[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/p/ - Photography

[Advertise on 4chan]

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 60 posters in this thread.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks. Make sure to check your spam box!


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: M4pHE8ZJgfVLTk4RD36jqd.jpg (2.21 MB, 2601x2601)
2.21 MB
2.21 MB JPG
For me, it's the 35 1.4.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2018 (Macintosh)
PhotographerHandout
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2021:03:29 09:01:05
Exposure Time1/500 sec
F-Numberf/5.0
ISO Speed Rating640
Lens Aperturef/5.0
Brightness5.0 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Focal Length45.00 mm
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width2601
Image Height2601
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
File: goatmar_goatzalez.jpg (58 KB, 900x900)
58 KB
58 KB JPG
problema?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareGoogle
PhotographerOmar Gonzalez
Image-Specific Properties:
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
File: fuji lenses 2.jpg (144 KB, 880x1050)
144 KB
144 KB JPG
finally a new fuji appreciation general thread. I was worried it would die forever.
>>
>>3938915
I left the board for a few months and couldn't find it when I came back. I missed you guys...
>>
I wanna get into photography and currently eyeing used X-T20 listings. Thinking of pairing it up with 35mm f2 but all the listings I could find either sell the body at ridiculous prices or pair with the cheap XC16-50 or XF15-135 lenses.
Found a great listing with XF 18-55 f2.8-4. Now I've heard good things about this lens, should I grab it and try to resell/swap it with a 35mm prime lens? What do I do lads?
>>
File: tjshgaebrs.jpg (4.56 MB, 3774x2831)
4.56 MB
4.56 MB JPG
Sold my soulless z6 a couple weeks ago for Fuji, love it but fuck me the glass is expensive.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeApple
Camera ModeliPhone 12 Pro Max
Camera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 4.4 (Macintosh)
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)26 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2021:09:13 20:56:10
Exposure Time1/35 sec
F-Numberf/1.6
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating400
Lens Aperturef/1.6
Brightness0.3 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length5.10 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3938918
I would get an XT-2 for WR, better viewfinder, has a joystick, bigger better screen, 2 sd slots, etc. What's the price difference where you live between the two?
>>
>>3938920
Congrats man, may it serve you well. Buying new I would agree, but used Fuji lenses really are a great value. Especially so the ones that've been around a while as they're cheap, have great iq and retain their value very well.
>>
>>3938921
Slightly higher usually. But I just found a listing for XT-2 with some accessories + XC 35mm f2 lens for the same price. Is the difference between the two really significant, especially between XF 35mm f2 & XC 35mm f2 lenses?
>>
>>3938924
XC and XF 35f2 is optically the same lens but the XC is made of plastic and has no aperture or weather sealing. The differences between the X-T2 and X-T20 are subtle but I would go out of my way to pick the X-T2 every time, if for no other reasons than the joystick and the screen.
>>
>>3938924
Pretty sure the XF and XC 35 have the same glass and quality, the cheapness is from the materials, no aperture ring, aesthetics. I used the XC for a long time before selling my fuji stuff. Loved it, tried XF 35 for a bit and the images looked identical but felt much better to use ngl.
>>
>>3938927
>>3938928
jinx
>>
File: 1446090242685.jpg (51 KB, 359x305)
51 KB
51 KB JPG
>>3938928
>>3938927
Oh shit should I pull the plug then? I'm about to send the owner a message.
Aperture dial isn't a huge deal as I can always use one of the two dials on X-T2/20 I guess.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
>>
>>3938930
If you end up getting the x-t2 then i'd suggest the XF lens for the weather sealing. Although i had the XC on an X-t3 in drizzle and some rain (while keeping it covered as best i can) and it was fine.
>>
>>3938923

I'm a little wary of buying used, becasue of QC issues and potentially no recourse.

The first copy of my 56mm 1.2 had a loose focus ring with tons of play, shit would move if i even brushed past it with my finger. And my 100-400 had 2 loose mount screws and as a result of the play in the mount a lot of my pictures weren't sharp as i hoped. luckily i exchanged both under warranty
>>
>>3938930
You can always just get the x-t2 and sell the xc lens for whatever you want. Keep in mind bundles aren't always worth it, especially in some used markets. Where I am in particular normies are absolutely retarded and over value their gear like hell.
>>
>X-T2 has no touch-screen
Smartphones have been disastrous for the mankind. I honestly feel like a fag for saying this but I'd appreciate having it.
>>3938935
>>3938938
I might consider getting an XF once I get a hang of it. As I've said my options are either X-T20 with XF18-55 or X-T2 with XC 35mm. My cousin has XF35mm f2 on his X-T10 and I like the feel of it really, just not sure whether it deserves double the price over its XC counterpart.
>>
>>3938939
>deserves double the price over its XC counterpart.
Yeah I don't think it does, both those lenses are good to have in those bundles honestly. If it was me I'd go for the T2 even though I liked that 18-55
>>
>>3938920
>but fuck me the glass is expensive.
lmao and native z mount isnt?
i'll give you fuji chuds one thing: yall are actually buying and shooting with native lenses.
>>
File: xt2.jpg (311 KB, 900x1200)
311 KB
311 KB JPG
X-T2/X-T20 anon here, just got a reply from the X-T2 owner. The listing includes X-T2, Vertical Camera Grip, 3 batteries, charger, XC35mm f2, 64gb sd card. All for $650 when converted to USD.
The listing says the shutter is at 20.000s, the box for the camera is missing but the lens both box and still under warranty for two more years. In a way it feels too good to be true, I'm also hesitant about picking up a camera like an X-T2 as a beginner. I'm familiar with the concepts as I was into photography back in 2005 with my Sony H1 but all those buttons and dials scare me.
>>
>>3938966
650 sounds normal leaning for that set up, even leaning a bit high but I haven't bought or looked at the market in a while so someone else hopefully has a better idea.

Don't worry too much about being a beginner with the T2, You'll get used to the dials pretty quick they're just a physical representation of normal stuff you would be using anyways
>>
>>3938968
650 honestly feels good, the asking price for X-T20 at many places is around $450 for the body only here. Guess I'll meet with the seller tomorrow, anything I should be aware of before buying it?
>>
>>3938969
>anything I should be aware of before buying it?
About the camera and shooting experience or what to check when doing the purchase?
>>
>>3938971
Doing the purchase, such as hard to notice defects etc.
>>
>>3938939
I'll take a joystick over a touch screen every single time
>>
fuji users look like THAT?
>>
>>3938973
ngl, I had no issues with my cam for the whole time i had it, so my suggestion would be just as good as whatever googling you do.

