User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  11
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22

Thread: Seeking Focal Length Advice Based on Style of Images (Samples Shown)...

  1. #1
    Member toast's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 2009
    Location
    North Ryde
    Posts
    20
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Seeking Focal Length Advice Based on Style of Images (Samples Shown)...

    Hi Everyone,

    Can you please take a look at the images and make some focal length recommendations for me?

    All of these images were taken on a Nokia Lumia 920 and I'm looking to upgrade to a Fujifilm X camera with a few primes and the standard kit zoom. I have a budget that will limit me to the kit lens and two primes.

    This will be my first serious camera with quality lenses and I'll be carrying it everywhere as I have done with my smartphone. Based on the things I like to shoot I thought to buy the following lenses:
    Fujifilm XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 R LM OIS Zoom Lens (kit);
    Fujifilm XF 14mm f/2.8 R Ultra Wide-Angle Lens;
    Fujifilm XF 23mm f/1.4 R Lens.

    These will go onto either a Fujifilm X-E2, or an X-T1. My preference is for the X-T1.

    I'm interested in:
    Street (the Nokia was just far too slow for this);
    Landscape and foreground object emphasis, looking out from small spaces; and
    Architecture (even though only one or two samples shown);
    Products, or objects.

    Dunno about portraits - maybe an extension of street photography?

    I don't think the Fujifilm XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 R LM OIS Lens is going to get much use. But, if you think otherwise please let me know.

    The Fujifilm 35mm f/1.4 XF R Lens looks like a fantastic standard prime but I dunno how useful it will be if I have the 23mm lens and the 18-55mm zoom. I think the 35mm would only be useful to me in low-light situations that the zoom won't like.

    Thanks all.
    Nick
































  2. #2
    Moderately Underexposed I @ M's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 2007
    Location
    Marlo, Far East Gippsland
    Posts
    4,911
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    My $$ would be going on the X-T1 and the 35mm F/1.4 to start with and wait for the 10-24 zoom which is expected to start selling here in March.
    I would by pass both the 18-55 and the 55-200 ( unless you feel the need for the reach of the 200 end ) and then think about something like the 60mm macro which would work well as portrait lens as well as macro and general purpose a bit later on.
    Andrew
    Nikon, Fuji, Nikkor, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina and too many other bits and pieces to list.



  3. #3
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,643
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    What happened to your D200, as the D200 was a good serious bit of kit, and still performs admirably?


    Based on your choices Get:
    Fujifilm XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 R LM OIS Zoom Lens (kit);
    Fujifilm XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 R LM OIS

    that covers you from 18mm - 200mm, You will be surprised how often 100mm and more is great for portraits, street photography.

    then get Fujifilm XF 14mm f/2.8 R Ultra Wide-Angle Lens; for your landscapes etc.

    that covers it all fairly much, and you have one less lens than you planned for (the 23mm is covered by the 18-55). So you would have some $ left over for something else. Andrew ^ offers you some good alternative ideas.
    Last edited by ricktas; 11-02-2014 at 6:19am.
    "It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro

    Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
    Nikon, etc!

    RICK
    My Photography

  4. #4
    Member
    Threadstarter
    toast's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 2009
    Location
    North Ryde
    Posts
    20
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by I @ M View Post
    My $$ would be going on the X-T1 and the 35mm F/1.4 to start with and wait for the 10-24 zoom which is expected to start selling here in March.
    I would by pass both the 18-55 and the 55-200 ( unless you feel the need for the reach of the 200 end ) and then think about something like the 60mm macro which would work well as portrait lens as well as macro and general purpose a bit later on.
    Wow, Andrew, those are very different recommendations. Thank you. With the 10-24 this looks like great coverage indeed. However, what do you think about the speed of the 10-24 compared to the primes? Especially compared to the 23mm f1.4 street optimal lens? Or, are you prioritising focal length coverage for budget? Are you recommending the 60mm primarily for macro?

