/fujigt/

>>3117540
>What am I in for?
Regret

>fuji general
it's called the gear thread retard

File: DSCF0175.jpg (2MB, 1400x1400px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1400x1400px

It's far from perfect but I like mine a lot. Whenever I have it with me I feel reassured and free to just shoot whatever

when you get it go through customizing what's displayed in the vf and change the buttons around to how you like before you do anything else

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X100F
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.10 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:11 09:02:30
Exposure Time	1/90 sec
F-Number	f/10.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/10.0
Brightness	8.6 EV
Exposure Bias	1 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	23.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3117540
It'd be better to spend that much on a fuji ILC. Just get a used xe or xt.

>>3117540
>What am I in for?
disappointment

>>3117550
>>3117622
sonyshills pls go
>>3117540
>What am I in for?
a really sweet leaf shutter and amazing flash sync with great speed, nice colours and. Also the best travel camera. Basically if youre not a complete idiot youll have lots of fun with this baby.

>>3117540
This is basically the ultimate travel camera - I was going to get this but the XT-10 with the 23mm f1.4 suited me better.

Would strongly consider the X100F, but I might one another generation before I pull the trigger.

>>3117699
>sonyshills pls go
lol no
>>3117540 (OP)
>What am I in for?
horribly over saturated greens
shoulda got a GR

I recently purchased a brand new fujifilm x30 off ebay for $255 dollars. Any tips for a beginner, or recommended settings?

Also did I pay too much for that camera?

>>3117861
No you didn't but you did buy a shit camera with a sensor the size of your smartphone.

>>3117883
Why are you always so angry poopCo
You avent posted a thread in close to a year
Is it depression?

How shit is the x20 really?

I had to sell all my gear to make rent and I want a small camera to bring on vacation to australia. I know the sensor is tiny, but is it really that bad? I can get a used x20 for $280.
Had a XM-1 earlier but I really want a camera with OVF. Any other recommendations around that price?

>>3118276
Not with an ovf.

You can get a used a5000 and kit lens for that, or an xa2...possibly.

>>3118276
>Sells gear to make rent
>goes on vacation
Kill yourself my man.

just buy a mju 2

>>3118352
I know people like this in real life. Barely making 1500€ / month, taking a 27000€ loan for a new car, then selling the car because they can't afford it and making a 4000€ loss in a matter of months. And then their parents have to take loans to pay for their kids stupidity (though I blame the parents for most of this). These are the type of people that make eugenics sound like a really solid idea.

>>3118276
you should rethink your priorities

>>3118377
Man, I hear you. I'm a tight as a jew, and I've let any hopes of owning a car go, they are too much of a money sink.

>>3117616
XE-2 has shit autofocus

>>3117550
>>3117622
fuck you this shit just came in today and its the best camera I've used to-date.

>>3117585
resize your shit strum.

>>3118416
You need pretty steady cash to own a car. They are damn expensive.

>>3117540
>23mm crop
Not even once.
35mm crop or bust.

File: ?.png (101KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 640x640px

>>3121141
but its 35mm equivalent?

>>3121177
I know. I'm saying 35mm crop (as in 50mm equivalent) or bust

>>3121075
eh its close enough

>>3121202
I hate 50mm personally. At least for documentary shooting it generally sucks. Plus I think it just gives a very generic and familiar look that I don't really care for.

>>3120407
What if I'm just buying it to adapt manual lenses?

>>3118377
must be greek.
i can't see a german doing this.

>>3121513
M4/3 and sony do it better.

>>3121540
>m4/3
2x crop
>sony
doesnt have shutter speed or iso dials

Please explain how they do it better?

>>3121603
They don't have X-Tranny most importantly.

>>3121784
fuji's file format is only a downside to people that a) struggle to adapt with technology and b) can't get it right in camera

prove me wrong by posting your work

>>3121603

>Sony
>No shutter speed or ISO dials

They do have three programmable dials, so it is pretty much the same thing though.

>>3121940
No, it's not, casual.
With properly labeled dials you can set the cameras parameters while its turned off, without looking at a screen or in the viewfinder.
You cannot replicate that utility programmable, blank dials.

The purpose of external, labeled control schemes is the same as the purpose of the top screen of a DSLR.

I'm not surprised a sony user makes so few photographs as to discount the utility of always-visible settings.

>>3121814
>prove me wrong by posting your work
you post your own then we'll talk
>>3121961
Are you so braindead that you need to look at your damn dials for every shot? You've got a fucking mirrorless cam that has all the info on the EVF and LCD. What would possibly compel you to look at some tiny ass dials?

>>3121967
>what is conserving battery life
>what is internalizing your most used focal length such that you can shoot it from the hip
Sorry you don't know anything about real-world professional photography.

If your camera is turned off, and you see a subject and immediately know what settings you'd like to shoot it at from experience, it is much faster to adjust a fuji as you're flipping the switch on than it is to flip the sony on, make sure the mode dial is in the right position, and then lift the camera to your face (or turn it so you can see the back, meaning pointing the camera down instead of at the subject) and adjust your settings.

If I want to go from f/1.8, 1sec to f/8 1/500, I can do that on a Fuji without even turning the camera on. You can't.

