgwood.com/wp/2016/02/x-pro2-render-my-raw/#more-1801
Logged
Regards,
Ron

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2130
    • Photos
Re: Fuji X Lenses
« Reply #161 on: September 11, 2016, 10:52:09 PM »

I'll be going in backpacking trip in few days and I'm still undecided what lenses to take so I'm curious to hear different points of view.
The area will be a lot of above treeline landscape.
The camera will likely be the X-T2 if I friend with it fast (if not it will be the Olympus E-M5ii and there the lens choices are easier as I don't have many).

The two basic options are:
1: 14mm F2.8 + 18-55mm F2.8-4 +/- 60mm F2.4
2. 10-24mm F4 + 35mm F2 + 60mm F2.4

First option will give me the range I expect to use the most plus a good and light wide.
Second option will give me a lot of flexibility on the wide end and extra weather resistance.

PS. While tempting the 55-200 or the 90 are probably too heavy for what I need.
PPS. If X-T2 I will take the RX100 mark1 as a backup

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2604
Re: Fuji X Lenses
« Reply #162 on: September 12, 2016, 07:34:35 AM »

Armand, I love my 10-24 for IQ, OIS and WR.  It's a beautiful option for grand landscapes.  Its also the only WR lens in your list. 
Logged
Regards,
Ron

Alan Smallbone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 720
    • APS Photography
Re: Fuji X Lenses
« Reply #163 on: September 12, 2016, 09:26:47 AM »

I agree with Ron, the 10-24mm is an excellent lens. Have a good trip.

Alan
Logged
Alan Smallbone
Orange County, CA

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2130
    • Photos
Re: Fuji X Lenses
« Reply #164 on: September 12, 2016, 11:21:40 AM »

Armand, I love my 10-24 for IQ, OIS and WR.  It's a beautiful option for grand landscapes.  Its also the only WR lens in your list.

I used it so I know what it can do but the 18-55 range might be more convenient.
While initially I thought so too but the 10-24 is not labeled as WR. The 35 F2 is.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2016, 11:55:23 AM by armand »
Logged

Chris Kern

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 385
    • Chris Kern's Eponymous Website
Re: Fuji X Lenses
« Reply #165 on: September 12, 2016, 09:31:51 PM »

The area will be a lot of above treeline landscape.

[ . . . ]

PS. While tempting the 55-200 or the 90 are probably too heavy for what I need.

Weight is always a serious issue for me, too (I suspect I'm somewhat older than you are), but every time I go somewhere without the 55-200, I'm sorry I didn't take it.  Great for compressing distant landscape features.

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2130
    • Photos
Re: Fuji X Lenses
« Reply #166 on: September 12, 2016, 11:08:50 PM »

Weight is always a serious issue for me, too (I suspect I'm somewhat older than you are), but every time I go somewhere without the 55-200, I'm sorry I didn't take it.  Great for compressing distant landscape features.

You are not helping here  :D

Ken Bennett

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1707
    • http://www.kenbennettphoto.com
Re: Fuji X Lenses
« Reply #167 on: September 13, 2016, 08:37:54 AM »

I went backpacking with a student orientation group last month. I took a pair of X-T1 bodies, the 16/1.4 and 35/2 lenses, and the 90mm. I went back and forth for a while on the 55-200 instead of the 90, but eventually figured the weather resistance and faster aperture would be more useful than the versatility of the zoom. All of it fit in an old LowePro waist pack, along with a ton of spare batteries.

The 90 got some use shooting candid portraits, but for the most part the photos (link to gallery) are all shot with the other two lenses. Had I been shooting landscapes, I would have taken the 55-200, of course.

Backpacking and long distance hiking are my chief escapes from photography, so I don't have much experience carrying "real" gear on the trail. I was pleasantly surprised by how easy it was to wear the waist pack in front, put on my backpack, and hike with easy access to my cameras. The weight wasn't a big deal (maybe 5 pounds or so?) and the cameras performed well.
Logged
Equipment: a camera and some lenses. Images: Work photos. Personal photos.

Alan Smallbone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 720
    • APS Photography
Re: Fuji X Lenses
« Reply #168 on: September 13, 2016, 12:05:53 PM »

I'll be going in backpacking trip in few days and I'm still undecided what lenses to take so I'm curious to hear different points of view.
The area will be a lot of above treeline landscape.
The camera will likely be the X-T2 if I friend with it fast (if not it will be the Olympus E-M5ii and there the lens choices are easier as I don't have many).

The two basic options are:
1: 14mm F2.8 + 18-55mm F2.8-4 +/- 60mm F2.4
2. 10-24mm F4 + 35mm F2 + 60mm F2.4

First option will give me the range I expect to use the most plus a good and light wide.
Second option will give me a lot of flexibility on the wide end and extra weather resistance.

PS. While tempting the 55-200 or the 90 are probably too heavy for what I need.
PPS. If X-T2 I will take the RX100 mark1 as a backup

If the weight was not a huge issue, if I was younger and in better shape, I would just take the 10-24, 18-55, and the 55-200mm that would cover all that may happen.......

 ;D ;D ;D

Alan
Logged
Alan Smallbone
Orange County, CA

barryfitzgerald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 688
Re: Fuji X Lenses
« Reply #169 on: September 15, 2016, 06:30:29 AM »

I tried the 10-24mm recently and it's a very fine lens, I admit though I do like the Tokina 11-16mm for the extra stop at times. Biggest disappointment to me was the 18-135mm lens it's just not close to the Canon/Nikon/Sony equivalents unless I tried a bad copy it was nowhere near as good as the other makers.
Logged

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2604
Re: Fuji X Lenses
« Reply #170 on: September 15, 2016, 10:42:35 AM »

I tried the 10-24mm recently and it's a very fine lens, I admit though I do like the Tokina 11-16mm for the extra stop at times. Biggest disappointment to me was the 18-135mm lens it's just not close to the Canon/Nikon/Sony equivalents unless I tried a bad copy it was nowhere near as good as the other makers.

Barry, in what way do you think the Canon EF-S 18-135 is better than the Fuji 18-135??  How did you compare them?
Logged
Regards,
Ron

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2130
    • Photos
Re: Fuji X Lenses
« Reply #171 on: September 16, 2016, 12:30:31 AM »

After all I got the 10-24, 35 F2 and the 18-55.
While they are quite close to each other it will minimize the change of lenses as, depending on the scenery, one will choose itself. The 35 is for simplicity, maybe panos and weather sealing.

Initially I got the 55-200 instead of the 18-55 but it looked just too heavy and with the extra resolution the 85mm equivalent hopefully will be good enough. I will likely miss the occasional wildlife but with the weight savings it's easier to justify bringing the RX100 as a backup.
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9]   Go Up