I would just suggest that you take a few pics with it before buying just random shit. Most importantly just check the lens carefully.
>>
>>3938973
take test shots, focusing, test aperture/shutter speed/iso dials etc
>>
>>3939018
>>3939058
Eh, the camera was rather beaten up with its eyepiece rubber falling off. It shot fine but I couldn't bring myself dishing out $650 just like that. Guess I'll check the other X-T20 with the 18-55 f2.8
>>
>>3939246
damn rip. You won't regret the Xt20 either so not really a big deal. gl though
>>
>>3939256
>You won't regret the Xt20 either so not really a big deal.
Not him but I would not consider the x-t20 a replacement for the x-t2, it's better in every way.
>>
>>3939309
It was rather bulky, but the large viewfinder compared to X-T10's viewfinder (which my cousin has, assuming X-T20's viewfinder is of the same size) was great not gonna lie. I'm afraid the other T2 listings are above my budget, guess the seller knew and that's why she kept the price down.
The search continues. Found a mint X-T20 for $480, a $200 35mm/f2 XC drives the price way too up. I'll try to haggle tomorrow as the store that sells is within walking distance.
>>
>>3938909
all x cameras are gay shit and for neckbeard fedora types and girls. except for the x100 series. which is ok for a compact fashion statement i suppose. just get a real camera
>>
>>3938920
sold a real camera for a shite toy with a plastic stick on grip. must be the type that takes more pitures of his camera than with it
>>
>>3939309
Yeah, but t20 will still be fine was my point.
>>
File: EWPliGmUEAAAnv4.jpg (16 KB, 419x600)
16 KB
16 KB JPG
>>3939353
I don't know man. A a few points:
1) if you're a hobbyist it's a toy anyway, no matter the camera
2) that looks like a bottom-plate-mounted grip
3) it's anon's choice, whether you agree or not, and getting buttmad does nothing productive
Show me on the doll where the Fuji hurt you, anon
>>
File: 8c6.gif (443 KB, 480x238)
443 KB
443 KB GIF
>>3939353
>>
bros i wanna buy the x100v so bad...........
>>
>>3939377
I actually own and like the x100v, but the rest is mostly hype. Shitposting aside, I have used both and xt4 and a z6 in the past, and it's no contest. the xt4 is an expensive accessory that can also take photos.
>>
>>3939343
x-t2 viewfinder is larger (0.5" vs 0.39") and more magnified than the x-t20. if you just want a good camera that will last you a few years without feeling like you're lacking in any significant way, i would 100% go with the x-t2 over the x-t20.
>>
>>3939016
yes.
>>
33 or 35 f1.4?
>>
>>3939530
Not many people have the 33mm yet. According to dpreview it's slightly better the 35mm for edge to edge sharpness. But I've made plenty of money shooting with the 35mm 1:1.4 and no one has ever complained about the sharpness of my photos.
>>
>>3939530
35 if you're an older photographer that likes feeling and character
33 if you're a zoomer making youtube videos and need your sharp lens to cut yourself because you're too cowardly
>>
>>3939545
but i'm a zoomer that likes feeling and character
>>
>>3939545
No, if you're making videos the 35mm is way too tight. You'll want the 23mm 1:1.4, or the 18: 1.4, or maybe even the 16:1.4 if you do any walking around your house etc. Maybe even that Rokinon 12mm 1:2 especially if you do vlogs while walking outdoors.
>>
selling a bit of gear and then I’m gonna get a used X-E2 for doing whatever I used to do with Leicas. Maybe the 7artisans 35/1.2 and the Fuji 18/2
>>
>>3939548
Stay away from all of those manual focus 35mm 1:1.2's. 7aristans, Neewer etc suck. Even the new Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 is awful and 10 times the cost of the 7artistans. Honestly, the point of the system is the amazing glass. Get the 35mm 1.4 used from someone, it will keep its value and the results will be worth it.
>>
>>3939552
>Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 is awful
Proofs?
>>
>>3939553
Check the reviews. It's softer at every aperture than the Fuji f1.4 until around f8-f11. And it doesn't handle light flares as well. It's just a cheap made in China lens from a company that has license the Voigtlander name.
>>
>>3939552
>Voigtlander 35mm f1.2
>awful
I think we’re coming from different points of view here. I want a Sonnar formula for people pictures
>>
>>3939559
Have you seen the rendering of the Fuji 35mm 1:1.4? You're telling me it's not ideal for people pictures?
>>
>>3939554
>It's softer
Doesn't make it awful unless tones get busted too
>And it doesn't handle light flares as well
That's an actual concern, Voigt has been promoting some lenses without coatings which isn't a good thing at all unless people want in-lens haze filter.
>cheap made in China lens from a company that has license the Voigtlander name
That's just outrageous, Cosina is dropping the ball there because Fujipsters do drop good money on decent lenses for them to be peddling chinese quality control. But have to say some rare chinese lenses are actually well made but the price demands it.
>>
The proof is in the sample photos. The Voigt doesn't interest me at all.
>>
The fact that the new 33 f1.4 is only 100$ more than the voigtlander blows my mind
>>
>>3939554
>It's just a cheap made in China lens from a company that has license the Voigtlander name.
What’s the source of this statement? Typical asspull rumor?
>>
>>3938910
My boy has switched to Nikon now, he has seen the light and its piss yellow.
>>
>>3939596
He's always been hypergamous, Canon then Sony for pro work and Fuji for pleasure. He has like 10 Fuji bodies and his audience is 90% fujicels so idt he's as far gone as you might think.
>>
>>3939530
>>3939544
I'm waiting for real world reviews after it comes out. I love the focal length, have the f/2 (which I really like), but not the 35/1.4 because the focus mechanism and lack of weather sealing turned me off. So, the idea of the 33/1.4 is compelling to me, despite that it's a big boy. Wait and see. Although one thing I read was that it outresolves the current sensors by a lot, which is pretty cool. There's also a possibility of a Sigma prime trio soon. Lotta choices soon.

The 50/1.0 got a lot of hype, but a lot of people returned them becaue they were soft and enormous. Fuji is slowly becoming a very nice system.
>>
>>3939628
>Fuji is slowly becoming a very nice system
Nothing slow about it, it's been the best APS-C system for a very long time.
>>
Will they ever update the 56 1.2 i wonder
I plan on switching from the D7200 + Sigma 18-35 to a X-T4 + 18-55/56 1.2 soon
>>
the XT4 is an absolute masterpiece camera and fuji lenses are generally a delight to shoot with

