Jump to content

Duncan_Andison

Verified
  • Content Count

    1,049
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Duncan_Andison


  1.  

     

     

     

    That's a shame, looks like you might have to get that 120mm macro in the future then  ;)

    Oh, shoot! ;)I'll wait for reviews, my usual stance. The only times I get on waiting lists are for long-awaited cameras.

     

    Same for me. The only camera I'll be keeping an eye out for will be the X-T2. No so bothered with the X-Pro2 if it's going to be a range finder styled camera, I prefer the X-T styling with vertical grip. I didn't bother with either of the 16-55 or 50-140 until a few months after to see the reviews. They are now my main working lenses with the primes and 10-24 stepping in for specialist duties.

    Sounds like we are of like minds. I don't have a Fuji backup, although I still have my D800 (seldom used), Rx100 and RX100-3.

    If the XT-2 reviews are good, I'd like to have it so I could have both cameras with different lenses mounted and not have to change in the field.

    This camera and excellent lenses have injected excitement back into my photography.

     

    I am with you on that Betty. With a second x-T? I would sell my other zooms (except perhaps the 10-24) and go for the 16-55 and 50-140 - that would still be a manageable bag.

     

     

    I've been busy shooting with the 16-55 today and it has returned some serious "Prime Like" images, very impressive and weather/dust resistant as well!

     

    As it stands, I'm keeping my 23mm, 56mm & 60mm but the 56 could be in danger, it won't see as much use as before. I will probably keep them for low light use. That said, I can use the 50-140 at night and still get ISO 200-400 because of it's IS. The 55-200 will definitely go. 

     

    At the moment, I carry the 16-55 & 50-140 attached to it's own X-T1 and the 10-24 ready to swap with one of them as and when needed. Lens changes kept to a minimum and quality set to max!


  2.  

    That's a shame, looks like you might have to get that 120mm macro in the future then  ;)

    Oh, shoot! ;)I'll wait for reviews, my usual stance. The only times I get on waiting lists are for long-awaited cameras.

     

     

    Same for me. The only camera I'll be keeping an eye out for will be the X-T2. No so bothered with the X-Pro2 if it's going to be a range finder styled camera, I prefer the X-T styling with vertical grip. I didn't bother with either of the 16-55 or 50-140 until a few months after to see the reviews. They are now my main working lenses with the primes and 10-24 stepping in for specialist duties. 


  3.  

     

    Get ready for this. Yesterday I bought some bedding flowers for my beds in front. Before planting them, I took some shots with the 50-140. I set the ugly pots on top of my brick courtyard fence, but framed the pots out. Behind them was my front yard, cars on the street, and a house.

    I shot them at 140, 2.8. Hand held. All the stuff in the background was rendered in complete OOF soft color, as if it were a dedicated macro. Flowers sharp. My nikon 105 couldn't have done it better. Actually, I think I like these flowers better with the Fuji, because even at 2.8, there is more dof on the flowers while still keeping the bokeh. The nikon has a shallower dof, and if I stop down, I lose some bokeh.

    Only difference is, of course, I can't get close to small things like a true macro, but with things like flowers, close enough.

    I keep getting freshly impressed with this lens. The way it handled the flowers is big for me.

    If the Fujinon macro coming down the pike renders like this, but with closer focusing, it will be some special lens.

    I'll be curious to see what I can do with butterflies with the 50-140. Frankly, if I can get close enough to pretty much fill the frame with flower and butterfly. I won't need to get the macro. Butterflies and flowers make up 98% of my macro shooting.

     

    Betty, take a look at the MCEX 16 Macro tube from Fuji

     

    Normally you can only get to within 806mm from the front element and the subject but with the macro Tube You can get to 318mm @140 and 80mm @50.

    Just remember to get full focal range (distance wise) you have to remove the macro tube.

    Duncan, that's exactly what I wanted to know. I did a search trying to find out the information you just provided, but all I got were reviews of the lens, instead of anything about modifiers that can be used specifically with that lens. Thank you!

    I assume dof is reduced using it, right?

     

     

    Yeah, f/2.8 is very thin.I was using 3.2 handheld down to 1/8th sec and was getting nice sharp images. 1/20th is a good starting point though if in low light.