>>3121975
also all the decent fuji lenses have the push-pull mf so you can prefocus pretty well too if need be

>>3121975
>what is conserving battery life
Dude how are you going to take a photo without looking at the EVF or screen? And nobody wants to look at your blurry ass street crud

>>3121991
well you are posting in a thread where the camera in question has an OVF

>>3121997
It's fuji general not X100 general. Nobody but hipsters buy an X100 over an XT. Too bulky for a fixed APS-C camera.
also
>X100
>professional photography

>>3122001
I mean if you really need the video or burst, sure

At the end of the day it has the same sensor and processor. You could get the exact same results with just a different interface, granted you'd be shooting at the same fl

>>3122001
Also it's the only fuji with a leaf shutter so you'll have dat sync speed

I'd actually rather use an x100 for whatever you'd consider 'professional photography'

>>3122003
>granted you'd be shooting at the same fl
that is literally one of the biggest reasons people don't get an X100.
>>3122005
>I'd actually rather use an x100 for whatever you'd consider 'professional photography'
Because you're not a professional. Almost no professionals would be able to live with a single focal length for their job.

>>3122007
Really depends on what you mean by professional photography as there's just so many different facets you could be doing

>Because you're not a professional. Almost no professionals would be able to live with a single focal length for their job.

I've done a decent amount of professional photography work where I've used more limited focal lengths. I've done a lot of archival work where I've exclusively used macro primes and some real estate where I've used a single wide angle prime

I'm obviously not trying to argue that the x100 is an end all professional camera since it's obviously not and was never designed to be but my main problem with your distinction is that it certainly could fit a specific role with its features, i.e. small size, leaf shutter sync speed, same quality of the flagships

Still not sure how this ever got to be about professional photography though, you kinda sprang it up outta nowhere

>>3122008
See>>3121975
>Sorry you don't know anything about real-world professional photography.

>>3122010
Oh I thought you were that guy

At any rate just my two cents

And as for

>Nobody but hipsters buy an X100 over an XT

I mainly bought mine because I do a lot of flash work and I'd much rather have the sync over just about anything else

>>3122007
If we're talking about the original x100, sure, very few professionals would be willing to use that as their only camera

If we're talking about the x100f, you're simply wrong. The first dozen or two reviews of the camera were working professionals that received early copies. Almost all of these people are still shooting them.

If you do a lot of strobe work, which is about the closest thing to a real definition of a "pro" photographer anymore, then the x100f is the most versatile camera Fuji makes if you also have the wide and tele adapters for it.

You can't fake a leaf shutter in post.

>>3121991
>what is internalizing your framelines mentally
>what is pre-focus
>what is using experience to make inferences about the exposure without looking at the meter
I've never suggested someone use film before but in your case you probably need to go back and start with film so you can know what the fuck you're talking about.

:)

>>3121975

You don't have to look at the camera to change anything, just bring the evf to your eye. Every setting is visible through the evf screen.

>>3122065
Lol, talk about not getting the point

File: example2.png (1MB, 661x988px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 661x988px

>>3117540

An overpriced point and shoot with poor color rendition, smeared fine detail, slow af, tin-toy build quality, shit lens and a leaf shutter with no real flash support.

Don't forget to not shoot over 1/1000, the bokeh turns into a fuck ugly mess.

I would love to see your face when you first pick it up.

>>3121603
Sony bodies in this price range have 3 fully customisable dials, an exposure comp dial, and a psam dial. Not to mention the advantages of full frame, ibis, 3rd party support, building everything in house, having direct support from adobe, zeiss and sonys other departments, and it will be around forever thanks to support from the cine industry adopting e-mount as the new standard.

Fuji are so ass-backwards and secretive no image processing software has the algorithm for demosaicing fuji files and fuji refuses to share it, which means worse than necessary image quality for the user.

Sony on the other hand have released e mount as an open standard, allowing anyone to create fully compatible lenses without royalties or permission. Which means af lenses from samyang, for a start.

>>3121814
Getting things right in camera and being able to adapt to technology doesn't change the fact no one has the correct algorithm for fuji files.
Enjoy your skin colored teeth and sclera, pic related, sooc from a current gen fuji, not even fuji manage to do it right.

>>3121975
If you're shooting from the hip, just use auto, it works great. The exposure comp dial is perma labeled so that combo works with the camera off too.

Please tell me about selecting less than full stops on the fuji, lmfao.

>>3122005
What good is sync speed when you have no flashes?

File: 1460264925879.jpg (141KB, 1018x728px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1018x728px

>>3122119
>it will be around forever thanks to support from the cine industry adopting e-mount as the new standard

>mfw Fuji has released more e-mount lenses this year than x-mount

>>3122119
Hey Moopco, lovely morning today isn't it?
t. Blayner from Bristol

Could you please post your most recent photos? I haven't seen a thread of yours in ages!

>>3122119
>What good is sync speed when you have no flashes?
>what is a studio strobe
>how do triggers work
>you mean professional lighting equipment isn't TTL? wtf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGbFAXqNVTE

>>3122119
if all of this is true then why do I see so many more good photographs from Fujifilm cameras than Sony cameras?
Shouldn't the superior technology always produce the superior photography?

Fuji has the Strobist and Zach Arias...Sony has Jason Lanier.

>>3122135
If this is how far your photographers horizon goes you sure have a problem

>>3122146
>implying JL isn't the best Sony photographer on the planet

>>3122119
>no image processing software has the algorithm for demosaicing fuji files
What is Rawtherapee? Stop sucking adobe's cock, faggot.

>>3120844
I liked my xpro for a day too.

>>3117540
that camera is so fucking sexy I've been lusting over it for the past month. if I wasn't saving up for a new imac right now I'd 100% take the plunge. carrying a mark ii everywhere for street stuff is really tiresome.

Why do Fujifags have the largest case of Stockholm syndrome?
Do they enjoy using a system that's essentially a walled garden? A system that forces its proprietary X-trans sensor that's riddled with Fuji worms, skin bleeding, and demosaicing problems?

>>3125579
Well aren't you smart and well informed individual.

That was sarcasm btw. You obviously have some sort of inferiority complex.

