BartyLobethal: Wow, 10 inks to waste during 'cleaning' cycles now.
did you find the Canon lasts longer?
Soon the pixels will be so tiny they'll be able to see into the future! Now THAT would be handy;)
timo: I don't think I would ever make a camera-buying decision on the basis that 16MP is inadequate for my needs. Scarcely more than ten years ago most people thought 6MP was adequate, and they were mostly right.
"You are both spectacularly pompous"
were you referring to me in that 'both'?
I hope not as question wasn't intended as pompous, just 'matey'
Still don't understand what you're on about- moon and iPhone etc
FogdeanDum - what are you on about?
MustyMarie: Title is very bad, as being 'dumped with' implies the person is IN the stuff being dumped, he was 'dumped ON'.
Which has happened when water was being scooped up from a lake and actually got a person IN the water, of course he drowned - Darwinism I believe is the cause !! ;)
gee, a teacher comment
picnut: I have an X-E1 and X-T1 plus several Fuji lenses. I love them all, but I more often shoot with my Sony a6000 simply because the lenses are so much smaller and lighter for walk-around and travel purposes. I don't understand why Fuji's lenses are so much larger when both cameras are mirrorless and have APS-C sensors.
and another thing....( ;) )
I now use the M1 with just the 27mm lens on it, small , handy with excellent image quality and hey - not expensive!
Still toying with whether to ditch the big DSLR and jump hp altogether, but that fast glass is looking good to meee:)
Stephan Def: I hope very much that Fujifilm continue this concept in future models. For me the key feature is the very good OOC jpegs & film simulations, also the EVF and swivel screen. Also the overall very good build quality. (High-end AF is not important on this kind of a Camera).
If one can use a TV screen & do post-processing in-camera without the need for an addtional computer & software then that is a huge benefit for any user.
I don't think Fujifilm has to jump on the 4K bandwagon, just decent enough Video qualtiy would be good. Also the ability to record a short sound clip with a still image is very nice to have and would be technically easy to do.
What I would like to have is film-simulation bracketing, so that I do 5 shots in rapid succession using various film simulations & settings. At the end of the day I could then just choose which ones I want to keep. More stuff like that, neat features to have implemented by exploiting existing hardware thru better software.
I'm happy for you that that is your preferred method and that you have time to use this way - but your mind set and situation are very different to mine. We don't want the same things.
I am already pretty fed up with all the PP I do already anyway- in fact that is why I'm using Fuji's excellent in camera jpg convert automatically in the first place.
MUCH easier to peruse all the options already created and chose the best on a full size screen, with full sized computing power and to just to delete the ones you don't want after the fact than faff about on a tiny screen pressing tiny buttons and taking year and a day to trawl through hundreds of images trying out different film styles to see which works best for that shot
What's the big deal? Memory is cheap FFS! Just give me better film bracketing - I want it and so why the resistance?
Fuji offer me best in class jpgs off the peg so why on earth offer 3 film simulations but prevent 5 when 5 are available? WHY? makes no sense at all.
Nice pics but the premise of the article is based on an assumption I neither hold nor find relevant. To my mind it reeks more of false modesty in the guise of percipience.
of course they COULD be cheaper, so could Canon lenses and others.
But I'd rather they made decent money and invested in top notch lenses than turn out a load of mediocre uninspiring glass for a pittance
people don't buy leica cos its CHEAP (or even affordable). Fuji might not be Leica but at least they're making an effort
anyway what are you on about with ebay and the M1 lenses-these ARE cheap lenses, the fact you managed to make a deal on it has nothing to do with it
so buy panasonic;)
Please don't look at Leica lens prices!
if all you want is to show pictures of the moon to friends on a phone/tablet then pictures FROM a phone/tablet should be fine for you- you don't need a 24mp crop size sensor to deliver that for you.
you don't need to hate yourself for wanting it, but its a waste of money
Fabio Amodeo: I find suprising that in the review RAW quality is judged only by the Adobe support of it. If so many people are too lazy to test some other RAW developers, mainly Capture One or Iridient, is not a position DPR should support. Lightroom is not the standard of industry. Photoshop was, but now is endangered by the crazy subscription policy. In the past Adobe has been an essential building force for the whole digital photography movement. But now I find it erratic in decisions, just as if they had lost vision.
the tests I did at home with LR actually surprised me how good they were after all the complaints Id heard. I even tried a demo of C, couldn't see any advantage at all - and the UI is poo
oh come on- we want high quality glass but don't want to pay for it- thats whinging!
Those small lenses ARE very reasonably priced!
"What I would like to have is film-simulation bracketing, so that I do 5 shots in rapid succession using various film simulations & settings. ."
EXACTLY what I asked for Stephan!
Somebody asked why I would want all that: my reply was 'asks sports shooter why they want motor drive!- CHOICE- EASY choice!
I don't want to have to delve into their fiddly internal raw convertor when I could just use the cheap memory card to save all the versions I might like.
Maybe not all shots all days but when I can't predetermine which version jpeg I ant along with saving a RAW file then hell yeah - great idea to just supply the lot. Boom boom boom.
I thinking especially good for street, where you might want bright colours for one shot, skin tones for the next, mono, for the next etc or a version of each.
Glad that at least ONE other person sees the use for this:)
Deardorff: No Optical finder, no thanks.
looking forward to see what they do with the next XPro:)
Hans van Eijsden: As you probably noticed, Adobe still hasn't fixed the issue with the new healing brush: it still removes too much skin texture.
OS X users can use this app to easily switch between the traditional healing brush and the new realtime healing brush: https://download.pureftpd.org/misc/SetPhotoshopHealingBrush.zipSo you can decide which one works the best for you.
More information from Adobe: https://download.pureftpd.org/misc/SetPhotoshopHealingBrush.zip
Hans the second link is same as first - not an Adobe info page....?
Sherlock74: No touch screen?
NO touch screen? -thank God -hate them
I really wish Fuji would make one of their dinky cameras for people with big hands/thumbs!!
I'd really love one, but having dipped my toe in the water with theX-M1 I realised that except for people without tiny hands there's nowhere to place yor thumb without constantly accidentally changing settings.
I'd LOVE an X-t1 or X-T10, really I would but until they remove or reposition those top plate dial on the right it's unusable for me
A real shame
maxnimo: These Fujinon lenses never fail to amaze me. The images they produce put Nikon and Canon to shame. I was thinking of migrating to Samsung or Sony, but I may just stay with Fuji forever.
@ Bartolyni(you wrote)"..I think you speak like you are poorly informed!! May be you need to read the review at lenstip. The score is unprecedented which made every one salivate a little."
Think what you like mate, I owned the 135L and the Canon 70-200L 2.8.mk2 and used them both extensively - I don't need some review or some chart to tell me what they can do. ...and I have looked at the full size examples from the Fuji 90 on here: unlike your good self I can SEE what they're like, I don't need someone else to tell me
I can only compare the result from this lens by eye with the only other lens I've had that is similar - the Canon 135 f2L - and I would say they are similar.
I wouldn't say the fuji is better but at f2 it's hard to tell anyway as you're only scrutinising the very narrow DOF and the blokey- (:p )
I don't think it has the same resolving power as a recent FF sensor and latest L Canon zoom at the same FL, but that kit weighs a ton and is decidedly conspicuous which is why I'm interested in the fuji kit and why I'm interested in this lens and not the fuji 50-140. No doubt the Leica 90 gives it a run but out of my league for that sort of money
The results are decent enough to warrant getting it for it's lightness and size (compared to their fastest zoom), and its price v Leica kit.
Looks like a great little lens that does what it says on the tin:)