[eddie1960]

I broke down on the weekend based on Wheatfields discription (and using upo the last of the insurance funds) and picked up a like new used XT! at Henry's cameras for $950 (and a 27 2.8 at the rebate price, and a used 60 from a craigslist seller and today the 42 flash........it's been a month of fun spending like a drunken sailor

Final kit is now XE2, XT1, Bower 8MM, Fuji 18,23m27m35m56m60 lenses,M42 and K mount adaptors, Fuji XE42 Flash with 3 diffusers, 3 extra batteries, Camera armor for both screens, half cases for both cameras, A think tank and an Ona Bag, .
Spent all the cash now I'll have to fund the 14 and anything else by selling on other items that weren't stolen or saving pennies (that's no fun)
Still have some GAS/LBA after all that - maybe I'll win the FA77 (It would end up glued to the K adaptor since the K7 sensor doesn't tough the XT1)

[LeRolls]

I have to admit that the new graphite edition of the X-T1 is quite sexy but jeez is it pricey. For that kind of money I could get a new Sony FF. How does the XE2 compare to the X-T1? If I was going to dip my toes into Fuji land it would probably be with that body.

[eddie1960]

I have to admit that the new graphite edition of the X-T1 is quite sexy but jeez is it pricey. For that kind of money I could get a new Sony FF. How does the XE2 compare to the X-T1? If I was going to dip my toes into Fuji land it would probably be with that body.

I have the older black XT, the XE is very close on content, It's a smaller VF but not a lot. the XT has more direct access to items but takes some adapting to where they are (I like having the iso and shooting modes on a dial, but changing iso sometimes changes shooting mode as well if you aren't careful.
I actually was very happy with the XE2 and was going to just buy a second for my wife but the deal on the XT was very attractive, I imagine when we go out together with cameras I will be the XT and she will be the Xe because she really liked the size and weight. Image quality wise they are almost identical, after the big firmware update coming in December the XT will pull ahead on some features (and become the equal of the graphite edition)
If you shoot streets the XE2 with the 27 2.8 or 18 2.0 is an ideal setup (and the 27 is a really good price right now in canada an XE2 - or an Xpro1- with the 27 is $1150)
if you need low light use the 35
the 23 and 56 are both astounding

[LeRolls]

I have the older black XT, the XE is very close on content, It's a smaller VF but not a lot. the XT has more direct access to items but takes some adapting to where they are (I like having the iso and shooting modes on a dial, but changing iso sometimes changes shooting mode as well if you aren't careful.
I actually was very happy with the XE2 and was going to just buy a second for my wife but the deal on the XT was very attractive, I imagine when we go out together with cameras I will be the XT and she will be the Xe because she really liked the size and weight. Image quality wise they are almost identical, after the big firmware update coming in December the XT will pull ahead on some features (and become the equal of the graphite edition)
If you shoot streets the XE2 with the 27 2.8 or 18 2.0 is an ideal setup (and the 27 is a really good price right now in canada an XE2 - or an Xpro1- with the 27 is $1150)
if you need low light use the 35
the 23 and 56 are both astounding

Never really been one for street photography myself (mostly because the streets of south Florida are pretty boring) but I certainly wouldn't mind trying out the 56 f/1.2 attached to either the XE2 or the XT1 for the purpose of portraiture. Although I have to admit that my current combo of the K3 and 77 is already quite nice.

[eddie1960]

Never really been one for street photography myself (mostly because the streets of south Florida are pretty boring) but I certainly wouldn't mind trying out the 56 f/1.2 attached to either the XE2 or the XT1 for the purpose of portraiture. Although I have to admit that my current combo of the K3 and 77 is already quite nice.

the comparable is the da*55 but i've heard it gets slaughtered by the fuji. (from wheatfield and others) I wish Fuji had a 70-77 length (a 105 replacement in FF terms) In fact if i win the 77 this month it will be used almost exclusively on the Fuji and only occasionally on Pentax - likely as a film lens on the SF1(it I would not sell)

