File: sUntitled-221.jpg (343 KB, 1600x1066)

343 KB JPG

>>4383822
>28mm
>most compact
I'm using Voigtlander 27mm f2, it's a tiny dedicated X-mount pancake and it's doing a great job given its dimensions. Not sure how leica compares, but it could be one thing to consider if you've missed this one. Here's some random stuff taken with this lens.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T2
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T2 Ver4.40
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	41 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:05:23 22:15:21
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/1.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	5000
Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Brightness	-1.7 EV
Exposure Bias	0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Focal Length	27.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: sUntitled-222.jpg (293 KB, 1600x1066)

293 KB JPG

Might sound dumb, but I struggled to enjoy the way camera handles lens corrections, so I taped the connectors out, hence no f-stop report in exif. Got this lens with X-T1 that didn't support the lens at all, loved it, then switched to X-T2, then I had a period of not liking this lens very much due to tons of extra noise in corners at high ISO (aggressive vingette correction). In the end I just taped it out and called it a job well done. It's subjective, but as far as I'm concerned, disabling lens corrections was a proper improvement.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T2
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T2 Ver4.40
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	41 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:05:23 22:15:22
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/1.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	6400
Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Brightness	-3.2 EV
Exposure Bias	-0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Focal Length	27.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: sUntitled-223.jpg (868 KB, 1600x1066)

868 KB JPG

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T2
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T2 Ver4.40
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	41 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:05:23 22:15:23
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/1.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	6400
Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Brightness	-3.1 EV
Exposure Bias	0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Focal Length	27.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

I got my sister a used XT3 and gave her my 18-55 to learn about the camera, she now wants to shoot macro for product photography, mainly pastries.
Is the new XF30mm macro good enough for such a use case? I can get it brand new for $580, the 80mm costs twice as much brand new and $700 for used. 60mm is also available used for $450 but has 2:1 scale, which I don't know if it makes a difference or not for this kind of use case.

>>4383822
Wait, that's actually a good landscape. Is fuji... good?

File: 3E888B60-4D43-40C5-B2D0-D(...).jpg (308 KB, 1086x724)

308 KB JPG

>>4384136
I was not aware of this lens. Will check it out. Worth the £380 you think?

>>4384282
I don't have a clue what I'm doing with landscapes.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T4
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T4 Ver2.12
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	76 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:10:26 12:33:26
Exposure Time	1/800 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	320
Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Brightness	8.9 EV
Exposure Bias	0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	50.50 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1086
Image Height	724
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: DSCF4626.jpg (3.76 MB, 4240x2827)

3.76 MB JPG

>>4383822
the xf 27mms have probably the best quality to size ratio. if you're coming from m mount , you might not mind the long minimum focus distance

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-Pro2
Camera Software	GIMP 2.10.38
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	27 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:11:12 00:54:29
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	500
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Brightness	4.0 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	18.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4240
Image Height	2827
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Blur Status	OK
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Auto Exposure Status	OK
Flash Mode	Unknown
Focus Mode	Auto
Focus Status	OK
Picture Mode	Aperture Prior AE
Sharpness	Normal
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
White Balance	Auto

File: sDSCF2967-2-1.jpg (377 KB, 1600x1066)

377 KB JPG

>>4384325
>Worth the £380 you think?
I personally love it, it sits on my camera 90% the time. Sharp in the center, sharp in edges above f2, minimum focus distance is relatively low, feels good in hand, and focus ends on infinity instead of going way beyond it - so when you see something cool more than 3m away, you just slam the focus ring all the way into infinity and then you can get a good shot even at f2 (correct me if i'm wrong, but I consider it a massive win, from all of my manual lenses this is the only one that does that). And in purely subjective terms, it does nice things to colors and sharpness in my opinion, feels like it kinda pretends to be somewhat vintage despite being sharp. No nasty chromatic aberration, no extremely blurry edges, the only two optical downsides are serious coma and vignette, I don't mind vignette and I can live with coma.

All things considered, I don't even consider it overpriced. It's expensive for what it looks like at a glance, but it's the only fuji native lens I can think of that does the things this lens does, at the size it is.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T2
Camera Software	RawTherapee 5.10
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
ISO Speed Rating	1000
Exposure Bias	-0.3 EV
Focal Length	27.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated

>>4384351
It is a lovely lens but it makes me angry Fuji themselves are not trying to make pancake sized F2 lenses because these bastards know it will eat into their x100 sales. There should be a 18,23,27 and 40 mm F2 auto focus pancakes for this system almost all other systems have it apart from us.

>>4384362
I feel you on this one, I'm annoyed by fuji's disregard for compact size in general
>official pancakes are not bright
>bodies keep growing larger and larger every generation, except for the new X-M5 but this one doesn't have manual dials
>small fuji bodies don't have dual display mode that helps with manual focus, it's a basic software quirk and there's literally no reason to not include it for those who want to use it on a smaller EVF
>35mm f1.4 is famous for subjective niceness, but objectively speaking it suffers from chromatic aberrations and it's just not horribly performant for modern standards, so fuji replaced it with 33mm f1.4 that's optically perfect, but it grew up twice in length in result
>meanwhile, leica has a 35mm f1.4 lens that's full frame and it's still shorter even compared to fuji 35mm f1.4. Of course leica can provide just about anything that's physically possible given their price, but still, they prove it's doable, and I bet many would appreciate a compact bright lens even if it's less than perfect, not to mention that aps-c should shrink it down further

I fully realize that size is a limiting factor for lens optics quality, but eh, I wish they would've played the lightweight card a bit more than they do. I'd kill for an x-t30 sized camera with a dual display mode, or a for a 33mm f1.4 in 35mm f1.4 form factor, but apparently they'd rather participate in optical quality rat race at the cost of practicality.

I'm just waiting for the XT6 announcement. I'm very curious to see what that will be like. I'd be very interested if it's pretty much the same, but with a stacked sensor.
Would be cool to run a lean and mean dual camera setup with the x100vi and XT6.

File: DSC_3475.jpg (3.76 MB, 2012x3024)

3.76 MB JPG

>>4383822
bitcoin is doing well. I wonder if I keep holding to afford my 50R or if I should buy a XT4 instead? what do you think?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON Z 6_2
Camera Software	Capture One 23 Macintosh
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	40 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Exposure Time	1/500 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	1400
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	40.00 mm
Image Width	2012
Image Height	3024
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4384370
The Dual Display really pisses me off because even my fucking XT1 can do it but not my XPRO 2 so it’s 1000% an artificial software limitation

>>4384392
The pros don't have it because you can do the same, but better, with OVF + ERF
It's an EVF size limitation

>>4384376
Anything less than a GFX100II is a cope camera, sensorlet.

>>4384422
I'm sure it's a good camera, but what's the point in medium format if you don't make large prints? Medium formats seems like a very specific tool to me.

File: news_11889_01.jpg (54 KB, 763x303)

54 KB JPG

>TOKYO, November 12, 2024 – FUJIFILM Corporation announces that it is currently in the process of developing its first-ever filmmaking camera, the “FUJIFILM GFX ETERNA” (GFX ETERNA), with plans for a release in 2025. The “GFX ETERNA” will feature a large format sensor, “GFX 102MP CMOS II HS”, which is approximately 1.7 times larger than a 35mm sensor, and the high-speed image processing engine “X-Processor 5”, enabling filmmakers to capture rich, true to life visuals and have enhanced flexibility in post-production. Both the “GFX 102MP CMOS II HS” sensor and “X-Processor 5” are the latest technologies featured in the mirrorless digital camera “FUJIFILM GFX100 II”, which delivers extraordinarily high image quality with its 102 million pixels.