but fuck me if I didn't wish i'd spent the money on fool frame instead
>>
>>3939638
Supposedly they're working on it but I wouldn't expect it anytime soon. Can I ask what would make you want to switch?
>>
>>3939635
Well, I mean a robust lens lineup with decent 3rd party options, several native choices at the same focal lengths, updating older lenses with more modern AF, somewhat generous software updates on older bodies. There's nothing to shit on here. It's a very nice brand for APS-C
>>
>>3939638
Yeah, the rumor was a 56 mkII for 2022 or 2023.
>>
Gonna meet with the guy that sells X-T20 & XF 18-55 f2.8-4 & some shit like bag/tripod/ND filter tonight. Wish me luck lads.
Also can I take nice portraits with that lens? It is one of the reasons why I want to get that 35mm f2 lens (The ideal would be XF 56mm/f1.2 but that's way above my budget)
>>
>>3939693
>Also can I take nice portraits with that lens?
sure! https://www.flickr.com/groups/fujinon_xf18-55mm/pool
>>
>>3939643
The 18-35 1.8,while a great lens(pretty sharp even at 1.8 acros the zoom range) backfocus a lot
Seeing as how Nikon has little to zero plan to update their APS-C lineup I'd say the most logical would either be
-buy a Z7 II so I can still use that 18-35 even in crop mode(21mp aps-c crop)
-switch to fuji
The Z7 II body alone would've cost me a XT-4 and at least 2 lenses
Plus I plan on trying out videography as well.And the Z seried, regarding video is a little...shit
>>
>>3939714
>Z7 II body
immediately plummets in value the moment the Z7 III comes out, too. it's a quick cycle. bodies essentially don't hold value.
>>
>>3939398
I want to hear your thoughts behind this, because I shoot on an XT-2 and have no trouble getting the shots I want, except for in low light because it's not full-frame
>>
>>3939697
Damn nice, I also didn't know about that lens' $700 price tag. Why do people call it a kit lens again?
>>
>>3939741
I love that D7200 and 18-35 like no other man,it was gifted to me by my mom when I entered college in 2015
So tbqh I was thinking about sending it to Sigma to change the mount to EF than grab one of those EF-Fx AF adapter shilled on youtube
>>
>>3939755
>Why do people call it a kit lens again?
because it used to come with many bodies, although its a fantastic lens in it's own right. it's not perfect and the 16-55 is much better but for the size and what they go for now it's a really good value.
>>
>>3939353

Reasons for selling my Z6 for the shite toy:

-Z6 Body + FTZ + 200-500 lens = Big and heavy, the XT4 + 100-400 has more reach and is lighter and smaller.
-Z6 is boring as shit
-Shite toy does 4k 60
-400mbps vs 144mbps
-Shite toy has phase detect AF in video
-Shite toy has more focus points (425 vs 273)
-Shite toy faster continuous shooting (30 vs 12)
-Shite toy has better battery life
-Shite toy has faster maximum shutter speed (electronic shutter)


Now in the interest of fairness, the Z6 has these advantages:

Better low light
Muh sensor size
Muh bigger back screen
More glass

Btw the grip is a Smallrig bottom plate mounted one because Fuji seem to want people to drop their cameras.
>>
>>3939883
>Big and heavy
manlet
>>
File: .jpg (872 KB, 1080x1080)
872 KB
872 KB JPG
anon with a x100v here

i like
>>
>>3938909
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28XY0JTcQ5Y
Fujibros, we are in deep shit.
>>
>>3939889
why that color on the border
ew
>>
>>3939892
shidddd colors when I cropped on my monitor imagine, it looks like a generic white on my shit but im not sure
>>
File: 20210916_003051.jpg (1.52 MB, 2160x2160)
1.52 MB
1.52 MB JPG
Ladies and gentlemen, I did it. I got the X-T20 & 18-55 F2.4-4 XF lens. The guy also added a brand-new K&F Concept tripod, a brand new big ass carry bag that is overkill for a camera like X-T20, 16GB SD card and an ND filter that I have no idea what it does about.
Borrowed my cousin's XF 35mm/f2 lens as well, might get one of mine with a new paycheck.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Makesamsung
Camera ModelSM-J730F
Camera SoftwareJ730FXWU8CUG1
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.7
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width2160
Image Height2160
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:09:16 00:30:51
Exposure Time1/25 sec
F-Numberf/1.7
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating500
Lens Aperturef/1.7
Brightness-1.3 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModeSpot
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length3.71 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width2160
Image Height2160
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Unique Image IDX13LSKA00MM X13LSMD01MA_
>>
File: 2021_0822_19165600.jpg (4.55 MB, 6000x4000)
4.55 MB
4.55 MB JPG
For me, it's the XC lenses. I've got the 15-45 kit, the 35 prime, and the 50-230. Using the X-T100 I got for $400 on sale with the kit.

All together it's less than $1000 on all accessories, camera, lenses and I've got more than what I need.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-T100
Camera SoftwareDigital Camera X-T100 Ver2.00
Maximum Lens Aperturef/5.6
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)68 mm
Maker Note Version0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:08:22 19:16:56
Exposure Time1/350 sec
F-Numberf/5.6
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating200
Lens Aperturef/5.7
Brightness7.5 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length45.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width6000
Image Height4000
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
SharpnessNormal
White BalanceAuto
Chroma SaturationNormal
Flash ModeOff
Macro ModeOff
Focus ModeAuto
Slow Synchro ModeOff
Picture ModeAperture Prior AE
Continuous/Bracketing ModeOff
Blur StatusOK
Focus StatusOK
Auto Exposure StatusOK
>>
>>3939943
nice dude, don't underestimate the kit, It's a pretty good workhorse but that 35mm is perfect. Have fun with it anon, hope you get some fun pics with it.
>>
File: PSX_20210911_131550.jpg (1.57 MB, 1653x1102)
1.57 MB
1.57 MB JPG
Sup friends, anon that bought an Xpro3 recently. Enjoying the camera so far but still not fully dialed in with it yet.
>>
>>3939943
>>3939969
congrats bros :)
>>
>>3939969
glad to hear it. nice shot.
>>
Can you configure your deal dial into setting ISO without having to tap then turning it and just adjust it via turning it, similar to the ISO dial on X-Tx models?
>>
>>3939755
no idea? i paid $200usd retail brand new in box
>>
hello fuji friends, does anyone have tried xm1 or xe2+viltrox speedbooster+canon fd lens or any vintage lens?
im thinking of buying the combo for camping trips and astrophotography.
any experience with the items or opinions are welcome, thanks before friends :)
>>
>>3939969
How are you finding its colors and rendering?
>>
>>3939969
Did you get a shot of the horse's cock?
I guess that's what you like, fag.
>>
>>3940252
Bad idea. Vintage lenses are notorious for poor performance wide open and huge coma levels. Both of these are awful for photography. And speedboosters kills your image quality at edges too.

There are many decent options for astrophotography for fuji. Samyang lenses like 12mm f2 or 21 f1.4 are cheap and have great quality for wide field astro. Even cheaper you can get 7artisans 7.5mm f2.8 fisheye. It is very wide and so great for milky way shoots. You can also defisheye this lens.

But honestly, you probably want to get at least one fujinon lenses. Cheap ones arent great for astro, but they are excellent otherwise.
>>
>>3940252
I bought my fuji to use with my vintage lenses but I got a xf 35 1.4 and it converted me into a digifag.
>>
>>3940366
i see, i do want a clean image for astrophotography since it will be stacked. i thought the speedbooster would help me with that +1 stop of exposure.
im not sure if i want to have an auto focus fuji lens since i would be working with manual most of the time for astrophotography, the samyangs are still over my budget for now, but i guess one good lens will satisfy me more down the line, thank you friend.
i guess my combo is more for portraits/daily.
>>
>>3940383
which camera would that be friend?
i didnt think i would need a flip screen before posting for astrophotography, thats why i thought the viewfinder in xe2 is a good point for me.
>>
>>3940385
Crop just sucks for astro, wide and fast are what you want, and crop is worse than FF for both of those.