>>3117540
tell me why i should ditch my D90 and go for a X100. or should i not ?

>>3122163
>Implying anybody else in the planet aside JL shoot with their playstation cams on fear that releasing the shutter once might void the warranty and instead fap over the specs sheet.

>>3125056

Build a PC and buy the camera, retard.

>>3125599
haha how did i know this was coming

>>3125625

Because somewhere in that dumb hipster head of yours resides a surviving piece of logic.

Macs are overpriced, gimped PCs for retards.

>>3125628
Ok not trying to get in a fight but like, i don't even care anymore? I built pc's when I was a teenager and that was fun and all but now I'm a grad student and a quasi professional image maker and I just want a hassle free computer.
I'm committed to the osx environment (and like it) and don't want to fuck around with a hackintosh. I'm not in a rush to buy a new camera anyways, it's just gear acquisition syndrome..

>>3125581
Why not both? I have a D3s and an X100 and they cover each other's shortcomings quite well. Sometimes you want versatility, sometimes you just want something small and subtle.

File: 1448364163874.jpg (300KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

300KB, 1024x683px

>>3125628
lmao. not that guy, but holy shit. macs are for financially stable people who are also socially stable and not computer hobbyists and just want a computer that is simple, that works, that has better build quality, that is made by bright people, that has the vision as us in terms of technology : a system that works and is reliable and doesn't require you to be a compsci mouthbreather virgin to figure out how things work.

videogames ? buy PS4, keyboards aren't meant to play videogames.

>>3125643
what are each other's shortcomings, if you don't mind typing long ?

>>3125646
DSLRs are big, heavy, imposing, loud, and aren't really great for tossing in a bag and traveling with, but they're more flexible with lens choices and typically have higher performance. But the X100 is small, light, extremely quiet, and is a great bag camera. It's limited to 35mm obviously, which is a versatile FL, but it's great having a DSLR to turn to when you want wider or longer.

>>3125641

Nigga, build a PC. The "hassle-free" Mac meme / propaganda has run its course.

Be your own man.

>>3125679
windows is only good for videogames

File: bd8.png (178KB, 1190x906px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1190x906px

>>3125645

>>3125645
You literally have no clue what you are talking about, do you? All I'm reading is "I can't be bothered to read moronically simple guides on how to build a computer that will perform 3 times better for a 10th of the price."

Or, to use a platitude since you seem to like them this much, you have more money than sense.

>>3125707
>>3125689
>>3125679
what a mess, sorry I said anything

>>3125731
The winning argument for macs is OS stability. Casuals will never get this.

>>3125748
can vouch for this, I've had a MacBook air since 2014 and had no major issues, runs like the first day I've bought it

it seems like windows desktops/laptops only last about 2-3 years max until it catastrophically shits itself

>>3125754
I'm still using my stock 2011 macbook pro (hence the imac upgrade) with only a hard drive switch out. Use it for all my lightroom/photoshop/premier work and it gets by just fine

>>3125748
Bought a MacBook Pro Summer 2015. I guess I haven't switched it off more than 20 times since then, it just keeps running without any problems.
My finder shut down once by itself and didn't remember that I copied some files, that's the only thing that ever went wrong.

>>3125754
>it seems like windows desktops/laptops only last about 2-3 years max until it catastrophically shits itself
Where do people come up with this shit

>>3125761
Mines going on 6 without any psrt changes. I think this fall though I'm going to upgrade

>>3125761
talking from experience, never had a windows laptop/desktop last me more than 3 years without me having to fuck with it, they age like cheese

was once a windows/pc fag now a normie mac faggot and won't go back

in my opinion apples computers are of higher quality
>quality parts
>stable os
>long lasting with little maintenance

unless your a /v/aggot that plays games on pc then its fine but macs are workhorses/better suited for photo/video work, in my opinion and experience at least

>>3125801
>Gimped CPUs that throttle like their life depended on it under load
>Better suited for photo/video work
Opinion discarded. Hackintosh is the best of both worlds, hands down.

>>3125801
how much did you spend on the windows computer though?

>>3117540
>getting anything fuji not film related
Get cucked faggot

>>3125801

>quality parts

From the same vendors as PC parts. They do practically nothing but design in-house. Everything is outsourced or purchased off the shelf. Do you know how many manufacturers made your Mac?

You just don't know how to build a PC. You need to use good components, not cheap shit.

Asus motherboard
GPU on a board from either Sapphire, Asus, HIS, EVGA.
PSU from EVGA, Corsair, Thermaltake
Samsung chip RAM from Corsair, Kingston, OCZ
HDD / SSD from Western Digital, Samsung, Hitachi, Kingston, Corsair

If you need a laptop, don't cheap out. A cheap Dell or Asus is garbage. A top of the line Dell or Asus is on par with Apple.

Motherfucker, learn your shit. My old Pentium 4 machine has never had an issue. I built it in 2004, and it is still kicking. Every PC I have built and eventually replaced for the sake of upgrading is still 100% operational.

>macs workhorses
>better for photo / video

You're spouting memes from 2003, and you don't even know where they came from. Why don't you go find out?

Here is where your money is going:

https://ycharts.com/companies/AAPL/gross_profit_margin

That is highway robbery, m80. Might as well buy 2 of each part and build a top of the line PC and a complete backup as well.

>>3125871
I was gonna say he can buy a mac if he can afford to but then saw he had to save money to do just that, as well as buy a camera.

Plebs... what can you do but love them?

>>3125871
>You just don't know how to build a PC. You need to use good components, not cheap shit.
And no one really should. It's something very specialized that there is a particular job field for it.