>Fujifilm will showcase the “GFX ETERNA” as a reference exhibit at the comprehensive media event “InterBEE 2024”, which will be held from November 13th to 15th 2024.

>>4384521
35mm is now officially small format
APS-C downgraded to micro four thirds
Micro four thirds downgraded to “phone/webcam”

>>4384436
the medium format look, duh

File: IMG_2383.jpg (2.28 MB, 3746x2107)

2.28 MB JPG

I think I’m addicted bros

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone 15 Pro Max
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 10.0.1 (iOS)
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	24 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:11:11 08:53:20
Exposure Time	1/45 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	80
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Brightness	3.0 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	6.76 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto

File: cbf73ed00293351c25ad3133d(...).jpg (207 KB, 999x749)

207 KB JPG

>>4384521
ok but when are they going to announce xpro4 with rangefinder patch and no rear display?
also, i've been thinking for a few days that long rectangle shape of film mf slrs is a form factor fuji should try for gfx rather than the thin rectangle of digital mirrorless. the space on the non-grip side of the body is wasted. and making a body thin does nothing but add heat management stress when the lenses are giant bazookas and there's a big grip adding a ton of depth anyways. i realized the other day that my little camera bag that can very awkwardly fit an xt3 with the 35/1.4 and is pushed to the limit fitting a 50R with the 50/3.5 very handily holds a bronica sq with standard normal lens. the same bag also easily fits two m bodies with pancakes i find myself quite taken with the packing-efficient shapes of this long block of medium format slr and the thin bricks of rangefinders

>>4384771
>also, i've been thinking for a few days that long rectangle shape of film mf slrs is a form factor fuji should try for gfx rather than the thin rectangle of digital mirrorless.
hassleblyat did this and no one bought the stupid MF cube. they all went for the faux rangefinder body

any yall niggas use a Fringer adapter? worth it? considering getting the Nikon F one but I'm such a cheap ass

>>4384771
Efficient to pack, awful to use for anything but building corners.

>>4384771
The box form factor is horrible unless you shoot street and building corners with your neck craned over all day. For anything more creative it becomes a hinderance fast, and then you put the grip and prism on.

>>4383822
what film simulation is this? Looks nice

Converted my friend to the church of Fooj :)
He's going on a long holiday soon and his old DSLR isn't up to the task + he uses some A7 for his work as videomaker for a big webshop. Borrowed him my old X-T2 with the 18-55 kitlens to test it out first and within a week he completely dove into the rabbit hole, already seems to know more menu options than I do and other tricks. Love to see it

>>4384370
>>4384362
It's because the market in general demands beefier stuff. Small size only appeals to a small group of people while all those boomers who pre-order new stuff care about grip size and clinical sharpness

>>4384351
>(correct me if i'm wrong, but I consider it a massive win, from all of my manual lenses this is the only one that does that).
You're not wrong at all and this is exactly why I never walk around with my LingLing manuals

>>4385482
that's fine since building corners are the ultimate subject and only can be appropriately captured by a format larger than ff
>>4385496
you're not thinking big enough. there's no reason a mirrorless camera would be limited to the top down vf or giant clunky prism finders of the film slrs. you could have a swiveling evf, a tilting display on top or back or side...
>>4385482
i've used it for portraits with no issues

>>4386085
The WLVF is awful if you ever want to shoot OVER something. There’s a reason basically all cameras essentially have both now. The sideways rectangle is more compatible with human hands. Ergonomically the modernized box (907x) is a shitshow. And also poorly made. I was excited, then mine didnt fucking work so i spent the 10k on a new hot tub.

>>4385871
It's a slightly adjusted Kodachrome 64 recipe from fujix weekly I think.

Anyone still using the X-E2? I'd like something smaller and wondering if it's long in the tooth nowadays. Does it have Classic Chrome?

>>4386192
I have X-T1 with the same sensor and hopefully same software. It has classic chrome, but you have to use latest firmware, it gets a bit old both in UI speed and in sensor noise at high ISO, but it's not exactly a tragic situation, just don't expect a particularly amazing responsiveness. On the flipside, auto white balance sets nice, pleasant, warm tones that I like. I've been using X-T1 on AWB all the time, then I switched to X-T2 and I hated colors, for quite a long time I thought it's this meme sensor magic, finally I've realized it's just AWB being trash on x-trans 3. Still pulling X-T1 out of my drawer every now and then, it's more than enough for casual photography and if it'd have sensor mapping (to reduce nasty uneven high iso noise), I'd probably still use X-T1.

X-E2 should be the exact same thing, except EVF is smaller and there's no dual display mode.

Am I the only one who doesn't really like classic chrome? I find Reala Ace way better, but it looks like almost everyone are using classic chrome or some variant of it

Which 23mm to buy? Except the latest one as that's too pricey for me. I just need it as a travel lens and not too picky about weather sealing.
Are my only options the Viltrox, Fuji f2 or Fujif1.4?

>>4386435
I had 23mm f1.4 and chromatic aberration was very painful to me, to the point where I sold the lens after some time. It was a nice lens otherwise, and it had nicest electronic focus ring I've ever felt in my life - but if I'd want another 23mm now on a budget, I'd probably go for an used 23mm f2. Even though I never had one, I know from 50mm f2 ownership that F2 trio delivers some really decent performance for what it is, so I'd expect good things from that, plus it's dirt cheap used.

>>4386439
Were you having issues with the original 1.4 R or updated WR version?

>>4386435
New WR version is worth it, big improvement.
f2 is on par or even better than the old f1.4 when stopped down, just worse at f2.

>>4386443
Original R. As far as I know, all R LM WR updated ones are nearly optically perfect with no major issues in any category, it's just that they're big and so I never got to buy one.

"having issues" is pretty subjective here though, I personally hate CA, but depending on your style, tastes, and subjects, it might be different for you. Big downside was that if I remember right, chromatic aberration wasn't exactly going away even when stopped down - but other than that, it was sharp, and it had really nice colors, so I don't want to bash on it all the way through even though personally I really disliked this thing.

>>4386448
>fuji lenses
>optically perfect
lol

>>4386459
So true, can we see some of your shots with some optically perfect lenses?

>>4386459
Nothing is perfect, and you know exactly what I meant. No big points of offense, no major downsides, nothing to ruin your photo just because lens didn't perform as expected and failed to correct some specific optical flaw.

>>4386462
The great joke is, they are as flawed as the smaller lenses from sony and canon despite being nearly GM sized, and maybe marginally faster but its like f2.1 vs f2.8 in “equivalence” (nothing important then). The size and price simply dont reflect this middling performance.

The tragedy of trying to pretend aps-c is viable outside of "character" (blurry photo) gear. Fuji done goofed.

>>4386448
The 18 f1.4, 23 f1.4 wr, 30 f2.8, and 90 f2 are the optically perfect ones of the system for me
Never once felt a need for improvement on them optically, and never once felt like I was missing out on anything compared to "better" FF glass I also use
The 33 f1.4 is close, but could be a tad sharper with less CA at f1.4
>>4386464
So when can you post some of your examples using that glass?

>>4386466
Why do i have to waste money on garbage to say it is garbage? This is the information age. Everything is tested and the results published. Lenses are not personal things. There is no magic or wonder. They are not crafted. They are soulless objects designed by algorithms and copied en masse by machines, then 9000 bugmen test them on all the charts, cats, corners, ugly people, sunsets, and hills in the world before putting it up on ebay at -30%$ for my consideration.

