X100(F) and conversion lenses

[markusw]

Dear all,

I am wondering how many X100(F) users are using the conversion lenses as well. Up to now, I am quite happy with the X100F for travel, but should I get the WCL or TCL for just in case....?

 

[Ed B]

I've had two X100F cameras.

One I bought new and the other was bought used and it came with the Tele Conversion lens.

Optically, the lens was great and I used it for a few portraits that turned out excellent but, for me, the lens wasn't good for anything else other than when I specifically wanted to use the X100F to take a formal type portrait and it didn't get used very often.

I ended up selling it because the digital converter on the X100F does a good enough job for my needs.

I do think the wide-angle conversion lens would be good to have because it really would add value to the camera and provide an angle of view you can't get without it.

 

[Zaax]

I had the original X100 and when the conversion lenses came out bought them. I liked the WCL-X100 but it changed the balance of the camera and made the camera a lot bigger. The TCL-X100 is huge and makes the camera very conspicuous. The balance is terrible with the TCL. I did not find it worth carrying the TCL around. One thing that always worried me about using either was crossthreading the ring where they attach to the camera.

A lot of the point of the X100 series is that they are small and light. The conversion lenses defeat that. After a while I sold both.

Recently I sold a bunch of Fuji stuff including the X100 and bought a X100F. I have no intention of buying either conversion lens.

 

[LeicaC]

I have both. I use the wide converter far more often, as the tele is awkward and heavier to carry around. Optically they are both great.

 

[purpwaltz]

In the few weeks since I bought the X100F, I have felt the need for a slightly wider perspective a few times. So I bought a WCL converter for USD 215 off Amazon. I should have it in my hands in a few weeks, post whichI can post my observations.

 

[Lahmajunior]

Dear all,

I am wondering how many X100(F) users are using the conversion lenses as well. Up to now, I am quite happy with the X100F for travel, but should I get the WCL or TCL for just in case....?

Get the WCL. It's fabulous and better balanced than the TCL.

It's extremely fast and sharp too.

I'm a longtime 28mm fan, having used Ricoh GRs for years.

 

[KFo]

It’s sets up the camera for the trinity: 28, 35, 50. You’ll think it was made in Wetzlar once you get this setup.

I’ve got them both. I like the versatility that the converters add to the system. You can not digitally go wider so the WCL (28mmFF) makes the most sense. The TCL can of course be more or less duplicated digitally, either in camera or in post. Nonetheless I have the TCL and enjoy shooting with it as well.

[I forget to add the picture when I posted]




Fuji X100F w/50mm TCL



--
More pictures, less talk.
.
Unconcerned but not indifferent.
.
Sharpness is a bourgeoisie concept.
.
Opted into the Fuji X system big time. Like to travel light and shot quick; that's why I also have a Ricoh GR....
INSTAGRAM https://www.instagram.com/streeteatsyou/
BLOG http://streeteatsyou.com/category/photography/

 

[Babu K]

Dear all,

I am wondering how many X100(F) users are using the conversion lenses as well. Up to now, I am quite happy with the X100F for travel, but should I get the WCL or TCL for just in case....?

Get the WCL. It's fabulous and better balanced than the TCL.

It's extremely fast and sharp too.

I'm a longtime 28mm fan, having used Ricoh GRs for years.

I agree, I think 28mm is the best focal length for street photography. I use the WCL a lot.

 

[DarnGoodPhotos]

Dear all,

I am wondering how many X100(F) users are using the conversion lenses as well. Up to now, I am quite happy with the X100F for travel, but should I get the WCL or TCL for just in case....?

I would say WCL first since the digital teleconverter can mimic 35mm, but not 18mm. But honestly, in all the time you have used your X100 have you never wished for as lightly wider or longer lens?

--
www.darngoodphotos.com

 

[Andreasfe]

I have both conversion lenses, but don't use them very much.

When traveling I usually bring the WCL. I find it practical to have the option for something little bit wider in tight city streets etc.

It's also quite small and have the same filter thread diameter as the filter ring for the native lens. I tend to have with me a ND-filter, which, in combination with the built in ND, gives me great flexibility for some long exposures.

If I know there's gonna be some portraits or other things that will need a more compressed look and a bit more shallow depth of field than what the native lens can give me., then I will bring the TCL as well. Although I find that this conversion lens makes the whole package too bulky and a bit uncomfortable to use.

 

[KaanG]

The X100 series is all about practicality. I don't understand how the conversion lenses will fly with the main idea behind this camera.

The Ricoh GR has the 21mm eqv. conversion lens with makes perfect sense. The difference between 28mm and 21mm eqv. is huge. But the conversion lenses don't change the fov that much, especially the teleconversion adapter.

The best thing about the X100 is that the lens is so small and that flat profile helps with both portability and stealth. But once you add those conversion lenses, it becomes another ILC.

I would consider a second hand X70 or XF10 as a second body if you need to go wider, because carrying a rectengular camera is more practical than the round lens. The price will be similar as well

 

[Zaax]

The X100 series is all about practicality. I don't understand how the conversion lenses will fly with the main idea behind this camera.

The Ricoh GR has the 21mm eqv. conversion lens with makes perfect sense. The difference between 28mm and 21mm eqv. is huge. But the conversion lenses don't change the fov that much, especially the teleconversion adapter.

The best thing about the X100 is that the lens is so small and that flat profile helps with both portability and stealth. But once you add those conversion lenses, it becomes another ILC.

When I had my X100 and both conversion lenses I ended up selling both lenses as it destroyed the whole point of the camera to be small, light and unobtrusive. Have a X100F now and do not intend to buy either lenses.

--
Zack S
"May the Focus be with you"
Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/10025089@N05

 

[MikeF15]

I too have hmm’d and hawwww’d about getting both conversion lenses but decided the digital “zoom” fit my need on the long end of things. While for a wider solution I use my x70 which can create fantastic images.

i believe there may be a wide angle conversion lens for the x70 which would give a 21mm FOV and would further increase the versatility of the camera combination. Of course that comes with the price of carrying more gear around which then negates the “portability” of a one camera/ two small camera setup.

the one-two punch and versatility of two cameras is great and having the flippy screen on the x70 helps when trying to be in a group photo and frame from a few feet away as well.

good luck with your decision and happy shooting!

Mike F

 

[Andreasfe]

I would consider a second hand X70 or XF10 as a second body if you need to go wider, because carrying a rectengular camera is more practical than the round lens. The price will be similar as well

I second it as a great alternative. Especially the X70, in terms of redundancy and having a camera with a flip screen.

But is it more practical to bring an extra camera (with maybe an extra of those other tiny NP-95 batteries) in terms of size and bulk? I dont think so. The WCL is small and also thinner than the X70. I can't see your logic here. The WCL-X100 can be throwed in anywhere.

The price of a used X70 is not even close to the a used price for a WCL-X100? Its like $400 vs $150.

But, of course, in terms of practicality and versatility, I see the combination of a X70 and X100F as a great combination. And I really hope Fujifilm will come back with a refined X70 successor.

Cheers.

 

[KFo]

I think the converters make a lot of sense for one camera shooters. You get the same controls, same batteries, same everything, with a little added versatility. I just don’t see a downside to this.

You can still have the minimal package of the X100F, then add in the convertors whenever you want.







--
More pictures, less talk.
.
Unconcerned but not indifferent.
.
Sharpness is a bourgeoisie concept.
.
Opted into the Fuji X system big time. Like to travel light and shot quick; that's why I also have a Ricoh GR....
INSTAGRAM https://www.instagram.com/streeteatsyou/
BLOG http://streeteatsyou.com/category/photography/

 

[Lahmajunior]

The best thing about the X100 is that the lens is so small and that flat profile helps with both portability and stealth. But once you add those conversion lenses, it becomes another ILC.

The X100F is just a smaller ILC in profile. It has no stealth qualities, physically speaking. It's way too large. I shoot all the time with it in very crowded urban settings.

I also own a GR and have used the series for years. It's a far more discrete camera in terms of being noticed and the response of people around you to it.

When you add a WCL or TCL to the X100F, it just enhances what is an already noticeable size, IE that you're using a camera.

You don't walk around with a conversion lens 24/7 anyway. You just have them available for instances when they're needed.

 

[ViMa]

When I had the X100F I bought both lenses. I ended up selling everything because of the TCL. The output (and FL - for me) of the TCL is excellent. But I felt it ruined the feel and handling of the X100F completely. On the other hand, the WCL fit the camera perfectly and didn't create trouble for me.

Having said that, I did not use it as much as I was not used to shooting so wide at the time.

 

[modo]

I have both conversion lenses, but only because I happened to come across a relative bargain at a used camera shop. I wouldn't have bothered otherwise; I tend to agree with Ken Rockwell - the X100 is not an interchangeable lens camera; if you wan't that get something else - X-E3 springs to mind immediately. Having said that, it's nice to have them, and I do use them occasionally. Although I agree that the wide angle conversion lens is intrinsically more useful - the point has been made that you can crop the native lens to achieve a tele effect, nevertheless I prefer the TLC, notwithstanding its huge size, I just happen to like the 50mm equivalent focal length.

 

[Keithpictures]

The X100 series is all about practicality. I don't understand how the conversion lenses will fly with the main idea behind this camera.

The Ricoh GR has the 21mm eqv. conversion lens with makes perfect sense. The difference between 28mm and 21mm eqv. is huge. But the conversion lenses don't change the fov that much, especially the teleconversion adapter.

The best thing about the X100 is that the lens is so small and that flat profile helps with both portability and stealth. But once you add those conversion lenses, it becomes another ILC.

I would consider a second hand X70 or XF10 as a second body if you need to go wider, because carrying a rectengular camera is more practical than the round lens. The price will be similar as well

I absolutely agree. It’s all about the flat body and minimal profile of the X100 shape.

If I cared about an angle wider than 35, I’d shoot with the X70 or GR3, or just get an ILC with some pancakes. The Panasonic GX9 with 24-64 equiv pancake zoom would fill this well. But 28mm isn’t worth the change. Can just shoot on the smartphone for that FoV.

I can imagine an ideal scenario of adding a conversion lens to the X100 if it somehow maintained the overall compactness, and offered a more dramatic change - make a 21mm the size of a filter, and I’d gladly carry that. That’s not gonna happen tho.

 

[KaanG]

The best thing about the X100 is that the lens is so small and that flat profile helps with both portability and stealth. But once you add those conversion lenses, it becomes another ILC.

The X100F is just a smaller ILC in profile. It has no stealth qualities, physically speaking. It's way too large. I shoot all the time with it in very crowded urban settings.

I also own a GR and have used the series for years. It's a far more discrete camera in terms of being noticed and the response of people around you to it.

When you add a WCL or TCL to the X100F, it just enhances what is an already noticeable size, IE that you're using a camera.

You don't walk around with a conversion lens 24/7 anyway. You just have them available for instances when they're needed.

When it comes to "blending into the environment" I think the lens sticking in front of the camera spoils your camouflage. The lens on the X100 series is almost flat which makes it less noticeable. For sure anyone can understand that you are taking a picture, but if a long fat lens is sticking out of your camera, it's much more noticeable.

The sony a6000 series might have a slimmer body, but any lens that you put on that body makes it bigger