Not saying you can't do it, but just expect a lot of noise, a speedbooster that doesn't suck butts costs as much as a fairly modern 2nd hand full frame camera.
>>
>>3940388
>m-m-muh full frame

Don't get meme'd info FF, fellows.
>>
Good evening, I hate my 18-135. That is all.
>>
>>3940420
Seethe, croplette
>>
>>3940388
>Crop just sucks for astro, wide and fast are what you want, and crop is worse than FF for both of those.

This is probably the most brainlet take I've ever seen. All of the heavy lifting is done by tracker. It is not uncommon to have stack of 36 images, 60s each. On bare tripod you rarely go over 30s. So tracker gives you 5 stops or more, while full frame gives you at most 1.

And there are problem with full frame. One, you have heavier bodies and heavier lenses. Which means that your wont be able to track for as long as you would be able on crop. Two, full frame have more coma and more vignetting. For many lenses you would need to stop down one or sometimes even two stops to get these two aberrations to acceptable level. And third thing is fuji specyfic: their sensors stack passes more h-alpha light, which is again, better for astrophotography. Also crop bodies cost less, so if you would like to make full spectrum conversion it is more affordable on crop. And at last, only small subset of astrophotography is done with wide lenses. All of deep sky is done with telephoto.

So unless you pour shitload of money on bigger tracker, high end lens and sturdier tripod you will actually LOSE light on shooting full frame.
>>
>>3939978
>>3939987
Thanks!

>>3940347
I've dialed in my own Provia preset (the ones online weren't even close imo) and I'm really happy with it now. Only thing I do in post now is crop and resize.
>>
>>3940503
>Only thing I do in post now is crop and resize.
turbo based
more based than a turkey
>>
>>3940501
star trackers work just as well on full frame as they do crop cameras.

And why are you even talking about star trackers? most people doing astro want some of the earth in the shot too for context, not just meaningless photos of the milkyway.

And 30 seconds? So I presume you're using a 16mm equivalent (10mm on crop) or wider lens, or your stars aren't going to be static anymore. And that's gonna be tough on fuji as the only option is the $2000 8-16 f2.8, and it's slow as shit, and has very bad coma in the corners, even once you get into the 12-16mm range, and it has over 2 stops of vignette in the corners.

On Sony, I could use the 14mm f1.8, which is $400 cheaper, is over a stop faster, projects onto a sensor more than twice as large, so gathers more than twice as much light, giving us around a 2 and a half stop advantage, meaning what would take your crop camera 30 seconds, the Sony setup could match for noise performance in just 5 seconds. Oh and fwiw, the sony lens weighs a little more than HALF of what the fuji does, completely mitigating any potential 100g saved on the weight of the body.
>>
File: PSX_20210917_085841.jpg (3.36 MB, 2000x2000)
3.36 MB
3.36 MB JPG
>>3940504
Not as based as the Xpro3 tho

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeGoogle
Camera ModelPixel 3a
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Express (Android)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:09:17 08:58:41
Exposure Time1/40 sec
F-Numberf/1.8
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating88
Lens Aperturef/1.8
Brightness2.2 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Subject Distance0.41 m
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length4.44 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingCustom
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Digital Zoom Ratio2.1
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeMacro
>>
File: DVwRJeyV4AAYTU4.jpg (64 KB, 680x680)
64 KB
64 KB JPG
>>3940508
>star trackers work just as well on full frame as they do crop cameras.
Lol, you literally never used tracker.

>star trackers are just for deep sky
You never shoot astro photo in your life.

>And that's gonna be tough on fuji as the only option is the $2000 8-16 f2.8
You missed like 20 other fuji lenses that are captable for astro.

You are really dumb troll and I'm done talking to you.
>>
>>3938909

I'm getting an XT4 if I'm buying a new camera anytime in the near future. Which lens do you recommend though?
>>
>>3940523
Look who's mad they got btfo again, lol
>>
>>3940542
>Look who's got btfo again, lol
You?
>>
>>3940523
You're the reason Fuji users are seen of as arrogant morons. Give it a break, obviously full frame is better for low light and wide angle, and a tiny % of people wanting astro want to do deep space boring shit.
>>
>>3940549
>dont buy tracker that cost 300$ and gives you +6 stopa of light
>buy camera for 2k that gives you 0.5 stop of light

Moop, i never tough you are this retarded. But after all you are too reterded for public transport so sky is the limit for your incompetence.
>>
>>3940554
Full frame gives more than 1 stop of light, it's more than twice the surface area.

Trackers work on full frame just as well as crop, even the cheapest, travel star trackers have a 5kg weight limit, or enough for 3 a7r's with 14mm f1.4 lenses.

For aperture and FL equivalence, full frame lenses are also more affordable and lighter than crop lenses.

Trackers also work better on full frame as they have a greater surface area per picture height, so are more forgiving for small errors in motion.

Also, that post isn't mine, but one further up is; there's far more than just me that thinks you're an insecure dumbass.

And where are these "20 other lenses" that can do a 30s exposure without a tracker? If you had used a tracker you would know that they turn the foreground into whatever motion blur you're trying to avoid from the stars in the first place. People want to take photos with context. Like pic related. Can't do that with a tracker. This is the number one hit on Google images when you search astrophotography, and guess what it's shot on ;)

If you know better, post one of your examples.

Or just do what you usually do and scream my name whilst you furiously masturbate as you're getting your much needed social interaction with me - regardless of how stupid you have to look in the process of doing so.

And where's your screengrab? Running out of ip's to be banned from? Lmao, retard.
>>
>>3940581
You're clueless. FF is so bad at night photography that Canon just killed it's specialised FF mirrorless line. It was beaten by dedicated inch sized night stackers running ai.
>>
File: MAGICAL_BUTTON.png (21 KB, 439x418)
21 KB
21 KB PNG
>>3940581
>Trackers work on full frame just as well as crop, even the cheapest, travel star trackers have a 5kg weight limit
Show me those trackers and how much they cost, and how much time you need to set them up.

>Also, that post isn't mine, but one further up is; there's far more than just me that thinks you're an insecure dumbass.
I know it isnt. Because you dont do astro.

>And where are these "20 other lenses" that can do a 30s exposure without a tracker?
You can do 30s exposure with 50mm lense. Without tracker, without light trails.

>If you had used a tracker you would know that they turn the foreground into whatever motion blur you're trying to avoid from the stars in the first place
What is stacking?

>If you know better, post one of your examples.
So you download photo of winner of some astrophotography contest and if I don't post better picture I lose.

It is retarded even by your standards.
>>
File: hat.png (342 KB, 499x540)
342 KB
342 KB PNG
>>3940581
>And where's your screengrab? Running out of ip's to be banned from? Lmao, retard.

