- Location
- Melbourne, Australia
-
Cameraderie, a friendly photography forum, join now for free!
Fuji My dream X100....
- Thread starter TraamisVOS
- Start date
emerson
Top Veteran
- Location
- Maritime Canada
- Real Name
- David
- Location
- Melbourne, Australia
28mm equivalent lens would be fine, I can see how that would work too. I like Sigma's idea of offering a range of lenses to cater for whichever you as the photographer prefers.
I don't agree with in-camera crops though. A 28mm lens cropped to 50mm would look different in terms of its field of view, its depth of field, its overall 'look'. Similarly, a 50mm equivalent on a medium format camera will look different compared 50mm on a full frame camera.
bartjeej
Hall of Famer
- Real Name
- bart
^ field of view of a cropped image would be 100% the same. Depth of field would be deeper (28efl 1.4 would be 18mm/1.4 is 12.86mm, so that cropped to 50mm efl would be equal to a 33mm f/2.56, or 50mm f/3.88.
At wider fields of view, larger sensors and the accompanying longer focal lengths tend to have a bit less distortion, but the difference isn't dramatic. 50mm is the point where this difference starts to evaporate, and by 100mm it's gone completely. In the end, it's all just down to the number of photons and the angle from which they reach the sensor.
As for my wish, I'm heavily debating between 35mm efl and 50mm efl. I would really like weatherproofing or even waterproofing. Image stabilisation would be welcome too. That's pretty much it for me.
At wider fields of view, larger sensors and the accompanying longer focal lengths tend to have a bit less distortion, but the difference isn't dramatic. 50mm is the point where this difference starts to evaporate, and by 100mm it's gone completely. In the end, it's all just down to the number of photons and the angle from which they reach the sensor.
As for my wish, I'm heavily debating between 35mm efl and 50mm efl. I would really like weatherproofing or even waterproofing. Image stabilisation would be welcome too. That's pretty much it for me.
emerson
Top Veteran
- Location
- Maritime Canada
- Real Name
- David
FOV would be a concern for me, too. Subject isolation with small sensors is a source of frustration.
I agree, in principle - although I think I'd have liked an 85mm (eq.) - especially since I have the TCL-x100 converter, and therefore already have a 50mm (eq.) f/2.0.
Incidentally, I'm very pleased with the TCL-x100. It does a great job, and looks really good, when attached. In fact, I've never seen a picture of this combination which actually does it justice. It looks much better in the flesh (or should that be: "in the metal/glass/plastic"?
).
- Location
- Melbourne, Australia
The equivalent field of view would be the same I suppose but the overall look would be different. But I should add that I am not a wide angle photographer, I seem unable to make a pleasing image at wide angles. HOWEVER, if I'm photographing with my LX5 or LX10, I only want to photograph at their widest angle.
- Location
- Melbourne, Australia
I agree, in principle - although I think I'd have liked an 85mm (eq.) - especially since I have the TCL-x100 converter, and therefore already have a 50mm (eq.) f/2.0.
Incidentally, I'm very pleased with the TCL-x100. It does a great job, and looks really good, when attached. In fact, I've never seen a picture of this combination which actually does it justice. It looks much better in the flesh (or should that be: "in the metal/glass/plastic"?
You know what, if they offered a 50mm f/1.4 X100, and then offered converters to go 28mm f/1.4 and 90mm f/1.4, that would just be perfect. You wouldn't have to buy lenses, just those converters and you're done.
I have been tempted by the current 50mm converter but it's the f/2 that holds me back. Otherwise, I would have jumped on this ages ago.
demiro
Serious Compacts For Life
It's hard to argue with that approach, but what I'd be happy with is a 40/1.8 or 2.0, with a TC to get me to 85 or 90. 1.4 would be cool, but I'm not sure I'd welcome the increased size. IS would be great; weather-resistance not important to me. I'd also like an interchangeable grip with a beefier option.
I've always thought that Olympus should make f/1.8 FFL options at 28, 50 and 90. Like the Sigmas, but with responsive controls and a lower sticker price, and good image quality instead of ridiculously good.
- Location
- Melbourne, Australia
Surely a faster lens is not a big deal if you're looking for beefier options?
gryphon1911
Hall of Famer
- Location
- Central Ohio, USA
- Real Name
- Andrew
Has anyone extensively tested the in camera crop/resizing options in the Fuji X100F?
I see some people on other sites state it is great and works awesome, so you get a 28, 35, and 50mm.
Others state that the upsizing is garbage.
My only experience with this is the old Olympus m43 2x digital teleconverter options. I tried those, hoping for something even usable and they were not worth even assigning to a button.