    Thanks again.
    Nick

  5. #5
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,643
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    the 'speed' is not really a speed. the speed is what shutter speed you use. When people talk about the speed of a lens, it generally refers to how fast it will auto-focus and lock. You will not really notice that much difference between f1.4 and f2.8 at all. But an f1.4 lens and a f2.8 lens, both set to f4 will enerally produce the same exposure as long as the photographer uses the same settings (iso. aperture. shutter speed).

    For most work, portraits, you are not going to use f1.4 anyway, as the depth of field will be to shallow at close distances to subject and result in blurring of part of your subject's face.

    So an f-rating does not really make a lens any faster than any other lens in the real world, except for speed of locking focus and between an f1.4 and f2.8 lens, we would be talking fractions of a second variance in how fast the AF system worked.

  6. #6
    Member
    Threadstarter
    toast's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 2009
    Location
    North Ryde
    Posts
    20
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ricktas View Post
    What happened to your D200, as the D200 was a good serious bit of kit, and still performs admirably?


    Based on your choices Get:
    Fujifilm XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 R LM OIS Zoom Lens (kit);
    Fujifilm XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 R LM OIS

    that covers you from 18mm - 200mm, You will be surprised how often 100mm and more is great for portraits, street photography.

    then get Fujifilm XF 14mm f/2.8 R Ultra Wide-Angle Lens; for your landscapes etc.

    that covers it all fairly much, and you have one less lens than you planned for (the 23mm is covered by the 18-55). So you would have some $ left over for something else. Andrew ^ offers you some good alternative ideas.
    Dayum, Rick, you've got a hell of a memory, haha! I still have it but hated the 70-300 kit lens that came with it, and the only other lens was a 14mm I think. It was big and heavy and I guess I never got the bug until I had the Nokia which was on me all the time and so easy to begin using. I could select focal point and metering point when touching the screen to shoot! Too damn easy but it got me interested.

    I began to look for something similar in execution and found the Canon EOS M. However, its poor auto-focus performance counted it out. I was hoping for the rumoured pro version to come out, but then got interested in the m4/3 and Fuji gear after moving beyond the idea of a more sophisticated smart phone (AKA EOS M).

    I think the main reason I didn't use the D200 was because I wasn't interested in my surroundings, being in Canberra. I'm currently in Dehradun, India and will be travelling a bit for the next six months or so. Maybe returning to Rishikesh and then Thailand and back to Australia (but not Canberra). Those landscapes were taken in New Zealand, where I was visiting prior to coming to India.

    I was even interested in the Sony A7 for a while, primarily due to its low-light capability. However, the AF was just not fast enough for the street stuff I want to take. There have been countless moments when I wanted to shoot street with the Nokia but there was just no way because it is so, so, so slow. But, I have had it set to ISO 100 to get best quality.

    There are many great things about the Fuji X cameras but a primary attribute I really like is the physical dials. My brain just refused to want to learn the Nikon's menu system. Although, I wasn't sufficiently motivated while living in Canberra.

    Cheers,
    Nick

  7. #7
    Moderately Underexposed I @ M's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 2007
    Location
    Marlo, Far East Gippsland
    Posts
    4,911
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by toast View Post
    The Fujifilm 35mm f/1.4 XF R Lens looks like a fantastic standard prime but I dunno how useful it will be if I have the 23mm lens and the 18-55mm zoom. I think the 35mm would only be useful to me in low-light situations that the zoom won't like.
    Quote Originally Posted by toast View Post
    However, what do you think about the speed of the 10-24 compared to the primes? Especially compared to the 23mm f1.4 street optimal lens? Or, are you prioritising focal length coverage for budget?
    You answered your own question in the first post. Neither the 18-55 or the 10-24 are going to be particularly useful as low light lenses compared to both the 24 or 35. I was prioritising with focal lengths in mind over budget. I find that if I want to photograph with an ultra wide to wide angle zoom lens that I am not going to be considering it in a low light situation and if I am looking for low light capability then a F/1.4 lens of the desired focal length will be mounted.

    You need to decide whether your priorities are width or speed. Having an interchangeable lens camera gives you the ability to fit the lens that best suits the occasion at hand. If you want an all in one solution to cover both then my recommendations would be for a DSLR and something like a Sigma 18-35 F/1.8

    Quote Originally Posted by toast View Post
    Are you recommending the 60mm primarily for macro?
    No, not primarily for macro. It is a reasonably fast lens that would work well for portraits and candids with the added benefit of being true macro capable.

  8. #8
    Member
    Threadstarter
    toast's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 2009
    Location
    North Ryde
    Posts
    20
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks, guys. I gotta sleep and will be back tomorrow. But, thanks Rick for pointing out the DOF restricting the use of the low fstop in the primes. Andrew, thanks also. I chose the primes because all the Fuji guys love them so much, especially the 23mm for street.

    I've never used the flash on the Nokia and dreamed about getting a camera and lenses that would give me the flexibility to shoot low light and still capture candid shots of people and objects moving around at normal speeds.

    Sorry guys, I am stepping into the deep end by asking about lenses and probably going to give you a headache haha. I see I just don't have the language nor experience to understand properly. For example, regarding DOF limiting the use of the low fstop: doesn't the DOF increase the further out you focus? Meaning that if the primes are used at or closer to infinity there would be no DOF issue at wide open?

    I know, probably not the time or place to get into the basics of photography. I'll digest your recommendations and see if I can't research answers to the questions that come up. Thanks again guys.
    Last edited by toast; 11-02-2014 at 7:07am.

  9. #9
    Moderately Underexposed I @ M's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 2007
    Location
    Marlo, Far East Gippsland
    Posts
    4,911
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by toast View Post

    There are many great things about the Fuji X cameras but a primary attribute I really like is the physical dials. My brain just refused to want to learn the Nikon's menu system. Although, I wasn't sufficiently motivated while living in Canberra.
    If you couldn't stand the Nikon menu system then the Fuji is not the camera for you. Both the Nikon and Fuji have menu systems that need learning and as for dials, both the D200 and Fuji cameras operate ( or can be set to operate ) in almost exactly the same manner.

  10. #10
    Member
    Threadstarter
    toast's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 2009
    Location
    North Ryde
    Posts
    20
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Good point, Andrew. I think it wasn't so much the Nikon menu system as my laziness and lack of motivation. That and the fact that the D200 was quite big and I didn't have the right lenses, and didn't know what I wanted to shoot. Perhaps it was a time and a place thing. Anyway, having the smartphone on me all the time and having such a good camera with OIS seems to have kickstarted my interest in photography.

    I think my initial impulse to upgrade from the Nokia was to get a top quality compact that would replicate the shooting style of the smartphone but bring speed and quality, and the option to go manual as I progressed. Hence my interest in the Canon EOS M.

    Anyway, I think the Fuji X cameras are significantly small enough that I can pretty much have it on me most of the time.

    One option is that I just get the X100S and just spend time with a single focal length (a great many people love this angle and that is all that they require for almost all of their shooting), or I continue with the decision to get the X-T1 with 18-55mm kit zoom and the 23mm prime. There isn't any savings to be had by buying lenses up front and this way I can make a more informed purchase later on. I realise now that while it is fantastic to have great advice from very experienced photographers like yourselves, without an appropriate level of experience and knowledge myself I cannot interpret the advice properly and apply it to my own photography. It would require that you explain your choices and shooting styles in much more detail. Taking up much time and effort from you.

    One thing I have appreciated about the Nokia is the fixed focal length. As others have said, having a single focal length can improve one's visualisation, intuition, and speed in capture. Certainly, the method of pre-setting hyper focal length and exposure for fast street photography is very appealing and I don't think this technique is used on zooms. That said, as you mentioned, Ricktas, using a 55-200mm zoom can also allow a more deliberate method for street and other photography, including portraits. Hmmm.