You must be new how the internets work. Don't blame you. You are literally too retarded to travel by public transport.
>>
>>3940600
>show me
pic related, see that cheapest one, designed to be small enough for carry on plane luggage, that takes 5kg. lol.
>You don't do astro
I've done more than you, as proven by
>you can do a 30s exposure on a 50mm with no tracker and no trails.
Ok, post up an example with exif, lmao. post any example you've done of astro, any at all.
>If i can't do better
I never said that, I said that you KNEW better than to use a full frame camera. If you know more, and have better equipment, even artistic ability aside surely you can post a photo that matches or surpasses it just on image quality. no?
>>3940595
>muh dedicated hardware does better
are you not going to even mention the product in question? I wonder why.
>>
Would any of you like to purchase a lightly used 18-135? Comes with box and hood.
>>
File: IMG_20210831_023354_950.jpg (1.29 MB, 4592x3064)
1.29 MB
1.29 MB JPG
thank you for your discussions about astrophotography friends.
im glad there are some new infos i learned, especially about fuji sensor is better at receiving hydrogen wavelength.
but to be honest, for budget considerations, i cant get into full frame cameras and lenses :(
most of the budget goes to transport and foods, since i would like explore more places for now.
thats why im looking at xm1+viltrox speedbooster+canon fd or vintage lenses to keep the cost down and still get usable pictures of the stars.
maybe the better term for what i want to do is nightscape photography? heres a picture from my current camera (gx85, meike 25mm f1.8, 10 usd tripod) of taurus constellation.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 6.4.0 (Android)
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
>>3940617
Stuff there killed this one.
>>
>>3940663
The speedbooster will make your images very blurry in the border regions, you are probably better off getting a cheap wide angle manual chinese lens
>>
File: 2019-08-14 21.34.58.jpg (363 KB, 3000x2000)
363 KB
363 KB JPG
>>3940523
>fuji lenses that are captable for astro
even just pointing the "unsharp" 56mm at the sky for 5 sec starts to reveal some basic dso with a single exposure.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-H1
Camera SoftwarePhotopea Editor (www.photopea.com)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.2
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)84 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created2021:09:18 11:42:27
Exposure Time5 sec
F-Numberf/1.2
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating2000
Lens Aperturef/1.2
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length56.00 mm
Image Width6000
Image Height4000
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3940737
whoa, thats quite clean friend.
but i suppose this was shot with a heavy light pollution?
>>
>>3940739
from the suburbs on a clear night, nothing special. just goofing off with a new tripod.
>>
File: 2019-08-14 21.41.27.jpg (436 KB, 1612x1074)
436 KB
436 KB JPG
>>3940761
more hot garbage, just cropping the 56mm single exposure no light frames dark frames stacking etc.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-H1
Camera SoftwareCapture One Pro 12.0.3 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.2
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)84 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Exposure Time2 sec
F-Numberf/1.8
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating3200
Lens Aperturef/1.8
Brightness-10.3 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length56.00 mm
Image Width806
Image Height537
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
Nikon Fanboy here... Fuck I might get a Fuji just see if the hype is real.
>>
>>3940776
Fuji makes fun to use, attractive cameras with unique image quality. If you're obsessed with spec sheets and other kinds of gearfaggotry you'd be better off with something else. What do you find appealing about Fuji?
>>
>>3940776
Sony Fanboy here... I was thinking the same thing!
>>
>>3940812
Fuji makes fun to use, attractive cameras with unique image quality. If you're obsessed with spec sheets and other kinds of gearfaggotry you'd be better off with something else. What do you find appealing about Fuji?
>>
>>3940805
>>3940826
Oh shit, the shill bot broke!
>>
>>3940835
Fuji makes fun to use, attractive cameras with unique image quality. If you're obsessed with spec sheets and other kinds of gearfaggotry you'd be better off with something else. What do you find appealing about Fuji?
>>
File: PSX_20210918_100451.jpg (898 KB, 1457x971)
898 KB
898 KB JPG
>>3940812
Came from an A7... using my Fuji is fun whereas my A7 never really was fun. My biggest hangup was going from FF to APS-C but I frankly don't even notice the difference.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-Pro3
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Express (Android)
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)38 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:09:18 10:04:51
Exposure Time1/250 sec
F-Numberf/1.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating250
Lens Aperturef/1.0
Brightness1.8 EV
Exposure Bias0.3 EV
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
Light SourceDaylight
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length25.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessSoft
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3940914
this is a really nice pic bro
>>
File: PSX_20210918_144541.jpg (1.18 MB, 1697x1132)
1.18 MB
1.18 MB JPG
>>3940920
Thanks broski. Really starting to get in the flow with the camera. Another from today.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-Pro3
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Express (Android)
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)38 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:09:18 14:45:42
Exposure Time1/2000 sec
F-Numberf/1.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating400
Lens Aperturef/1.0
Brightness4.7 EV
Exposure Bias0.7 EV
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
Light SourceDaylight
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length25.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessSoft
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
File: _A7_4295-Edit-3.jpg (496 KB, 1000x667)
496 KB
496 KB JPG
>>3940914
I did the opposite switch recently, even though my fuji and a7iii cost about the same, I get nervous taking it out of some fucking reason, hopefully that subsides.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeSONY
Camera ModelILCE-7M3
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 10.4 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)105 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2021:09:15 02:31:38
Exposure Time1/2500 sec
F-Numberf/4.0
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating200
Lens Aperturef/4.0
Brightness10.9 EV
Exposure Bias1.3 EV
Metering ModeAverage
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length105.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
>>3941018
>snoy af
>>
>>3940964
That's simply too good. I accept fuji, but I have hard time accepting it's capable of random greatness at a whim.
>>
>>3940763
well, i should also start labeling my photos too, those are well done images :)
should i expect the results with an xm1 to be half as clean as your xh1 friend?
>>
>>3941083
>should i expect the results with an xm1 to be half as clean as your xh1 friend?
i don't see why not, there isn't /that/ much difference between xtrans1 and xtrans3
just try it first and see what happens
>>
File: 1631769581804.png (66 KB, 840x574)
66 KB
66 KB PNG
>>3938909
I just spent two hours trying to figure how to turn on image display back on for evf. Nothing in menus, noting in manual. It turns out that it's adjusted by evf button as well.
>>
>>3941312
Which camera?
>>
should i sell my xt-2 for X-S10? im thinking of the better sensor and IBIS, is it worth it?
>>
>>3939755

It's about $400 if you buy it in a camera kit. Got mine off ebay new for $325. Grey market, but flawless.
>>
i want to get the X-H1 for video, but are any of the x lenses good for video, i heard that not all of them are good video lenses
>>
>>3941335
>should i sell my xt-2
are you a nigger or fat white bitch posting with nigger in your username? if no, then dump that tired old shit
>>
>>3941335
I would just save up for a used x-t4 as I really don't like the x-s10
>>
File: lens_XC35_2.jpg (308 KB, 2585x1940)
308 KB
308 KB JPG
Has anyone seen the XC 35mm available anywhere? There are zero listings on ebay and it's out of stock everywhere. Went to B&H and the guy said he hadn't seen it in stock for at least a year.
>>
>>3941351
Fuji has been suffering from the global chip shortages and haven't been prioritizing their low-margin items. I would check your local craigslist/facebook market or fredmiranda
>>
>>3941351
they're in stock everywhere here, to the point where theres tons of sales on them like they want to get rid of it. Although we havent had any fuji films like c200 in a year + or xtra 400.
The prices arent great either, they used to sell 3 pack C200 for 22 AUD (which is already not the cheapest) but they went ahead and only sell them in 2 packs for the same 22 AUD. 11 AUD for ""budget"" film
>>
>>3941335
I agree with the other fag, save up for the x-t4 rather than x-s10 it's a better jump you won't look back. However, arguably worth upgrading for the IBIS but not for sensor, not that big of a deal.
>>
>>3941351
wish you had posted that a few days ago mate, but I'm in the Uk. Just sold mine.
>>
File: Lea.jpg (835 KB, 1000x1230)
835 KB
835 KB JPG
I got the XF 18-135 and it's neat, I'm kinda disappointed with the low light performance but I was warned

