Changing to mirrorless camera

[Allan Bell]

 

This morning this godawful noise started on my street, sounding like a cement mixer. So I opened the live cam shot of Mulberry, and there was a cement mixer parked across the street. 

 

http://www.earthcam.com/usa/newyork/littleitaly/?cam=littleitaly

 

(Oh gosh, I'm off topic again!) Ah . . . and when I looked at the EarthCam I saw someone with a mirrorless camera. 

 

 

Just checked the earth cam and you can relax the cement mixer has gone.

 

Allan

[Allan Bell]

 wish Fuji would do a full frame that could work with their better lenses.

 

L

 

Linda surely Fuji would need to manufacture new lenses for a full frame camera. The existing X lenses were made for the APS-C sensor so would not have a large enough image circle for full frame.

 

Allan

[Allan Bell]

I had a revelation yesterday. I did some food shots with the X-T1, hand held. 18-135 lens. They were sharp and in focus. 

 

Betty were those shots jpeg or processed RAWs?

 

 

Allan

[Southpole]

prehaps fuji could get sensor even closer to lens to make full frame on existing lens

[Betty LaRue]

 

I had a revelation yesterday. I did some food shots with the X-T1, hand held. 18-135 lens. They were sharp and in focus. 

 

Betty were those shots jpeg or processed RAWs?

 

 

Allan

 

Processed Raw images, Allan.  The only difference was I shot the Fuji with available light, and the cam chose 3200 ISO.  Some of the shots are a bit noisy, but the sharpness is there.  

With the Nikon on a tripod, (which I should have done with the Fuji)  I could shoot in manual and with a slow shutter speed if I wanted, or do like I did, and bounce my Nikon SB800 light off the ceiling.

I have a flash for the Fuji, I've just never used it.  Note to self...USE IT!!!

 

Ed, since I am so used to the RX100 style of shooting, I forget about the pop up viewfinder on the 111 and have seldom used it.  Note to self....USE IT!!!  

[Ed Rooney]

 

Ed, since I am so used to the RX100 style of shooting, I forget about the pop up viewfinder on the 111 and have seldom used it.  Note to self....USE IT!!!  

 

 

Yes, that's what I assumed you might say when I asked the question, Betty. For the kinds of subjects and images we capture with a true pocket camera we can get used to 'screen shooting.' It doesn't work for everything--and it's a different technique--but one I became comfortable with when using my NEX-3 with the pancake 16mm. John in Vancouver has done some really good work with his NEX-3. 

 

I've been trying to get my food-writer friend to buy a RX100 and recommended either the I or the II. She's not a photographer but she is doing okay with her iPhone. She's not going to be putting images on Stockimo: she needs better, more conventional, printable quality to go with her texts. She just got back from an amazing trip to Europe, with river cruises, and now has only the snaps she made with her little Mickey Mouse Canon. 

 

I'm going over to the latest QC-fails post to comment on using the RX10 and some other things.

[Martin P Wilson]

I am really missing my Fuji X-T1 and the 18-135mm lens even though I have my X-E1 and kit 18-55mm (glad I kept them as backup) with 55-200mm it as an entirely usable backup. Now I know I made the right decision as I have not thought about using my Canon in its place.

 

I dropped them while working at an author's (Ali Smith) event during the Nottingham Festival fo Words, I tripped on the stairs while changing position in a darkened auditorium. The insurance company have authorised repairs (£435/ $700) so hopefully they should be be back in a few days with a new 12 month warranty. I do think Fuji will have to think about setting up a professional phtographer scheme now so many people are switching; 3 weeks to get a camera repaired is really too long for a working phoptographer. Fortunately last week and to some extent this was always going to be a quieter period as I have so much post processing and promotion to do.

[Southpole]

I have not realy looked at the 18mm-135mm lens I just assume focal length was to big to be any good Seems my assumption was wrong

[Martin P Wilson]

I have not realy looked at the 18mm-135mm lens I just assume focal length was to big to be any good Seems my assumption was wrong

 

The convenience is the key so I get more shots where I might not bother to change lenses - around 55-100mm. It provides enough range for about 95% of what i shoot. I would sacrifice a bit at the long end for a bit more width say 16-120 would be great. I shoot a lot news type stuff - the AF is OK but I do  miss the odd shot but not enough to really concern me.

 

That said I am not a pixel peeper. I work on the basis that most top end lenses from mainstream makers are plenty good enough if used properly. I was concerned about lateral chromatic aberration with the 18-135mm but as long as I watch for it (and automatically apply correction if it is likely to occur) it seems to be fine. I just judge each image at 100% and if I am happy I submit. As I said elsewhere;  if I have to ask for a second opinion then I don't upload it because I know my heart is trying to overrule my head.