     

    By the way, the 16-55 might not be as impressive as the 50-140 but it is still really good! These two lenses will be occupying an X-T1 each for some time!


  4. Get ready for this. Yesterday I bought some bedding flowers for my beds in front. Before planting them, I took some shots with the 50-140. I set the ugly pots on top of my brick courtyard fence, but framed the pots out. Behind them was my front yard, cars on the street, and a house.

     

    I shot them at 140, 2.8. Hand held. All the stuff in the background was rendered in complete OOF soft color, as if it were a dedicated macro. Flowers sharp. My nikon 105 couldn't have done it better. Actually, I think I like these flowers better with the Fuji, because even at 2.8, there is more dof on the flowers while still keeping the bokeh. The nikon has a shallower dof, and if I stop down, I lose some bokeh.

    Only difference is, of course, I can't get close to small things like a true macro, but with things like flowers, close enough.

    I keep getting freshly impressed with this lens. The way it handled the flowers is big for me.

    If the Fujinon macro coming down the pike renders like this, but with closer focusing, it will be some special lens.

    I'll be curious to see what I can do with butterflies with the 50-140. Frankly, if I can get close enough to pretty much fill the frame with flower and butterfly. I won't need to get the macro. Butterflies and flowers make up 98% of my macro shooting.

     

    Betty, take a look at the MCEX 16 Macro tube from Fuji

     

    Normally you can only get to within 806mm from the front element and the subject but with the macro Tube You can get to 318mm @140 and 80mm @50.

    Just remember to get full focal range (distance wise) you have to remove the macro tube.


  5. I sold my 18-135, wasn't happy with the IQ. That said, my experience with a duff 16-55 lens recently makes me feel I should have returned it and asked for a replacement before selling it. Especially when you see others that were happy with it!

     

    Another alternative is the 18-55 & 55-200 which are both great lenses. But, go for the 18-135 and test the hell out of it within the 1st week and return it for replacement if you are not happy!

    • Upvote 1

  6. I am confused! :wacko:    Not unusual for me though.

     

    Duncan is talking about the 16-55 f2.8 above.

    Posts photo from 23mm @ f5.6.

    Is this from 23mm lens or from 16-55 set at 23mm?

     

    Betty says this 23mm photo is tack sharp from front to back.

    When I view it on my 27" iMac it only looks sharp on the plane of the low hedge near front bottom and tree branches with blossom middle left. Everything else looks soft or OOF. :blink:

     

    What is going on?

     

    Allan

     

    Haha Allan..... you hit it spot on. It was the 16-55 f/2.8 at 23mm.

     

    The lens was a duff un. I got a replacement today that is sharp. 

     

    I posted it over on the Fuji Forum but a few people are viewing it on Retina screens which would make a soft image look razor sharp. Retina screens are a bit of a liability if you don't have a standard rez screen to QC your work.

     

    Amazon were fantastic by the way. In less than 24hrs, old one picked up and new one arrived. Nice and sharp. The other one seemed all over the place


  7.  

     

    When you click on my images here in the forum, the first eleven images were shot with the 50-140. Sharp edge to edge. There are others scattered through.  The rest of the images on the first few pages of the storefronts are shot with the 18-135. Very happy with both lenses.  I particularly loved the way the 50-140 handled the little girl and dad sitting on the park bench. Great separation and clarity.  Ya gotta get this lens!!!

     

    When doing the storefronts, the 18-135 allows me a very nice zoom range.  I shoot these from my car window, and I am confined to the paths through the parking lots, necessitating a wide angle view since I am usually no more than 20 feet from the store.  The 50 widest on the other lens doesn't allow this.  edited to add more information.

     Very nice. I love my 50-140, the IQ is breathtaking.

     

    So much so, I decided to pickup a 16-55 f/2.8 in the hope it would be similar in terms of IQ. Sadly the first copy I've received has been a little disappointing. After a couple of days testing it's going back to Amazon for a replacement. I've got to admit, Amazon have been nothing but amazing to be honest. I advised them this morning I would be returning it and would like a replacement. They are picking up the duff copy and delivering a new one tomorrow!!! That's service.

