Chasing the Dragon

Nikon Z7, Z 40mm f2

 Yeah, I'm bad for chasing the dragon. Legendarily bad in fact as I've been doing a constant round robin between Nikon, Sony, m43 and Fuji for over 15 years now since I got my G1 back in January 2009.

What is Chasing the Dragon though? It's when following 'the grass is greener on the other side' to the logical extreme. At one point I made 3 total system switches in a 1 year period. That's crazypants, but it's also a legacy of my unwillingness to accept that I both have bad Gear Acquisition Syndrome (GAS) and the perfect camera for me doesn't yet exist, nor does the perfect lens lineup.

Over the last few years I've been actively trying to stop and settle on one system. I almost achieved it with Canon, as I stuck with that system for 18 months (a recent record) and honestly only switched back to Nikon because I was unhappy with the adaptation experience for manual lenses on Canon, I was otherwise pretty happy with Canon (the bracketing UI aside). 

The other problem is that I just don't deal well with having 2 systems. Or more correctly, I want to have 1 system/2 bodies in the field ideally when I'm shooting landscape/nature. Ideally with shared batteries (I rarely swap cards in practice so while I used to select for that, it's no longer a requirement so long as I have enough 128GB cards so every body has its own card(s). )

The problem is that right now my sole body is a high mileage body I bought cheap specifically as a body to use with my old manual lenses. I like the body, but it doesn't meet my video needs without me buying several additional accessories to rig it out (external display for starters) and I'm always cognizant that a camera with 316k shots on it may die on me. Plus I'd like some more performance for bugging/wildlife/aviation. 

So what are my options?

I've really settled on 4 possibilities, and I'm about ready to narrow that to three. The plan really is to have 2 options when I'm ready to go to the local pusher. 

The first is to do the obvious, stick with the Z7 and just buy a bunch of interesting glass. The downside here is just the usual Nikon issue, the lenses are big & heavy unless I buy some of the few DX lenses, and those are very consumer. But I do have the option to get a bunch of lenses I'd always wanted. I also have the concern that my Z7 will die at a point where I can't just buy another body, but the flip side of that is that most of my lenses will work on DSLR's and a D610 or D800 is stupid cheap, so it's unlikely I'd be out a body more than briefly even if it died at an inopportune time. 

The second is to go Fuji. Keep the Z7 and use it primarily with my collection of manual focus FF lenses, even slowly adding to that collection, but the main system becomes Fuji. The biggest advantage here is that Fuji does have both compact offerings and all but 2 of their lenses are under $3k CAD, with the majority being under $1300 or so. Plus there's a wide variety of small lenses in the system, which is very nice. Biggest downsides here are processing X-Trans files (which I still don't love, but I can readily get good results from) and the pretty mixed selection of lenses in terms of rendering styles and resolution. The bodies available cover all my use needs, the X-Hx for fast PASM with good long-lens handling, the X-T series for retro/everyday use and the X-M5 as a small EDC/Webcam body.  Fuji also gives access to the ridiculous number of cheap & interesting APS-C manual primes (and AF primes too),

The third is to add the Zf and a couple zooms, which is in many ways the Nikon body I always wanted. But here the big issue comes down to the Nikon lenses not being well optimized for that body. Specifically the lack of aperture rings, as well as control dials on the handful of smaller lenses in the system. 3rd Party lenses do make up somewhat for that (both size & handling) but the best lineup of 3rd party lenses for the Zf isn't available in Z mount, so you need a MegaDAP adapter to use them (that's the Sigma 'i' series primes). Plus the Zf simply doesn't have as well sorted a UI as the X-T5. The other issue here is the Zf is best suited to the use I bought the Z7 for, old manual lenses, and I kinda want to keep the Z7 focused on those uses. There's a half-step option here of getting the Z50II instead of the Zf, and focusing on APS-C for most uses. The Z7 is a solid APS-C body to cover the Z50II's weak spots (and vice versa for the most part). This would be better if I could expect a higher-end APS-C body from Nikon. 

The fourth option is basically option 2, but Panasonic L mount. With the new S1RII arriving tomorrow with very aggressive pricing this looks even better than the third option for full frame for long term usage, with a wide variety of interesting glass existing in L mount, but we're still talking a large system, even if it's smaller than the All-Nikon Z setup. Could go S9 for a tiny body here, or S5II for all singing/all dancing with the view of adding the S1RII in the future as a resolution body to address the Z7's eventual demise. Lots of reasonably priced glass in the system, and some compact & excellent zooms as well. 

Now the reality is that I don't need better IQ than crop can deliver, and Fuji offers me a more compact option than Panasonic. Nikon just doesn't offer a compact/high performance option (only the Z50II which lacks IBIS and a good EVF, both items I'm sensitive to). 

What I really wish I could do is spend a week with an S5II, 20-60, 35/1.8 and Sigma 100-400, and a Week with the X-T5, 16-50 f2.8-4, 23/2 and Sigma 100-400 and see which I get along with better.

Regardless of what path I choose, I will continue to use the Z7 and add interesting primes to my system. I'll probably add 2-3 zooms as well eventually, likely F mount lenses I get for good prices.  

Ponderings about Retro Cameras

 

Fujifilm X-T2, XC 35mm f2

I'm very strongly attracted to Retro cameras, specifically those similar in design to Nikon's iconic FM & FM2n. This is largely because I shot most of my film work on those cameras, the F3 and a few other similar bodies (FA, FM10, FE, FE2). I still own an original FE and an F2a. 

With retro cameras I've seen 3 general approaches across the 4 brands that have seriously done retro cameras.

The first is 'Retro in looks only' with the new OM-3 being the classic example, but the essentially the whole Olympus/OM System Micro4/3rds line except for the E-M1/OM-1 series fall into this category. A few Fuji's do as well, notably the X-Tx00 series. Essentially this is a camera with retro styling, but a modern PASM+dual dial interface. Key items are no external shutter speed or ISO dials, although an external exposure compensation dial is OK (we've even seen that on non-retro designs like some Sony's). These bodies tend to work well and look good, but don't tend to become iconic as in use, they're just another camera with a small grip (The Pen-F being the exception)

The second is the fully integrated design. This is a design where you get an external interface with ISO & Shutter speed dials, intended to work with an aperture ring on the lens, but also two control wheels and you can readily switch between dial and wheel interfaces as needed. The Majority of Fuji designs are in this category. It's also what Nikon has tried to do, but not quite achieved with their 3 retro designs (the Df being an abject failure and the Zfc and Zf being near-misses). The key here is that these bodies allow you to work both like a fully retro body with the external exposure triangle (usually plus exposure compensation) and a modern body, and allow you to switch each corner of the triangle independently and seamlessly. Fuji also does a few bodies that are partially here, with ISO replaced by either some alternate control or nothing on some bodies that are either lower-end or more compact.

The third approach is to make the most minimal concessions to digital possible. The only real entry here is the Leica M digitals, although the X-Pro3 dabbles in this. Leica has simply taken their film body, stuck digital internals into it and added the absolute minimum required to make them a functional digital camera. It works very well, if you want a camera that works like it's 1985 and only that way. 

The challenge with Nikon here is they continue to half-ass the experience. The Zfc and Zf are excellent cameras. But they suffer from two significant issues, only one of which is at the camera level.

At the camera level, the core issue is that they work well when only using the external dials and when only using the internal controls, but when mixing the two experiences it's a study in gotchas, especially with ISO where you need a written guide to figure out how everything interacts (except in Auto mode, where it does exactly what you'd expect when moving the ISO Dial in and out of C, why can't it be set to work the same in PASM modes?). Some of this comes down to the choice to borrow the PASM switch from the old Nikon FA rather than use a Pentax/Contax style A positions (Fuji clearly borrowed their X-T series UI from Pentax's retro-style AF cameras like the MZ-5n). Ironically many Nikon film bodies use A positions on the shutter speed dial (the FA was the exception here) and even a P position on a couple bodies (like the FG). I'd bet whoever was lead designer for the Zf and Zfc used these cameras only in all manual or in Auto (which are the two good experiences) with minimal use of Aperture priority in particular.

The other issue with the Nikon retro bodies is simply Nikon has not given users a lens selection to match these two rather popular bodies. Even the two SE lenses match in styling and size only, but as they lack an Aperture ring (or even a control ring) you can't use the lens as the third corner of the exposure triangle in manual focus. The two f1.4 lenses are a better experience as they do have a control ring, but you still can't see aperture on the lens, only on that tiny top LCD display. The irony here is that there is a good experience available, just not from Nikon. Many 3rd party primes come with aperture rings, so if you want the best experience just use Viltrox, Voigtlander, Meike, 7Artisans or TTArtisan lenses instead of Nikkors on your Zf. Nikon needs to start releasing lenses designed for these cameras in more than just cosmetics, as by all reports they are very good selling cameras and likely would sell even better if Nikon had thought out the lens needs of these cameras. 

So what can Nikon do.

In short - firmware updates. I'd like to see the following changes:

1. Setting in the Auto-ISO setup to disable Auto ISO when the ISO dial is not set to C

2. Setting in Controls CF's to 'have camera select shutter speed when dial set to C' 

3. Setting in Controls CF's to ' Use PASM switch for User Custom Settings' 

4. Setting in Controls that if setting 3 is enabled it allows the PASM Switch positions Auto, P, A & S to each be mapped to a Ux setting (U1/2/3/4) instead of AE modes. - This would also solve the loss of directly selectable user banks on these two cameras.

5. Add an A position after minimum aperture in the aperture range so you can dial into having the camera select aperture + respect A position on lenses with a physical aperture ring. 

Also, when the ZfcII comes (and eventually for the ZfII), give us a half-grip option with a shutter release and front control dial, like the OG E-M5 offered. That will be killer for these bodies with larger lenses. 

If you wonder why all the retro musings, well I can't frikking decide whether I want a Zf or an X-T5. Or to be more correct, I want a Zf, but I want some of the X-T5 experience (UI fully sorted and lenses with aperture rings). I keep digging in and realizing the two best kits for me would be X-H2+X-T5 or Z7+Zf, in both cases with the small creator camera added at some point for video/light carry (Z30/Zfc or X-M5/XT-30II). The question if I go Fuji is how do I align the body selection/acquisition as I ultimately would want two bodies, but do I get X-H2+creator or X-T5+creator first, then add the other higher-end body afterwards. 

Pondering Systems Yet Again

 

Fujifilm X-T2, 7Artisans 25mm f1.8

I've been thinking about a second body for a while now, what would work for me as a complement to the OM-1. This has me strugging with m43 again.

What do I want in a body split?

1 larger body, PASM style controls, beefy grip, good performance, good EVF

1 smaller body, PASM or traditional controls, can be lower performance but same basic IQ wanted, I want a good EVF though. 

I'd really like common lens/battery/cards across the two, with battery actually being the key item (I rarely change cards when shooting, and frankly I kind of want to be zoom primary on the larger body, prime primary on the smaller, although being able to cross-swap would be useful when hiking).

The OM-5 fails on batteries and EVF. The Panasonic lineup has mostly the same set of issues.

Fuji on the other hand offers the X-H2(s) bodies and X-T4/5 in this space, which all share the same battery, support UHS-II cards (the X-H2's also support CFE B cards)

The downside, in holding the Fuji bodies it's clear that Fuji still hasn't figured out buttons. Even the latest of their bodies still suffer from chiclet buttons, although they have improved a bit. Honestly I could live with that on the dial-based smaller camera, but not on the larger PASM body.

The other issue is that simply even the X-H2s isn't as capable a camera as the OM-1, despite a higher cost. VERY limited computational capabilities (high-res only really, and that requires post-processing on your PC), and the AF doesn't stand up either, as Fuji lacks a basic AF-C+Tracking option, which is the weakest mode on the OM-1, but is at least there. Subject recognition is better on the OM-1, it's also faster (50fps vs 40). Video is better on the Fuji side, but if I was video focused I'd be shooting a GH6, not an OM-1. 

I actually did box up my gear and head in to Henrys to look at Fuji options. This usually results in my coming home with a different camera, but this time the OM-1 came home with me. None of the options I looked at were as good as the OM-1 as a primary camera. 

The takeaway? I think I'm sticking with m43 for now, but I still need to figure out what I'm going to do for a backup/city camera to the OM-1. Who knows, maybe I'll just get an X-T series and some cheap manual focus primes and shoot Fuji in the city, OM System in the field. 

A Few Thoughts

Fujifilm X-T2, 7Artisans 12mm f2.8

Processed the last few X-T2 images in my backlog today. There's still some to be posted, but the Fuji stuff is pretty close to being done, wrapping up my latest adventure with that system. Still have 2 X-T1 images to post, but I processed the last X-T1 images weeks ago.

I still do feel affection for the system, it's a solid choice but not for me for landscape work. I just don't get along with the colour science. Not enough deep blue. REALLY nice B&W output though, Fuji is probably my favourite for B&W tones out of the box. I still do think it's odd I can't get Provia colour from the camera made by Provia's maker and which includes a 'Provia' setting (which looks nothing like Provia btw)

At this point I've taken almost 1400 images with the E-M5 Mark II that replaced the Fuji stuff, that's in about 5 weeks with some hiking involved. That's reasonable, especially since I'm basically shooting with one lens welded on, namely the 12-40 f2.8 Pro. 

I did use my Micro-Nikkor 55/3.5 AI a bunch today, it's really nice on the E-M5 II, much more usable than on the Z5 where the working distance limits me more (in terms of filling the frame, the crop factor makes the 55 Micro at 1:2 actual magnification functionally the same as a 110 Macro at 1:1 on Full Frame)

The Z5 is coming up on 3400 shots, with 2 months more ownership. That's a solid increase since early May, but overall a lower rate than the E-M5 II so far. A lot of that is that the E-M5 II is just a better walkabout camera in most regards, with a much more flexible normal zoom, in terms of range, close focus ability and speed. 

The close focus ability is the real game changer here, it just makes the 12-40 so much more useable for around the neighbourhood shooting than the Z 24-50 is. Even the 24-70/4 S cannot match the close focus of the 12-40 Pro. 

The more flexible flip/twist LCD setup on the E-M5 II also contributes here. It makes low and odd angle shooting so much easier it's not funny, especially as I shoot a lot of portrait orientation work. If I did mostly landscape orientation the Z5's LCD would be way less limiting.

 I would love a Z5-level EVF on the Oly's. The difference in EVF quality and transparency is immense. With the Oly's you are clearly looking at an electronic display, the Z5 however just seems to show what's going on, like a regular OVF with more data. 

The Z5 also comes out ahead in terms of AF. More flexibility and more control than the E-M5 II. The one thing the E-M5 II does particularly well is handle when the scene is totally out of focus. The Z5 struggles, the E-M5 II pauses for a bit then starts racking through the focus range to try and find a subject.

A wildcard that's been thrown in on system selection for me is that Olympus/OMDS is no longer regular stock items at any major retailer. Henry's, Vistek and Downtown Camera all now treat it as Special Order. I need to figure out if I can live with that. That said, it's not like there's a lot of kit I'd be looking to add either way. 

For now, I'm going to keep tracking my usage to see if a clear winner emerges between the two cameras. If not, I'll have to make some sort of decision later this summer.

Gear Simplification - The Never Ending Quest.

Nikon FE, Ilford HP5+ in Rodinal 1:50

Gear Simplification is something that absolutely drives me nuts. Every time I get some time to think about my setup, I start looking at gear simplification. 

Two simple reasons:

1. I want the simplest setup possible for my needs.

2. I like buying gear.

Needless to say, those are two diametrically opposed items.

Looking at the gear I have lying around, I can put it into four categories.

1. Absolutely never sell:

FE, 55/3.5 AI Micro, Nikkor-S.C 5cm f1.4 LTM and 105/2.5 AI-S

Two of these are heirlooms (the FE and 55/3.5), one is my cold dead hands lens (5cm f1.4) and the last I've rebought every time I've sold one, I'd be a fool to do it again. 

2. I really like, but could part with if it made sense:

F2a, X-T2, Z5 bodies

7Artisans 12/2.8, Fujinon XC35/2, Laowa 15/4, Z 24-50 f4-6.3, m.Zuiko Pro 12-40/2.8, Super-Takumar 35/3.5, 7Artisans 18/6.3 UFO (yes, really).

3. I'm OK with it, but not too attached.

X-T1 body, Super Ricohflex

Neewer 25/1.8 MC, Nikkor 24/2.8 K, Nikkor-H 28/3.5, Nikkor 200/4 AI, Super-Takumar 135/3.5, Vivitar 70-150 f3.8, Nikkor 50/1.8G AF-S

4. I'd dump in a heartbeat if somebody was actually interested

Coronet 12-Twenty

Nikkor 50-135/3.5 AI, Nikkor 300/4.5 K AI'd, Hanimex 135/2.8 M42

Note this is the kit that might get actively shot. I've got a couple box cameras and a Soligor 300/5.6 that are heirlooms, but don't figure in as they are not active shooting gear and won't see use.

The challenge? What would a minimalist kit actually look like?

Well, in terms of film, I could readily get by with the following:

FE, Nikkor 24/2.8, 55/3.5 Micro, 105/2.5 AI-S

That would be minimalist, but workable. No low-light option, but I don't have that today really anyways.

For digital?

Z5, 15/4, 24-50, 50/1.8G, 105/2.5 could work.

X-T2, 12/2.8, XC35, 55/3.5 also works.

Re-acquire an E-M1.2 and use the 12-40 + 105/2.5 and add an UWA option (Laowa 7.5/2 or 10/2, or a 9-18). Eventually that might become the 12-40/2.8, 40-150/2.8 and the UWA. 

I really wish my brain could settle on a kit. This is why I so rarely get to one year of ownership on a digital camera. 

One thing I keep coming back to is that any attempt to make the Fuji more than a minimalist/manual focus kit bumps into the issue that it quickly matches the Z5 for size/weight while delivering IQ barely better than the E-M1.2 for single shot and inferior to the Oly's for multishot. I'm also finding that for all I like the idea of Fuji's classic UI, the only time it's been really been a benefit was shooting night work at Torrance Barrens last summer. This is part of what drove me to the E-M1.2 and Z5 earlier this year. 

So today I hauled in all the Fuji kit. X-T2, X-T1, the XC35, 7Artisans 12/2.8 and 18/6.3 UFO, the Neewer 25mm, the USB charger, spare batteries, USB power kit et al, and came home with an E-M5 Mark II.

Why that body?

1. E-M1.2's are just coming off the end of a ridiculous sale and are unobtanium right now, new or used, as a result.

2. The E-M5 Mark III has a worse EVF than the Mark II and no USB webcam support, so it can't do everything I used the X-T2 regularly for even if it does have PDAF and the better 20MP sensor. Webcam support was the deciding factor here, I do need that capability.

3. The E-M5 Mark II can get paired with small lenses for a very pocketable kit, essentially replacing the X-T1+18 UFO combo with something more capable if I track down a cheap Panasonic 14/2.5.

4. I already have some accessories for the body, namely a grip and a USB charger that I kept when I sold my last one in fall 2019. 

5. I got a new one for used cost. It was seriously cheap for an open-box but fully warrantied body with all accessories.

I'm aware I don't like the IQ on the 16MP Mark II as much as the 20MP bodies, or larger sensor bodies and long-term expect this is really a replacement for the X-T1 as an almost-P&S, although it can handle most of what I was doing with the X-T2 as well until I fill out the system (I still see another E-M1.2 in my future). But it should be a pretty solid setup paired with the small but superb 12-40/2.8 Pro.

 

Walking with the X-T1

X-T1, 7Artisans 18mm f6.3 UFO

I've been quite thoroughly enjoying the combo of the X-T1 and the 7Artisans 18mm f6.3 UFO lens. The lens is tiny, surprisingly good and so simple that it takes a lot of complexity out of shooting. You can't focus, anything past 1m is in focus. Aperture is fixed at f6.3, which is great for walking around. No close focusing, kinda sucky corners and really weird flaring are the downsides, but the plus side is a nice rendering, good colour and a really useful focal length. 

The X-T1is a little unique in my bag, it's a very good camera with two issues. The first is my copy has the common issue with the control dials, they pretty much don't work. That has less impact than you might think, the only real uses of the control dials on the X-T1 are setting aperture on XC lenses and changing settings in the Q menu. The second issue is it's just got a lot of rough edges, from being a very early X series body and the first SLR-style body Fuji did. So the controls aren't as well laid out as the X-T2 and there's a number of UI and system oddities that would slowly go away as the X series evolved, most notably the somewhat limited focus peaking implementation. 

Because of the former limited the X-T1 is best suited to working with lenses that have an aperture ring or are fixed aperture. The latter makes the use of manual focus somewhat more challenging than on the X-T2. So combining the X-T1 with a fixed focus and fixed aperture lens is pretty idea. 18mm works better for me than other options because it's a nice moderate wide (28mm-e), a 10mm like the Pergear f8 could be fun but is too wide for everyday use while a 35mm like the 7Artisans f5.6 needs to be focused because of DoF limitations and is too tight to hipshoot with unless you're an absolute god of the hipshot. 

As such, I mostly just leave the camera in a variant of B&W+R with boosted contrast, although occasionally I will change up and shoot either Velvia when I have a really colourful scene or Classic Chrome when I just want colour. Classic Chrome I find really pairs well with these Chinese lenses and their somewhat muted colour due to limited coating.

So the X-T1 is now a point & shoot for me, ideally suited for walkabout. 

I do have to admit that an X-Pro1 would be an even better choice with the 18mm UFO if I can get 18mm framelines active in the OVF. I've been keeping my eye out for a cheap X-Pro1 anyways and I think the 18 would be the perfect combination with the X-Pro1 as it pretty much eliminates all of the X-Pro1's real weaknesses, namely lousy AF and lousy MF assists. 

X-T1 Hits a Milestone

 

X-T1, 7Artisans 18mm f6.3 UFO

I missed it a couple weeks ago, but my X-T1 has hit a rather rare milestone. The X-T1 is now one of the few digital bodies I've owned for more than one year. I bought it at the beginning of March 2020 and have now owned it for 13 months.

That really shouldn't be a big deal, but I can count on one hand the number of digital bodies that have achieved that and only one of them (my last D300) was at all recent. 

I've long known I need to settle down the gear churn and quit chasing the dragon, and I think I might actually be getting there finally with the two X-T bodies and the Z5. The Z5 covers my needs & desires for shooting landscape & nature, especially when hiking, as well as for a platform for adapting classic 35mm lenses while the two Fuji's cover my needs for a good handling almost-P&S in the X-T1 with the 18/6.3 UFO, and a general purpose body that does everything reasonably well without being too large or heavy in the X-T2.

The X-T1 for me is somewhat limited in its utility as my copy has issues with its control dials and the focus peaking implementation is somewhat weak. But it's great paired with the 18/6.3 UFO where focus peaking is irrelevant as the lens is fixed focus, and I just leave it in B&W mode with a red filter applied and boosted contrast and get great stuff. It does alright with other manual focus lenses mounted but my only current Fuji AF lens is an issue because the XC35 doesn't have an aperture ring and that means it relies on the wonky rear control dial for setting aperture. So I pretty much just leave the 18/6.3 UFO mounted and use it as a light walk around body as it's still noticeably lighter than the X-T2.

What About Fuji?

Fuji X-T1, 7Artisans 18mm f6.3 UFO

That's some really funky flare shooting into the sun with this surprising little lens. It works for this image, which would otherwise need a sunstar to be at all interesting.

Now that I've got the Z5 and really settled what will be my primary landscape kit for the foreseeable future, as well as a platform for adapting my old film lenses, what does that mean for my Fuji kit?

Well, I considered 3 options.

1. Sell the X-T2 and XC35, buy a Z50. 

2. Keep shooting the Fuji stuff on the side, but don't buy any more X mount glass

3. Keep shooting the Fuji stuff, continue to invest in primes for X mount and leave the zooms to Z mount.

The first option would have got em settled on a single mount. I'd have kept the X-T1 simply because there's so little value in selling an X-T1 with bad control wheels, and same goes for my 3 manual focus X mount lenses, only the 12/2.8 has any sale value and that's fairly minimal. The downside is the EVF on the Z50 isn't as good as either Fuji, most of the neat manual lenses aren't in Z mount and the Z50 doesn't share batteries with the Z5, leaving me to buy more batteries in yet another form factor. Only the manual lens availability could really be mitigated, as I could buy E mount versions and use my Haoge E to Z adapter. 

The second option really was never happening, regardless of what I planned. No way I'm not going to buy some neat lens for the Fuji's if I had them.

The third is basically going back to where I was last July/August before I sold the D750, except with a body that's neither timed out (the D750 I had was beyond its rated shutter life) nor a large DSLR. I'd continue to shoot with both Fuji's, especially for cityscape & street work as well as some nature work and I'd continue to acquire neat APS-C lenses for them, be it AF lenses like the XF line, or manual focus lenses. 

I've been trying to make a decision on this, and my head prefers options 1 or 2. I took the X-T1 out on a walk today, shooting primarily with the utterly tiny 7Artisans 18mm f6.3 UFO lens, and was reminded about what I could do with that kit that I can't with the Z5, which is wander around with a camera in my hand shooting without any cares, as the X-T1+UFO combo is so ridiculously light while still offering full controls and a pretty darn good EVF.

Needless to say, I'm going with option 3. I won't go whole-hog on expanding my Fuji setup, but the reality is I only ever sold off two zooms and I'd only got them for landscape/nature shooting in the first place. The Z5 will do that better (and I won't have to struggle to get the blues I want). I'll just continue to shoot my Fuji stuff with neat primes, and the Z5 with classic lenses and zooms.

 

X-T2 as a Manual Focus Body

 

Fujifilm X-T2, Micro-Nikkor 55mm f3.5 AI, Acros+R Film Simulation

The image above is straight out of the camera, Acros film simulation with simulated Red 25 Filter and H+1, S-1 and Sharpness +2 for a bit of extra punch. Cropped down to 1:1 and slightly less than full width.

This is part of why I still love the Fuji's, especially for B&W and cityscape work. The film simulations just give a great starting point to get a great image. I took the X-T2 out with a bag full of primes, native & adapted, and just had some fun shooting in the city. 

I've largely settled on how I'm going to approach my kit for now. The Fuji's will stay and will be paired with manual focus lenses and mostly be used in the city. The Oly will be primarily zoom-based and backpacking/rough weather kit. The 12-40 replaces the XC 16-50 and a 40-150 Pro will replace the departed 55-200. I'll still need a UWA for the Oly, likely a Laowa 7.5mm f2 as I'm just not sure I want to spend on a 7-14 Pro with its lack of filter compatibility and likelihood to just get used at 7.5mm. Maybe I'll look at a zoom when Oly releases their new f4 option (they have 2-3 f4 zooms known to be coming, all of which are interesting to me)

So the X-T2 will mostly get used with the inexpensive Chinese manual focus lenses I've been buying. I really do find manual, mechanical lenses more fun to use than zooms on the Fuji bodies. I've ever liked focus by wire that much and the more I rely on just the physical controls, the more I like the Fuji's. The only physical control I never really liked is the M/S/C AF switch on the front, and shooting MF glass makes it irrelevant. I suspect I will continue to add inexpensive MF lenses to my Fuji kit, but right now I don't really see adding any AF lenses, although that could change, Fuji's primes are excellent and I could totally live with an all-prime Fuji kit if the Olympus kit handles my zoom needs. That also saves me from looking for a second Olympus body, as I'm quite conflicted as to what would be interesting there. No smaller body has battery compatibility with the E-M1.2. 

All of this will let me use the two kits at what I like best about them. Oly colours for landscapes, Oly tech for landscape & long exposure work, Oly sealing for rough conditions. Fuji Film Simulations for B&W and night work, classic Fuji handling & big beautiful finders for manual focus lenses and taking advantage of the fact that most manual focus crop lenses are designed for APS-C use (Laowa's MFT lenses being some of the rare exceptions). 

This also lets me continue to focus on the inexpensive lenses that I so enjoy, without giving up performance by settling on 3 higher-end lenses for my landscape work, where I need the absolute quality.

This won't stop me from shooting landscape on my Fuji's, especially while my only UWA option is on that system (I sold my Nikkor 20mm and my Laowa 15mm Macro is already spoken for, eliminating my UWA FF options, outside of my 7Artisans 12mm on Fuji, all my other systems are limited to 24mm-e at the widest for now). I ill just prioritize using the Oly when I have to go somewhere I don't want to carry 4+ primes to.

Taking a Look Back - My Time with the E-M1 + E-M5 II kit

Olympus E-M1, m.Zuiko 9-18

I did a review of the images I've posted from my period shooting Olympus in 2019, as a result of the conversation that triggered my last post.

This made several things clear.

1. I prefer Olympus colour to Fuji colour for landscape work, by a fair margin. In the city it's a wash, but for landscape Olympus simply delivers the blue tones I can never quite get with any other system except Nikon.

2. I miss shooting 4:3 aspect ratio. I simply like it better than 3:2. This is not really news, I've liked squarer formats ever since I was introduced to them.

3. I do miss Olympus IBIS performance. It remains the only IBIS system I've shot that I've really found effective.

4. Fuji's LCD setup remains better. Dual-tilt beats flip/twist beats single tilt beats fixed, at least from a photographer's perspective. 

5. I'm less convinced now that the extra malleability of the Fuji files are winning me anything, since I have to push them more to get close to what I want as compared to the Olympus files. Full Frame is still better, but not by that much. I've never been sold on X-Trans anyways.

6. I'm unconvinced I would be happy with 16MP as a primary body in either Fuji or Olympus.

7. E-M1 II prices are now down to a level that I consider very reasonable. And they're USB-C but not USB Power/Charge, X-T2 is USB Micro-B 3.0, but does do power/charge. The 20MP m43 sensor is supposed to be a real improvement.

8. E-M1 II handling is MUCH better gloved than the X-T2, even with the bracket and marginally better ungloved.

9. m43 lenses are getting cheap.

What does this mean? Probably another system switch for me, and possibly something of a draw-down in my overall setup. Notionally I'd ditch the X-T2 and the 3 AF lenses, but keep the X-T1 and all my manual lenses. That would get me into the E-M1 II, another 12-50 and maybe either a 25/1.7 or a 40-150 R, rounding out my personal favourite cheap yet decent kit for m43.

I'd sell my Laowa 15mm f4 to fund a proper UWA (9-18 or a 7.5-10mm prime) and possibly sell off some Nikkors, keeping the 55/3.5 (a gift from my Aunt) and probably the 105/2.5 as well (such a good lens) long-term. Then troll the used market to add a 45/1.8, 17/1.8 and a 12-40 or 12-45and wait for the rumoured 45-200/4 Pro that's supposed to match the 12-45/4 (maybe a matching UWA zoom too?)

I'd keep the X-T1 around with the 12/18/25 primes and probably add a 35 and 55 for fun. That's just a great street shooting kit and cheap but fun. Eventually I'd want a compact body for m43 to share lenses, but that can wait. And if I sold off most of the Nikkors I'd be less tempted by another FX body.

 

The Last Frame, Revisited

 

Fujifilm X-T2, Micro-Nikkor 55mm f3.5 AI

About 18 months ago I posted The Last Frame, my goodbye to my first X-T1 and a short summary of what I thought Fuji needed to do.

I noted 3 issues in their lens line.

1. The XC 50-230 is too expensive - Still true today, and more so now with the space getting more aggressive. Fuji needs to drop the price, the XF70-300 will result in a flood of used XF55-200's which will make the XC50-230's pricing even more difficult to sell at.

2. Consumer UWA. I said the 10-24 needed a WR update, which arrived last fall, and they needed a cheap UWA option. With used original 10-24's coming down and a plethora of cheap 3rd party options around 12-14mm, I think this is much less critical although I still want an XC10-xx zoom for ~400USD

3. No consumer Fast prime. The XC35/2 solve that a year ago. Fuji too the other option from what I suggested, cloning the XF35/2 into a cheap barrel rather than doing a slower 35/1.4

In addition I noted they needed a 80-300, a 135 and 300/4 prime and a 200-600. We got the XF70-300 and a 150-600 is now a strong rumour, which will cover the zoom side of things. I still think they need the telephoto primes as well. 

In addition we got 2 lenses that I happen to think were a complete waste of time and effort.

The XF50/1.0, which has not been well received. It's clearly a good lens, but it's not exceptional and the price is, and Fuji dropped the ball badly when they decided to change track from a needed XF33/1.0 to an unneeded XF50/1.0. They'd have been much better off doing a WR/AF update of the well loved XF56. 

The XF27 updates a lens which is beloved and ignored. The original lens was optically excellent and quite liked by a small but vocal group of users. The rest thought it too expensive for a lens without an aperture ring (it is the only XF lens like that), too large for a f2.8 APS-C pancake and/or too slow for a large APS-C pancake. Fuji's updated added WR and an aperture ring, but didn't solve the fundamental issue with the lens for many, it's too big for its speed, or too slow for its size. I'd rather have seen it either become a 27/2 on the same size budget or be tiny and an XC27/2.8.

The 10-24 and 27 updates now set the expectation that Fuji will be updating or replacing their older XF lenses. And I agree they should. But not all of them.

1. The primes - all should get WR and AF drive updates. The 23/1.4 probably should get a full redesign. I'd like to see the 35/1.4 keep its optical design and Fuji should launch a XF 35/1.2 WR to deliver that fast modern lens. Note we already know that a XF18/1.4 is coming that will replace the XF18/2

As noted above, I want to see a 135 and 300, I think Fuji needs a 70/1.8 or 70/2.8 and a 180-200/2.8 as well on the long end (a 500/5.6 PF would be amazing). They also need some work on the wide end, a 8-10mm prime would bring some real love in an area Fuji has mostly ignored for years.

2. The zooms need some work too. As I noted above, I think Fuji needs to get a consumer UWA out. The 150-600 is even more important as telephotos remain Fuji's weakest area system-wise.

What else I'd like to see:

XF18-55 and XF55-200 need either an update or a price drop. The XF16-80 and XF70-300 functionally replace them for the higher-end user, but the older 2 lenses are still smaller, faster at the wide end and cheaper, but they aren't cheaper enough for non-WR lenses.

I'd like to see an XC100-400 as well, say f4.5-7.1 or 5.6-7.1 and compact. This is a 'nice to have' as for many the XF70-300+TC14 will cover this need. But if they can get this really small, it will sell.

I'd also like to see an XC18-135, essentially the same idea as the XC35, stick the current good optics into a cheaper barrel.

The idea here is largely building the right lens options for the X-S10 user. 

On the Body side, Fuji has 3 issues that I see.

1. No consistent UI. There are 5 current X bodies, the X-T4, X-T30, X-Pro3, X-E4 and X-S10. There are 5 current UI variants in that line. You cannot buy 2 different model bodies and have consistent UI unless you buy a body and its predecessor. Fuji only has bad choices here, but I can't help thinking that it's going to settle out with the X-Pro series + the X-S series. As much as I love the UI on the X-Tx series, when I look at how I use the cameras I'd get much more use of a camera laid out like the X-S10 or GFX100s and having real Custom Settings banks. And I'm probably about as close as you can get to someone for whom the X-Tx is perfect for in terms of UI. 

2. No WR bodies to match the lower-end WR XF lenses. It's interesting as Olympus has the exact opposite problem, no WR lenses to match their mid-level WR bodies. One of the X-S10, X-T30 and X-E4 replacements needs to be WR. The X-T40 is the obvious one, as the X-T30 has really lost its relevance in the current lineup, it's not small like the X-E4 but it's not got the ergonomics or IBIS of the X-S10. 

3. The $850-999 model jumble. This was bad enough when it was just the X-T30 and X-T200, now it's 3 bodies targeting the same pricepoint. That really should be one consumer body or two wider spaced models. Killing the X-T30 would largely solve this, as there's enough price and capability gap between the X-S10 and X-E4 to make them make more sense. The big issue is that the X-T30 competes against both the X-E4 and the X-S10, while those two bodies are so different that they only sort-of compete on price.

I can't help but think that Fuji needs to get back to the two line split. I'd like to see one of two model lines:

X-S1, X-S10, X-S100, X-Pro3

or X-S1, X-S10, X-Pro3, X-E4

I don't see Fuji going back into the low end of the market now that the X-T200 and X-A7 are done and Fuji has dropped their relationship with the 3rd party that was doing those bodies for them. So the second line makes more sense. 

I would be sad to see the X-T line die, but as much as I love those bodies, the X-S UI style would let Fuji grow their system. I think that Fuji would have introduced custom setting banks

I'd like to see it play out like this. X-T30 is quietly discontinued. X-S1 or X-H2 is released with an updated sensor, improved processing and GFX100s-derived ergonomics, but with a flip/twist screen for the hybrid shooters. X-T4 soldiers on until sales dry up or relative sales vs the X-S1/X-H2 show the market doesn't like the change.

Fuji could then either treat the X-Tx line like the X-Pro line and make it a specialty body (a X-T5 that's reverted back to a pure stills-oriented body at a premium cost and with the double-tilt screen returning could work alright, as  long as it is a niche body like the X-Pro3)

Taking the A7II for a Spin

 

 

A7II, FE 28-70 OSS

I borrowed my partner's A7II to take on a photo walk today as I ran a couple errands. It's been a while since I used it (it's my second A7II, now passed on) but I wanted to shoot some Full Frame and also wanted something that played better with gloves than my X-T2 does. I had the kit 28-70 lens plus my Nikkor 20/2.8 AF and 105/2.5 AI-S on an adapter.

I was reminded that the A7II is a pretty good camera overall. I'd still rate the X-T2 better in some regards. The X-T2 is faster, has a better EVF and better LCD articulation, and it's weather sealed, but the A7II has better buttons for the gloved user as the chiclet buttons are limited to the back side, the larger C1, C2, and C3 buttons are reasonably glove friendly, and the chiclets are still bigger than the Fuji chiclets. The grip is also more positive than the X-T2, although it definitely suffers in terms of lens/finger clearance as that's minimal on the Sony.

Image quality is better naturally. The bigger sensor gives that and Bayer still converts better than X-Trans. I'll give Fuji the nod in general on colour, but Sony's blues are nicer even if they don't match Nikon's.

 In terms of glass, the 28-70 is average. Not nearly as bad as it's reputation, but not winning any awards either. I think for the cost it's a great lens, and definitely better optically than the E 16-50 PZ, even if the latter lens is wider, longer and a better near-macro shooter. The Fuji 16-50 is a step above all-round, as are the Oly kit lenses.

One nice thing is that it's smart enough to default to Manual Focus mode when no CPU lens is present, on the Fuji's I have to manually set the focus mode to M to get Manual Focus assists. One downside is Sony will give invalid operation errors on things like AF Mode if pressed with a manual focus lens attached.

Breaking out my FF glass after it's been sitting for a few months was nice. The 105/2.5 in particular is just such a great lens and one I don't use enough on the APS-C Fuji's (Hey Fuji, how about a 70/1.8 with rendering like the 'Afghan Girl' Nikkor 105?)

It's always nice to revisit an old camera, especially a competent one. I'm also reminded that I really do love my classic full frame lenses as well.

What does that mean? As usual, I don't know. I'd bet money that I'll buy another Full Frame camera, probably this year at some point. But I'd like to keep using the Fuji's. I really do love the X-T2 for most shooting, I just love it somewhat less when shooting with gloves.

The One Ring Camera and the Landscaper's Dream

 

 

 

Fujifilm X-T2, Neewer (7Artisans) 25mm f1.8

This week has seen 3 new cameras announced.

Sony announced the A1, their flagship for the Alpha line. This is their first true attempt at a direct analog to Canon's 1D X line and Nikon's single-digit line. It's also a shot across their bows. It's simply the best do-everything camera on the market by a long shot, combining the second best resolution on the market for Full Frame with the best AF and highest frame rate. It comes at a price, but the A1 is no more expensive than a D6 or a 1D X Mark III. Assuming there's no hidden crippling issue, this release puts Sony firmly atop the Mirrorless market for the forseeable future. Everyone expects Canon already has something on the way to match this, given the performance of the R5, but Nikon just refreshed its Z6 & Z7 and didn't manage to match the then-current competition, the A1 raises the bar for Nikon to match with a notional Z9, and to a point that few think Nikon will be in a position to match within the next two years.

The A1 is simply the new standard for a do-everything camera. If you want a camera that can do everything well, even if it's not quite class leading at everything, the A1 is it and there is no competition for that crown anymore.

Fuji had a pair of announcements.

First off is the long awaited and much rumoured GFX100S. This takes the sensor of the groundbreaking GFX100, shrinks the IBIS unit and stuffs it in to what's basically a X-H1 body. While not small overall, it's small in comparison to any MF option except the GFX50R, notably smaller than the GFX50S in fact. You also get a modern-style PASM interface and what is frankly a disappointing EVF spec (basically the EVF introduced in the X-H1) although in practice the EVF should be fine. And it's $500 cheaper than the A1. AF is class-leading, as is video. Yes, this is a practical 4K camera using a medium format sensor. For landscape shooters this now sets the bar, as the size/weight issues of the GFX100 are set aside on this body, which comes in between a D850 and D780 in weight.

Fuji also announced the X-E4, a camera that some folks have been waiting for since the X-T30 launched. It adds a flip screen, deletes a bunch of controls and goes with more Leica-style ergonomics, ie none whatsoever. And it costs $50 less than the X-T30. Unless you really love the 'RF on a budget' looks of the X-E line, spend the extra $50 and get a camera with better controls, or $150 and get one with IBIS, a real grip and a flip/twist screen (the X-S10). The X-E4 is form over function, and doesn't bring much to the table for the X-E3 user as the gains are largely in video and action shooting, neither of which this form factor is really intended for.

Fuji also launched 3 lenses.

The GF 80/1.7, now the worlds fastest AF Medium Format lens. Looks great and is an optical derivative of the XF 50mm f1.0, so it should render well. $2300USD though. MF glass ain't cheap.

The XF 70-300mm f4-5.6 R WR LM OIS. This one's been known about for a year. Exactly what everybody expected, except $800USD and takes both Fuji TC's. It's barely larger than the 55-200 when collapsed, so unless there's optical issues expect this to replace the 55-200 as the default long zoom for people who don't need the speed of the 50-140 or the reach & quality of the 100-400. I'm very interested in this lens, although as I already own the 55-200, it's low on my priority list. Perfect match for the 16-80/4 WR and/or the 10-24 II WR in a landscape set.

Finally, the XF 27mm f2.8 R WR II. Fuji's pancake gets an aperture ring and weather sealing with the same excellent optics but without the speed boost it really needed. The 27 has always been a lens that a few love and everybody else ignores. This won't change that, beyond now having the features that make it no longer overpriced. The first version was too much money for a lens that lacked the features of a Fujicron, it now has those. For me, this is a yawn but some will like it as it's very good optically. Still $400USD for a somewhat large pancake that's only f2.8.

Overall, a solid set of releases for both, although to me the X-E4 and XF27II underwhelm. The other two bodies are very interesting, but also solidly in the range of too rich for my blood.

Out for a Hike

 Fuji X-T2, XF 55-200mm

I got out for a hike yesterday, I found a somewhat optimistically named woodlot, Jefferson Forest, that's not too far away from home. It's a reforested farm located in Richmond Hill and is filled with hiking & biking trails.

This is the first real hike I've done since early September, if not August. Between work & volunteer commitments between August & December and the subsequent lockdown and now the stay at home order we're under, I've just not had the time or the opportunity to do any real hiking.

The hike was more of a hike with a camera than a photo trip in the woods. I knew going in that I was going to what was essentially a tree farm with trails. I didn't take that many images (93 frames in 5.3km, vs the typical 4-500 frames I would shoot on a similar length back country hike), but that's mostly because I only shot landscape work, there was no wildlife and most of the shots I come home with on the typical hike are wildlife, especially insect shots which I can't do in the winter.

I carried the X-T2, with my new Smallrig L-bracket/grip and my standard hiking trio of the 7Artisans 12mm f2.8, Fuji XC 16-50 OIS II and Fuji XF 55-200 OIS. That worked very well although I did find the 7Artisans 12mm's aperture ring gets quite stiff in the cold.

Very much liking the Smallrig grip, I'd been using a plain L-bracket on the X-T2 because I needed something quickly & cheaply and I'd been missing the wooden extension grip I'd had on the X-T1 (which was nice, but not an L-bracket, just an Arca-Swiss rail+grip). I'd been intending to buy the Smallrig bracket since the summer, but at $105CDN for a camera I only spent $600 on, it's a relatively major investment for the body. However it was time to make the investment and I'm glad I did, it's a quality L-bracket and the grip extension is both cosmetically delightful and very comfortable. And the L-bracket extends to clear the ports which is nice for when I'm using the camera on my Platypod as a webcam.

A nice thing with this bracket is it's also compatible with the X-T3, so if I add one of those to my kit, I can just fit my old bracket to the X-T2 and use the new one on the X-T3. A nice savings there. I can see myself replacing the X-T1 at some point. Won't get rid of it, but the performance compared to newer bodies is such that I would have few issues demoting it to only street work with manual lenses and using the newer bodies when I'm in the bush. I'm finding that even the X-T2 sometimes struggles to AF in some circumstances when I'm working in brush. If you haven't guessed, I'm very happy with the Smallrig bracket.

One takeaway from this hike is that I absolutely need to invest in crampons. I had one spill and several other close calls because the trail was quite icy and I didn't have enough traction on the ice. Guess there will be an order next week for a couple sets (my partner could really use a set as well). I'll probably get her a low-profile set that's sidewalk friendly and a more aggressive set for myself. Also on the list at some point are hiking poles. They definitely can help when the ascents & descents get technical, and they collapse so they're easily stored when not needed.

2021 is Finally Here

 

Fuji X-T2, AF Nikkor 70-300mm f4-5.6 D

It's been a while, the last quarter of 2020 was extremely busy for me in terms of work and my commitments as a member of the Board of Directors for MAAC. That meant that I did very little photography in the last 3 months of the year, less than the already low level I expected to do.

Now 2021 is here, and we're locked down. That means minimal photography for me this winter, as I expect we'll continue to be locked down through February and maybe even March. That said, I should get out some as I really need to get outside more. I've been cooped up too long and it's getting to me.

I'll post a summary for 2020 soon, but I met pretty much all of my goals, except I was unable to maintain my pace of posting on Instagram and Flickr in the last quarter of the year.

On the gear front, I have one major purchase I'm looking at, a Fuji 10-24/4 OIS. Aside from that, my gear focus is going to be on a Smallrig L-Bracket with grip as an upgrade for my X-T2 (my current bracket is OK, but I miss the extended grip I have on my X-T1) and I plan to continue investing in inexpensive manual focus lenses for X mount. The next on my list is the new TTArtisan 50mm f1.2, which was recently introduced for $99USD and seems to be pretty decent. I still want to expand my collection of 7Artisan lenses as well, but that will wait a little, the TTArtisan 50 is just so cheap I can't resist it.

Beyond that, once things start opening up I need to get out and hike. A lot. Actually doing photography is something I want to focus on more than gear this year. I'm largely happy with my current setup in terms of bodies and my lenses meet my needs aside from a lack of flexibility in my UWA setup. I do love the 7Artisans 12mm, but it's a lot less flexible than a zoom would be.

 

A Little Update

 

X-T2, XC 16-50 OIS II

It's been a month since my last update, and there's a few reasons for that. Largely work, the last 2 months have been flat out for various reasons, but I also found myself unexpectedly on the Board of a national non-profit organization as of the end of September. That's been occupying much of my free time right now.

The image above is from the last chance I got to go out and do some photography, a drive up to Bala, ON and back on a Saturday morning before I stopped in at a friends in Barrie for the evening. It was a good, if short trip with some interesting skies.

The X-T2 is now up over 3700 images and continuing to climb. Still very happy with it. That said, we're now heading into a dead zone for me, the gap between fall colour and lush snowy winter. So while I'm hoping to get some late fall colour over the next couple weeks, shooting will die off in November.

On the gear front, I note we've seen a number of new introductions this week.

Canon updated their popular low-end EOS M50 to the EOS M50 II. As far as I can tell, this is entirely functionality that should have been added to the original via a firmware update. It gets a new model in stores, but the old model is pretty much identical.

Nikon launched the Z6II and Z7II. These are a mix of one real improvement (dual processors) and features that the originals should have had (grip, dual slots). Pricing is wise, the Z6II hits the original Z6 price of $2000USD while the Z7II actually launches $400USD below the Z7 price, eliminating the biggest mistake with the initial Z7 launch, it coming in at more than the more capable D850. A couple updates to the lens roadmap, but nothing in the biggest area of concern which is the lack of consumer lens options for the Z5. Now that's an area where all the full-frame systems are weak, but Nikon is the weakest and in a position where they need every sale they can get.

Fuji launched the X-S10, bringing DSLR ergonomics and IBIS to their mid-range. It's a mix of X-H1, X-T4 and X-T200 and looks excellent, taking over from the X-T30 as arguably the best body in its class (and putting a huge shot across the bow of the A6600 which is more money and less capable aside from AF/Buffer). Fuji did miss the chance to bring competitive viewfinder magnification to the mid-range (which I think they should do to better differentiate the mid-line from the X-T200's). They also missed the chance to make the bodies match the mid-range lenses in terms of WR. I don't get why all Fuji's mid-range lenses are getting WR and only the high-end bodies are. Fuji hasn't launched a non-WR XF lens in years. The X-S10 is on my radar though. 

Fuji on the Cheap - Lens #4 7Artisans 12mm f2.8

 

Fujifilm X-T2, 7Artisans 12mm f2.8

The 4th lens in your basic 5 prime set is your Ultra-Wide Angle lens. We've covered the wide/normal (25mm f1.8), the normal (35mm f2) and one good option for the mild telephoto (the 55/3.5 Macro).

Rounding out the kit on the wide end for now is the moderate Ultra-wide. This is going to be in the 18-21mm range in terms of 35mm equivalent, so 12-14mm. Keeping the focus on cheap options, below $200 USD, there's really only a couple options in this area, specifically the Meike and 7Artisans 12mm f2.8's. These are different designs, not the same lens rebadged (as is so common for these Chinese lenses) and 7Artisans has the better overall reputation for quality, although their offering is a little more expensive (about $10USD more). 

I've selected the 7Artisans and have been shooting it for about 6 weeks now. I was extremely impressed with it from the initial presentation through the handling and image quality. 

The 7Artisans lens arrives in a very nice presentation box, frankly a much nicer one than many far more expensive lenses. it's nestled in quality foam (no styrofoam or cardboard like Zeiss or Sony/Nikon/Canon respectively) and includes a good rear cap, a push-on front cap, a microfibre pouch, a microfibre lens cleaning cloth and a stick-on focusing tab. 

The build quality of the lens is excellent. It's all metal, smooth focusing, no wobble/wiggle anywhere. My stick-on focusing tab did unstick after 6 weeks, but that's just going to happen with anything stick-on. It was a nice add and I'm looking at more permanent attachment options for it. 

Optically, it's quite good. Don't expect something that will embarrass the XF 14/2.8 or Touit 12/2.8, but it's sharp everywhere except the extreme corners, has nice colour and a nice overall rendering. The flare control is very 70's, with some loss of contrast and mild to moderate ghosting. Nice sunstars, but expect to deal with ghosts if you include the sun in the frame. 

I do recommend this lens quite highly. It's a much better experience in terms of handling and quality than the 25, which was merely nice for the price. The 7Artisans lens could easily command twice the price or more if 7Artisans got access to better coating technology. As it is, I think it's still worth $300USD or so, which is pretty good for a $180 lens. 

More images from the 12/2.8 can be found here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/mawz/tags/12mmf28/

 

2500 on the X-T2

 

  

 

Fujifilm X-T2, Fujinon XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 LM OIS

I passed 2500 shots on the X-T2 today, after less than 2 months ownership, making it my most used Fuji body (I have shot more with X-T1's, but that's evenly split across two bodies with ~2250 shots each). It simply continues to deliver a great shooting experience in a compact and mostly well thought out package. I don't regret at all making it my primary body. The handling is excellent, the IQ is very good and it just makes me want to shoot.

I've been shooting a lot lately with the 55-200, it's a good flower and bugging lens and that's all I've been able to do lately due to work, I'm in the middle of a major project release and it will be at least 2 weeks before I can get out for a real hike again so shooting lately has been in the neighbourhood or in Cedarvale Ravine. But for the work I've been able to do, the 55-200 is doing very well and I look forward to trying it out in the bush. So far the handling is good, the images sharp and the OIS is surprisingly good, I've gotten good results down to 1/20 handheld at 200mm. The only thing I'd knock is the merely average close focus ability, it's enough for what I need but I'd love a little more.

I've done a bit with the XC 16-50 OIS II as well, and confirmed I have another good copy of that small but competent lens. It won't win any awards, but it does what it does quite well and for not much investment. I'd call it probably the best all-round kit lens in its class, being wider than the Olympus or Panasonic 14-42's, quite sharp, good close focus, it's big enough to handle well even on a larger body and small enough that it's non-collapsible operation really isn't that much of a downside. The only knock is it's not pocketable on a body, unlike the 15-45 or the various pancake zooms from the competition (everybody but Canon makes a collapsible pancake in at least one mount).

In terms of workflow, I've been doing everything on the iPhone/iPad Pro combo for the last week and have sorted out most of the challenges. I'd kill for a good Blogger app though, right now I have to edit in the browser which is less fun on a tablet and definitely need to get a keyboard cover & Apple Pencil 2 for editing. LR Mobile has been giving good results with the 24MP X-Trans files so far, so fingers crossed that I won't run into any issues, of course if I do, I can just edit on the desktop. I am still working on the best way to handle sync back to the desktop for Archival purposes. I don't trust Adobe Cloud as the sole repository for my RAW files. I'd also like finer grained control over on-device caching with LR Mobile. It's supposed to manage it for me automatically, but until I see it clean up old cache files to allow a big import, I won't trust it entirely.

I have actually found import to iPhone useful when out shooting. I can dump the card, do a quick edit for Instagram on the phone and post it while on the move, then let it sync when I get home and do selects/edits on the iPad. The only annoyance is that I need to proxy any posts through Photos, rather than sharing directly from LR Mobile. LR Mobile can DM a pic, but not post to my feed.

Right now it seems with both Instagram and Flickr I have to post then edit to do some key stuff. When posting to Instagram, right now I'm blocked on editing hashtags with suggestions and direct to Facebook flow. With Flickr it's groups, I can add to Albums but not Groups on upload. I also can't get BBCode or an Embed link from Flickr's app, have to use the browser for that. For the most part it's not more difficult, just different.

I have been following the recent announcements. Panasonic's S5 looks killer for landscape work, between the highres multishot, Live long exposures and that 20-60mm compact zoom (the perfect wide zoom for hiking). And Panasonic is bringing a set of f1.8 primes, hopefully at reasonable prices.

The S5 is pricey though, plus the EVF is low spec for the pricepoint. The video features keep the price up (it's worth it if you care about the video). We'll see what a 2 lens kit ends up looking like after their 70-300 ships later this year and frankly if the free Sigma 45/2.8 deal comes to Canada it's a lot better value.

The Nikon Z5 looks great and has much better pricing on the body, but honestly I'd rather a 20-60 than a 24-50 any day of the week, especially since the 20-60 costs the same. Still have an interest in the Z5 though, it's a steal for its price already and will only get cheaper. A pity that Nikon is so lacking in the cheap but good Z lenses the Z5 deserves. The current Z lineup is great, but none of them are inexpensive and Nikon needs some consumer glass to go with their consumer body. Z5 customers just aren't interested in spending $800CDN for a nifty fifty.

A6300 Gone

Fujifilm X-T2, Micro-Nikkor 55mm f3.5 AI

I've been enjoying the A6300 over the last week or so. It really is a nice little camera and a lot better than I was expecting in terms of ergonomics.

However something was bugging me about it, and I figured out what it was.

Basically, I'd got it because of Sony's better lens selection compared to Fuji, specifically in the case of telephoto zooms. But I'd still need to buy that zoom. The ability to share kit with my partner (who shoots my former A7II) and have access to some other interesting glass was secondary.

What was bugging me? In short, the A6300 cost me pretty much what a Fuji XF 55-200 does. That lens is basically the right answer for my long lens challenges. So the A6300 went back, along with the E 16-50, and a 55-200 and XC 16-50 came home in its place.

How Does the A6300 Fit?

Nikon D750, Laowa 15mm f4 Macro

So all random musings aside, how does the A6300 fit into my gear.

1. It provides me a more capable light/compact carry body than the X-E2. Frankly, I'd just been leaving the X-E2 at home, carrying the X-T's or no camera at all. While the X-E2 is a perfectly capable camera, I wanted a larger finder (X-E2 finder is 0.62x), a better grip and a flip-up screen. I got all of those from the X-T's with plates attached, but the A6300 delivers that in a smaller & lighter package.

2. It lets me adapt lenses I didn't have the right adapters for on Fuji. Specifically Canon EF lenses and Nikon G lenses (I still have a 16-85G VR DX). The Fuji EF adapters are very pricey, and I have access to the decent performing Fotodiox Fusion adapter in E mount (plus I own an EF 50mm f1.8 STM and can borrow a 75-300 USM III).

3. It gives me long lens with AF options. Fuji is VERY weak here, while E mount has a bunch of options, plus EF adapting is more viable opening even more options up. I just have had a hard time trying to justify getting Fuji's 50-230 OIS when the similar performing EF 55-250 IS STM can be had for half the price. For 55-200 money I can get into a 70-350 or a used 70-200/4 IS USM, a native 100-400 is cheaper & lighter than the Fuji 100-400. Fuji's strength is 1st party primes and wide zooms, but they're not that far ahead in wide zooms on APS-C (one Sony G UWA and it's a wash) and frankly Sigma and Samyang are doing well enough on the primes side that you can mostly ignore Sony's weak APS-C prime offerings.

4. I can share glass, batteries & other accessories with my partner in the field, as she now shoots my A7II. 

I'm not getting rid of the X-T's for now, frankly even if I did I'd keep the X-T1 and the 12 & 25mm lenses just to play with. If I did get rid of the X-T2, it would be for another A7 body, likely an A7III or A7RII or later. I can see myself carrying the X-T2 for wide and A6300 for long when hiking though.