Mac is a company where the hardware and the software are assembled by one company. And then the phones are also assembled by one company. It's a big ecosystem of one company. That's great.

>>3125871
>A top of the line Dell or Asus is on par with Apple.
Yeah, no. The Dells and Thinkpads that is on par with Macbook is more expensive than the Macbook, actually.

>>3125649
But you don't get a pure OVF in mirrorless. That camera is expensive for trying to get as close of quality as DSLRs, which doesn't end up on par either. You still see pixels in the "OVF". Or maybe if you have that top right OVF thing, it doesn't really let you look at what your lens is looking.

>>3125968
Nigga you what?

The X100 OVF is really easy to shoot with since it has frame lines that correct for the parallax, and unlike a DSLR you can see the area outside of those frame lines as well, so you don't get tunnel vision on your scene. It's also great because you can switch to the EVF for exposure, focus, and DoF preview instantly, and review images without taking your eye off the viewfinder.

Also it's expensive if you get the X100F, but the original X100 can be had for under $400 which is a total steal as far as I'm concerned.

should i keep using my nikon d3300 kit lens until xt-2 becomes affordable and switch to mirrorless

>>3125968
>pixels in the ovf

what are you smoking? you mean evf not ovf

the ovf in the x100f doesn't have a screen hence it being optical you dingus and it is on par with dslr quality. almost
every 24 megapixel camera on the market nowadays is on par with each other besides a few differences albeit minor

>>3125994
xt2 won't come down in price for a long time, unless your d3300 is limiting you curatively then id switch to something else

if you have glass invested in nikon then just upgrade the body, if not then look for something that youd think would suit your needs, one
thing I've learned is always try out the camera before buying it. go to your local camerashop or best buy to test the camera in person

>>3125935
whoa sorry successful six figure adult, i am but a mere student working to pay tuition and rent and it takes me a few months to have enough extra money around to by 2500 dollar computers and 1600 dollar cameras

>>3126033
don't worry man just save your monz and take advantage of the student deals apple always has around the start of the school year

>>3126028
But you're not seeing what the lens is seeing

>>3125993
>the original X100 can be had for under $400 which is a total steal as far as I'm concerned

Yes, a total steal. Fuji is stealing from you.

Why spend $400 on a camera with auto focus so bad it is practically non-existent and a lens soft as hell when you could get a real MICL camera for that price?

>>3126028
>the ovf in the x100f

The x100f does not have an ovf, it has a rangefinder.

A rather shitty one, but the way.

>>3126069
this has got to be a troll

>>3126068
Clearly you haven't used one, but keep parroting nonsense if you want. Just take that shit to the gearfagging thread.

File: 1501684786064.jpg (17KB, 542x540px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 542x540px

>>3126069
guy that is an optical viewfinder, you can see right out of it and it has glass, there is no screen unless you turn on the electronic viewfinder option

it isn't a traditional optical viewfinder in a sense that your looking straight out of the lens but it still technically an optical viewfinder, you can call it a
"rangefinder," but you are still looking out of a VIEWFINDER that isn't hindered by an electronic screen hence being OPTICAL

>>3126105
If the camera doesn't look cool, no one would buy it. I mean who is actually okay with not being able to look through the lens ?

>>3125994
XT-1 is on huge sale now btw.

Guys should i switch my D90 for a X-T1 ? What are the pros and cons ?

>>3126137

Pros:
>Smaller
>Looks way cooler

Cons:
>Worse lenses that cost more than their ff equivalents on other mounts
>Shitty sensor and raw files
>jpeg issues such as color bleeding and fuji worms
>shit battery life

>>3126154
yeah i just saw the specs and price. oh and the price, it's far more expensive. but has fewer stuffs.

>>3126137
Depends on what you expect and need. I sold my 4yo D90 with 50/1.8, 24/2.8, 35-70/3.3-4.5 a couple weeks ago for a new X-T10 from ebay. I don't need no wr no battery grip but weigh and size are important for me – that's why D90 was collecting a dust during the most time of last two year.
I believe you did some research and learned some obvious pros of X-T1 - cool sooc jpeg, good high iso, film simulation, tilted screen, weather resistance, big evf, lots of customised buttons and so on – as well as cons – some troubles with adobe demosaic algorithm for x-trans sensor, slightly cheated iso, noise reduction in raw files, poor battery life, no additional top screen, mediocre video. Also evf by itself is not for everyone – before i purchased X-T10 i had borrowed a camera with evf from my friend. It was some sony with shitty field-sequential evf but even this shit was ok for me.
Also you can adapt nearly any pre-digital era lenses (and some digital as well) for fuji – especially if you have some decent nikon lenses with diaphragm controlling ring. The native fuji lenses are quite good but also pricy.

>>3126068
IQ. Also razor sharp at f4. On the12MP sensor lens is fine. Also built in ND filter, that sync speed, totally silent, 10cm close focus. DoF scale in evf and ovf, and completely custom is able HUD. Who the fuck needs af when you're already focussed.
The shooting experience is god tier.
Just saying...

>>3126158
but it's only 12 MP ? with that money you can get a 24 MP Nikon

>>3126163
X-T10 shares almost the same guts with X-T1 – so 16MP all the way.

>>3126164
okay. with the same money, you can buy a 24 Nikon, so what's up with that ? what is it about the fuji that can make the megapixels not matter ?

guys what do you think about the XT20 ?