     

    I'm hoping the replacement is a lot better, closer to the IQ of the 50-140. If not it will go back for a refund. I don't mind paying a premium for top quality glass but not for something that seems average / poor.  I don't know, I may be just expecting to much. Here's an example of a 23mm @ f/5.6 focused on the tarmac. It would have been in the region of 1/300sec.

    Your 23 is very sharp front to back of the image at 5.6, I can see that. The only Fujinon prime I have is the 56. I'm a sucker for zooms. Hope your replacement lens is a good copy. Makes you wonder if sellers recycle returns until someone finally accepts them, not knowing any better.

     

     

    You do wonder. The ting is, I've read so many good reviews of this lens it was a massive anticlimax when I seen the results.... very poor when compared to the 50-140. I hope the new one proves this on is dud, I can't believe the one I have is right (hope not anyway).


  8. When you click on my images here in the forum, the first eleven images were shot with the 50-140. Sharp edge to edge. There are others scattered through.  The rest of the images on the first few pages of the storefronts are shot with the 18-135. Very happy with both lenses.  I particularly loved the way the 50-140 handled the little girl and dad sitting on the park bench. Great separation and clarity.  Ya gotta get this lens!!!

     

    When doing the storefronts, the 18-135 allows me a very nice zoom range.  I shoot these from my car window, and I am confined to the paths through the parking lots, necessitating a wide angle view since I am usually no more than 20 feet from the store.  The 50 widest on the other lens doesn't allow this.  edited to add more information.

     

    Very nice. I love my 50-140, the IQ is breathtaking.

     

    So much so, I decided to pickup a 16-55 f/2.8 in the hope it would be similar in terms of IQ. Sadly the first copy I've received has been a little disappointing. After a couple of days testing it's going back to Amazon for a replacement. I've got to admit, Amazon have been nothing but amazing to be honest. I advised them this morning I would be returning it and would like a replacement. They are picking up the duff copy and delivering a new one tomorrow!!! That's service.

     

    I'm hoping the replacement is a lot better, closer to the IQ of the 50-140. If not it will go back for a refund. I don't mind paying a premium for top quality glass but not for something that seems average / poor.  I don't know, I may be just expecting to much. Here's an example of a 23mm @ f/5.6 focused on the tarmac. It would have been in the region of 1/300sec. 


  9.  

    I would like to hear the results too please.

     

    Well Fuji are still playing silly b-----s.

    They promised a new 55-200.

    I said on condition of full refund for abortive repair for what was obviously a faulty lens from the start.

    They returned the original lens with note saying it hard been repaired but no refund.

    Tested lens today and find it is sharp corner to corner at all focal lengths so will be keeping it.

     

    Still mad at Fuji's inactions, lack of communications, and saying they will do something then go ahead and do something different.

     

    They seem to have a policy of no refunds and in one phone message they stated "We can not - Will not refund purchase price." Like to see them try that throughout the courts.

    Seems that they will not admit to faulty lens and refund repair costs as well.

     

    Bad customer relations from Fuji. And my local supplier agrees saying they are having similar problems with Fuji too.

     

    All this is via their Bedford UK centre.

     

    Allan

     

    HOORAH! Major update.

     

    Today I received a full refund of £205.46 into my bank account from Fuji that I paid for the repair to the disputed 55-200mm lens.

     

    I did mention earlier that I received that lens back from repair. At least I assumed it was the same lens as it had the same serial number as the one I sent back. Now it may appear that it could have been a new lens but with the same serial number as the original. This from Southpoles post above. However if it is the same lens as I returned fuji did a great job on it the second attempt at repairing it as it is now the best zoom lens for IQ that I own. The others being the 10-24 and the 18-135.

     

    Fuji have now redeemed themselves somewhat in my eyes but it could have been handled with better communications from their end.

     

    Allan

     

     

    Result and half with that Allan...... you could put it towards a 50-140mm  :D


  10. Having just had my first batch of shots pass QC I set about separating the key words between essential/ less essential  - but soon discovered that I'm unable for some reason to cut and paste relevant words from the collection of keywords uploaded with each image. Without the C&P facility separating and correctly allocating the key words will be a laborious chore, so can anyone out there tell me if I'm omitting to do so something really obvious? As far as I can see the only means of cutting and pasting is via the Safari Edit menu, which, as I say won't allow me to actually paste any of the words that I select.

