Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Fuji X Series > Fuji X Lenses & Images

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 10-09-2016   #41
grouchos_tash
Registered User
 
grouchos_tash's Avatar
 
grouchos_tash is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NE England
Posts: 444
Anyone noticed any distortion with theirs close up?

Anyway, here's an example with an X-T10 and an attempt at a Acros 100 style...

__________________
Gary

flickr

www.garyharding.website
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-10-2016   #42
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 44
Posts: 18,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by grouchos_tash View Post
Anyone noticed any distortion with theirs close up?
What type of distortion?
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-10-2016   #43
grouchos_tash
Registered User
 
grouchos_tash's Avatar
 
grouchos_tash is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NE England
Posts: 444
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
What type of distortion?
Does it not look like the horizontal lines of the camera curve towards the corners or is it just me?
__________________
Gary

flickr

www.garyharding.website
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2016   #44
tbhv55
Registered User
 
tbhv55 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Devon, UK
Age: 62
Posts: 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by grouchos_tash View Post
Does it not look like the horizontal lines of the camera curve towards the corners or is it just me?
See attached - I've put a grid overlay on the image that you posted. There is a little distortion, but I wouldn't say that it's excessive.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Grid.jpg (42.4 KB, 51 views)
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2016   #45
grouchos_tash
Registered User
 
grouchos_tash's Avatar
 
grouchos_tash is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NE England
Posts: 444
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbhv55 View Post
See attached - I've put a grid overlay on the image that you posted. There is a little distortion, but I wouldn't say that it's excessive.
The more the lens costs the more picky I get haha! I don't have any complaints about my £20 Jupiter 8
__________________
Gary

flickr

www.garyharding.website
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2016   #46
tbhv55
Registered User
 
tbhv55 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Devon, UK
Age: 62
Posts: 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by grouchos_tash View Post
The more the lens costs the more picky I get haha! I don't have any complaints about my £20 Jupiter 8
Good point! I have no complaints about my J-8 either (or my Industar I-61L/D...)
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2016   #47
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbhv55 View Post
See attached - I've put a grid overlay on the image that you posted. There is a little distortion, but I wouldn't say that it's excessive.
At this subject distance variations from a perfectly square camera to subject orientation could explain these results.

Please describe exactly how you set the shot up such that the subject was square to the sensor in three planes.
__________________
“To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle.” George Orwell

williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2016   #48
tbhv55
Registered User
 
tbhv55 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Devon, UK
Age: 62
Posts: 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
At this subject distance variations from a perfectly square camera to subject orientation could explain these results.

Please describe exactly how you set the shot up such that the subject was square to the sensor in three planes.
Not me - I only put the grid overlay on ... grouchos_tash made the shot.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2016   #49
grouchos_tash
Registered User
 
grouchos_tash's Avatar
 
grouchos_tash is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NE England
Posts: 444
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
At this subject distance variations from a perfectly square camera to subject orientation could explain these results.

Please describe exactly how you set the shot up such that the subject was square to the sensor in three planes.
There was no measuring involved
__________________
Gary

flickr

www.garyharding.website
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2016   #50
skopar steve
Registered User
 
skopar steve's Avatar
 
skopar steve is offline
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 276
Picked up a copy of this lens Friday before last. Kind of a impulse/GAS attack. Normally my purchases are thought out as photography funds are very limited. Not to mention I've been satisfied with the XE-1 and 18-55mm kit lens. So far I like the size and focus speed of the lens. Have not had much time to use it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2016   #51
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by grouchos_tash View Post
There was no measuring involved
Well it then it's not the lens.
__________________
“To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle.” George Orwell

williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-24-2016   #52
rhl-oregon
jolly good dog Robert
 
rhl-oregon's Avatar
 
rhl-oregon is offline
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,552
John, although you never preach in your mod role despite abundant opportunities, it's especially good to see your visual practice in these sets--the coherence of which suggests at least a section of a book. (This is not a hint, just an affirmation.)
__________________
Robert Hill Long
Eureka California USA


Robert Hill Long Tumblr

  Reply With Quote

Old 10-24-2016   #53
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 44
Posts: 18,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhl-oregon View Post
John, although you never preach in your mod role despite abundant opportunities, it's especially good to see your visual practice in these sets--the coherence of which suggests at least a section of a book. (This is not a hint, just an affirmation.)
Thanks Robert. I make a lot of books for practice in hopes of one day making THE book (once I really edit down and feel I have something complete). I have a lot of room for improvement too, but I am happy with what I am making as well. Thank you for viewing, I appreciate the kind words.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2016   #54
mabelsound
Registered User
 
mabelsound's Avatar
 
mabelsound is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Age: 47
Posts: 6,216
Welp, I've returned to Fuji and was debating between a used 35/1.4 (which I've owned before) or new 35/2 to accompany my X-E2. This thread clinches it. These pictures look great.

jsrockit, what settings do you use for black and white? Are you shooting raw and post-processing, or do you have a custom jpeg setup?
__________________
flickr insta twitter
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2016   #55
mabelsound
Registered User
 
mabelsound's Avatar
 
mabelsound is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Age: 47
Posts: 6,216
Miserable sucker that I am, I think I am going to actually pay for the optional bayonet hood
__________________
flickr insta twitter
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2016   #56
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 44
Posts: 18,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by mabelsound View Post
jsrockit, what settings do you use for black and white? Are you shooting raw and post-processing, or do you have a custom jpeg setup?
I shoot RAW and then PP each individual photo.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2016   #57
mabelsound
Registered User
 
mabelsound's Avatar
 
mabelsound is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Age: 47
Posts: 6,216
Well, they look very good—nice work.
__________________
flickr insta twitter
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2016   #58
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 44
Posts: 18,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by mabelsound View Post
Well, they look very good—nice work.
Thank you sir.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2016   #59
johnwolf
Registered User
 
johnwolf's Avatar
 
johnwolf is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,454
I just sent my MM for sensor corrosion inspection, so I'll be carrying my X-Pro1 for a few months. Kind of looking forward to shooting color again. I still have both 35s and can't seem to part with either.

John
__________________
tumblr | instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2016   #60
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 44
Posts: 18,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwolf View Post
I just sent my MM for sensor corrosion inspection, so I'll be carrying my X-Pro1 for a few months. Kind of looking forward to shooting color again. I still have both 35s and can't seem to part with either.

John
Two nice cameras to choose from Enjoy!

PS: Some nice work on your site too! I don't think I've seen it before either.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-07-2016   #61
mabelsound
Registered User
 
mabelsound's Avatar
 
mabelsound is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Age: 47
Posts: 6,216
Hey, this lens is discounted to $299 today. I'm very annoyed, as I just bought it for $399. Asked amazon for a partial refund, which I suspect won't work. But if you're on the fence, this is a great time to get one.
__________________
flickr insta twitter
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-07-2016   #62
grouchos_tash
Registered User
 
grouchos_tash's Avatar
 
grouchos_tash is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NE England
Posts: 444
Just playing the around the house today with the 35mm that I don't use enough...



__________________
Gary

flickr

www.garyharding.website
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-08-2016   #63
grouchos_tash
Registered User
 
grouchos_tash's Avatar
 
grouchos_tash is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NE England
Posts: 444


__________________
Gary

flickr

www.garyharding.website
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-08-2016   #64
35photo
Registered User
 
35photo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 584
_DSF0978.jpg by Marko Mihailovich, on Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2016   #65
grouchos_tash
Registered User
 
grouchos_tash's Avatar
 
grouchos_tash is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NE England
Posts: 444
__________________
Gary

flickr

www.garyharding.website
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2016   #66
mabelsound
Registered User
 
mabelsound's Avatar
 
mabelsound is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Age: 47
Posts: 6,216
Shot some music with it the other night...I like it!

__________________
flickr insta twitter
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2016   #67
coelacanth
Ride, dive, shoot.
 
coelacanth's Avatar
 
coelacanth is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,462

Vanilla Sky by Suguru Nishioka, on Flickr

Just came back from a quick motorcycle ride in Woodside/Skyline. X-Pro2 and 35/2.

P.S. I noticed Flickr image posting quality got really worse recently. Not sure if I'm doing something wrong...
__________________
- Sug

b/w guy.

flickr | Instagram

  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2016   #68
intheviewfinder
Rich Beaubien
 
intheviewfinder's Avatar
 
intheviewfinder is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bolton MA USA
Posts: 210
A beauty Sug.
__________________
-- Rich
  Reply With Quote

How do you think IQ of 35/2 compares to 35/1.4?
Old 12-07-2016   #69
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
 
Jamie Pillers's Avatar
 
Jamie Pillers is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 3,832
How do you think IQ of 35/2 compares to 35/1.4?

There are SO many beautiful images in this thread! Thank you all for posting them.

I'm wondering if any of you have a sense of how the image quality of the 35/2 lens compares with the older 35/1.4. Aside from the extra stop and the focusing speed. Do you notice any sharpness/color/bokeh differences? Over-all character difference? Thanks for any thoughts.
__________________
Talk to a stranger today!

Fuji digital; Polaroid 250 (waiting for an 'art' project)

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2016   #70
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 44
Posts: 18,653
Jaime, I'm not the type to compare lenses too much with tests or anything. I think both are great lenses and that's enough for me. Of course the 1.4 has a nicer bokeh due to its speed. But both are great lenses that you cannot go wrong with.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-10-2017   #71
Scapevision
90% Film
 
Scapevision is offline
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Toronto
Posts: 361
Pretty cool regardless.


Breaking Pointe
by Scapevision, on Flickr
__________________
Flickr
scapevision.ca
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #72
j.scooter
Registered User
 
j.scooter's Avatar
 
j.scooter is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Toronto-ish
Posts: 974
Fuji XT1 35 f2

Last edited by j.scooter : 02-18-2017 at 14:29. Reason: .
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #73
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 4,940
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie Pillers View Post
There are SO many beautiful images in this thread! Thank you all for posting them.

I'm wondering if any of you have a sense of how the image quality of the 35/2 lens compares with the older 35/1.4. Aside from the extra stop and the focusing speed. Do you notice any sharpness/color/bokeh differences? Over-all character difference? Thanks for any thoughts.
The 35mm f2 is a good lens in a lovely body, the 35mm f1.4 is a lovely lens in a good body. Personally I sold my 35mm f2 - the extra stop of the f1.4 is just too valuable on a crop body. If you never shoot wide open, the f2 is 95% as good optically with a little faster focussing and a jewel like body.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #74
f16sunshine
Moderator
 
f16sunshine's Avatar
 
f16sunshine is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Age: 49
Posts: 6,015
Well said Gavin.
I also prefer the f1.4/35 images but still keep the f2/35 for it's WR and small size.


The f1.4 has a real air to it wide open. Just special. Summilux like. It's a Fujilux .
__________________
Andy
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #75
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 538
The F2 has more distortion than the 1.4. Compare raw turning on/off correction in something not Adobe (you can not disable geometric distortion correction) and you can easily see how much more distortion the 2.0 has. If is also not as sharp. Very nice lens but the 1.4 is magic.

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #76
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 4,940
Quote:
Originally Posted by f16sunshine View Post
The f1.4 has a real air to it wide open. Just special. Summilux like. It's a Fujilux .
Yes, exactly. There's something special about the way it does things that elevates it above the f2. The f2 is solid optically, but not special.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2017   #77
Dogman
Registered User
 
Dogman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 817
I have to agree with gavinlg and f16sunshine concerning the "specialness" of photos done with the 35/1.4 compared to the 35/2. Both are good lenses but there is definitely a quality to photos done with the 35/1.4 that is missing from photos done with the 34/2.

One caveat--I don't test lenses, I just take pictures with them. Therefore, I cannot comment on the clinical sharpness or other qualities of one lens vs the other.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2017   #78
f16sunshine
Moderator
 
f16sunshine's Avatar
 
f16sunshine is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Age: 49
Posts: 6,015
Mono(y) for this one @ f2
Jasper at home in Oakland by Adnan, on Flickr
__________________
Andy
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-07-2017   #79
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 44
Posts: 18,653
Santiago, Chile

  Reply With Quote

Old 06-08-2017   #80
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 44
Posts: 18,653
Santiago, Chile

  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:58.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.