File: foto3.jpg (374KB, 712x1072px) Image search: [Google]

374KB, 712x1072px

>>3126171
like, what if i'm only into basic kind of photography like city photography (minus the people) ? is the XT20 a good choice for me to replace my D90 ?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D90
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	5140
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	27 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2848
Image Height	4288
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:07:30 22:56:41
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/14.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/14.0
Exposure Bias	1/3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Fine Weather
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	18.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2848
Image Height	4288
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3126158
>>3126154
i never get that "poor battery life" everyone throws around it here all the time. Ive brought my x-t1 to japan which was my biggest trip ever and one battery always lasted me the full day or approximately to 400 shots. By the end of the day when you come back to hotel you just charge it again and have it full for the morning. Also theres a spare one just in case. Never ever have I ran into issue of OH NO BATTERIES GONE WHAT DO. Also i believe if i used only evf i could push to 500 easy. And if it was manual lens all the time only too i could go to even 600 shots a day.

File: 24-16-12.jpg (31KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 600x400px

>>3126166
I was ok with my D90 in term of quality but not ok with its weight and size. Why on earth i should change one bulky camera for another one?
>muh 24 mega pickles
Not a big deal for me. I was ok with 12.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	144 dpi
Vertical Resolution	144 dpi
Image Created	2017:08:03 11:56:18
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	600
Image Height	400

File: Lens-2[1].jpg (37KB, 640x473px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 640x473px

>>3126171
i wanted to upgrade to x-t20 but the rumors say x-e3 is just round the corner so i'll wait for that since I like the viewfinder on the side better.

>>3126173
Every dslr without evf would give you at least twice as much shots on one battery. I agree that 500 shots is quite ok but in comparison to even cheapest ordinary dslr it's not so much.

>>3126176
Btw what was the initial price for X-E2? May be it reasonable to wait some discount for X-Pro2?

>>3126179
cant remember x-e2 but rumors are that x-e3 will be slightly more than x-t20 so maybe $999

>>3126178
youre right but im just trying to say that if you dont run into the issue its not really an issue then. Its just that people always bring it out so it looks like its a major flaw or something.

okay guys it's solid now, i will switch to a XT20. i'm not a pro, i will have a job and family and shoot sometimes and not gonna go into the wilderness only to get shots. also i like dressing up so buying a Fuji would be a big plus for me. okay then

>>3126181
I think it is reasonable to wait for some discount for X-Pro2 + 23/2 or 35/2

>>3126196

>i like dressing up so buying a Fuji would be a big plus for me

Good choice.

Fuji is a solid fashion accesory, but a mediocre, overpriced camera.

As long as you are aware of that and intend on using it that way, it is a good buy.

File: Leica-M3-vintage-replica-camera-tins-for-sale.jpg (374KB, 1200x1243px) Image search: [Google]

374KB, 1200x1243px

>>3126206
There are much /fa/ leica tin replica for this. As low as $39, it's a fucking steal!

>>3126206
okay so what are some solid-priced mirrorless cameras that are below $1300 ?

>>3126275
Sony a7 2

>>3126284
i said below. too expensive. what else is below that ?

>>3126284
a7ii less than $1300?
and some kind of lens for how much extra?

>>3126275

Literally anything but Fuji.

a7ii has been below $1,300 on sale/grey market, probably your best bet.

>>3126202
nah, x-pro2 is too big for me, plus x-e3 is said to feature 4k too.

File: fooji.jpg (681KB, 1700x1200px) Image search: [Google]

681KB, 1700x1200px

>>3126275
dont listen to these fags. Fuji does not only take great shots its also super fun to use and makes you go out and shoot more.

>>3126128
umm... many people are ok without looking through the lens. ever use a rangefinder before?

why are people so butthurt over ovf vs evf? especially since the x100 has both

>>3122119
Someone can't afford to buy fun cameras..

>>3126284
So buy a used A7 II, but that literally leaves shit sony prime used level money for glass.

>>3126173
>>3126178
>>3126184
I honestly doubt people who use the battery life meme actually shoot 300-500 shots, in actuality just having the camera on
wastes batteries quit a bit. And if you have a dslr or mirrorless you most likely have spare batteries unless your a complete idiot.

I admit dslrs can shoot for longer but your almost always going to have a spare battery on you so why do people always bitch about battery life

>>3126397
I've never drained the battery life in my 80D, but with batteries to small for the X100 series it'd be more than doable to carry a extra or two in a pocket.

Unless you camp/travel seriously I see no reason to get a DSLR other than battery life and lenses.

>>3126387
Because both the OVF and EVF are medicore as shit.

>>3126400
This is some serious clownposting lad.
What are you even comparing them to?

>>3126434
Fuck sake dude just use them yourself. Tiny ass low res EVF with shit refresh and tiny ass 92% OVF with shit magnification.

File: blini.jpg (51KB, 604x550px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 604x550px

It amazes me how much people here can talk about cameras. Pretty much any digital camera with a big sensor will take good pictures. Unless you are a professional working in extreme conditons you really don't need to overthink cameras so much. The difference between brands is small.

>>3126437
what magnification do you need?, you are shooting a 35mm equiv lens with frame lines for 35, 50, and 70, its a fucking digital rangefinder not a dslr u cunt and
you also have the option to use the evf if you want, its not bad but its not great either, your argument that everything is shit doesn't cut it faggot, theres not a lot of evfs out there
that are any better than the fujis.

even if it had a super fast refresh rate and super clear oled screen youd still complain about it.

>>3126437
>what are frame lines
You've lost it. The ovf has more than 100% coverage. No idea what your issue with magnification is, it's a fixed lens cam with a 75 degree AoV through the vf. The og x100 evf is indeed sub par compared to new cameras costing twice as much, but still fast enough, and the whol3 point is to switch appropriately. What do you think people want to shoot with it? Sports and BIF? FFS.