[Winder]

the comparable is the da*55 but i've heard it gets slaughtered by the fuji. (from wheatfield and others) I wish Fuji had a 70-77 length (a 105 replacement in FF terms) In fact if i win the 77 this month it will be used almost exclusively on the Fuji and only occasionally on Pentax - likely as a film lens on the SF1(it I would not sell)

The Fuji is sharper at F/1.2 than the DA* 55mm is at F/2.8. The Fuji 56mm is really an amazing lens. I compared the DA* 55mm on my K-3 to a friends X-T1 and the 56mm. The Fuji is sharper (more detail captured), faster, & had better contrast and color for skin tones. When I put my 31mm on the K-3 and compared it to his X-T1 with his Zeiss 32mm, the 31mm was sharper, but color and contrast was pretty much a tie.

We tried to equalize for processing by using the same Lightroom presets for film emulation.

The Fuji 23mm and 56mm are reason enough to buy into the Fuji system.

[eddie1960]

The Fuji is sharper at F/1.2 than the DA* 55mm is at F/2.8. The Fuji 56mm is really an amazing lens. I compared the DA* 55mm on my K-3 to a friends X-T1 and the 56mm. The Fuji is sharper (more detail captured), faster, & had better contrast and color for skin tones. When I put my 31mm on the K-3 and compared it to his X-T1 with his Zeiss 32mm, the 31mm was sharper, but color and contrast was pretty much a tie.

We tried to equalize for processing by using the same Lightroom presets for film emulation.

The Fuji 23mm and 56mm are reason enough to buy into the Fuji system.

I would tend to agree those 2 lenses alone are pretty stellar. The zeiss 32 actually isn't as good as the Fuji 35 (locally hte shop has had a lot of zeiss 32 returns across both the fuji and sony mount (I could have got a used zeiss for the same price thanks to that as I paid for the 35 - I opted for the 35 because I heard so many good things. center sharpness is just fantastic and stopped down to 5.6 to 8 its razor sharp across the board (honestly who cares if its razor sharp on the edges at 1.4 that's not why I'm shooting at 1.4 . not a lot uploaded yet but for the 35 (on the XE2)

35 @ 1.4



@ 5.6

[LeRolls]

I would tend to agree those 2 lenses alone are pretty stellar. The zeiss 32 actually isn't as good as the Fuji 35 (locally hte shop has had a lot of zeiss 32 returns across both the fuji and sony mount (I could have got a used zeiss for the same price thanks to that as I paid for the 35 - I opted for the 35 because I heard so many good things. center sharpness is just fantastic and stopped down to 5.6 to 8 its razor sharp across the board (honestly who cares if its razor sharp on the edges at 1.4 that's not why I'm shooting at 1.4 . not a lot uploaded yet but for the 35 (on the XE2)

35 @ 1.4



@ 5.6

The Fuji is sharper at F/1.2 than the DA* 55mm is at F/2.8. The Fuji 56mm is really an amazing lens. I compared the DA* 55mm on my K-3 to a friends X-T1 and the 56mm. The Fuji is sharper (more detail captured), faster, & had better contrast and color for skin tones. When I put my 31mm on the K-3 and compared it to his X-T1 with his Zeiss 32mm, the 31mm was sharper, but color and contrast was pretty much a tie.

We tried to equalize for processing by using the same Lightroom presets for film emulation.

The Fuji 23mm and 56mm are reason enough to buy into the Fuji system.

the comparable is the da*55 but i've heard it gets slaughtered by the fuji. (from wheatfield and others) I wish Fuji had a 70-77 length (a 105 replacement in FF terms) In fact if i win the 77 this month it will be used almost exclusively on the Fuji and only occasionally on Pentax - likely as a film lens on the SF1(it I would not sell)

Those shots seem plenty sharp to me.

Yeah, once I got my hands on the FA Limiteds I really didn't have much desire for the 55 to he honest (don't really need the weather sealing). If I ever do end up getting a Fuji body I will most likely stick to the Fuji glass starting with the 56.

[Wheatfield]

A quibble in an otherwise very informative post, but I don't think that's quite accurate. The Fuji maxes out at only a 1:2 macro reproduction ratio and is very significantly shorter at 60mm. (And I doubt it's weather sealed, though I have no idea if Fuji lenses have the equivalent of quickshift. But both those things are very secondary for me.) Anyway, for serious macro shooters, a Pentax 100mm macro - whether it be D-FA WR, D-FA, FA or even F - is a much more desirable lens than the Fuji 60mm...

I am talking specifically about it's optical qualities. Anyone can read a spec sheet and make comparisons between focal lengths, maximum apertures, reproduction ratios, etc.
I do a heck of a lot of macro shooting, I dare say I am serious about it, and the 60 is an incredibly competent lens with a similar angle of view to a 90mm lens on full frame (which is where the 90-100mm focal length as ideal for macro was settled upon).

[LeRolls]

I am currently bidding on a XE2 body on eBay. I doubt I will win it but will give it a shot.

[Doundounba]

I am talking specifically about it's optical qualities. (...)

While I do find it surprising that you'd be satisfied with 1:2 - most of my macros are at least near 1:1, and usually higher - I have no doubt the 60mm a competent lens. If you're already in Fuji land, I'm sure you will do well with it, especially once the tubes come out. But even if it has unicorns jumping out of it, it's not a lens one would switch systems for, especially not from Pentax. The XT-1 is a very appealing camera - I love the split-view MF assist mode, for instance! But as a primarily macro shooter, there's no way I would consider switching in the current state of affairs (ie two macro lenses: Zeiss 50mm 1:1 $1k / Fujinon 60mm 1:2 $500). I can get 1:1 macro lenses for Pentax in 35mm, 50mm, 55mm, 70mm, 90mm, 100mm, 105mm, 180mm and 200mm. I don't need to go further than the spec sheet to know that I get a better working distance with a 90-105mm macro than with a 60mm at the same reproduction ratio. And that does make it easier to approach bugs - ie it's not a meaningless stat! Besides, it's not like the macros available in this range for Pentax have been found weak or lacking. There are lots of reasons to like what Fuji is doing, but what they offer the macro shooter is not what will get people to switch systems. Of course, you can adapt lenses... Me? I just got myself a K-3.

[Wheatfield]

While I do find it surprising that you'd be satisfied with 1:2 - most of my macros are at least near 1:1, and usually higher - I have no doubt the 60mm a competent lens. If you're already in Fuji land, I'm sure you will do well with it, especially once the tubes come out. But even if it has unicorns jumping out of it, it's not a lens one would switch systems for, especially not from Pentax. The XT-1 is a very appealing camera - I love the split-view MF assist mode, for instance! But as a primarily macro shooter, there's no way I would consider switching in the current state of affairs (ie two macro lenses: Zeiss 50mm 1:1 $1k / Fujinon 60mm 1:2 $500). I can get 1:1 macro lenses for Pentax in 35mm, 50mm, 55mm, 70mm, 90mm, 100mm, 105mm, 180mm and 200mm. I don't need to go further than the spec sheet to know that I get a better working distance with a 90-105mm macro than with a 60mm at the same reproduction ratio. And that does make it easier to approach bugs - ie it's not a meaningless stat! Besides, it's not like the macros available in this range for Pentax have been found weak or lacking. There are lots of reasons to like what Fuji is doing, but what they offer the macro shooter is not what will get people to switch systems. Of course, you can adapt lenses... Me? I just got myself a K-3.

I already had a K3 when I bought the Fuji. I'm not really sure what you are going on about. The Fuji 60mm lens, within it's limitations is an extraordinary lens, as good as the 100mm 2.8 wr macro from Pentax (which I also own). The extension tubes will be welcome, as it will increase the ability of the lens,
Having said that, it is just one lens in the Fuji system, not the entire system. You make it sound like as if Fuji makes nothing else but a somewhat macro limited macro lens.
If you want to talk about lenses to switch systems over, we could talk about the Fuji 14mm f/2.8 (absolutely amazing glass), or the 23mm f/1.4 (one of the sharpest lenses I have ever used), or the 35mm f/1.4 (right up there with the 31mm LTD, but almost half a stop faster and half the size and weight), or the 56 f/1.2 (a lens that makes the DA* 55/1.4 look like a rather sad attempt at a lens).
As much as I like Pentax (I own some 75 Pentax lenses at the moment), every Pentax lens that I have is outclassed by it's Fuji equivalent. If all you can do is find fault with is a 1:2 macro lens, you aren't looking at the big picture. If all you do is shoot macro, I can understand that.

[eddie1960]

I already had a K3 when I bought the Fuji. I'm not really sure what you are going on about. The Fuji 60mm lens, within it's limitations is an extraordinary lens, as good as the 100mm 2.8 wr macro from Pentax (which I also own). The extension tubes will be welcome, as it will increase the ability of the lens,
Having said that, it is just one lens in the Fuji system, not the entire system. You make it sound like as if Fuji makes nothing else but a somewhat macro limited macro lens.
If you want to talk about lenses to switch systems over, we could talk about the Fuji 14mm f/2.8 (absolutely amazing glass), or the 23mm f/1.4 (one of the sharpest lenses I have ever used), or the 35mm f/1.4 (right up there with the 31mm LTD, but almost half a stop faster and half the size and weight), or the 56 f/1.2 (a lens that makes the DA* 55/1.4 look like a rather sad attempt at a lens).
As much as I like Pentax (I own some 75 Pentax lenses at the moment), every Pentax lens that I have is outclassed by it's Fuji equivalent. If all you can do is find fault with is a 1:2 macro lens, you aren't looking at the big picture. If all you do is shoot macro, I can understand that.

while I have not used as extensive a Pentax kit as Wheat I have to agree, you need to look at the whole picture - I don't own the 14 yet, I do however own every other Fuji Prime and have to say across the board they are excellent but the 23/35/56 are truly special lenses. the 27 pancake which many Fuji guys deride as their snapshot lens i would happily put up against the LTD series pancakes - at f5.6 - 8 shooting on the street it is a fantastic lens, it's also quite decent opened up . the 18 outclasses the da21 imo and has an aperture ring as well as more than an extra stop of light. I won't comment on the zooms since the ones in my signature haven't arrived and they are for my wife mainly. I will say the 18-55 kit is probably the single best kit lens in it's category (28-75 equivalent)bar none really very sharp wide open and dead sharp at 5.6 with good ois - wish I'd kept the XE1 i tried before swapping it to the XE2 just to have that lens (but then i wouldn't have got the XT so ....)

[Doundounba]

I already had a K3 when I bought the Fuji. I'm not really sure what you are going on about.

I had (and have) two K-01 bodies, and wanted to upgrade right about now. Fuji and others were candidates, and I don't especially think I need a mirror, but ultimately, the K-3 won anyway (thanks in no small part to Black Friday pricing). Received it last Sunday.

If all you can do is find fault with is a 1:2 macro lens, you aren't looking at the big picture.

So we've now come full circle. I began my first intervention in this thread, after you posted about your experience/opinion of various Fuji glass, with the following words: "A quibble in an otherwise very informative post [...]". I'm not sure which part of "quibble" you didn't understand. As a main macro lens, 60mm is too short for me and 1:2 is not enough, when on Pentax I have access to a wide range of 1:1, inexpensive, optically excellent 90-105mm macro lenses. Of course, YMMV.

If all you do is shoot macro, I can understand that.

I believe my exact words were "as a primarily macro shooter". Meaning it's not the only thing I do, but I'm not going to switch into a system that is weaker on my main type of shooting.

If I come across as a bit of a fan boy, I apologize, [...]

Indeed... But nevermind: apology accepted.

[Winder]

THE REAL DIFFERENCE: XF56 vs XF56 APD vs FF (GUEST POST – NIKO VILLEGAS | JAN GONZALES) | RANDALL CIPRIANO . COM

For those interested.