I've upsized many images for print using Photoshop and On1 Resize with great results.
I would love to have the performance of the X100F with a usable digital teleconverter. That would be as close to a perfect X100 type camera as I can think right now.
I see some people on other sites state it is great and works awesome, so you get a 28, 35, and 50mm.
Others state that the upsizing is garbage.
My only experience with this is the old Olympus m43 2x digital teleconverter options. I tried those, hoping for something even usable and they were not worth even assigning to a button.
I've upsized many images for print using Photoshop and On1 Resize with great results.
I would love to have the performance of the X100F with a usable digital teleconverter. That would be as close to a perfect X100 type camera as I can think right now.
bartjeej
Hall of Famer
- Real Name
- bart
With 24mp, you can crop the X100T/F's files down to 50mm equicalent and still be left with a 12mp file before upressing, that's the same as the original X100. And you'd be cropping from the centrap, sharpest part of the lens. That should make it possible to make excellent prints (upressing my original x100's files, I printed as wide as 80cm / 32 inches with fantastic results).
(Edit: I think I just answered my internal debate about whether I'd prefer the next X100 to have 35mm or 50mm efl... Although with a 50mm efl lens, you could crop down to 70mm and be left with 12mp... Also tempting!)
(Edit: I think I just answered my internal debate about whether I'd prefer the next X100 to have 35mm or 50mm efl... Although with a 50mm efl lens, you could crop down to 70mm and be left with 12mp... Also tempting!)
agentlossing
All-Pro
- Real Name
- Andrew Lossing
My dream camera along similar lines would just be the Panasonic LX100 minus the zoom, with a built in version of the 20mm f1.7 lens. You could put a slightly better EVF in there too if you want, but even without it, that would be a killer camera.
Where did all the compacts with a lens closer to 40mm go? It seems like 38mm was all over the place on cheaper fixed lens rangefinders, and the closer you get to 40mm the less wide angle "feel" you have, while still retaining more frame area than a fifty.
Where did all the compacts with a lens closer to 40mm go? It seems like 38mm was all over the place on cheaper fixed lens rangefinders, and the closer you get to 40mm the less wide angle "feel" you have, while still retaining more frame area than a fifty.
- Location
- Boston Burbs
- Real Name
- David
My perfect X100 would be more of a merger between the X100 and X70. In between size, OVF/EVF, tilt LCD, add a better grip, improved AF, and a 28mm lens with the 35mm and 50mm TC (saving the original RAW).
1/30, f/2.8, ISO 3200, 35mm TC
I use it on my X70, I'd say it's OK. But it only works in JPeg on the X70, hence saving the RAW on my wish list.
1/30, f/2.8, ISO 3200, 35mm TC
- Location
- Boston Burbs
- Real Name
- David
The 20 f/1.7 wouldn't be bad. But I'd prefer the current lens range with the manual zoom action like the X10/X20/X30, or even a collapsible action like the P12-32.
gryphon1911
Hall of Famer
- Location
- Central Ohio, USA
- Real Name
- Andrew
Definitely looks better than what I've experienced on the m43 cameras.
Might need to rent an X100F and test it myself. I've always loved a lot of what the X100 series had to offer, but went cold on AF speed. I hear the X100F has the same AF system as the X-E3/XPro-2 has now, which is great. I'm very happy with my X-E3 performance.
Goodness me....better get a few extra photo jobs to pay for my next round of GAS. LOL
- Location
- Boston Burbs
- Real Name
- David
I heard the AF was better, but I didn't think it was the same as the X-E3.
CraigC
Top Veteran
- Location
- Toronto, Canada
- Real Name
- Craig
You're right. My experience was that the Pro2 (with 23mm f2) is a fair bit quicker and more sure of itself to than the X100F.
- Location
- Milwaukee, WI USA
- Real Name
- Luke
We should be careful when we compare speed of focus between an X100F and various different bodies without specifying the lens..... The difference between lenses can be huge.
One would think that the speed of autofocus for any X100 series camera would be similar to the Fuji ILC bodies from their general release date...with some variances allowed for limitations of the actual lens/body combinations.
Anyone that has an X100f and and any Fuji ILC body could maybe make some comparison.
One would think that the speed of autofocus for any X100 series camera would be similar to the Fuji ILC bodies from their general release date...with some variances allowed for limitations of the actual lens/body combinations.
Anyone that has an X100f and and any Fuji ILC body could maybe make some comparison.
- Location
- Melbourne, Australia
Just want to say quickly - I had the opportunity to play around with the X100F at the camera shop last year and I found the AF was lightning fast with stationary subjects. It's the kind of speed I'd be happy with for sure. I didn't think to try it with movement subjects though.