>>3126399
I have the x100f and the battery life is ok, I carry 1 extra spare and thats if i really need to have the camera in hand all day long and
i could probably save a lot more if i just use viewfinder instead of switching off between the screen and the evf/ovf

>>3126470
that guy doesn't get it at all, i doubt he ever used one before especially not the f version

>>3126468
>>3126470
>>3126473
You people would defend a steaming pile of shit if Fuji shit it out. The X100F has a tiny VF. You can literally go into Best Buy and play with the thing.

File: Screen Shot 2017-08-03 at 4.44.18 PM.png (381KB, 897x405px) Image search: [Google]

381KB, 897x405px

>>3126475
stop being such a baby and get your eyes checked then, the viewfinder is fine faggot get some glasses

>>3126481
Glasses can't help magnify the tiny VF.

>>3126483
cup your hands around the screen and use that as your viewfinder

>>3126475
There are dozens of cams with big humps on them to house their massive viewfinders. We could shove one of those onto the x 100 just for you. 0.72 is fine.

>>3126442
We're talking about mirrorless vs DSLR though

File: .png (34KB, 659x484px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 659x484px

>>3126481
Dude you know what the ERF is right? It's that tiny ass screen on that already tiny ass VF. Here's the actual magnification specs on the VF on the X100F.

File: .png (23KB, 659x414px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 659x414px

>>3126481
And here's an entry level DSLR. Canon T6.

File: .png (29KB, 660x453px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 660x453px

>>3126481
And here's what a good EVF looks like (X-T2). All info from Imaging Resource. Face it, the X100F tries to to hybrid VF but ends up mediocre in both cases.

>>3126571
>>3126575
>>3126576
it isn't a dslr tho

>>3126583
Yeah it's worse

>>3126584
opinons

>>3126585
fact

>>3126585
Look, it's not as high in magnification, and worse, it's not as high in coverage. I mean like, what else is there that matters in photography ? You want to actually capture what you see in viewfinder, right ?

>>3126597
>>3126654
not sure about you guys but I can compose photos just fine while using my x100f

you are comparing apples to oranges, mirrorless ovf/evf are not the same as a dslrs viewfinder, you can say its worse all day long but they are two different things,
you're comparing a rangefinder to a dslr

>>3126658
So you admit that the X100F has medicore viewfinders then.

>>3126658
>my x100f
You sound just a bit biased.

>>3126154
All your cons are false tho

>>3126156
Niga what? D90 was wayy over $1000 whan new, xt1 was only marginally more. You can't compare current prices, the D90, while still capable, is ancient in comparison. And yeah, xt1 is far faaar superior in every possible way except battery life.

>>3126658
Well i'm gonna tell you that there are tons of other better cameras

>>3126576
Xts have too much magnification, you can't actually see the edge of the frame without moving your eye.
That's why they have a vf size reduction setting.

>>3126692
>D90 was wayy over $1000 whan new
you must be new here

>>3126807
wat

...are you implying that people here don't buy new expensive cameras or what? btw I've been on and off this fuckhole of a website for... 13 years or so.

>>3126867
the D90 was never $1000 you fool, it's a cheap camera

>>3126880
Check your facts retard.
"The Nikon D90 began shipping to the US market in September, 2008, with a suggested retail price of $999.95, or $1,299.95 with the 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6 ED VR lens."
And in reality it was way over 1000 euros new when my buddy bought one. Fucking kids these days.

>>3126692
>except battery life
the only thing that matters

>>3126978
It only matters if you're stupid.

>>3126729
>too much magnification
Fuji might have screwed up the implementation on their end but all film SLRs have at least .7x magnification, and I have yet to see anyone say that they are too big. The only reason you'd think the magnification is too much is if you use glasses or if you don't know how to use a viewfinder.

>>3126671
i never said it was mediocre, those are your words. i like it, its and on par with other viewfinders, your trying to win a argument thats not there, i can say
a v8 will eat a rotary but your still comparing two very different things.

>>3126719
sure there are better cameras, whats your point?

never seen such hatred for one camera on this board before

>>3127057
>i can say a v8 will eat a rotary

I'd like to see any standard v8 eat a quad rotor twin turbo

>>3127057
Fact is, because Fuji wanted some hybrid bullshit, they they were only able to put in a mediocre OVF and EVF. You absolutely cannot deny that, or you'd be flat out lying. Also kid you really need to stop defending your shitty purchases. Just because you bought shit and like shit doesn't make it not shit.

>>3127070
ok kid

>>3127070
>because Fuji wanted some hybrid bullshit

Actually people wanted it which is why the x100 series is widely used by lots of people for lots of different things

Being able to have the versatility in such a small package is fantastic

>>3127095
>X100
>Small
Sure thing mate.

>>3127095
The only thing small about the X100 series has always just been the viewfinder.

>>3127101
>>3127103
Why does people liking the x100 make you so pissed off that you post such clearly delusional things

>>3127107
I don't care that you like shit. The entire time, the only thing I was saying was that both the EVF and OVF are mediocre, and you dumbfucks go crazy without providing anything to refute the facts. Are we done here?

>>3127111
So what camera has a better hybrid viewfinder?

>>3127112
Backpedaling again? Again, you don't provide anything to refute the fact that both VFs are mediocre. One good finder is far better than two mediocre ones. You only have a single focal length to use. There's not even a point to the hybrid finder. The X100 tech was just a niche prototype for the X-Pro line. Anyways I'm done. No need to correct a baby making post-purchase rationalizations.

>>3127117
I mean it sounds to me like its just not a camera for you.

It's pointless to use numbers to prove whether or not the viewfinders are worse. Having both can enable you to get shots you couldn't otherwise by being able to make decisions and observations from utilizing them. Having a fixed focal length has never been a problem for some of the greatest photographers of all time

>The X100 tech was just a niche prototype for the X-Pro line

Even if true this is pointless as it has many more iterations and unique features than the xpro

>No need to correct a baby making post-purchase rationalizations.