    Lens choice is certainly a very individual choice. One that is clearly evidenced by both of your recommendations above. Andrew, you recommended the classic 35mm standard prime and an ultra-wide to wide angle zoom. Whereas Ricktas, you recommended one or both of the kit zooms and the 14mm for the ultra wide end. Neither of you recommended the 23mm street prime which was unexpected. The majority of the street shooters have promoted the 23mm over the 35mm lens, citing that the 35mm is too narrow. Interesting.

    Still others add either the 27mm pancake prime for ultra lightweight snapping, or the tele zoom for distance street shooting.

    Going the X100S route would simplify things greatly, and keep costs down. However, I am afraid of wanting other focal lengths as I progress in my learning and being limited. I could go to the X-E2 but then I may as well go for the X-T1. Getting the kit lens seems to be the practical thing to do as a good saving can be had in a kit purchase.

    As usual, money dictates choice.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  11. #11
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,643
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    To be frank (hi frank!)

    I think it wasn't so much the Nikon menu system as my laziness and lack of motivation.
    The issue here will be this ^^, not the gear you have. Hand me a Fuji with a kit lens and I could get some brilliant street photos, at 10mm, 23mm, 35mm or 200mm. The camera is just a tool and the skill of the photographer is paramount. It seems to me from your comments that you think the gear is going to be your savior. It won't be!

    If someone is telling you to get a 35mm over a 23mm for street photography, that just shows their limited viewpoint and self imposed restriction on their photography. So go ahead and get the 35mm and shoot the same as all these other photographers, or get the 23mm and create your own style.

    Hope I an confusing you even more, cause you should be, cause there is no simple easy answer to what you want. You need to decide what you think you want, get it, love it, learn how to work it, and improve your photography. Listening to others to much, just means you end up with the same kit as them, taking the same photos as them....boring!

    If you want excitement and fun, do it differently!

  12. #12
    Moderately Underexposed I @ M's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 2007
    Location
    Marlo, Far East Gippsland
    Posts
    4,911
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by toast View Post

    One option is that I just get the X100S and just spend time with a single focal length (a great many people love this angle and that is all that they require for almost all of their shooting),
    The X100s is the option I elected for a lightweight pocketable camera with good controls and excellent image quality and I very much like the 23mm field of view which corresponds roughly with my other much liked 35mm lens on a Nikon FX body. In saying that, I didn't replace one system with the other, they both meet totally different needs and that is where you need to decide what your needs are.


    Quote Originally Posted by toast View Post
    The majority of the street shooters have promoted the 23mm over the 35mm lens, citing that the 35mm is too narrow.
    Please cite your source of the majority of street shooters , I am afraid this whole "street shooting" thing is very over hyped at the moment and places like flikr seem to be the natural habitat of claimants to the title of that genre and even then if you go back through their photos 12 months or so you find the inevitable pictures of cats.

    My preference for the 35mm over the 23mm was based on focal length duplication in conjunction with the 10-24 zoom and the fact that the 35 mm is a brilliant lens by anyone's standards. If I was going to buy a Fuji interchangeable lens body I would simply stick to the primes that work well for my type of photography but once again, you need to decide what you want to do primarily. There is no one stop solution I feel. That is another reason I bought the X100s, I didn't want to become involved in another system that involved wallet draining expenditure on lenses.

  13. #13
    Ausphotography Regular swifty's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 May 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,440
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    A lot of good advice here already.
    But something struck me about your original post in that you want to take it everywhere with you just like your smartphone.
    Other's experience may differ but I have found I can't achieve this unless I can fit the camera in my jeans pocket.
    Once I have to use a wrist strap or more, it no longer is a take anywhere camera. But it all depends on how you travel and get around I suppose. If you always have a messenger bag or something along those lines then your scope of choice really opens up.
    If you do end up living/travelling in cold climate, your jeans pocket size also changes to jacket pocket sized.

    Anyways, with consideration to just pocket cameras that are of high quality, the Sony RX100/II stands out currently. But I get the feeling the high end P&S market is about to get a shake up. For example look at the heavily leaked Canon G1 X Mark II that is considerably slimmer than the mark I and sports an almost APS-C sensor but will likely be a bit too big to be considered pocketable.
    Also, arguably cameras such as the Ricoh GR are still pocketable but the X100s that Andrew has is probably a little beyond that.