[Allan Bell]

prehaps fuji could get sensor even closer to lens to make full frame on existing lens

 

A lens has a fixed point of focus distance at the back end so moving the sensor closer would cause OOF images.

 

Allan

 

Edit

 

Thinking about it you nearly caught me out. I think you meant to say moving the sensor FURTHER away so more of the image circle would come into play. This would make for a much deeper camera body, if it were possible. Which I doubt.

 

 

Allan

[Allan Bell]

I am really missing my Fuji X-T1 and the 18-135mm lens even though I have my X-E1 and kit 18-55mm (glad I kept them as backup) with 55-200mm it as an entirely usable backup. Now I know I made the right decision as I have not thought about using my Canon in its place.

 

I dropped them while working at an author's (Ali Smith) event during the Nottingham Festival fo Words, I tripped on the stairs while changing position in a darkened auditorium. The insurance company have authorised repairs (£435/ $700) so hopefully they should be be back in a few days with a new 12 month warranty. I do think Fuji will have to think about setting up a professional phtographer scheme now so many people are switching; 3 weeks to get a camera repaired is really too long for a working phoptographer. Fortunately last week and to some extent this was always going to be a quieter period as I have so much post processing and promotion to do.

 

Sorry to here your problem. I have just returned my 10 - 24mm under warranty as it was showing signs of serious OOF on the righthand side of the image by as much as 20% of the width. Told it will take 15 - 21 days before I get it back.

 

Agree with the PPS just like Canons scheme, of which I was a member when I was shooting with their equipment.

 

Allan

[Martin P Wilson]

 

I am really missing my Fuji X-T1 and the 18-135mm lens even though I have my X-E1 and kit 18-55mm (glad I kept them as backup) with 55-200mm it as an entirely usable backup. Now I know I made the right decision as I have not thought about using my Canon in its place.

 

I dropped them while working at an author's (Ali Smith) event during the Nottingham Festival fo Words, I tripped on the stairs while changing position in a darkened auditorium. The insurance company have authorised repairs (£435/ $700) so hopefully they should be be back in a few days with a new 12 month warranty. I do think Fuji will have to think about setting up a professional phtographer scheme now so many people are switching; 3 weeks to get a camera repaired is really too long for a working phoptographer. Fortunately last week and to some extent this was always going to be a quieter period as I have so much post processing and promotion to do.

 

Sorry to here your problem. I have just returned my 10 - 24mm under warranty as it was showing signs of serious OOF on the righthand side of the image by as much as 20% of the width. Told it will take 15 - 21 days before I get it back.

 

Agree with the PPS just like Canons scheme, of which I was a member when I was shooting with their equipment.

 

Allan

 

 

Fujis don't bounce!

 

Its insured and these things happen, especially if you treat it as a working tool rather than a piece of jewelry (most bags are overpadded, shows my view ). It was my reaction that interested me - I did not go for my Canons but used the original X-E1 instead. Probably time to sell the heavy stuff - it should raise enough to buy the new fast lenses and next year's superzoom. Maybe even the X-T2 eventually if I am shrewd.

 

There was no visible damage which was testament to the basic ruggedness, tI reckon he X-T1 is going to survive minor Knocks as well as any pro dslr. However after the drop the combination would not find focus, zoom was exceeding stiff. Camera still seemed to work with my other lenses but I got it checked as I did not want to find there was a problem further down the line - there was obviously some work needed probably on checking and ensuring proper registration of mount sensor etc.

[Linda]

 

 

I had a revelation yesterday. I did some food shots with the X-T1, hand held. 18-135 lens. They were sharp and in focus. 

 

Betty were those shots jpeg or processed RAWs?

 

 

Allan

 

Processed Raw images, Allan.  The only difference was I shot the Fuji with available light, and the cam chose 3200 ISO.  Some of the shots are a bit noisy, but the sharpness is there.  

With the Nikon on a tripod, (which I should have done with the Fuji)  I could shoot in manual and with a slow shutter speed if I wanted, or do like I did, and bounce my Nikon SB800 light off the ceiling.

I have a flash for the Fuji, I've just never used it.  Note to self...USE IT!!!

 

Ed, since I am so used to the RX100 style of shooting, I forget about the pop up viewfinder on the 111 and have seldom used it.  Note to self....USE IT!!!  

 

Betty,Why don't you use your Nikon flash on the Fuji? I use my generic Yongnuo on at least 15 previous camera models without issue. A friend uses his Nikon flash with his Sony A6000 as well.

 

L

[Southpole]

I use my Nikon Flashes on my Fuji with no problems at all

[Martin P Wilson]

I have used my Canon 270EX flash on my Fuji OK, didn't seem to want to work with my 550EX or old 540EZ. I had to set the camera up old school based on guide number but no ptroblem as I go back to pre-sensor fixed output flash (even bulbs, just).