I'd say the same about talking to someone that's not interested in actually using a camera to take photos but argue about them for fun/rationalization

>>3127117
The x100 viewfinder is larger than the xpro viewfinder, which you'd know if you'd actually used both cameras extensively instead of arrived at the conclusion in reverse from your clear preference for Sony toys.

It's sad at this point, Tim. Just stop it.

>>3125579
>if it has some flaws, it must be shit

>>3127111
all you provided was the word mediocre and "0.65" magnification. never once have I ever heard someone complain about its viewfinder.

If the viewfinder is so shit like you say then why is the camera so successful.

Why don't you fully use the camera for awhile instead of just talk shit about it. youd probably end up liking it anon :^)

Fujitrannies are quite easily triggered aren't they? Can't say anything bad about their cheap Leicas.
>>3127126
You sure showed that Sony shill! You go girl.

>>3127150
Who's backpedaling now

>>3127150
you showed your power level, bad move friendo

>>3127152
Your samefag meter is broken
>>3127156
I thought you losers hated Sony shills? Are you ironically calling me your friend?

File: Double_Palm_Through_Face.jpg (67KB, 579x600px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 579x600px

>>3127166
you just admitted to being a sonyshill

>>3127171
And?

>>3127174
lol

>>3127175
Epic dude. I came into the containment thread to trigger some tards but it seems like someone else already came to do the job. You hipsters sure are paranoid.

>>3127177
lol

>>3127178
Great post I rate it 10/10

>>3127180
lol

>>3127184
Another great post! Have to lower it to 9/10 for repetition though.

>>3127185
lol

>>3127187
8/10 now. Better keep your post quality up.

>>3127188
lol

>>3127190
7/10

>>3127191
you admitted to being a sonyshill, talk about quality posts

>>3127193
Quality post there friendo.

>>3127194
friendo m8

>>3127195
Bruh don't even

>>3117540
Fuji's are great. The evf/ovf hybrid is really brilliant to use and works better than a lot of cameras still living in the past. Lenses are great as well, though it's lacking in a 1:1 macro which annoys me. I've tried a Sony A series and it's a competent system but is dead boring to use.

>>3127198
Not really no. Fuji is crud.

>>3117540
There's a reason why people rave about USING a Fuji camera and the photos they get from it compared to just raving about the sensor in a Sony. The Sony's are a cold system and won't make you love photography.

Since you're coming from a film camera background, Fuji's won't be hard to work with and make a nice intro to mirrorless.

>>3127201
Now that's proper shill posting. 10/10.

>>3127203
>>3127201

I give it an 8/10.

Shillposting works better when you don't shit talk the competition. And his shitalk sucked, he shoulda used a real complaint (god knows Sony has more than enough issues) instead of some made up "feels" shit.

>>3117585
>>3117585
I like mine a lot as well. I just like my xpro2 better than using my Canon gear. I initially didn't like it as much as a do now, but it grows on you as muscle memory builds again. People can't really get into the system just by renting it for a couple of days.

And I've noticed that Fuji users don't troll any other brands. We're just happy with our systems

>>3127207
Sony's are boring to use. Deal with it

>>3127210
Weak shilling skills mate

>>3127201
True. I rented A Sony a72 with the 50mm. It was a good camera and did what it does well. Some flaws but that's with every system. Felt all to clinical to use though. I didn't see myself taking it travelling.

Just picked up a 35mm f2. It's a great little lens. Fairly cheap and focuses fast. It'll be my go to lens for traveling.

>>3125871
>PSU from EVGA, [...], Thermaltake
>HDD / SSD from Western Digital, [...], Kingston, Corsair
Anon....

>>3126275
>>3126317

this. i love mine. color's fantastic, camera's a joy to use. i don't even bother editing anymore.

Bought an x100t from someone on Facebook. In the off-chance that I don't get scammed, will I have fun?

>>3127370
yes

>>3127370
Depends on your needs.

>>3126275
Nothing is going to come remotely close to a 2nd hand A7ii for versatility, expandability and image quality.

Budget is clearly a concern, with fuji you're stuck with only fuji lenses if you want AF, on Sony they have an open format for the mount, so even samyang push out AF lenses with perfect performance.

Fuji lenses start at about $350 and are on a dying mount that will lose all value when x mount is canned, e-mount has been adopted by the cine industry, so will have a good couple of decades in it at least, lens prices will hold their value making them practically free.

>>3127500
Fuck off Moopco

>>3117540
An elite little camera that's breddy fun and isn't slow as shit like the original x100. Also, the focus joystick thing.

t. guy who owned an original and x100f

File: 2017_0803_17270200.jpg (648KB, 1776x1184px) Image search: [Google]

648KB, 1776x1184px

Fuji and Sony both can take great photos if you know what you're doing. If you get a recent camera is capabilities will most likely exceed your skill as a photographer.

I have xe2 ATM. It's good. I've used my mates a6000 and that is also good.

There you go.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-E2
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-E2 Ver4.01
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	41 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:08:04 11:58:17
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/16.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/16.0
Brightness	6.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	27.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1776
Image Height	1184
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Sharpness	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Flash Mode	Off
Focus Mode	Auto
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
Picture Mode	Aperture Prior AE
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Blur Status	OK
Focus Status	OK
Auto Exposure Status	OK

>>3127732
>terrible pictures
>terrible cameras
this whole post is pure bait

I've been playing with an x70. It's a really good camera for every day carry. It's comparable to my GRII, though my GR is on it's last legs. I'll definitely move to the x70 or x100f

>>3127518
I'm not moopco, and what a compelling counter argument you have there.