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width11811
Image Height17717
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution600 dpi
Vertical Resolution600 dpi
Image Created2021:09:19 23:12:19
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width1000
Image Height1230
>>
>>3941376
I'm glad you like it, I hate mine and still can't believe I fell for it. Michael Sladek is a snake oil salesman.
>>
>>3941378
i homestly dislike how heavy and big my xpro 2 is now, considering i also had to put on the grip so i can hold it better.

i miss one handed shooting with my x100s
>>
>>3941380
You could sell it and get the Tamrom 18-300 for studio work, stick to pancakes and fujicrons for outside?
>>
>>3941381
I guess that would work, I might just buy the 35 for outside

Also unrelated to this does anyone else feel the low light performance of the xpro 2 xtrans is worse than the first iteration of xtrans? I feel I got more out of x100s at underexposure without the extra noise
>>
>>3941385
more megapickles = more noise. if you scaled xpro2 images to 16mp or whatever the first sensors were, they'd be less noisy than the x100s
>>
>>3941376
i got my 18-135mm bundled with an XT-2 for 550 USD used, mint condition.
I still feel ripped off lol, but i mostly shoot landscape/general photography where the softness in the edges are extremely bad. I find i have to shoot at f/8 bare minimum, and if i can afford to, f/11 for actual decent results. Not just for landscape of course but for anything.
>>
>>3941375
why did you sell it?
>>
Anyone here have any experience with the Rokinon 12mm? Thoughts on it?
>>
>>3941400
ah that makes sense, thanks for the explanation
>>3941476
I don't mind the softness so much for my stuff, I even added a black mist filter on top.
Just wish it was a little faster, even half a stop would be brilliant but I guess you can't trick physics
>>
>>3941488
It is probably most popular third party lens. Tons of reviews out there.

Great lens for astro, good lens overall. Make sure to get sharp copy, because samyang/rokinon has problemy with quality control so ask for samples if buying second hand or buy it from online shop and return if faulty.

For me it was to wide for anything other than astro. I've sold it and bought samyang 21 f1.4
>>
File: DSCF3070-Pano.jpg (3.57 MB, 7259x4489)
3.57 MB
3.57 MB JPG
>>3941488
Good lens for landscape photography. It's easy to manually focus with. I didn't make any edits to this raw file before converting it to jpeg.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-T3
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 10.1 (Windows)
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)32 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2021:08:12 22:28:38
Exposure Time1/320 sec
F-Numberf/1.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating160
Lens Aperturef/1.0
Brightness0.4 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModeSpot
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length21.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3941575
Bretty nice photo
>>
File: DSCF3234.jpg (674 KB, 4000x2667)
674 KB
674 KB JPG
First photo from my X-T20 that I posted here.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-T20
Camera Softwarepaint.net 4.2.16
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.0
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)53 mm
Maker Note Version0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:09:20 18:30:03
Exposure Time1/1400 sec
F-Numberf/6.4
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating200
Lens Aperturef/6.5
Brightness10.6 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length35.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width6000
Image Height4000
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
SharpnessNormal
White BalanceAuto
Chroma SaturationNormal
Flash ModeUnknown
Focus ModeAuto
Slow Synchro ModeOff
Picture ModeAperture Prior AE
Continuous/Bracketing ModeOff
Blur StatusOK
Focus StatusOK
Auto Exposure StatusOK
>>
>>3941479
I moved to sony
>>
how's the 16-55 for astro? and do I need an nd filter? where do I start
>>
>>3941715
Absolute trash, even at it's widest the max exposure time you're going to get before star trails become too noticeable is just 10 seconds, that combined with the slow f4 equivalent aperture means you ain't gonna get nothing but noise.

The fuji 16mm f1.4 would be a better choice, but still pretty shit, and a waste of money compared to just getting a full frame camera system. Full frame gathers twice as much light, and has a far larger range of more affordable fast, wide angle lenses.
>>
>>3941715
It's okay, it'll do the job and is fine to start. I would watch some youtube videos on astro to start and ask here for help. Good luck, anon :)
>>
>>3941757
no thanks, I already have the lens and if I get a larger sensor camera it'll be medium format not some tiny fool frame meme camera.
>>3941766
thanks bro, will watch some videos. Any specific ones you reccomend?
>>
>>3938920
Based
>>
>>3941779
>It'll be medium format
If you're thinking of the gfx, that's also worse than full frame at astro, as it's lenses aren't fast enough. The fastest it has is a 60mm f1.4 equivalent; absolutely useless for astro, and 23mm f4 is the widest, at an 18mm f3 equivalent, making it over a stop slower than the Sony 14mm, and over 2 stops slower than the 24mm.

This isn't even gearfaggotry, just basic optics.
>>
>>3941793
nah it's okay, full frame isn't as good as medium format and they're quite cringe as shown by your post. thanks though :)
>>
>>3938909
Hey fags.

I own a XA3 I got at a pawn shop as an alternative to carrying around a DSLR all the time. I love it and recently been shooting with only that for walk around stuff. I want to upgrade now, should I get the X100V or the XE4? I will probably end up using a 35mm equivalent lens on the XE4. Besides the lens is there any huge differences between the two? Ideally a faster AF or lowlight AF would be the real deciding factor.

For professional work I’m considering using one of these cameras for close to medium range and a Sony with a telephoto for longer range stuff.
>>
>>3941793
>worse than full frame at astro, as it's lenses aren't fast enough
you know the fucking best near optically perfect refractor telescopes are at best f/5 and typically f/7-f/11? you have no fucking idea what you're talking about, just parroting memes and nonsense
it's so painfully obvious you haven't shot any astro at all
>>
>>3941815
>it's so painfully obvious you haven't shot any astro at all
This, he's just a pathetic anti-shill and it's abundantly clear to anyone who can read. Not sure why Fuji supremacy makes him seethe so hard.
>>
File: sakdlsa.jpg (197 KB, 1200x800)
197 KB
197 KB JPG
>>3941715
>how's the 16-55 for astro?
Honestly, on fb group I'm in I've seen surprising amount of people using it for astro. Fast prime still would be better.

Of all lens makers samyang have carved themself a niche for making astro lenses. Their wide angles often have low coma (coma is a smearing of bright points of light on edges of frame).

However, you can do astro with much crapier lenses that that. Check you this guy: https://www.instagram.com/marcinslipko_photo/

He shots with lenses like ttaritsan 50 f1.2, viltrox 33 f1.4 and gets away with it, because those lenses at ~ f2 have low enough coma and vignetting, uses tracker for longer exposure and stitches photo to get wider field of view. So, if you have good understanding of what you are doing then you can get away with a lot.