Get a grip. Gear is nothing but consumer products that spill from a factory at 1/4th the rate of some toxic sludge. I will dismiss it all on test photos alone if i so please and continue waiting for my x100six preorder.

>>4386468
apparently having the same look as a mediocre full frame lens on apsc is a big deal or something (but we bought apsc for it to be apsc not sharper full frame????)

>>4386468
>Why do i have to waste money on garbage
You misread, I was asking for examples from the optically perfect glass you use.

who owns the 27mm pancake and likes it?

>>4386548
Two anons on top of the thread, apparently

>>4386480
When did I say I used perfect lenses? They definitely exist. Its easy to find out what they look like (not like anything fuji makes desu). That’s why I don’t use them. Duh! Grow a brain moran

>>4386548
Waited like 6mo for mine and always disappointed when using it. Optics are fine, but slower AF, f2.8 kinda sucks, not internal focusing. I just stick with the 35 f2 for small size.
Voigt 27 f2 seems great though.
>>4386551
I just assumed since you made a fuss about Fuji glass, but thank you for confirming you are just another nophoto. Unless of course you want to contribute and share some examples of that glass you like and use, that looks nothing like Fuji.

File: DSCF0394.jpg (1.64 MB, 1776x1184)

1.64 MB JPG

Just upgraded from the T1 to T4 and trying out the 35f1.4 as well. I'm liking the film styles more, and I'm still being lazy about colour correcting myself. Took these shots a few days ago, appreciate any feedback. (Positive and negative)
>>4384376
I was caught between getting a H2s, T4, or maybe switching to Nikon, but in the end I just went with what seemed the best increase in features/price. It's hard not to go full gearfag though and buy the best you can afford. If it's just about that med format style then get what makes you happy. It is a hobby after all.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T4
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T4 Ver2.12
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	53 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:11:17 19:54:10
Exposure Time	1/350 sec
F-Number	f/1.4
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	160
Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Brightness	3.9 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1776
Image Height	1184
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Sharpness	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Flash Mode	Unknown
Focus Mode	Auto
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
Picture Mode	Aperture Prior AE
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Blur Status	OK
Focus Status	OK
Auto Exposure Status	OK

File: DSCF0406.jpg (1.51 MB, 1776x1184)

1.51 MB JPG

>>4386579
Overlooking Lake Ashi.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T4
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T4 Ver2.12
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	53 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:11:17 19:53:57
Exposure Time	1/1000 sec
F-Number	f/2.5
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	160
Lens Aperture	f/2.5
Brightness	7 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1776
Image Height	1184
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Sharpness	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Flash Mode	Unknown
Focus Mode	Auto
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
Picture Mode	Aperture Prior AE
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Blur Status	OK
Focus Status	OK
Auto Exposure Status	OK

File: DSCF0417.jpg (658 KB, 1776x1184)

658 KB JPG

>>4386583
Last one, definitely need to stop-down more often I think. I like Fuji's bleached film for seeing Fuji.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T4
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T4 Ver2.12
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	53 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:11:17 19:53:53
Exposure Time	1/8000 sec
F-Number	f/1.4
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	160
Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Brightness	9.8 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1776
Image Height	1184
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Sharpness	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Flash Mode	Unknown
Focus Mode	Auto
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
Picture Mode	Manual Exposure
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Blur Status	OK
Focus Status	OK
Auto Exposure Status	OK

File: 4567456347848.jpg (274 KB, 1776x982)

274 KB JPG

>>4386579
>appreciate any feedback. (Positive and negative)
I think you'd benefit greatly from avoiding clutter in your frame, or from putting more effort into leading the eye towards the subject. I won't complain about center framing because I think it's intentional and you're doing some work to make it right (like framing subject with bushes in second and third photo), but I must say, it took me quite a while to even notice the mountain in third picture, or gate in the second one. Kinda like pic related, I think it's easier without attention-grabbing cars - and then it'd be even easier without the aireal tramway, but I don't want to remove it from your photo because I bet you like it and it also makes it an extremely basic landscape of a mountain with only some minor bushes to distinct it from every other mount fuji photo.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: 456845648564568.jpg (871 KB, 1776x1184)

871 KB JPG

I also struggled to find the gate here despite having it dead in the middle, but I'm not sure what could be done to make it better. Maybe postprocessing/film simulation thingy that emphasizes of red? It's cheesy, but it helps with knowing what's where, so that's one idea.

I don't think second photo is a bad one though, I like the colors and this odd feeling of scale on those mountains. My mspaint crops and gimp edits are probably not very striking, but I'm trying to somehow visualize the idea of having less things that distract you from the subject.

>>4386659
Funny you say that because I took a second shot without the cars or the aireal, but it looked too simple and I didn't like it. Probably could have edited it similar to what you have here, and I agree it looks better without the cars. Hakone was super busy that day.
>>4386660
I'm with you that it kind of blends, but I really like the muted colors and how it affects the mountains like you said. These are more luck than skill I think, but I was trying to get the center framing with blurred foreground because I enjoy the feeling. The blurred lantern in the first one for example. The lake one was just a spur of the moment shot that I ended up liking. I don't know why the water feels so firm(?) but I like that as well.
Thank you for the feedback.

>finally got my x100vi as my compact daily camera
>sudden thoughts of trading it in for a Nikon zF
oh lord

File: DSCF0679.jpg (1.19 MB, 2000x3000)

1.19 MB JPG

>>4386548
i have it and like it and i even said it's the best value of all of fuji's small lenses earlier itt. it's a nice general photography lens. however i haven't used it all year. i have many x-mount lenses and many other camera systems so with that comes specialization and less benefit from an all-rounder. if i want a compact setup, i'll take a bessa r or a point and shoot. if i want a compact digital setup with better iq than a compact, then i'll bring an xpro. this case is generally edc, street, or some sort of event with crowds. in which case i'll take the xf 18/f2 for its wider field of view and closer focus compared to the 27. the 27 is the smallest fuji xf lens but its normal fov and relatively long min focus distance prevent it from being particularly useful in the situations where i prioritize portability. the one big thing it does better than the 18 for me is be weather resistant, but it hardly rains in my area and i can't justify buying a hood for a lens i only use five times a year at most
>>4386095
you would have the option to shoot waist level, but not be locked into that position. again, not thinking big enough. tilting/articulating screen could be attached anywhere and point any direction. essentially what i'm suggesting is the camcorder layout

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-E4
Camera Software	GIMP 2.10.34
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	41 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2023:08:15 00:44:08
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Brightness	-1/4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	27.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4416
Image Height	2944
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Blur Status	OK
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Auto Exposure Status	OK
Flash Mode	Unknown
Focus Mode	Auto
Focus Status	OK
Picture Mode	Manual Exposure
Sharpness	Normal
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
White Balance	Auto

>x-t30 mk2 only like $50 more expensive than new X-M5
>$300+ cheaper than X-S20
>$400+ cheaper than X-T50
Am I missing something here or is the X-T30 Mk2 by far the best brand new Fuji to buy?

>>4386548
It was my first lens and is still my favorite. It's really hard not to love it.
That said TikTok fucking ruined the pricing, you could pick them up for less than €200 because nobody wanted them anymore. I think I can now sell mine (non-WR version) again for like €350

>>4386668
the nikon zf feels awful to use and the baseplate is cheap plastic. it's comically oversized for a retro body and looks like a clown's prop.
PASM switch+retro does not blend.

get a 1st gen a7c, and then the 24mm f2.8 g, 40mm f2.5, and the sigma 90mm f2.8. it's the actual classic photography experience with modern specs. although the a7cii has better options for jpeg shooters, 24mp is closer to film.