>>3128656
Nah, you're like the gay moopco. And what part of "fuck off" didn't you grasp?

>>3128692
Lol, look at this angry faggot.

Surely you're intelligent enough to have some sort of counter argument? Or is there not one?

>>3128698
Here's a counter argument:
fuck off moopco, no one falls for your shit anymore

>>3128707

Superlative;

Can you make that relevant to me or photography instead of just shouting at clouds?

>>3128707
The guy asked a question, why can you not answer it if it's not correct?

>>3127500
>>3128656
>>3128698
>>3128710
>>3128712
Not that guy, but: come up with a sony a7ii and a lens kit under $1300 that is small in size and not completely beat to shit. Yeah you can't.

>>3128712
because moopanon I'm not the same anon you were talking to earlier, I dont even know the question
I just recognize a moopco when I see one

File: Screenshot_2017-08-07-09-36-50.png (371KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 1080x1920px

>>3128718
Pic related is a sold listing, perfect condition, converted to $ it leaves you $250 for a lens, which leaves the kit lens, 28mm and 50mm from sony within budget. The 28 and 50 are plenty small.

If you wanted, you could use the pancake 16mm in crop, that would give you very similar iq and physical size to the fuji, but in a package that's infinitely more versatile.

>>3128729
>similar physical size
you know that that massive hand grip counts as physical size right moopco?

>>3128729
Wow sony loses value like sonyshills mother loses hope on ever having grandchildren. Or more likely that is a scam.
The cheapest a7ii I've come across was 1340€.

A7 by itself is already larger than x100, let alone any lens attached.

>>3128742
Amazon germany have them for just over 1000 euros brand new.

You're chat shit to present a biased and incorrect picture, team sony need not do that.

https://www.amazon.de/gp/offer-listing/B00Q2KEUFI/ref=sr_1_1_olp?ie=UTF8&qid=1502100593&sr=8-1&keywords=a7ii

>>3128760
Sure buddy. I'm sure they're brand new with warranties and all.
>buying anything from overseas from a seller with 67% satisfaction
Go ahead man, it's yor money.

>>3128765
>warranty

If you're in the EU you get covered by a 2 year warranty from the retailer by law, as the seller is selling on amazon, if they have any objections to honouring your consumer rights you can claim against Amazon. This applies to any business selling an electronic product in a non-auction format (bin on ebay is covered), you can not exclude your company or any products from this agreement,even if you explicitly state you will not cover any warranty issues at the point of sale.

Just learn basic law homie and you won't be a cuck.

Also, as it's the retailer, not the MFG, it's unlikely they have a repair facility, so will just send out a replacement straight away.

>67% seller rating
OH NO, if they don't send it, you don't pay, if it's not in the condition you expected, you don't pay.

If you think any of the above are serious issues, you're more cucked than i ever imagined.

Also, check ebay, more than 30 a7ii's in full working order in the last 2 months have sold for under 1000 euros from the UK alone.

I've had my a7ii for over a year and I bought it for under 1000 euros from a highstreet store.

>>3128822
Not everyone is an unemployed autist free to chase frivolous lawsuits moopco.
Pathetic leech.

An A7 with lense is massive compared to X100 or x70. You will find that you won't take your camera with you as much as with the Fuji's.

If you're a street shooter, the larger camera and lense will make people stop and look at you funny. My x100 hardly gets any looks and I get much better natural street photos

>>3117540
dunno bout the other equiv cameras but being able to set your settings before turning on the camera is a fucken godsend in fujis.

>>3128608
Do you like the x70 more than the GRII? I'm actually debating of moving from my x100S to the GRII because of the snap focus feature. Autofocus on my x100s is pretty shit and I know the GR II's colors and snapfocus are both pretty great.

File: dsc_7588-edit.jpg (335KB, 950x669px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 950x669px

>>3121202

50mm is too tight. I know, I know, it's the "standard" lens used by street photogs immemorial. But I find that it's still too tight for street work. Much better to use the 35mm and to crop if required after the fact. 35mm is THE best focal length for street. You can disagree, but you're wrong.

>>3129906
I will admit that I will miss snap focus. I'm still leaning towards the GRII as it's what I know for traveling. But I have an xpro1 as well so I'm not completely unused to Fuji.

>>3130204
40mm is better

how do you decide between all black or silver

silver looks kinda cool but it will probably get dirty

black just looks sleek and subtle

Are the older models like the X100 and the X100S still good for their age and price? The X100F is tempting but at 1700 moosebucks it's just too much while i can have an older one for a grand less. I want a camera to bring with me everywhere that doesn't take a lot of place and is good for anything.

Plus i like the fact there's a rangefinder on it instead of having to get an external one like on the Ricoh GR.

>>3130404
>>3130204
>have pen f
>have nice as fuck 35 mm equiv, have small as fuck 40 mm equiv, and have 2 50 mm equivs

>>3130468
You already have a 28mm fixed lens camera in your pocket that can't into bokeh or sharpness, why do you need another?

Get something with versatility and a compact size.

>>3130499
the X100 is 35 not 28, you imbecile.
35mm f2 is quite capable of bokeh if you're not scared of approaching your subject.

guys. why should i buy an X70 instead of shooting with my iphone ?

guys. why should i buy an iphone instead of shooting with my x70 ?

>>3131382
Is the X70 sharper than the iphone ?

>>3130446
Black. Silver is nice but will show wear and tear much faster

>>3131711
are you an idiot? thats exactly backwards
black is fragile black paint, silver is silver paint over silver metal.

gee, which scratches easier?