>and do I need an nd filter?
Fuck no! Nd filter makes you lose light for weird colors on your photos. Worst trade off ever for astro. You can get some interesting stuff with circular polarisers, but overall you really don't need filters for your astro.

>where do I start
You need good location and good timing. Both of those are much, much more important than gear. Location means place with low light pollution. You can check it on your light pollution map. Car will be very helpful to travel there. It would be helpful to travel to location where big sources of light would be sort of "behind your back" to portion of sky you are interested in.

And how do you know on which portion of sky you are interested in? And at what time you should go? You can install app like SkySafari to get location of astronomical objects (like milky way) in real time as well as in advance. Moreover, if you are in dark enough area, you can see milky way with your own eyes. No, it will not look like on photos ; P

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
After you got these two things, set up your tripod, zoom out to widest angle, check out if you don't have any bright objects in your frame and there is no glare of flare from nearby light sources, shoot wide open for idk 20s iso 800-1600.

In theory, there is 500 rule, but it is not really a "rule". You can break those. And this is single exposure. And that's single exposure astrophotoraphy. It is really basic, but after you experiment a bit you can move to exposure stacking.

But that's topics for another time.
>>
>>3942011
>>3942012
thank you for taking the time to explain everything, really appreciate it
>>
How is 7artisans 55m f1.4 as an entry level lens for portraits? The manual focus scares me as an absolute beginner but gotta start from somewhere I suppose.
>>
>>3942367
I'm not especially experienced in portraiture but I can imagine the majority of the skill in it would be creating the shot in your mind and directing your model to that position. In my view, as someone who hates shooting people, having to manually focus while also juggling the direction of the shoot would be a bit much for an "absolute beginner". With the best portrait photographers I've seen, the camera disappears and all thats left is their vision and the flow-state him and the model are in. AF can contribute to that flow state, although it should be said that manually focussing becomes a non-issue with practice and focus peaking.
>>
>>3942367
Between that and the TTartisan 50mm f1.2, pick whichever one is cheaper in your region.
>>
>>3942367
portraits are more than just an eyelash in focus.
you can use any lens for portraits, but short fast telephotos give you quick and easy memeshots for your facestagram.
i personally wouldn't bother with a fast manual focus chink lens.
your kit lens at 55mm f/4 is more than sufficient to get you practicing composition, lighting, pose and posture, moment and time, without hiding your lack of talent behind a sea of background blur.
>>
>>3942370
>>3942373
>>3942390
Thanks for the input. Guess I should focus on the photography itself rather than being a retarded gear-faggot.
>>
Looking to move from no camera (had a Nikon df / Sony A7RII) to either a XE4, or X100V, or Xpro2/3 (just outside my price range).


I really want a rangefinder, as I just enjoy the feeling of it. I know the Xe4 has a “rangefinder”. I also know the x100v has no interchangeable lenses sadly and the digital telephoto has quality loss.

Anyone have suggestions? Looking for a daily carry that’s not too bulky. Something light and quick.
>>
>>3942453
Fuji don't make a rangefinder
>>
>>3942453
as >>3942455 said, Fuji does not make a rangefinder. they advertise "rangefinder style" bodies, which simply means that the viewfinder is off to the left side of the camera body instead of in the center on a prism-like raised structure, like an SLR would be. that's it.

now your question. since you said the X-Pro3 and X-Pro2 are outside your price range, I don't really know why you mentioned them. so we'll leave them as disqualified since you already did so. now for the X100V vs X-E4:
X100V:
* larger body
* more traditional vintage camera look
* 35mm equivalent FOV
* hybrid OVF + EVF combo
* higher resolution EVF
* leaf shutter
X-E4:
* interchangeable lenses
* small, compact body
see https://cameradecision.com/compare/Fujifilm-X100V-vs-Fujifilm-X-E4 for a big list of specs compared and what's identical between them.

now for me, interchangeable lenses are a must, so the X-E4 is the easy choice. but if you don't ever want to use anything but a 35mm, or if you are OK with using shitty attachment lenses to try to convert the focal length (there are 2 available for the X100V), then the X100V could be an attractive option I guess. to me, the X100V doesn't seem like a "one camera I own" body unless you're really a die hard minimalist.
>>
>>3942461
I mentioned xpro bodies cause if I saved a bit longe it could probably get one. Though I don’t think it’s Needed due to its price point.

Also that makes more sense. I guess I meant rangefinder style cameras, since they aren’t actual rangefinders.

Also from what you’ve said, looks like XE4 is my go to. Just hoping it performs in lowlight alright. Thanks a lot for this
>>
>>3942467
well any Fuji camera of the current generation will perform identically in low light since they have the same sensor. with the X-E4, at least you can put a faster lens on it than you can the X100V. the only other way to increase low light performance would be to go to another camera brand entirely (I'm not even counting the GFX system because that's extremely niche).
>>
>>3942468
Yeah, I don’t think I’ll be shooting regularly in low light. So, I’ll most likely stick with the XE4. Probably order it today :)
>>
File: 21815195350s.jpg (1.01 MB, 2000x1333)
1.01 MB
1.01 MB JPG
>>3942469
it's really not bad in low light as long as your expectations for an APS-C sensor are set.
hope it works out well for you! I like mine.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-E4
Camera SoftwareCapture One 21 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)41 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Exposure Time1/250 sec
F-Numberf/2.8
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating1600
Lens Aperturef/2.8
Brightness2.0 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length27.00 mm
Image Width2000
Image Height1333
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3942467
Bruh, x100v has weather sealing. IMO this can be really nice.
>>
>>3942473
taking your camera out in bad weather is always at your own risk though since the manufacturer won't stand behind their claims and replace it if it gets damaged or breaks as a result of exposure.