>>4387205
Based three-prime enjoyer.
All you need is two or three good primes. All else is skill issue

>>4387205
Seconding this anon. I don't think Zf is all that horribly huge objectively speaking, but the first time I saw it on the store's display, I thought it's an upscaled model for advertisement purposes. There's something weird about its design, it just feels way off, again, kinda 2:1 scale mode vibes. If anon bought x100 for compact size (and x100 is not even all that horribly compact), then swapping it for a Zf would be a weird choice, unless some realizations happened and compact size is no longer a concern.

>>4387205
Fuck that. Get an X-T4 or 5 with 23mm f2 and 35mm 1.4
Anything wider than 35mm is pleb.

File: 06278DF6-4248-4A28-9378-1(...).jpg (233 KB, 886x886)

233 KB JPG

Why the fuck is the Fuji 28mm 2.8 so expensive?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T4
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T4 Ver2.12
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	41 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:09:15 12:08:10
Exposure Time	1/1400 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Brightness	7.6 EV
Exposure Bias	0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	27.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	886
Image Height	886
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4387247
If you mean the 27mm the answer is tiktok.
Fun fact: it used to be the cheapest Fuji prime on par with the XC35

>>4387247
People want the X100 series as a fashion accessory but can't afford them. X-Pro with the 27mm pancake was the closest aesthetics wise. Those are are also ridiculously expensive. Then they moved on to the X-E series which is why an X-E4 costs the same as an X-T4, which makes no sense at all aside from the pseudo rangefinder form factor. This all explains the X-M5 which is closer to what these people want and need. But they're still going to want to put the 27 pancake on it. Why Fuji doesn't ramp up production on the models of cameras and lenses that sell out is beyond me.

>>4387205
Based working autofocus enjoyer

I'd like to see some comparisons between the new 16-55 2.8 ii and some prime lenses. The new 16-55 pretty much looks like the only lens I'd need.

>>4387272
>the answer is tiktok
what happened?

>>4387281
>still using my X-E3 from 2018
>bought the 27mm f2.8 WR in Japan last year before the official price hikes
Feels comfy man
Hopefully the X-E5 goes back to looking more like the 3 rather than 4

File: DSCF9349.jpg (1.25 MB, 3000x2000)

1.25 MB JPG

>>4387405
why would you hope that? the 3 and prior are just shrunken xpros in design. the 4 was pretty much flawless in design and had the cleanest look of almost any modern camera and still has nothing comparable out rn amongst ilcs>>4387246
>Anything longer than 35mm is pleb.
ftfy

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-E4
Camera Software	GIMP 2.10.32
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	41 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2023:03:27 01:37:20
Exposure Time	0.1 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Brightness	-1.0 EV
Exposure Bias	-0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	27.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4416
Image Height	2944
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Blur Status	Blur Warning
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	On
Auto Exposure Status	OK
Flash Mode	Unknown
Focus Mode	Manual
Focus Status	OK
Picture Mode	Aperture Prior AE
Sharpness	Normal
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
White Balance	Unknown

>>4387499
The flat everything on the 4 looks like ass
>but i think it's great
and I think the 3 looks great

xh2s firmware is working well
eager for xt5's update too

>>4387384
See >>4387281
Fuji with in particular the X100V (like 2 years after release) became incredibly popular and a whole new generation of ""photographers"" started buying up all the compact gear like the X-E4, X100V(I) and XF27mm.
I have some tiktok addicted friend who told me about a camera brand with build-in image editors which looks like old film cameras. I've been shooting Fuji since 2018

File: DSCF6780.jpg (770 KB, 3000x2000)

770 KB JPG

>>4387505
>and I think the 3 looks great
oh man that's super cool! fortunately for you, there are at least six whole other bodies in the fuji x system alone you get to choose from with the looks you like, as cheap as $500! not to mention other systems. meanwhile there is nothing else like a 4 which is inflated to the moon and doesn't sell for less than $1000. thanks, you really convinced me

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-Pro2
Camera Software	GIMP 2.10.36
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	36 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2023:12:07 01:55:07
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	1250
Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Brightness	-4.7 EV
Exposure Bias	-2 EV
Metering Mode	Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	24.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3000
Image Height	2000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Blur Status	Blur Warning
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Auto Exposure Status	OK
Flash Mode	Unknown
Focus Mode	Manual
Focus Status	OK
Picture Mode	Manual Exposure
Sharpness	Normal
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
White Balance	Auto

>>4385482
>>4385496
Genuinely don't get this. They're fine. I know the viewfinders are stupid in that the waist level ones have a mirrored view, but other than that I find them absolutely fine to shoot at any level. Are you really weak or something? Does your neck not bend? I genuinely don't understand what your complaint is.

>>4387911
Can we see some examples of the types of pictures you take with yours?

File: 0EBEE8F9-DD88-492A-A9D5-E(...).jpg (264 KB, 1086x724)

264 KB JPG

I love my X-T4 and in the market for a 23mm. Should I just go for the f2? I'd appreciate the WR.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T4
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T4 Ver2.12
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	41 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:09:15 13:03:18
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	320
Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Brightness	7.7 EV
Exposure Bias	0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	27.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1086
Image Height	724
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4387915
>f2
you mean f3, cropfag

>>4387915
I've actually gone for the MF TTArtisans 25mm F2 to try it. Will post results and if it sucks I'll return it.

>>4387925
Woah calm down there, Diogenes

>>4387927
Own it. Decent. Bright enough aperture and solid build. Only major flaw is the strong purple colour cast at f/2 until f/2.8 when there's a bright light source.

>>4387925
I can't believe people are so mindbroken about some DOF on cameras that they don't use and images that they don't take.

>>4387925
Equivalence is a lie, gearfag. f2 is f2. period. as long as every f2 is a t2, 2 exposes the same everywhere for every sensor size and focal length.

DOF curves don't follow equivalence 1:1.
Exposure doesn't change with sensor size. The apparent amount of quantization noise does.
Equivalence does not include ISO because crop sensors only have more quantization noise. Other sources of noise are not enhanced.
Sampling rate changes processing options for noise reduction efficiency so not just theoretically, but factually, a sensor with a finer sampling rate has less noise if not used at 1:1 zoom. This is frequently abused in video. Oversampled 4k is less noisy because the pixels are averaged together. Line skipped 4k is more noisy because the pixels are NOT averaged together. Stillsfags are still confused about it because they can pick their own downsampling algorithm and lean towards sharper ones, which dont average the noise out as effectively. But if you have say, an x-t5, xh2, or x100vi, if you use your 40mp xtrans to create 24mp, or smaller, photos, the noise basically fucking vanishes and you get performance within a fractional stop of full frame. Sometimes better because xtrans has less chroma noise, and finer luma contrast preservation. It shits the bed on red and blue textures like cardinals but everything else comes out better than 24mp FF.

If you wanna bitch about fuji harp on the autofocus, write fuji a letter, we'd like it if they were as good as sony too

But due to the nature of high res xtrans ,equivalence is totally fucking irrelevant.

>>4387205
a7c and a7cii are good cameras, great IQ and great af. But I'm happy i sold the a7cii because of how awful it is to actual shoot with it. The shutter sound is incredible anoying. UI is bad, even though it got better with the 2nd gen. And obviously it looks shit. Bad design overall. But the lenses you mention are amazing. The other sigma i-series are so good!
To this day I'm waiting for a perfect full frame camera with a shooting experience similar to Fuji as well as a nice body design. Nikon came close with the Zf if it would be 2/3 the size, or even smaller. With the hype it generated I sure hope they continue working on retro body full frame cameras.

>>4387942
I automatically ignore anyone who gives a shit about shutter sound personally. Its very "i own an analogue pocket and a dedicated mp3 player".

Retro design on digital is awful. 1/3 stop declickable aperture rings can stay. The rest of retro design was engineers coping around 35mm film transports and they ditched it as soon as mechanical linkages were not needed to control everything. Even fuji knows hence the more ergonomic bodies.

File: Screenshot 2024-11-25 123916.png (95 KB, 1033x593)

95 KB PNG

>>4387933
Equivalence can be useful for comparing different field of views and DoF
>DOF curves don't follow equivalence 1:1
Except they kinda do though

>>4387954
an aperture ring is just a normal control placed where your hand should be anyways. they should be the standard. sony, fuji, and finally canon figured it out. nikon can not. permanently declicked controls suck dick. declick is only for video.

>>4387942
the only thing sony cameras are missing is a dial pair for AF modes and drive modes and a physical auto ISO toggle. almost spot on otherwise
>aperture control on lens
>shutter speed, ISO, and AE compensation on body

I hit some portraits w my XT-4 this weekend (35mm SMC lens) and am now realizing I have no clue how to edit portraits.
>just do shit till it gets better bro
but what makes a portrait "better"?

File: file.png (479 KB, 1042x249)

479 KB PNG

>>4387986
Like I get the basic idea, some touchups for spots, wrinkles, makeup, etc. But all color correction I try to do ends up with the vintage-ness of the lens getting washed out and making the image look overly sterile and digitized, which I hate.

>>4383822
Jon Crab.

>>4387988
Editing is like frosting a cake. If you put shit frosting on, the plain cake would be better. The plain cake is actually pretty tasty. If you’re a half competent chef, you pick the right frosting before you even make the cake.

>>4387912
No because I don't have a 6x7 scanner. Also doesn't answer my question, that's just a catty remark typical of someone with weak arms.

Looking for a little advice
I have a friend who is looking for a compact point and shoot style camera that's better than a phone camera. Also not very expensive.
The thing is, he's 80 years old (but is very fit and healthy both physically and mentally) and just wants it to be as simple as possible, but look great.
I thought something like the XM5 with the 15-45 kit lens would be perfect for him. It's just a little too expensive and doesn't have a built in flash.
Do any of you have any recommendations for a used Fuji camera that would be good for this?
So cheap, compact enough for travel and for it to not really be noticeable when hanging on a strap around his neck, better than a phone, built in flash, very simple to use, can transfer photos to his phone.
It doesn't need to be Fuji, but he liked the idea of the film simulations and I think he found the design of the cameras pleasing too because they reminded him of older cameras.

Would love to get some advice on this

File: DSCF2941.jpg (1.55 MB, 2000x3000)

1.55 MB JPG

>>4387986
>but what makes a portrait "better"?
i think portraits are about emotion and personality. a better portrait expresses these human qualities more impactfully or more accurately

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-Pro2
Camera Software	GIMP 2.10.34
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	135 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2023:09:21 13:58:28
Exposure Time	1/300 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Brightness	8.4 EV
Exposure Bias	-1.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	90.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4240
Image Height	2832
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Blur Status	OK
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Auto Exposure Status	OK
Flash Mode	Unknown
Focus Mode	Manual
Focus Status	OK
Picture Mode	Aperture Prior AE
Sharpness	Normal
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
White Balance	Auto

>>4388016
The sorrows of analog, okay nophoto, go enjoy your imaginary camera

>>4387942
they still didn't fix the shutter sound? It was one major reason I stuck with fuji rather than sony back then, but I thought it was limited to their cheap models

>>4388186
people care about shutter sounds? what aspergers variant is this?

>>4388188
Gear youtubers who use the sound bite in their fade to the slowly zooming photo care about authentic shutter sounds.

I enjoy using Nikon AI/AIS lenses on a Fuji XT2. 28 2.8 and 105 2.5 specifically. I think it's very fitting. That's all.

>>4388188
Me when I take upskirts on the JR

>>4388181
Have fun trying to live as a male and being unable to carry 2kg

>>4388188
I Actually find the tactile sound of the shutter is pretty important. PEN F and X-T4 have the best shutter sounds I've heard.

File: D82420EF-7299-4FE7-8AA1-F(...).jpg (1.09 MB, 1586x1982)

1.09 MB JPG

>>4388197
I use an old Canon FD 28mm f2.8 and it's pretty fun. It has a natual bloom that makes the photo look old.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T4
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T4 Ver2.10
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	53 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:05:04 13:05:07
Exposure Time	1/480 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Brightness	2.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1586
Image Height	1982
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4388239
Have fun with your imaginary camera

File: Voigtlander-Nokton-35mm-f(...).jpg (702 KB, 2000x1333)

702 KB JPG

I have unexpectedly come into possession of an X-T5 with 16-50 f/2.8-4.8 kit zoom.
I'm a fullframefag and the ergonomics on this don't work for me at all, feels like it's made for female hands (how much does the OEM grip improve this?), but everything else aside from a some additional nitpicks is pretty neat, particularly impressed with the IBIS.
I also like the lens selection. Good variety of cute little OEM AF glass and the 3rd party primes, of which Voigtlander and Sigma are the most attractive to me. But it's still fucking APS-C and 40MP on this tiny sensor is retarded..?
Do I keep the camera and invest into the X system? I already own a late Canon DLSR with a few lenses, a Ricoh GRIIIx (which I had previously intended to be my sole crop sensor camera), and a Nikon F3 with some vintage glass. I was thinking I'd get a Zf and adapt some F mount Voigtlanders (good value for me when I can use them on the F3 too), but now the X-T5 has thrown a spanner in the works of my overthinking...

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-E1
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 22.3 (Macintosh)
Photographer	Patrick Leong
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	53 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3878
Image Height	2585
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2022:05:05 17:57:24
Exposure Time	1.2 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Brightness	-1.0 EV
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2000
Image Height	1333
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4388398
>I have unexpectedly come into possession of an X-T5 with 16-50 f/2.8-4.8 kit zoom.
give it back, Tyrone

Seriously, keep it and use it for 6 months and then review your needs/wants

>>4388398
I like the smallrig grip, improves it a lot imo. I liked it so much on the Zf, I went back and got one for my T5.
Zf is better for adapted mf lenses, but I prefer using my T5 for everything else. T5 handling / operation is significantly better, and a similar kit comes in like half pound lighter, and takes up less space.

File: lok.gif (826 KB, 320x180)

826 KB GIF

>>4388412
>>4388404
Thanks. Decided to try it with the grip and adapter.

>>4388398
Image quality protip:
Use capture one. export 6000x4000. Do half your sharpening in the edit mode and the other half in export mode.

File: 5D636D83-CEF0-473C-818D-6(...).jpg (320 KB, 1024x768)

320 KB JPG

I dig it.

File: B0255F78-D1EB-45F5-807F-A(...).jpg (154 KB, 886x886)

154 KB JPG

>>4388571

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T4
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T4 Ver2.12
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	38 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:11:27 14:41:08
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Brightness	-4.8 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	25.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	886
Image Height	886
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

Fuji GFX rangefinder with fixed lens incoming according to fuji rumors.
Are they already coming out with the x100vi killer?

>>4388578
You mean the gfx100sii killer because half that things sales are cash strapped a7r shooters who just buy the 55 and nothing else and use it for high resolution travel snaps.