     

    If someone can help I'd be really obliged!   

     

    Keyword on a computer using software that allows you to place keywords in a specific order (not just alphabetically). Such as Photo Machanic 5.

     

    Upload to Alamy and when passed, copy the first keywords totalling 50 characters to first box and the rest to the next box.... done, next image please.

     

    There are a few agencies that use keyword ranking so I always work this way to avoid spending a lifetime keywording images.

     

    That said, keywording for Alamy is the last thing I do as they are the lowest payers (net per month)....I concentrate on other agencies and come back here when I have time. 

    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 1

  11. Duncan you make this lens sound very interesting but I am still sceptical of Fuji zooms from my experiences to date. :(

     

    I have the 10-24 which, although now good since sending it back for adjustment for excesive OOF at edges, is still not up to expectation from others praise but usable with caution. :unsure:

     

    Also the 18-135 again was returned for adjustment and has to be treated with caution. :wacko:

     

    The sharpest zoom is now my 55-200, but it should be after the problems Fuji caused with adjusting it for excessive OOF again. In fact I rather like this lens for closeups now. :)

     

    Still not sure which lens I would dump in favour of the 50-140. :huh:

     

    Of course I could go with the 16-55 and 50-140 then wait for a longer lens to appear. B)

     

    Decisions, decisions! :mellow:

     

    Allan

     

    If I was in the same boat as you I'd also be cautious..... You had a raw deal with the service recently etc so you have a good right to be careful.

     

    If it helps, I posted some examples on the Fuji forum here. I may keep a hold of the 55-200 for a little while longer until I've been on a few walking / hiking trips etc but it is likely to go... it really isn't close to the same IQ and IS flexibility.

     

    That link has examples down to 1/3sec through to 1/8 sec as well as an outside shot with 100% crop etc.

     

    Jessops have a good returns policy and is worth looking at. Receive lens, test it.... likey keepy, not likey send back  :D


  12. After a little more testing I was able to get a steady sharp shot at 1/3 sec @140mm f/2.8. That took a bit of effort but with a steady hand at 1/4sec I was able to routinely get sharp shots. By the time you hit 1/8th it became quite easy to achieve.

     

    This may seem a extreme lengths but what it means is in a dimly lit room you can take a 50-140mm shot with an ISO between 250 and 400. This makes a massive difference in processing. Of course, subject matter has to be stationary unless you want to show action blur of people moving amongst the scene, which could be good as well. This could turn out some very interesting night scene shots!


  13. Wow, Duncan! If your testimony doesn't sell this lens, I don't know what would.

    So glad the lens and you are a match made in heaven. Obviously you have a steady hand. But then, my test was pretty much firing from the hip to see What sharpness without using anything but normal handling gave me. I expect I can get slower speed if I use better technique.

    I haven't picked up the camera in a week. All of a sudden it seems health issues are popping up with me, hubby, and extended family members. I'm hosting family from Wichita now so they can be near a hospital. My son-in-law's mother has brain tumors and was transported to my city. I get an arteriogram in less than two weeks. Oh, joy.

    May be a while before I can get back to shooting.

     

    A reminder that there are more important things in life.... our health and those close to us is far more important than a few shots!! I hope good news is just round the corner!

    • Upvote 1

  14. Well Betty, you inspired me to take a look at this lens.

     

    I was considering the 16-55 as well but I've lived without a standard zoom for about a year. Also, when reviewing images I favour wide (i.e. my 10-24), tend to stick around 10-19mm and wide for me is 23mm. I normally have a T1 with the 10-24 and the other with the 55-200 on it. With the 55-200 I mainly use 60-150mm. So, I opted for 50-140.... The plan was not just to improve IQ, I really needed a good weather proof solution to isolate interesting shots when out in the mountains in dodgy weather (this is still light compared to a 100-400 on a 5dmkii :-) )

     

    The test shots in normal/good light were simply breathtakingly sharp....I think I nearly wet myself. It was prime quality!?! So, as I'm sat in a dark room processing shots, decided to take a couple of shots at 1/10th sec at 50mm. Still sharp?!? Okay I thought, I'll break ya this time sunny jim, 140mm at 1/10th.......  :blink: Still sharp even at 6400!?! In CP1 you can turn the Details slider right down (under noise reduction) and add sufficient NR and still retain excellent sharpness to be still very useable when downsizing. I'm going to see how low I can go before this starts to blur..... it's crazy! Noise becomes a problem before you have a problem keeping it steady/sharp. 