    So how crucial is the 'take anywhere' aspect or do you just want a camera system to expand your photographic capabilities without going to the full sized DSLRs.
    Nikon FX

  14. #14
    Moderately Underexposed I @ M's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 2007
    Location
    Marlo, Far East Gippsland
    Posts
    4,911
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by swifty View Post
    Also, arguably cameras such as the Ricoh GR are still pocketable but the X100s that Andrew has is probably a little beyond that.
    Ok Ok, I know I am a little overweight but seriously, the X100s will fit in front pockets of cargo type pants and shorts comfortably or in the rear pockets of loose fitting pants ( not jeans ).

    I would post photos to prove it but I am so NOT into selfies. :P

  15. #15
    Member
    Threadstarter
    toast's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 2009
    Location
    North Ryde
    Posts
    20
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by swifty View Post
    A lot of good advice here already.
    But something struck me about your original post in that you want to take it everywhere with you just like your smartphone...
    Thanks, Swifty. I was just rethinking the portability factor and have indeed been looking at the RX100 MkII, and also the Panasonic GM1. The Canon G1 X MkII you mention has just appeared on dpreview, as has the Sony a6000. Both of these new cameras are looking good for someone like me who wants to have a camera with them almost as much as the smartphone.

    I think the X-T1 would be an awesome camera and if I could find a way to have it on me without it becoming an burden then that would be the most desired solution. I'll have to give it lots of thought to see if I can come up with a way to make it possible. Although, I am travelling right now and there are plenty of interesting subjects to shoot, so I want the camera on me whenever I go out. However, when I am back in a routine I will probably go out specifically to shoot and so the always on me requirement will not be in effect.

    Regardless, I'll be looking at the P&S sized cameras extensively to see if these will give me the scope to grow with me into the future, and to see if they might be every bit as enjoyable to use as something like the X-T1.

  16. #16
    Member
    Threadstarter
    toast's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 2009
    Location
    North Ryde
    Posts
    20
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In addition to the above fixed-lens cameras, the due-to-be released Fujifilm X30 will be an interesting consideration - as long as Fuji can resolve the apparent noise levels that start as low as ISO 400 on the X20. I think IQ was the only major complaint for that camera.

    Regarding focal lengths for a limited budget, I found this article and a review by Ming Thien useful:
    *removed - read the site rules, in particular rule #4*

    In this article he suggests his ideal travel package for his m4/3 E-M1 as being a 24/1.4 (48mm FF) and an 85/1.4 (170mm FF). Although, I don't know what he uses for ultra-wide and wide angles (if any), and 170 is an interesting length for a fixed telephoto.

    And, his recommendation for a single zoom plus a prime in this review of the Olympus 12-40 f2.8 M.Zuiko PRO (24-80 FF equivalent):
    *removed - read the site rules, in particular rule #4*
    In a stroke, I think this lens becomes the defining do-it-all-and-anywhere for M4/3; yes, it’s a bit large, but the useful range, reasonably large aperture, solid build, outstanding optics, very close minimum focusing distance more than outweigh that. It’s not a cheap lens; but then again, I can’t think of any others with the same spec that are. Optically, this is one of the best zoom lenses I’ve ever used. It can replace a couple of primes in your kit quite easily; paired with the 75/1.8, I suspect this will make an outstandingly flexible travel combination. And yes, I’ve ordered one to go with my E-M1.
    He almost mirrored Andrew's recommendation of an excellent quality fast zoom paired with a prime (where budget trumps purchase of all primes). Although, once again, I don't know what he is using for ultra-wide.

    Clearly, choosing the right focal lengths and lens types for a range of styles is going to be different for each person. As Ming says, there isn't really a proper perspective and a wide-angle or telephoto can be used for portraits and street as much as a standard.