[AlbertSnapper]

I am really missing my Fuji X-T1 and the 18-135mm lens even though I have my X-E1 and kit 18-55mm (glad I kept them as backup) with 55-200mm it as an entirely usable backup. Now I know I made the right decision as I have not thought about using my Canon in its place.

 

I dropped them while working at an author's (Ali Smith) event during the Nottingham Festival fo Words, I tripped on the stairs while changing position in a darkened auditorium. The insurance company have authorised repairs (£435/ $700) so hopefully they should be be back in a few days with a new 12 month warranty. I do think Fuji will have to think about setting up a professional phtographer scheme now so many people are switching; 3 weeks to get a camera repaired is really too long for a working phoptographer. Fortunately last week and to some extent this was always going to be a quieter period as I have so much post processing and promotion to do.

 

this month i sent my fuji back for repair to fuji, very impressed with the turnaround. sent on a monday, back by the thursday. very pleased with that. front and top cover/buttons replaced and given a good clean (girlfrined dropped her pint of beer on it  ).

 

sorry no capitals, using someone's laptop and can't the capital letters to work !

[Southpole]

Oh Dear that doesnt sound a cheap repair

[christian58]

Guys!  mirrorless is half-format, isn't it?  who wants to go back to that?

[Martin P Wilson]

Guys!  mirrorless is half-format, isn't it?  who wants to go back to that?

 

Only if you go Micro 4/3

 

edited to add:

 

And many people said the same about 35mm (what we pointlessly call full frame), even when I started photography at the end of the 60s "real" photographers used rollfilm or even cut sheets in 5x4 or 10x8 cameras. 35mm was seen as toy cameras by many at that time; technology changes.

[davidl]

I decided on Fuji mainly because of the quality of lenses. Because I am now more or less retired my needs for a large outfit has gone. It's so nice to be able to carry a small bag, instead of the big one I used to.
You loose a bit of response, although I've not tried the X-T1. The flash system isn't like my Nikon one was, but it no longer needs to be and I find the EF-42 flash adequate. I understand a new flash system may be on the way.
With current deals there are some bargains out there, although other manufacturers are also having to cut prices.
Loking forward to seeing what the X-Pro2 will be, but not in price terms

[Bryan]

 

 

What's the secret then John?

 

I use the selective spot focusing a lot more than I used to, especially with the 55-210 lens. Also, I keep a careful eye on which focus points the camera is selecting when in multi-point AF mode. When I first started using the NEX cameras, I was too trusting of the technology. My manual-focusing skills never seemed to come back from the distant past, but I do use MF sometimes as well.

 

Maybe it's just me but I find old lenses designed for manual focus to be much easier to focus than modern glass switched to manual focus. I have tried manually focusing my AF Sigma 19mm, and I find that next to impossible. In contrast I have no difficulty with say the old Pentax 28mm. I find that the technology gets in the way, making assumptions that I don't want it to make about what I want to do next...

 

But there's good and bad technology, and a 10x EVF is one wonderful bit of kit, closely followed, but not matched, by contrast detection.

[Betty LaRue]

 

 

 

I had a revelation yesterday. I did some food shots with the X-T1, hand held. 18-135 lens. They were sharp and in focus.

 

 

Betty were those shots jpeg or processed RAWs?

 

 

Allan

Processed Raw images, Allan.  The only difference was I shot the Fuji with available light, and the cam chose 3200 ISO.  Some of the shots are a bit noisy, but the sharpness is there.  

With the Nikon on a tripod, (which I should have done with the Fuji)  I could shoot in manual and with a slow shutter speed if I wanted, or do like I did, and bounce my Nikon SB800 light off the ceiling.

I have a flash for the Fuji, I've just never used it.  Note to self...USE IT!!!

 

Ed, since I am so used to the RX100 style of shooting, I forget about the pop up viewfinder on the 111 and have seldom used it.  Note to self....USE IT!!!  

Betty,Why don't you use your Nikon flash on the Fuji? I use my generic Yongnuo on at least 15 previous camera models without issue. A friend uses his Nikon flash with his Sony A6000 as well.

 

L

I have a system I bought for doing this before my camera was even delivered. I've not used it once. I know for a non-technical person like me, it will take some time figuring it out.

[Duncan_Andison]

 

 

I am really missing my Fuji X-T1 and the 18-135mm lens even though I have my X-E1 and kit 18-55mm (glad I kept them as backup) with 55-200mm it as an entirely usable backup. Now I know I made the right decision as I have not thought about using my Canon in its place.

 

I dropped them while working at an author's (Ali Smith) event during the Nottingham Festival fo Words, I tripped on the stairs while changing position in a darkened auditorium. The insurance company have authorised repairs (£435/ $700) so hopefully they should be be back in a few days with a new 12 month warranty. I do think Fuji will have to think about setting up a professional phtographer scheme now so many people are switching; 3 weeks to get a camera repaired is really too long for a working phoptographer. Fortunately last week and to some extent this was always going to be a quieter period as I have so much post processing and promotion to do.