>>4388572
Is this contrast your processing, or uh, built-in lens feature? I feel like it's the lens, if it is, i must admit it looks kinda stylish, can see how this style would fit all kinds of photos

especially given this lens costs pizza money

>>4388102
I kinda get what you are saying, I ended up just going ham on what functions I already knew how to use and then dropping the opacity on the layer to ~60%, just to avoid getting that over-processed inhuman look. Client seems to be happy with it, so.

>>4388599
It's SOOC but with a film recipe. It looks the same with my 35mm 1.4. Actually quite a similar lens visually.

>>4388398
Ok, the workflow with adapted lenses is really nice. However, sometimes I get serious EVF lag (like 5 frames per second) when focusing (possibly related to punching in and the digital MF aids - happened with both digital split image and microprism). Is this a known issue?

>>4388965
I have that in X-T2, and I solve it by putting it into performance mode.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssiID7zhSog
fujibros...

>>4389904
My man Andy Mumford still got me

File: DSCF5031.jpg (538 KB, 2400x1800)

538 KB JPG

>>4389904
meh usual youtuber practice. if anything, it's surprising that he didn't branch into other systems before seven years. besides, i don't blame anyone for dropping fuji these days. the company peaked with the xt3 and by now has lost its edge

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	XQ1
Camera Software	GIMP 2.10.38
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:12:04 21:16:47
Exposure Time	1/15 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Brightness	-0.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	20.30 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2400
Image Height	1800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Blur Status	Blur Warning
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Auto Exposure Status	OK
Flash Mode	Off
Focus Mode	Auto
Focus Status	OK
Macro Mode	Off
Picture Mode	Manual Exposure
Sharpness	Normal
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
White Balance	Auto

>>4389904
Why the fuck is it even worthy of a mention what brand of camera you shoot with or don't shoot with? I just find that brand "loyalty" so ridiculous, like it's a lifestyle thing or a reflection of their personality. It's a fucking tool.

File: DSCF5072.jpg (511 KB, 2400x1800)

511 KB JPG

>>4390040
same reason you'd use as many differnet systems as possible - so your video comes up when someone searches a camera. seo. good luck starting a photography channel without mentioning a piece of gear in title

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	XQ1
Camera Software	GIMP 2.10.38
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:12:04 21:45:34
Exposure Time	2 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Brightness	-3.8 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	6.40 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2400
Image Height	1800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Blur Status	Blur Warning
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Auto Exposure Status	OK
Flash Mode	Off
Focus Mode	Auto
Focus Status	OK
Macro Mode	Off
Picture Mode	Manual Exposure
Sharpness	Normal
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
White Balance	Auto

Do you keep all your raw files? The GFX is filling up my external harddrives really fast. Spend another 70€ für a 2TB harddrive or should I change my workflow and delete all the unedited raws?

Thing is sometimes I enjoy checking my years old raw files and find some gems that are worth to edit

>>4390184
I know what you mean, but this is more like it's a lifestyle choice or some shit and I find it ridiculous.
I can see he made the video unavailable too now.

>>4390738
I personally hate clutter and I tend to remove everything except for a bunch of things i like (usually 5 photos or so) + rejected folder of things I don't like but see the value in, but if you're struggling with size, yeah, 4tb external ssd would be good for probably 20-40k gfx raws.

I'd do whatever's most comfortable for you, if you want to batch dump everything into an external SSD and it makes you happy, then mechanical portable hard drives are dirt cheap nowadays and it's definitely a worthy purchase. If you want to give it a shot without walking out of your comfort zone, then copy a handful of genuinely great shots on main hard drive and dump everything on a spare portable HDD, then you can make an informed choice on whether you want to keep being selective or not.

File: JANK3475.jpg (367 KB, 2048x1151)

367 KB JPG

I've seen it repeated several times that GFX is only worth getting in 100MP.
What's the reasoning here? Wouldn't 50MP have better SNR? What if you don't need 100MP/don't want to deal with insanely large files?

>>4391372
afaik 100mp is full modern sensor, BSI, phase detection pixels, you name it, while 50mp is just some old ass basic bitch sensor thing. So, for example as far as noise goes, 100mp seems to actually perform better despite having 4x smaller pixels. Verify that yourself on the internet though, I'm not 100% certain, just remember some news here and there

>>4391374
I hadn't considered that, thank you for the info.

>>4391372
I'm in this camp, having used a 50R for a few years. For lowlight shooting or bokeh, or anything that moves, FF is way better. Even IQ wise, my 50R often left me quite underwhelmed. You're getting a much slower and bulkier system for some marginal DR increase at low ISO, which just wasn't worth it for me.
The 100mp models include a number of performance improvements (AF, IBIS, battery life, etc), combined with the 100mp sensor makes them worthwhile.

>>4391372
The 50r uses an old sensor with smaller pixel apertures so it receives less light

>>4391372
not only is the 100mp a better sensor, it enables downscaling based NR (which you WILL do to get down to sane resolutions) and is basically immune to moire irl

>>4391372
Went from A7IV to GFX50SII and the IQ is miles better. Similar good as jumping from aps-c to full frame. But autofocus is very slow.

One of my friends got into photography and splurged on a xt4 and 18-300

He let me use it with a kit lens and it was really, really comfortable to shoot with. Viewfinder and grip were much nicer than my A7c (even with a cage I added).

It almost made me want one but then I remembered it's like an extra 1k more expensive than my A7c. Also shitty apsc performance in low light.

I'll just buy a better grip and some primes

>>4391985
>I'll just buy a better grip and some primes
I loved the Sigma i-series primes on my A7CII. APS-C would be a downgrade in any aspect, would not recommend. Too bad Sony bodies are so shit and soulless.

>>4391984
can you post some examples of the IQ

>>4391984
>50mp is better than 33mp
woah

>>4391985
shame about the absent autofocus and gross inferiority of xtrans but you guys only shoot concrete boxes and underexposed trees while wanking to how retro, i mean soulful, things are

>>4391994
>woah
>thinking it's only about megapixel

>>4391985
If I'm coming from a Canon 5dmkii with a 2.8f lens, will something like the aps-c sensor in the XT5 and their new 16-55 2.8 ii be that much of a downgrade in low light? Hasn't iso performance enhance drastically since then?
Whenever I read people talk shit about the sensor, iso performance and auto focus, it's usually people comparing it to the top of the line stuff that's currently available. But compared to my old 5dmkii it's probably light years ahead (even though I still like the images it takes).
I shoot a lot of low light shit and thinking about getting some Fuji stuff soon, but will likely wait until the XT6 hopefully comes out next year.

>>4391996
it is only about megapixel. just megapixel and 4:3. there is no measurable difference otherwise unless you care about 10% noise differences that humans cant see. I have seen some really pathetic cope to the contrary like jim kasson enlarging images beyond the pixel level to claim better sharpness (vs a slightly soft nikon lens typically described as for more for adding slight glow than document reproduction).

>>4391997
top of the line nah, these things dont keep up with nikon DSLRs technically

fuji was really cool when the xe-4 wasn’t the youtube leica now it’s mostly for overspending leica snobs that cant afford leicas

File: fujifilm_16900707_x_m5_mi(...).jpg (43 KB, 500x500)

43 KB JPG

Would I be retarded to buy an XM5?
>My phone has an awful camera.
>I have zero experience with photography.
>My friend keeps telling me to buy an XM5.
I want an everyday camera to capture family memories. I want a film-like look but don't want to develop film or do post-production.

>>4392000
its gonna miss focus all the time

buy an om-5 instead. same image quality unironically. better, more affordable small lenses. fuji doesnt even look like film but you could pass olympus colors off as ultramax.

