Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'fuji x-t1'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Alamy Forum guidelines and announcements
    • Forum guidelines
    • Announcements
  • Alamy discussion and community support
    • Introductions
    • Portfolio critique
    • Community support: ask the forum
    • Stock photography discussion and contributor experience
    • Alamy Quality Control and technical talk
    • Let's talk about pics
  • Suggestions and ideas
    • Alamy
    • The Forum

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Alamy URL


Joined Alamy

Found 2 results

  1. There's a lot I like about it. And quite a bit I'm disappointed with. I like the viewfinder - biggest and brightest I've ever seen. However (and I don't know whether this applies to all electronic viewfinders) I don't like the fact that it's very contrasty and adjusts the sensitivity as you move the camera around the scene, which makes it more difficult to assess how the scene as a whole will look. I like the size and weight. I don't have large hands so it's very easy to operate and feels just right. I can't remember the sizes of some of my earlier SLRs but I guess the X-T1 is not far from the Canon AE1 or T70. The way it's all laid out seems logical. I much prefer dials and buttons to menus. I like the fact that the metering seems to handle dynamic range much better than my 5D2. Out of my initial batch of 50 shots there were only a couple that needed an exposure adjustment in Lightroom, and only one that needed shadows lightening, whereas with the 5D2 it's not unusual for me to have to manipulate the exposure, shadows or highlights (and sometimes all three) in about two thirds of the shots. However, the time saved by this is offset by the fact that it interprets colour temperature differently from all other digital cameras I've owned. I always thought colour temperature values were absolute, but apparently not because whereas the Canon images usually look right at 4800 or above, the Fuji (on Auto WB) produces distinctly cold Kodachromey pics and the minimum needs to be upped to around 5200 (Daylight WB is way too high for most). It's slightly irritating that it's too easy to inadvertently change the aperture when using aperture priority, which for me seems to negate the point of using it in the first place. The aperture ring is exactly where the zoom ring would be on my Canon 24-105 so every time I go to zoom I end up changing the aperture, and as it shows in the viewfinder as blue rather than white I simply can't read what I've just set it to without pointing the camera at something with a contrasting background, thus losing the shot I've just carefully framed. The specifications are very misleading in one aspect. While wavering over whether to get it, one of the features that swayed me was multiple exposures as I've always wanted to play with in-camera multiple exposure but never had a camera that would do it. But it doesn't do it at all - it does double exposure and nothing more. So I'm a bit annoyed about the deceptive marketing. Finally, the thing which has stopped me being enthusiastic over my new purchase is that I can't see the much-vaunted super sharpness. On a carefully controlled tripod test the sharpness from the Fuji 18-55 was exactly the same as from the Canon 24-105. But in real-life use, hand-held, I've struggled to get any higher proportion of my shots QC-sharp than I did with the Canon, and when the Canon was sharp it was really sharp whereas the Fuji sharpness almost looks 'forced', rather like the effect I used to get when upsizing my 300D pics for Alamy with Genuine Fractals. OK, my first batch has just passed QC but I was very apprehensive about submitting them, which is not usually the case with the Canon. So I now have two systems neither of which I'm entirely happy with, but unlike some of you I can't afford to keep both. I will probably keep the Fuji, mainly because of the much better ISO capability, but instead of cheerfully waving goodbye to my Canon as I take a step into a bright new future, it will be with a tear in my eye as I mark time until the right camera for me comes along. Alan
  2. It's getting closer... I think what I need to persuade me to ditch my 5D2 are the following: 1. Better low-light performance. Ideally I would like to be able to shoot at 1600 ISO with the same noise levels as I get at 400 with the 5D2. 2. A good replacement for the 24-105 which takes about 95% of my shots. 3. A replacement for my lovely little Sigma fisheye. I think as far as (2) is concerned the 18-135 would just about do the job. The extra couple of mm at the wider end would be useful but I doubt if it would be a serious drawback, and on the plus side, the longer range would mean I would no longer need a telephoto zoom as well. So, my questions for all you happy X-T1 users are: how does it perform at 1600 ISO? And has anyone used the Samyang/Rokinon fisheye and is it good enough for Alamy? Alan
  • 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.