 

Sorry to here your problem. I have just returned my 10 - 24mm under warranty as it was showing signs of serious OOF on the righthand side of the image by as much as 20% of the width. Told it will take 15 - 21 days before I get it back.

 

Agree with the PPS just like Canons scheme, of which I was a member when I was shooting with their equipment.

 

Allan

 

 

Fujis don't bounce!

 

Its insured and these things happen, especially if you treat it as a working tool rather than a piece of jewelry (most bags are overpadded, shows my view ). It was my reaction that interested me - I did not go for my Canons but used the original X-E1 instead. Probably time to sell the heavy stuff - it should raise enough to buy the new fast lenses and next year's superzoom. Maybe even the X-T2 eventually if I am shrewd.

 

There was no visible damage which was testament to the basic ruggedness, tI reckon he X-T1 is going to survive minor Knocks as well as any pro dslr. However after the drop the combination would not find focus, zoom was exceeding stiff. Camera still seemed to work with my other lenses but I got it checked as I did not want to find there was a problem further down the line - there was obviously some work needed probably on checking and ensuring proper registration of mount sensor etc.

 

 

Mine did. I only had it a couple of weeks and dropped it onto a tiled floor. Both camera and lens were fine.... unlike my nerves which were completely shattered!

 

Anyway, I ended up trading in my X-Pro1 & 14mm and got a 2nd T1 with the 10-24.... with two at least I'll have a second to cover if I drop it again :-)

 

Christian, the drop in IQ from FF to the Fuji is minimal although I'd prefer a few more pixels, 20-24mp would be ideal. I know it performs better than the 5dmkii I had but not as good as the mkiii. You are better dropping FF and using the Fuji's (or equivalent) for your main day to day stuff and a MF for the top end stuff. The weight saving, EVF with all the features etc are worth the slight drop in IQ, especially if you have a MF system (which I know you have).

 

With Fuji, the glass is excellent and if they get round to releasing a camera with the Organic Sensor they've been developing with Panasonic then there will be no need for Fuji FF anyway.

[Allan Bell]

I was reading a report on the Fuji 18 - 135mm lens, which I have and use. The say in the report that it is the best glass around at that range but at a price. They then go on to say that the IQ is so good only because of a combination of lens quality AND in camera software making adjustments to the image to counteract some of the lens problems you get at the wide and long ends.

 

They still say, even with the in camera adjustments that some blurring of edges is noticeable at the wide end and a lack of overall sharpness at the long end. The report suggests, not in as many words, that it would be best to stick to the middle range to achieve the best image quality.

 

Of course the software adjustments would only be available with OOC jpegs the RAWs not being affected. I think I can vouch for this after spending a lot of time with RAW images in LR trying to counteract the problems at the lens extremes.

 

Or I have a duff lens.

 

Have just returned my 10 - 24mm lens to Fuji under warranty to have heavily blurred righthand side in images corrected.

 

Allan

[Martin P Wilson]

I was reading a report on the Fuji 18 - 135mm lens, which I have and use. The say in the report that it is the best glass around at that range but at a price. They then go on to say that the IQ is so good only because of a combination of lens quality AND in camera software making adjustments to the image to counteract some of the lens problems you get at the wide and long ends.

 

They still say, even with the in camera adjustments that some blurring of edges is noticeable at the wide end and a lack of overall sharpness at the long end. The report suggests, not in as many words, that it would be best to stick to the middle range to achieve the best image quality.

 

Of course the software adjustments would only be available with OOC jpegs the RAWs not being affected. I think I can vouch for this after spending a lot of time with RAW images in LR trying to counteract the problems at the lens extremes.

 

Or I have a duff lens.

 

Have just returned my 10 - 24mm lens to Fuji under warranty to have heavily blurred righthand side in images corrected.

 

Allan

Needing to stick to the middle of a zoom, and aperture range, is probably true for ALL lenses to get the BEST performance. Frankly, I am not bothered about the ultimate quality on lab or bench tests. I merely want good enough for all appropriate practical purposes; after all we choose to degrade the images as soon as we create a jpg!. I would argue that most lenses (if not out of adjustment like Allan's 10-24) from major manufacturers can achieve sufficient quality to exceed that standard by a significant margin and certainly out-perform the technique of many, perhaps most, photographers. I have never felt my technical quality has been seriously limited by the lens I was using, but my technique would be the limiting factor most of the time. So I am always working to improve that, it is cheaper than changing lenses

 

Hand on heart, how many peeople can genuinely say they failed QC because they were using a bad lens or camera (unless it was damaged or on the unsuitable list)?