    And, as Ming reiterates in his travel article, and as Andrew and Rick have both said, the subject/location, experience and preference generally decides what one should bring along or purchase. For the beginner like me it's going to be a bit of try-it-and-see.

    Thanks guys.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I think that the process of discovering the right focal lengths might require that I find the distances I am comfortable with when engaging the world around me. Naturally, this will be different according to mental state/level of interest/motivation/perception/perspective at the time and the situation.

    As I engage I can explore different distances and alternative angles. Some days I will be happy to get close on the street with a wide or ultra-wide prime, or I might be looking side-ways at the world and like to use a telephoto to reflect this mental position and capture what this viewpoint reveals/perceives.

    Of course, I can detach and just use whatever focal length is required to achieve an arbitrary effect.

    So yeah, choosing the right focal lengths is going to be as much a self-study as it will be a technical consideration.

    - - - Updated - - -

    *images removed- do not post photos that you have not taken onto Ausphotography. This is a copyright breach. Read the site rules, in particular rule 20*
    Last edited by ricktas; 15-02-2014 at 8:40am. Reason: grammar

  17. #17
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    8,185
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Going by the type of images in your OP .. I'd say that the 35/1.4 will be too limiting for you.

    Of course I don't know this has been a deliberate set of images posted(as in these are the types of images you like), or just as a consequence(that is the phone is limited to capture these types of images).

    But one thing is abundantly clear in the images posted, your preference for environmental portraits.

    That is, not so close in and intimate with long focal length/limited FOV .. but more of the people, and more importantly the background they're surrounded by.
    So you have the people, but also and strongly indicating where these people are!.

    The widest fastest portrait type lens for the system you're buying into will be (most likely) you favoured lens.

    I'm not sure if the 14mm is capable of achieving that end effectively .. 14mm even on an AP-S sized sensor, while it's not the same wild FOV and distorted lens as it will be on an Fx sensor .. it will still distort.

    I would hazard a guess that the 23mm will be more sufficient, but if one exists between 14mm and 23mm, then this may be more ideal for you.

    The question then becomes that of .. how confident are you in getting closer to the subject to get your shot?
    Wider = getting closer, otherwise it has the potential to be just another smartphone image. Which then begs more questions .. etc, etc.

    I'd say go to the extremes with your focal lengths(up to a point)

    23/1.4 + 55-200 will give you 'the best of both worlds' in a manner of speaking.

    23mm gives you that environmental portrait you seem to enjoy doing .. and 55-200 is more general, but also allows you the option to keep your distance if needed too.

    Speed of lens in the case of the Fuji cameras seem to be moot in many ways. Yeah it'll give you the ability to separate subject from the environment, but in terms of shutter and ISO ratings .. Well ISO on any current Fuji is damned close to usable all through the range in raw mode(ISO6400 has never really looked so good on any current crop cameras to date).

    ideally you'd want this 10-24, 23, and 55-200 if you think you'll use it.

    The comment re the Fuji noise levels(starting at ISO400) are a bit confusing too tho.

    Have a look on DPR to see a real time indication of what camera does what at which ISO setting.

    I'd be happy to leave a Fuji X-trans sensor at ISO6400(in raw mode) all day if need be.

    The only reason any other camera does better at high ISO is via the age old adage of output display size. So, that any 24Mp sensored camera no matter how badly it does at the pixel level at high ISO, will look cleaner at the same output level as the Fuji sensors.

    That is, the 24 million pixels are all downscaled so that the inherent noise isn't as obvious as the less downscaled Fuji(and m4/3's) images .. which sort of means it looks cleaner.
    That's how DxO works as a reference guide.

    ps. I can confirm Andrew's comment re the pocketability of the Fuji X100s. Seen it, even tried it while he was out adding to his collection of coffin nails(where I'd forgotten mine! ).