     

    I'm going to have a good bit play with this lens tomorrow when I have time.... thanks again!

     

    Edit.....Forgot to say, all shots were at f/2.8 as well!


  15. One thing I find amazing is the dynamic range. Crikey it's way better than my 5D3. No shadow noise banding or colour noise. I heard that Sony make the sensor for the X series but I can't confirm this. It certainly seems so with this excellent performance. Not really liking the kit lens for CA at all right enough. Plus there's no profile for LR for it. I end up needing to use the X100S profile, and still manually need to remove the CA. I heard the kit lens was bad for this. 

     

    CA is such a pet hate of mine. 

     

    Sony do make the sensors for Fuji and then Fuji create the CFA layer (X Trans)

     

    I don't have the 18-55 lens so can't comment on the CA for that but there is little to no CA with their primes, even the 10-24.

     

    Once you get used to the C1 P interface it's actually not that complicated. Go to their website for video tutorials on how to migrate from LR to C1.

     

    As others have said, the CA handling of C1 might not as good as LR but I don't often have CA with the lenses I use so it hasn't been a big issue for me. 


  16. I would like to hear the results too please.

     

    Well Fuji are still playing silly b-----s.

    They promised a new 55-200.

    I said on condition of full refund for abortive repair for what was obviously a faulty lens from the start.

    They returned the original lens with note saying it hard been repaired but no refund.

    Tested lens today and find it is sharp corner to corner at all focal lengths so will be keeping it.

     

    Still mad at Fuji's inactions, lack of communications, and saying they will do something then go ahead and do something different.

     

    They seem to have a policy of no refunds and in one phone message they stated "We can not - Will not refund purchase price." Like to see them try that throughout the courts.

    Seems that they will not admit to faulty lens and refund repair costs as well.

     

    Bad customer relations from Fuji. And my local supplier agrees saying they are having similar problems with Fuji too.

     

    All this is via their Bedford UK centre.

     

    Allan

     

    No good at all..... I would be tempted to send an email to their head office along with copies of the UK office emails. I don't think they would be impressed and it is not the image they are looking to build. I think they should hear of these stories so they have a chance to sort them out!

     

    Fortunately, my only experience was the light leak and they sent out a courier box for me to send it to them, repaired and returned it within 8 days.


  17. All Fuji zooms have upgraded firmware as do the X-T1 and X-100T. I think the X100T is the only one out of the X100's to receive the latest one according to Fuji Rumours website.

     

    I haven't tested them after the update but reports are suggesting they may have tinkered with AF speed as well?!? That would be a nice bonus. At least now you can select Mechanical+Electronic shutter and still use the flash until the speed crosses over the point you need to use the Electronic shutter now.

     

    The IS on the lenses is supposed to be greatly improved!

     

    FR are also reporting a new Macro lens from Samyang - 100mm / f/2.8. It will feel like a 150mm on your fuji as it's been designed for a FF camera originally. It will be manual, which is fine for macro studio work. Could be worth picking up!

    • Upvote 1

  18. Now..... if they had provided notice of "Possible" changes and asked for opinion to begin with, they would have been pro active, caring and valuing their contributors opinion. Maybe going forward that could be a business model to follow? It would give them room to back out gracefully from "ify" changes and look good at the same time?!?

     

    Good to see the changes in the end though!!

    • Upvote 7
    • Downvote 1

  19. I recently sold my EF-X20 flashgun, primarily due to it's lack of standby mode and relatively slow wake-up time. I am now considering the Nissin i40 as a replacement to use with my X-E1 and, possibly, my X100. If anyone has experience of using the i40 with the Fuji X-Series, I'd be extremely grateful for their opinions.

     

    Best regards, John.

     

    If you need TTL then it would be an interesting option yo go for! I have the EF-X20 for the times I need that.

     

    If you don't, then the Yongnuo 560iii would be a better one..... hell, you could buy three of them for the price of the i40 or two plus the radio transmitter below. 

     

    The 560iii has a built in radio receiver and works with the Yongnuo YN-560-TX transmitter that allows you to control up to 6 groups of these flashes from the camera.

     

    They're well built and work really well..... but, manual only so if you need TTL....  :D


  20.  

     

     

     

    I'm very much alive and have been selling prints at good prices through a number of galleries and dealers for over 40 years. Print sales account for about 90% of my (very comfortable) income with other photo related incidentals making up the rest. I also receive research grants to make new work etc. Certainly if you are dead, you can't make any more prints and there are collectors who insist on a 'vintage' print, made by the photographer and these can command silly prices.  I am kept busy in my darkroom by collectors making selenium toned silver gelatin B&W prints. (Serious collectors don't want an inkjet print, even if you give it a false, fancy made up name like 'giclee'). My large, type 'C' colour prints are made for me by the lab that has been printing my colour work for over 30 years under my supervision. I set aside a few days a month and have a darkroom session to satisfy orders or re-print others. My archive of negatives certainly keeps me in the manner to which I am accustomed and also allows me to keep on making new work. That's the work and projects I want to do, not what a client or stock library might dictate. So, job satisfaction and a good income. It can be done. I suspect that one of my large colour prints probably sells for more than many make from Alamy here in a year. After an exhibition a few years ago I made enough to buy a cottage in Snowdonia outright. I use it as a base for when I choose to work further north. I'm lucky of course because I have an extensive archive of past work that people still want and I'm making new work all the time. 

    We're not all in your fortunate situation.  I wonder how useful it is to hear over and over again how well someone is doing, how expensive their prints are and how little they need Alamy. I for one do.

     

     

    :blink: Personally.... I thought he was just giving an alternative point of view to the one that you have to be dead to make money from selling prints!

     

    Hearing someones point of view, even if it is different to your own, doesn't make it any less valid. While it may not be useful to you it might be to others! Anyway, hearing about success stories should inspire us to get out there and try new things and stretch us further. I for one am more than happy to hear of other peoples experiences, whether they are good or bad.... it's all useful information!

     

     

    I'm going to get out there and open a brothel. :)

     

    Allan

     

     

    Haha.... the Missus may object if I took my career in that direction  :P

    • Upvote 1

  21.  

     

    I'm very much alive and have been selling prints at good prices through a number of galleries and dealers for over 40 years. Print sales account for about 90% of my (very comfortable) income with other photo related incidentals making up the rest. I also receive research grants to make new work etc. Certainly if you are dead, you can't make any more prints and there are collectors who insist on a 'vintage' print, made by the photographer and these can command silly prices.  I am kept busy in my darkroom by collectors making selenium toned silver gelatin B&W prints. (Serious collectors don't want an inkjet print, even if you give it a false, fancy made up name like 'giclee'). My large, type 'C' colour prints are made for me by the lab that has been printing my colour work for over 30 years under my supervision. I set aside a few days a month and have a darkroom session to satisfy orders or re-print others. My archive of negatives certainly keeps me in the manner to which I am accustomed and also allows me to keep on making new work. That's the work and projects I want to do, not what a client or stock library might dictate. So, job satisfaction and a good income. It can be done. I suspect that one of my large colour prints probably sells for more than many make from Alamy here in a year. After an exhibition a few years ago I made enough to buy a cottage in Snowdonia outright. I use it as a base for when I choose to work further north. I'm lucky of course because I have an extensive archive of past work that people still want and I'm making new work all the time. 

    We're not all in your fortunate situation.  I wonder how useful it is to hear over and over again how well someone is doing, how expensive their prints are and how little they need Alamy. I for one do.

     

     

    :blink: Personally.... I thought he was just giving an alternative point of view to the one that you have to be dead to make money from selling prints!

     

    Hearing someones point of view, even if it is different to your own, doesn't make it any less valid. While it may not be useful to you it might be to others! Anyway, hearing about success stories should inspire us to get out there and try new things and stretch us further. I for one am more than happy to hear of other peoples experiences, whether they are good or bad.... it's all useful information!

    • Upvote 3
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.