>>4392000
>I want a film-like look
This is more about the editing/filters than the camera and its sensor
Pick a camera body for its size, ergonomics, features like dials, electronic viewfinder, back LCD, etc.
X-M5 is a good entry-level camera body coming from the smartphone experience. I personally would miss having an electronic viewfinder but that's possibly not a dealbreaker for you coming from a phone

>>4391999
Yeah it's only about megapixel if you ignore micro-contrast, dynamic range, better tonal transitions, shallower DoF, larger pixel pitch, etc

>>4392005
1: Not a real term.
2: Same as FF
3: Artifact of megapixels (more samples)
4: False actually, except for a shitty chinese lens or two G mount can’t go faster than f1.4 equivalent
5: Doesn’t affect anything with an old gapped microlens sensor

Its just 33mp vs 50mp thats it

>>4391997
You might be surprised how marginal the difference is if you're just pixel peeping noise 100% for both, but in practice, you will see improvements. You gain a little better noise handling from the higher resolution sampling, an X-T5 will push much better being more invariant, and you get IBIS. Much better lowlight AF too.
>>4392000
It's pretty compact for an ILC, and decent video for home movies.
>I want a film-like look but don't want to develop film or do post-production.
just find a preset / filter you like, and use any camera you want

>>4392005
>micro-contrast
property of a lens, not camera
>dynamic range
compared to your a7IV, the only potential gain is 0.2 of a stop at ISO 100, and you are worse of anything 400 or more
>better tonal transitions
what a great opportunity to share an example with us
>shallower DoF
lens + sensor, FF still has better options for shallow DoF

>>4392011
micro contrast ((c) apothesis theora llc) is a property of schizophrenic gear nuts

>>4392003
>>4392010
>This is more about the editing/filters than the camera and its sensor
>just find a preset / filter you like, and use any camera you want
Does that imply I would have to apply the filter after transferring photos to my PC? Sounds like I could save a lot of money for a little tradeoff in convenience

>>4392013
Yes, you can do it after transferring to your PC. More flexibility provided you shoot RAW format
You could also set up a filter in-camera using the various filters and (Fuji's) film simulations so your JPEGs come baked in with the filter applied and you won't need to edit after the fact
Less flexibility doing it in-camera of course but it's very convenient if you can achieve the look you want using in-camera filters and settings

>>4392013
Yes, Fuji's sims are just presets like you find on Instagram (albeit more advanced).
Fuji has the marketing, film sim community, and base profiles that attempt to emulate film, but other cameras actually have even more in-camera preset options than Fuji (so you can get it right out of camera), they just require a bit more DIY to do so.
For digital, "looks like film" = film-like preset, just in camera or in software

>>4392019
>other cameras actually have even more in-camera preset options than Fuji (so you can get it right out of camera), they just require a bit more DIY to do so.
Any suggestions on those cameras good for sooc jpg? Seems like I need to do a lot more research before buying anything. Ty all btw

>>4392022
Nikon has a PC program where you can make your own presets and load them to the camera, see nikonpc.com
Sony has extensive in-camera options if you make use of the video-oriented picture profiles which also work for stills, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZDaH3k6BUw
Pretty sure Panasonic now lets you load LUTS directly
not sure for others

>>4391997
I think f2.8 doesn't cut it for aps-c, these kind of zooms are great for low light and event photography but only on full frame. On crop you're only going to get noisy shit and be disappointed as your two thousand dollar a6700 or xt4 shits the bed.

So then you're limited to using faster and more expensive primes to make up the difference. If I was shooting studio portraits and casually during the day I would honestly be interested in buying a Fuji, but in reality I would feel I'm cucking myself buying a crop.

Fuji need to get their shit together and produce something similar to the Nikon Zf or A7c on full frame

>>4391999
But if people aren't comparing it to top of the line gear, then what are they? I know this is 4chan and people shit on everything no matter what, but I see people making comparisons like that all the time on social media shit too. Not just Fuji, but everything. It's fucking tiresome for somebody who's personality doesn't revolve around cameras and photography. It's hard to ever get any normal advice.

>>4392010
I would ideally want full frame, but the ibis that you point out is a great feature for me as it'll allow me to shoot with slower shutter speeds handheld. The slowest I could get acceptable shots with my 5dmkii was 1/50.
I never pixel peep anyway, I'm only interested in the overall image.

>>4392089
2.8 on aps-c is roughly f4 right? I mean ideally I'd want to open the camera up a lot more, but I don't have the budget for primes at the moment. Are you comparing a 2.8 for aps-c with other current cameras? The only reference I have is my old 5dmkii that I bought when they first came out. Again when I see people talk shit about features cameras have these days, they're still miles above what I'm used to. As good as the images I can still get on my 5dmkii, it is a clunky dinosaur at this point that I'm fucking tired of lugging around.
I would love to just try one out a bit so I can see and feel the difference for myself, but I don't know anybody who has any fuji or aps-c cameras in general.

I do find it weird they haven't made full frame cameras. It's either aps-c or medium format. Could be they just sell more cameras in those formats and can't be bothered.

File: DSCF4369.jpg (752 KB, 3000x2000)

752 KB JPG

idg why people keep suggesting that fuji could reasonably produce a ff line at this point. maybe before gfx was launched there was a chance, but not now. they're far too deep in to the x mount and gfx development to throw all that work away to start an ff line. they'll make ten more gfx bodies before they make a ff system

>>4392148
i shot a nikon d700 a few times and while archaic, it looked great at night. much cleaner than my xt3 and xpros. however, like you i was simply not interested in carrying a big heavy camera everywhere so i stuck with the fujis and now 35mm film. anyways, i've moved to mostly using flash so low-light performance doesn't matter.. can you give an example of the type of low light you're trying to shoot?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-Pro2
Camera Software	GIMP 2.10.38
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	27 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:10:10 00:36:33
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Brightness	-1.1 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	18.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3000
Image Height	2000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Blur Status	Blur Warning
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Auto Exposure Status	OK
Flash Mode	Unknown
Focus Mode	Auto
Focus Status	OK
Picture Mode	Manual Exposure
Sharpness	Normal
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
White Balance	Auto

File: Ren-Kockwell-Growing-His-(...).jpg (2 KB, 97x124)

2 KB JPG

>>4392148
>, but the ibis that you point out is a great feature for me as it'll allow me to shoot with slower shutter speeds handheld
Good, stabilised lenses will allow you to do this as well, do not forget.
>2.8 on aps-c is roughly f4 right?
Roughly yes. Math gets fucky because the real formula is f/2.8 x 1.5[Canon 1.6] so depends on exact f/stop you're speaking of, but guessing a one-stop difference is close enough for practical use. Hold in mind that for foolframe glass on crop the f/stop only matters for DoF because of the different FoV and distance-to-subject you'll have; there is no difference in exposure because of the f/stop.
BUT foolframe has the biggur sensor, better pixel pitch and better performance at high ISO which *will* help you.
>I do find it weird they haven't made full frame cameras.
Foolframe market is oversaturated for the rather low amount of people buying dedicated cameras. Crop is popular because cheaper and smaller, and MF is popular for the turbo autists that want to BTFO foolframe, and they're the only ones doing it.

>>4392171
I just shoot a lot in poorly lit rooms, bands in low light situations, night time shots and stuff like that. Just generally a lot of scenarios where I don't have a lot of good light, if any, to work with.
I have a speedlite I used a bunch on my 5dmkii, but again with the 24-70 lens and the speedlite it was just so fucking heavy to lug around. It balanced terribly when hanging on the strap (with and without the flash) and always felt like it was going to fall off. I hate having to constantly have a hand on the camera.
I'm not loyal to any camera brand or anything. I used to do a lot of amateur work from shooting weddings to music videos and shit like that. I've been out of the game for many years and only recently found out about Fuji cameras. I've been very intrigued by them.
I've been thinking about getting back into photography work seriously and running a two camera setup and Fuji stuff just seems ideal to what I'm looking for. I'm just curious about a few things because I've never tried any in person.

