The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Fun with the Fuji X-Pro 2 and X-T 2

Grayhand

Well-known member
Omberg Nature Reserve

X-Pro2, 18-55




I have now rebuilt my web site because the old "engin" was working really bad with the latest version of OS 10.12.
The rendering of Jpeg:s had become horrible...

The new "engin" is so much better!!!

The negative thing is that all old links on this site to my photos are now broken...

But, It had to be done!

Ray
 

jdphoto

Well-known member
Just a quick pic of a misty Summer night...
Fuji XT2/35mm f2 WR.
One thing about this camera I love, is the dials. It's so easy to configure this camera quickly. When I sold my Leica Q, I was hesitant because I loved the feel, but babied it too much because of the price. With my XT2, I still feel like a film shooter and even took it out in the rain. Heck, I even stuck it out a moving car's window in the rain. This camera rocks! Great lens selection too!
 

Shashin

Well-known member
I love Maine! Thanks for the photos! How do you like the Fuji X's in comparison to other digital camera models?
I like my XPro 2. I wanted a digital camera with an optical viewfinder. The fact I can shoot square or 16:9 was a really nice bonus--two of my favorite film cameras were a Mamiya 6 and Horsemen SW612.

The APSC format changes the dynamic of the images--I also shoot with a Pentax 645D and Sony RX1. I am still getting used to depth of field. Color and contrast are also different. I did make some 40" prints when I got the camera to make sure I could achieve a certain level of image quality. I was very pleased by the large prints, but they are different from my other cameras. I hate to sound so ambiguous, but obviously different format cameras are not going to be the same, yet to say one is superior to another is not right either.

I have always had a soft spot for Fuji cameras--they are a crazy company that makes products for photographers. I like both the 23mm f/2 and 14mm f/2.8 Fuji lenses. The camera feels good to use, but I am still getting a feel for it. It always takes me a while to really understand how a camera sees. But I am really impressed by how flexible the camera is--from IR to night photography as well as long exposures with ND filters. Obviously, this camera was designed to be handheld, but it is also a joy on a tripod.

A few niggles. I was the frame lines would not dim when using ND and IR filters--it thinks it is dark outside and reduces the brightness which makes them useless in bright daylight. Also, at night, the frame lines will washout the viewfinder, which is a bit of a pain. I also which the frame lines could be changed to compensate for the curvilinear distortion in the viewfinder.

All in all, I am very satisfied with the camera. I just have to catch up to its potential...
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I like my XPro 2. I wanted a digital camera with an optical viewfinder. The fact I can shoot square or 16:9 was a really nice bonus--two of my favorite film cameras were a Mamiya 6 and Horsemen SW612.

The APSC format changes the dynamic of the images--I also shoot with a Pentax 645D and Sony RX1. I am still getting used to depth of field. Color and contrast are also different. I did make some 40" prints when I got the camera to make sure I could achieve a certain level of image quality. I was very pleased by the large prints, but they are different from my other cameras. I hate to sound so ambiguous, but obviously different format cameras are not going to be the same, yet to say one is superior to another is not right either.

I have always had a soft spot for Fuji cameras--they are a crazy company that makes products for photographers. I like both the 23mm f/2 and 14mm f/2.8 Fuji lenses. The camera feels good to use, but I am still getting a feel for it. It always takes me a while to really understand how a camera sees. But I am really impressed by how flexible the camera is--from IR to night photography as well as long exposures with ND filters. Obviously, this camera was designed to be handheld, but it is also a joy on a tripod.

A few niggles. I was the frame lines would not dim when using ND and IR filters--it thinks it is dark outside and reduces the brightness which makes them useless in bright daylight. Also, at night, the frame lines will washout the viewfinder, which is a bit of a pain. I also which the frame lines could be changed to compensate for the curvilinear distortion in the viewfinder.

All in all, I am very satisfied with the camera. I just have to catch up to its potential...
I do have similar feelings and observations. Meanwhile I shoot Fuji (XT2) and Olympus (EM1.2) exclusively and sold all my full frame stiff (mainly Nikon) and MF stuff (Mainly Hasselblad).

I fully agree WRT the advantages and disadvantages of different sensor sizes and one has to get used to and practice. So switching between different formats and even more so camera models is a bit tricky, as it always takes some while to adjust. I still keep doing that as there are so many advantages to the different formats - in my case APSC and m43 - that it is worth for me to have both.

I love my Fuji, especially colours and also the lenses, I currently own the 18-55 kit lens and the 100-400 for wildlife and both are great. I had the 1.4/23 and the 1.2/56 and loved both of them, unfortunately sold during another system swap a few years ago. But I most probably will get both of them again.

The one thing I am missing from Fuji is IBIS and I am not sure if they can add this into some of their X system cameras. But if that happens I would be hard pressed to go Fuji X system exclusively and simply get rid of all my m43 gear.

And yes, I am far behind in using these cameras to their real potential ...

Peter
 

Grayhand

Well-known member
X-Pro2, 18-55



Inspired by Will:s IR-photos with his X-Pro2 I bought an adjustable IR-cut of filter 530-750nM.

But I think I have been skunked..

The picture become pathologically red, but there is no enhancement of the foliage for a tree in the sun.
The tonal range is more or less the same as for an normal B/W photo.

So I am working with too short wavelengths, have to buy a cut-off filter at 800nM or longer wavelengths.
(low-pass filter for frequency or high-pass filter for wavelength)

Back to the drawing board, ehh I mean ebay..

Ray
 
Last edited:

Shashin

Well-known member
Ray, the IR filter I am using on my XPro2 is an 820nm cut-on filter. Since you are fighting a built-in IR cut filter in the camera, deep red filters tend to result in more exposure toward the red than the NIR resulting in fairly normal images.

 

Grayhand

Well-known member
I previously had a Canon G10 converted for IR photo.
It had a range of 0.72-2.5 micrometer according to the company that did the converting of the G10.
But I did a test and was able to photograph IR from an old hob att 500C. I verified the temperature with my Flir P640s IR camera.
The meant that the G10 could detect IR all the way down to the border of the medium and long wave band!

I read somewhere that the X-Pro2 should have a weak IR-filter, so I was hoping that the filter I was trying would balance visual and IR to a "healthy" mix.
But it look's like you should not believe everything you read on internet...

So I will try a filter with the same cut of wavelength as you use!

Ray
 

Shashin

Well-known member
I previously had a Canon G10 converted for IR photo.
It had a range of 0.72-2.5 micrometer according to the company that did the converting of the G10.
But I did a test and was able to photograph IR from an old hob att 500C. I verified the temperature with my Flir P640s IR camera.
The meant that the G10 could detect IR all the way down to the border of the medium and long wave band!

I read somewhere that the X-Pro2 should have a weak IR-filter, so I was hoping that the filter I was trying would balance visual and IR to a "healthy" mix.
But it look's like you should not believe everything you read on internet...

So I will try a filter with the same cut of wavelength as you use!

Ray
NIR is weak to begin with that I think the IR cut filter on the camera just removes too much IR. I was out shooting NIR (see image above) on a sunny day this weekend and I was getting 60 sec, f/8, at 100 ISO for exposures. For a comparison, with a 7-stop ND filter for visible light, I was getting 1.5 sec, f/11, at 100 ISO.
 

Shashin

Well-known member


This is with an adapted lens: Minolta M-Rokkor 90mm, f/4. It is a surprisingly small, but heavy, lens. It seems sharp on the X Pro2.
 
Last edited:
Top