inb4 anecdotal "I've never had an issue"
>>
File: DSCF4158_1.jpg (4.65 MB, 6000x4000)
4.65 MB
4.65 MB JPG
>>3942475
Idk. If I would not have weather sealing I probably would never take rain shots.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-T2
Camera SoftwareCapture One 21 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.0
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)75 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Exposure Time1/80 sec
F-Numberf/2.0
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating3200
Lens Aperturef/2.0
Brightness-2.6 EV
Exposure Bias-1 EV
Metering ModeAverage
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length50.00 mm
Image Width6000
Image Height4000
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3942469
Back again, looks like there’s no XE4 kits available right now. Just bodies. What’s a good lens that won’t break the bank but will perform similar to the XF 27mm that comes with the XE4 usually? Looking to keep everything around 1100-1200
>>
>>3942512
23mm f2
>>
File: laowa 65mm f 2.8.jpg (58 KB, 1000x1000)
58 KB
58 KB JPG
Do any of you guys have one of these? I recently bought an 11mm macro tube to dip my toe into macro and I found it completely liberating as far as framing the kinds of shots I keep wanting to do. But I'm already feeling the limitations of the narrow focusing range. The fuji 80mm macro lens looks fantastic, but that one is outside of my budget. The laowa 65mm 2.8 looks optically excellent. I can't find very many negative reviews out there besides people bitching about manual focus (but who cares? It's a macro lens).
>>
>>3942569
You can't get anything better for the price.
>>
File: PSX_20210918_095749.jpg (1.01 MB, 1675x1117)
1.01 MB
1.01 MB JPG
>>3942512
Why don't you want the 27mm?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-Pro3
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Express (Android)
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)38 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:09:18 09:57:49
Exposure Time1/250 sec
F-Numberf/1.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating400
Lens Aperturef/1.0
Brightness2.2 EV
Exposure Bias1.3 EV
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
Light SourceDaylight
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length25.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessSoft
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3942598
I want it, but from what I’ve seen I can only find it online for 350+ as used. Which puts the camera well over the 1050 price point with the kit lens. Though the kit with lens is on back order everywhere. So I’m resorting to copping a body, and a lens until I can get my hands on the 27mm
>>
>>3942569
decent af-c and macro is a gamechanger desu.
>>
>>3942467
>>3942469
I think even if the pictures come out identical, the XPro2/3 are so much more fun to use and I think that's what you're looking for. The XE4 is fine, it's just not an XPro. I would really just bite down and save up for a used one if I were you.
>>
>>3942512
I use an 18mm f/2 with my X-E4 and it fits well. That said, if you can wait a few weeks, it shouldn't take longer than that to come in stock at B&H. I had a couple of duds before I got a working one and both times I placed an order for the kit while they were backordered and it came within the next few weeks.
>>
>>3942616
How do you like the 18f2? I've always heard such mixed things about it
>>
>>3942637
Not the same anon, but I have the 18 f2 as well.

It's alright for what it is. The focus motor is super noisy and it can miss focus sometimes.

Also, not worth the full retail price it goes for (600$), the 23 or 35mm f2 are way better choices.

I got my 18mm second-hand for much cheaper so it was worthwhile for me.
>>
>>3942644
I've always heard it was the worst fuji lens but haven't looked at enough photos from it. Some people really like it though. Would you mind posting some photos from it, if not that's okay too
>>
>>3942637
I got mine used for $250 and it's a perfectly competent 28mm equivalent lens for my purposes. I like that it's compact. It fits with the size of the X-E4 really well.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-E4
Camera SoftwareCapture One 21 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.0
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Exposure Time1/500 sec
F-Numberf/2.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating160
Lens Aperturef/2.0
Brightness7.3 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length18.00 mm
Image Width1184
Image Height2000
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3942648
more photo

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-E4
Camera SoftwareCapture One 21 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.0
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Exposure Time1/500 sec
F-Numberf/2.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating640
Lens Aperturef/2.0
Brightness3.2 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length18.00 mm
Image Width2000
Image Height1333
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3942648
and again

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-E4
Camera SoftwareCapture One 21 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.0
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Exposure Time1/100 sec
F-Numberf/2.0
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating1250
Lens Aperturef/2.0
Brightness-0.9 EV
Exposure Bias-1 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length18.00 mm
Image Width1484
Image Height2000
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3938920
I traded my xt-4 for a z6. now i think I'm gonna go back. why did you anon?
>>
Who /35f1.4/ here? I always find myself being impressed by it and it makes me more and more thankful I chose Fuji.
>>
>>3942656
one of my favourite lenses. i just wish the motors were like sony or canon or nikon, instead of whirring and clunking like some ancient cheap piece of shit.
wtb an LM version, or preferably something like those tamron motors. silent and fast.
>>
>>3942665
the LM motors modern fuji lenses use would be perfect but I suspect they couldn't find a way to change the motors without affecting it's rendering, hence the 33 1.4. The whirring and how lightweight it was felt jarring to me at first but it soon didn't bother me and I barely notice it now. I still think the used prices they go for now are an incredible value for how much character it has.
>>
>>3940914
What's more fun about Fuji? Curious about it for my next camera, I'm coming from an a7 as well
>>
>>3942794
shortest distance between intent and execution
>>
>>3942794
They're simply a pleasure to use and the dials become so intuitive your hands move before you think. Fun is just the best way to describe it.
>>
>>3942794
Lack of PASM control scheme. The exposure triangle is manifested through dials, shooting manual is effortless. Built in film sims are bliss if you like the look of them. You don't have to edit much (or at all) because SOOC images are pretty good looking, so chimping is satisfying. Lastly, the camera bodies themselves (XE series and upwards) look and feel pretty good to hold in your hands so you feel inspired to go out and shoot more.
>>
55-200 or 70-300... what are the trade-offs here?
>>
>>3943015
55 gives you 55mm, 300 gives you 300mm. 300mm is also the only one that's weather sealed.
>>
Thinking of getting an X-T4, what lens should I initially buy
>>
>>3943110
18-55mm kit lens, because if you're asking this question, you don't know what focal lengths you enjoy.
>>
>>3943026
you can crop the 200 to 300.
>>
>>3943110
I would get the 16-55 and a prime (35 f2/1.4 or 23 f2)
>>
Why does Fuji make people here so angry? Do you guys have any insight on why that's the case?
>>
>>3943166
Put simply, gearfaggotry.
>>
>>3943111
seconding this because the 18-55 is an excellent kit lens, but if you want a prime go for the 35mm f/1.4
>>
>>3943166
A lot of people here bought into full frame systems thinking it would make their photography not suck. A lot of hipsters shoot fuji. A lot of good photos on here are from fuji shooters.
>>
fuji sisters we did it
>>
>>3943229
>buys crop fuji camera
>stitches 200 photos together because the resolution and dof was shit, even with a $1500 lens

lmao
>>
File: Kites_001.jpg (1.17 MB, 1600x1067)
1.17 MB
1.17 MB JPG
>>3942648
I also have the 18/2 and have zero complaints about its image quality. It sounds terrible when focusing, but whatever. For the $200 I paid I'm very happy with it. My goal for my Fuji kit is small and light, and the 18/2 fits that perfectly. Coupled with the pancake 27/2.8 WR I have the perfect kit for myself.

>>3942794
These anons hit it pretty close >>3942802
>>3942806

It feels like a camera and not a device. Ive dialed in a few film sim settings so I know I'm capturing images in a way I want them to look. I now do essentially zero post processing, which is such a garbage part of the photography process for someone that already spends too much time on the computer due to work.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
>>
>>3943233
>which is such a garbage part of the photography process for someone that already spends too much time on the computer due to work.
outstanding. could not be more based.
>>
>>3943113
>16-55
That shit is huge. Might as well get a full frame camera.
>>
>>3943421
>>>3943113
>>16-55
>That shit is huge. Might as well get a full frame camera.
???????????
have you seen the sizes of 24-70mm??
>>
>>3943421
It's big but not nearly as big as comparable full frame lenses and it really earns it's bag-of-primes reputation.
>>
What's the best cheap macro lens for scanning 35mm? Are there any relatively cheap xf options or should I adapt something?
>>
>>3943544
>>3942569
>>
>>3943509
>>3943520

That Fuji is over 100g heavier and just under 20% more volumous than the tamron 28-75 2.8 and $320 more expensive, despite being over a stop slower equivalence.

It's more than 200g heavier $300 more, and nearly 50% more volumous than the equivalent (well, still slightly faster) Sony 24 - 70 f4.





Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.