>>4392177
You make some good points, but you don't have to say "foolframe" though. That's what I'm talking about when I say it's hard to talk about any of this shit with people. It's tiring and unnecessary

>>4392180
Sorry lol. When in rome and all that.

>>4392178
the latest fuji i've used was the x-e4, which was certainly behind dslrs in terms of af in the dark but maybe the latest gen has improved. i like x mount but it doesn't seem especially well suited for your purposes. i think a canikony mirrorless ff would do you better, but i guess you won't know until you try.

>>4392148
You'll be totally fine with an X-T5, I've been rocking mostly Fuji for the last 8 years of weddings & events.
>2.8 on aps-c is roughly f4 right?
It's still f2.8 in terms of light, but comparable to f4 for depth of field. The advantage of FF is that you get less noise for a given ISO.
The FF market is crowded enough, so it made more sense for Fuji to split, and now there's zero point to going FF. GFX is already smaller than many FF bodies, and cheap enough for anyone that needs it at this point.
>>4392178
A faster lens is going to give you bigger improvements for lowlight than any camera upgrade. If you're at the point you need to use a speedlight, you'll need one regardless of FF or APS-C.

File: maxresdefault[1].jpg (174 KB, 1280x720)

174 KB JPG

this lens sucks. I am dissapoint :^(

>>4392191
I thought about the Canon R5 for a while, but the RF lenses are fucking huge and using an adapter for the old EF lenses adds size/bulk too. It just seems way too inconvenient to me and the opposite of what I want in terms of weight/size.
I haven't properly looked into Sony yet, I just like the colours I see from Fuji stuff better and I like how the camera bodies are a bit old school in terms of button layout. I'm of course saying all this without ever having touched one before.

>>4392200
Ah ok, so it's mostly just less depth of field and not in terms of light.
I'll get a flash for the Fuji too (or whatever camera I end up getting) and eventually get one or two primes. I'm just in the planning phase right now. But thanks for the replies.
I won't be buying anything for a while still, so pretty much just waiting to see X-T6 specs. I'll honestly be happy if it's the same, but with a stacked sensor.

>>4392215
>so it's mostly just less depth of field and not in terms of light.
Same light, but more depth and more noise, so "as if" you were using like an f4 lens on FF.

I'll probably be picking up the new 16-55 too in the next month or so, next wedding isn't until end of January.

Man it's been 4 years since I come here and the same fucking discussion about f2=f3 and "I want a digital range finder camera but if you suggest an Xpro I will sperg out" is still going on.

>>4393101
DX was a disaster for photography. They should have just called it half frame and turned it 90 degrees.

>>4393101
> the same fucking discussion
It's almost like new people pick up new hobbies all the time. Did you expect /p/ to just be the same group of people, 4 years of experience later?
>I want a digital range finder camera but if you suggest an Xpro I will sperg out
Anyone that says this just wants a Leica but can't afford. Anyone that genuinely wants a "rangefinder" will appreciate what the X-Pro offers already.

File: Screenshot 2024-12-18 220008.png (238 KB, 617x453)

238 KB PNG

rejoice

>>4383822
Where is the Fujifilm? I only see photos.

>>4393196
>new autofocus
Meaning tracking is no longer buggy and it’s just slow and of questionable accuracy on anything but unobstructed faces again?

>>4393380
its actually pretty solid now (xt5, xh2s)

>>4393381
>finally as good as a 5 year old sony if you spend $2k
RIP nikon, #4 brand soon

What's the go-to free RAW processing and photo editor for Fujifilm now?

>>4393429
Rawtherapee

Now that the X-M5 caters to the entry-level market and new photographer market, I hope Fujifilm moves the X-E line upmarket a bit.
I'd like the X-E5 to be more like an EVF-only X-Pro

>>4392205
it's only worth it on a FF camera

you'll only get noisy shit with a 2.8 on crop

File: worms.png (571 KB, 731x673)

571 KB PNG

the worms! the worms!

>>4393429
MS Paint, Vista Edition.

I've got a heavy FF camera

What's a good casual Fuji option for casual portraits of friends? I want something that can pump out good pictures sooc, viewfinder is mandatory, no fixed lens

>>4394050
>all cameras from each generation have same sensor, same processor, and similar SOOC capabilities aside of a bunch of new fancy filters/grain/color chrome in new generations, so as far as general IQ goes, it's literally just form factor
>X-T1/2/3/4/5 are great for premium huge viewfinder, but camera is bigger
>either double digit X-T or X-E would be a smaller camera that does the same thing in every regard, except viewfinder is smaller and it has no dual display mode (small preview of 100% crop next to full image in viewfinder, crazy useful for manual lenses). X-E and X-T are comparable in size, so it all boils down to preference
>once you've decided, pick any generation that suits the price you'd like to pay. I'd say anything from X-T2 feels modern enough, but that's just my personal take on it

What do you guys think of the X100VI? Is it worth the premium over a used X100V? The price difference seems to be around $500 for a new VI as opposed to a V.

>>4394053
The ibis alone makes it worth it over the V

>>4394050
My X-T has gotten a lot of positive attention from friends at parties, might be your best bet.

>>4394050
X-T2/3/4/5
X-Pro2

I'm torn between fuji & sony a6700. I hear fuji colors are much better. If I know how to fiddle with LUTs could I achieve similar color on the Sony, or is there fuji color science magic beyond the reach of user defined LUTs?

>>4394561
Go with the a6700. You will not regret having fast and reliable autofocus.

>>4394566
Yeah, I'm basically leaning that way. Fuji has my eye though if I ever upgrade

>>4394568
The next upgrade would be full frame rather than Fuji GFX. Much more versatile. Forget the X system until Fuji catches up with the competition.

My local store finally has the "In stock" light on for the x100vi. I wish I wasn't broke and could buy it, but more than that, I wish I had the life where having a camera like that would be nice.

>>4394582
Yeah, travelling or doing crazy shit is when you have the most fun taking photos.

>>4394561
>>4394568
Why do you want crop?

An a7c/a7cii is basically the same weight and size as an a6700. But fujis are nicer crop cameras imo, if you want to maximize bokeh/low light/DR/autofocus go for a compact FF Sony.

Buy Sony crop and you'll just be thinking about "upgrading" to FF while wasting a load of money.

File: DSCF4854.jpg (830 KB, 3000x2000)

830 KB JPG

>>4394050
what >>4394052 said. body only affects ergos and handling. the question should be what lens to get. and the answer is probably the 18/2 or the 35/1.4, depending on whether you want to do environmental portraits or just headshots. or you could split the difference and get one of the kit zooms i guess
>>4393116
they still haven't implemented a satisfying manual focus experience. and far as i know, there's no 28mm or even 35mm equiv mf lens on x mount with a suitably-spaced focus throw for quick zone focusing

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-Pro2
Camera Software	GIMP 2.10.38
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	53 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:12:26 04:11:29
Exposure Time	1/15 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Brightness	-3.1 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3000
Image Height	2000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Blur Status	Blur Warning
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Auto Exposure Status	OK
Flash Mode	Unknown
Focus Mode	Auto
Focus Status	OK
Picture Mode	Manual Exposure
Sharpness	Normal
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
White Balance	Auto