    Fuji in pocket is like a wallet full of cash .. you feel all the richer for it!
    Last edited by arthurking83; 17-02-2014 at 5:59am. Reason: edited out the double posting issue.
    Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
    {Nikon} -> 50/1.2 : 500/8(CPU'd) : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8ais : 105mm f/1.8ais : 24mm/2ais
    {Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
    {Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC


  18. #18
    Member
    Threadstarter
    toast's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 2009
    Location
    North Ryde
    Posts
    20
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thank you, Arthur. I very much appreciate your insight and comments. Very helpful and informative indeed. I completely agree that I seem to have a preference for environmental portraiture. I really like the wide angle for this and, after reflection, I think the 55-200 would also provide the means to capture environmental portraits that will be quite different to the close-up wide angle viewpoint, where I am approaching the world in a far more reflective way.

    I've done a ton of reading these past few days, including researching the range of mirrorless cameras from compact enthusiast cameras, like the Sony RX100 II and Fujifilm X20 (this was the Fuji that appears to suffer noise from ISO 400), right up to the larger Olympus OM-D E-M1 and Fujifilm X-T1 models.

    I was out at dinner with friends tonight and was taking some shots with my Lumia 920. I don't like to use flash and even at ISO 400 the camera was struggling with the low light. It is just so slow from the time the shutter button is pressed (actually, I always use the touch screen to take the shot) and even small movements were blurred. I didn't want to ask people to stop and hold steady so really I couldn't get much. I thought that it would be great to have something like the X-T1 but wondered about the intrusiveness of the camera's size (even with only something like the 27mm pancake or 23mm prime).

    However, I could probably have a small bum-bag that could hold the X-T1 with a flat lens and walking with this would be okay. It could even be quite unnoticeable to others and not be burdensome to me. A slightly bigger X100S when fitted with a small lens?

    As much as I like the thought of having a small go-anywhere camera like the Sony RX100 II I think there will be many situations where I will want the larger and more capable X-T1.

    I agree with your recommendation of the (APS-C native) 23mm and 55-200mm lenses for starters. I also think the 10-24mm would be fantastic to have as well. I don't know why, but the 35mm doesn't interest me at this point in time and perhaps that is because of my experience with the wide angle on the Lumia 920.

    Hopefully, the 55-200mm is also available as a kit option on the X-T1 but so far I haven't seen it.

    Cheers,
    Nick


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    28 Aug 2008
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,913
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Those sample pics you posted are more in line with my favoured travel lens, the Canon 35L - my preferred choice for environmental portraiture during travels as I can still isolate the subject enough with a shallow depth of field that is almost impossible to achieve on say - a 24L etc. Yet be wide enough for landscapes without suffering much barrel distortion and maintaining an awesome low light capability.

    But traveling with just one prime lens is not something most ppl are comfortable with.
    Commercial/Editorial/Wedding work - www.jackietranphoto.com
    Travel Photography - www.wanderingasianguy.com

    Broncolor lights up my world.

  20. #20
    Member
    Threadstarter
    toast's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 2009
    Location
    North Ryde
    Posts
    20
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thank you, JM. The Fuji 23mm is the 35mm equivalent.

    Interestingly, according to dpreview, the Lumia 920 has a FF equivalent focal length of 26mm in 16:9:
    http://connect.dpreview.com/post/912...iew-first-look

    The 14mm is a 21mm FF equivalent and is 5mm shorter than the 920's 26mm FF equivalent. This might be just too low - as you say, Arthur.

    I've been looking for a small waist pack to carry the X-T1 / 27mm prime combo wherever I go and the Lowepro Adventura Ultra Zoom 100 - also here on Youtube will fit the X-T1 with 27mm perfectly and can be attached to a belt (or use its own). I would be happy to carry this everywhere.

    For the rest of the focal lengths, I agree that the 10-24mm might be a good option with the 55-200. However, I am still attracted to primes and the 23mm sounds a very useful lens.

    So, the 10-24mm, 23mm, 27mm, and 55-200mm should cover everything for a while. The 18mm is closest to the Lumia 920, at 27mm FF equivalent. Unfortunately, the 55-200mm does not appear to come as a kit option.

    Cheers,
    Nick
    Last edited by toast; 19-02-2014 at 11:14am.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •