Starburst Comparisons of 8 Fujinon XF Lenses

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

X-T2 Lens Test: Comparing Seven Lenses

Lenses tested in order:

  • XF56 F1.2
  • XF55-200 F3.5-4.8
  • XF35 F2
  • XF10-24 F4
  • XF23 F2
  • XF16 F1.4
  • XF16-55 F2.8

Notes

1. All shots handheld with X-T2 between 7:30-9:00 AM, indoors with natural lighting. All are RAW conversions SOOC, with no editing or cropping.

2. All shots were taken from the same spot to get a better feel for each lens and its natural focal distance.

3. Throughout the video, the zooms are consistently up to 100%.

4. Variable natural light from the window meant the clock, farthest from the window, was noisy. The chart, closest to the window, had the least amount of noise.

5. All three items are protected by a clear plastic or glass surface.

6. I was most impressed with the IQ from the 55-200 under these conditions.

7. I was least impressed with the 16-1.4, 16-55, and 23-2.

7. The 56-1.2, 35-2, and 10-24 delivered as expected.

Thoughts

1. The low-light performance of the 16-1.4 worries me. I expected much less noise in the given conditions.

2. I expected to be blown away by the 16-55, but in this test, I wasn’t.

3. I’ll need to look further into the possibility that the 55-200 is a good walk-around lens.

4. With the 23-2, 16-1.4, and 10-24, I’ll need to get up closer if I want certain details.

5. Variable lighting is tricky.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

XF56mm F/1.2 – South King Street

The Fujinon XF 56mm f/1.2 was the first lens I bought for the X-T2, which I purchased body only. I shoot a lot of family socials, which are usually in low light, so the 1.2 was very appealing. I also did a lot of research online, and all the reviews were extremely positive.

From the get-go, the 56mm has performed beyond my expectations. I haven’t had a moment’s disappointment with it. However, I hadn’t done an extensive shoot with it until a couple days ago. I specifically set out to test its capability as a walk-around.

I wasn’t disappointed. To date, I’ve tested the XF10-24mm ( First Shoot with XF 10-24mm f/4 on X-T2 and X-T2 + 10-24mm f/4: Old Plantation-style Houses in McCully), XF55-200mm (XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8: First Shoot at Magic Island with X-T2 and Hokulea Returns Home After Three-Year Journey and the XF23mm f/2, X-T2 with XF 55-200mm: Night Crew) and XF23mm F/2 (First Shoot with XF 23mm f/2).

I wasn’t completely satisfied with the 10-24, 55-200, and 23 f/2 IQ. Zooming or cropping to anywhere close to 1:1 wasn’t impressive. The 56mm was a different story. I didn’t do any cropping and didn’t have to because the 56mm focal length pretty much pulled everything in very tight. The wide aperture meant high shutter speeds so that 99% of the shots were sharp.

The IQ is unbelievable at 1:1 and even 1:2 zoom-ins in video production.

For this video, I used JPGs SOOC with no editing or cropping.

During the shoot, there were times when I wished I had the 10-24, but the 56’s IQ made up for the lack of zoom. For my purposes, the 56 could serve as a walk-around, but the lack of width was a problem. I’d probably bring the 10-24 along next time.

I ordered the XF16-55mm f/2.8 and XF16mm f/1.4 a couple days ago to improve the IQ of my shots. I’ll be testing them after they arrive.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

X-T2 with XF 55-200mm: Night Crew

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

D5100: Live Display Settings

Julie Adair King, “Customizing the Nikon D5100 Live View Display,” Dummies, n.d.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

X100T: Biki Comes to Honolulu

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Free Photo Editors vs. Lightroom

Note: I’ll be updating this post from time to time as I learn more about LR and free alternatives.

LR6’s ability to compare the original and the edited version with a single click is one of the primary reasons for getting it.

To edit photos, I’ve been using Photoshop CS3 in conjunction with the free editors from Fujifilm and Nikon to convert RAW to JPG. I decided to get Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6, the standalone version, rather than the CC (Creative Cloud) version. The primary reason was the perpetual monthly cost of the latter.

The best YouTube videos to understand the differences are:

The cost of LR6 isn’t high, but it made me curious about free alternatives.

The best YouTube videos about free editors are:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment