Fuji X-T3 and X-T4 discussion

[sanveer]

13 minutes ago, frontfocus said:

it's not officially released yet

Oh ok, thabks foe the answer.

I am looking forward to improvements in the video quality with HLG. 

[androidlad]

39 minutes ago, sanveer said:

Oh ok, thabks foe the answer.

I am looking forward to improvements in the video quality with HLG. 

If you watch the preview video from Newshooter, HLG has a minimum ISO of 1000.

This is interesting because it seems like a "DR800" mode, exposing using ISO160 then a 3 stop push to ISO1280, then a digital pull to ISO1000. My hypothesis is that it may have slightly more highlight latitude at the expense of a bit more shadow noise.

[KnowsNothing]

I’m getting an x-t3 and switching over to fuji lenses— any must haves for video? Not really sure what else to get besides the kit lens, thinking maybe the 23mm f2.

[thephoenix]

for video i am afraid you have to go for stabilized lenses.

such a shame the 16-55 isn't

[KnowsNothing]

What lenses are stabilized besides the 18-55 and 55-200? I’m also considering the latter though it’s variable aperture.

[thephoenix]

easy, you go to b&h website and you select stabilized in the lenses left menu

 

[KnowsNothing]

Ok. In any case I’m not going to rule out primes just because they aren’t stablized.

[frontfocus]

if you work with sliders, gimbals and other forms of stabilisation, you don't need to get the OIS lenses. If you want a zoom, I would go for the 16-55mm f/2.8, even though it has no OIS.

if you are recording audio near camera, don't go for 35mm f/1.4, 18mm f/2.0, 60mm f/2.4 those are loud to focus
I also wouldn't recommend 23mm f/1.4 and 56mm f/1.2 since you can hear those too. 

Optically even the cheaper lenses are very good, so you can't go wrong. 

[DanielVranic]

16-55 is a great lens. Absolutely gorgeous and really does have a cinematic feel to it.

I am actually having some issues with the focus though, and most likely it is user error, I am flying mine on a gimbal and it locks and loses focus with the subject and hunts like crazy - yet handheld and tripod use is totally fine, and photo af is perfect, when im moving on a gimbal it freaks. most likely user error though

[androidlad]

11 hours ago, DanielVranic said:

16-55 is a great lens. Absolutely gorgeous and really does have a cinematic feel to it.

I am actually having some issues with the focus though, and most likely it is user error, I am flying mine on a gimbal and it locks and loses focus with the subject and hunts like crazy - yet handheld and tripod use is totally fine, and photo af is perfect, when im moving on a gimbal it freaks. most likely user error though

If you're using it on the X-T3/X-H1, there's dedicated video AF-C setting with "sensitivity" (affects how much hunting) and "speed".

[KnowsNothing]

Can anyone recommend the Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster 35mm f/0.95? Thinking of getting that over one of the fuji F2 primes.

[webrunner5]

1 hour ago, KnowsNothing said:

Can anyone recommend the Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster 35mm f/0.95? Thinking of getting that over one of the fuji F2 primes.

Here is a review using it on Fuji Bodies. He didn't like it on the X-T2 because it was too front heavy.

https://fstoppers.com/originals/fstoppers-reviews-zhongyi-mitakon-speedmaster-35mm-f095-fujifilm-206972

[KnowsNothing]

Hmm, seems to say it’s not a good all rounder but more of a specialized lens... I wouldn’t be shooting wide open all the time. It’s too bad Fuji’s f1.4 primes have issues like aperture chatter, it’s a challenge finding a low light normal lens.

[KnowsNothing]

Some other reviews on youtube are not as critical... I’ve even seen two seperate comparisons with the 35mm f1.4 that put the mitakon ahead in sharpness even at f4 and beyond.

 

[frontfocus]

I own the Mitakon as well as the Fuji f/1.4 and the Mitakon has a special look to it. It's not just the amount of blur, but bokeh and overall how it renders. Aperture is smooth and stepless. No sharpness problems in video either, since X-H1 and X-T3 oversample from 5K and 6.3K, resulting in more than sharp enough videos.

For photos and overall I prefer the Fuji 35mm f/1.4, but not for video, since the AF motor is loud

[thephoenix]

still looking for a review or advice for a good canon to fuji adapter

[thebrothersthre3]

8 minutes ago, thephoenix said:

still looking for a review or advice for a good canon to fuji adapter

I've heard good things about the Viltrox.

[thephoenix]

wonder if the af remains brillant with the viltrox and other brands af

[thebrothersthre3]

5 minutes ago, thephoenix said:

wonder if the af remains brillant with the viltrox and other brands af

I meant to say Fringer, they make the better adapter. Their auto focus is ok'ish. But its a huge downgrade from normal auto focus. You'll be dissapointed. 

The viltrox works but the auto focus isn't really usable, at least not continuous. 

[KnowsNothing]

52 minutes ago, frontfocus said:

I own the Mitakon as well as the Fuji f/1.4 and the Mitakon has a special look to it. It's not just the amount of blur, but bokeh and overall how it renders. Aperture is smooth and stepless. No sharpness problems in video either, since X-H1 and X-T3 oversample from 5K and 6.3K, resulting in more than sharp enough videos.

For photos and overall I prefer the Fuji 35mm f/1.4, but not for video, since the AF motor is loud

Thanks, i’m assuming this is the mark ii? And is the lens capable enough to be one’s main prime, or is it too niche? I really like the look of it. Weight is a bit of a concern but it’s so small, how problematic can it really be.