Fast Fuji Glass

[DanielVranic]

Hey guys, 

I have (2) XT3's that I use for photo and video. Mostly video oriented. Been doing some live events and weddings lately with them and they work really really well. 

One thing that has been on my mind, has been faster glass. I came from a Sony system with really fast glass. FF with 1.4 or 1.8 all around. Now I love the video and ergonomics so much better but wish I didn't have to pump the ISO up so much during the receptions or during the lulls of an event.

So my main question is this. Is the AF on the 35f1.4 that bad? Everywhere I look its people saying how bad the AF is. And with most of these events, I do need AF. If I didn't, I know there is some new cine glass from SLRMagic that is T1.3 that fits, but for live shows and weddings, a fully manual system just wouldn't work super great.

So I guess my question is whether I go with the 35f1.4 or adapt an EF or go full manual (which in that case I have plenty of options)

 

Thoughts?

[Thomas Hill]

I loved the 35/1.4 for stills when I had it and the X-T2. Zero issues even in fairly low light situations.  So I  was very  surprised when I  saw all the  negativity toward it. 

But it wasn't very good for video, more breathing and pulsing. It could be better with the new focusing system, though.

[MrSMW]

Viltrox EF-FX2?

Retains AF and speedbooster.

I use the Fringer Pro myself to adapt Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 and Canon EF 50mm f1.8 but would look at this Viltrox as an option.

 

[DanielVranic]

So far every review of the EF-FX2 has been extremely poor so I have not considered it.

Been looking at the Fringer, with a Sigma 30f1.4 Art. I have not found any good examples of how well it works in spot AF. For my video work on my gimbal, I always set the square on the eye-line of my third grid and just make sure I frame with that. 

I just need to make sure that works well. 

[Vladimir]

15 hours ago, MrSMW said:

Viltrox EF-FX2?

i've been using it with canon 28/1.8 here on a shots with dancing girl and couple of other:

 

and it did pretty well, also totally ok for photo. Although i have a minor glitch before i updated firmware to latest version.

[MacMurphy]

The 35mm f1.4 is supposed to have much improved focus speed (~15%) on the XT3, but it will still make a noise (which doesn't bother me). I have been avoiding testing it in a store as I expect it will be on a par with a Sigma with adapter for focus speed and have a bit more character (or "magic" as Fuji users say), so I would probably buy it.

It's not worth the risk of using the Viltrox adapter. Using a native lens makes much more sense to me as you can rely on it and it is smaller and lighter. But before buying more FX lenses I want to check if the APSC sensor is suitable for 8K in future (I remember reading M43 is not ideal and assumed Panasonic went FF for that reason). If not it means a move to Panasonic or Nikon FF, so may as well invest in a sharper, quieter FF Sigma you can adapt.

[thebrothersthre3]

I've seen people getting good results with the 1.4 lenses on the XT3.

[frontfocus]

I own all of the f/1.4 /1.2 lenses. They got a significant boost in autofocus performance with the X-T3. They aren't silent and the 35mm f/1.4 is the loudest. Overall I like their rendering and think they offer good image quality for the money. But it shows, that Fuji wasn't thinking about video back when those lenses were designed

8 hours ago, MacMurphy said:

But before buying more FX lenses I want to check if the APSC sensor is suitable for 8K in future (I remember reading M43 is not ideal and assumed Panasonic went FF for that reason). If not it means a move to Panasonic or Nikon FF, so may as well invest in a sharper, quieter FF Sigma you can adapt.

Do you think that's really necessary? At the moment we get 6.3K downsampled to 4K. And there are some, that already claim 4K is too sharp. 
The other point is, why stop at 8K? Why not future proof for 16K?

[Inazuma]

I've heard the old lenses work a lot better on the XT3. But you'll still have to deal with how noisy those fast lenses are, especially the 35mm 1.4 and 18mm f2.  If you're doing a wedding or some other quiet event then I wouldn't recommend it

[MacMurphy]

54 minutes ago, frontfocus said:

...

Do you think that's really necessary? At the moment we get 6.3K downsampled to 4K. And there are some, that already claim 4K is too sharp. 
The other point is, why stop at 8K? Why not future proof for 16K?

For me, yes. Just 8K.

[MrSMW]

1 hour ago, Inazuma said:

I've heard the old lenses work a lot better on the XT3. But you'll still have to deal with how noisy those fast lenses are, especially the 35mm 1.4 and 18mm f2.  If you're doing a wedding or some other quiet event then I wouldn't recommend it

As a long term Fuji user, I'd say the opposite actually and the newer lenses work better, - faster, more accurate and quieter.

The f2's especially.

[Inazuma]

4 hours ago, MrSMW said:

As a long term Fuji user, I'd say the opposite actually and the newer lenses work better, - faster, more accurate and quieter.

The f2's especially.

I never mentioned the newer lenses?? I agree they are functionally better than the old lenses

[frontfocus]

4 hours ago, MrSMW said:

As a long term Fuji user, I'd say the opposite actually and the newer lenses work better, - faster, more accurate and quieter.

The f2's especially.

I think what he wanted to say is, that older lenses got a bigger boost in performance compared to newer lenses. The new f/2.0 primes and f/2.8 zooms are still faster, but the improvement from X-T2/X-H1 to X-T3 was by far not as big as with the older lenses. 
And I absolutely agree with that. 

[MrSMW]

29 minutes ago, frontfocus said:

I think what he wanted to say is, that older lenses got a bigger boost in performance compared to newer lenses. The new f/2.0 primes and f/2.8 zooms are still faster, but the improvement from X-T2/X-H1 to X-T3 was by far not as big as with the older lenses. 
And I absolutely agree with that. 

Yep, sort of... The older lenses got a boost by virtue of being on the more recent bodies, but the newer lenses generally perform better regardless, especially those f2's.

[DanielVranic]

I have the 35 f2. LOVE IT!

I just wish i had something brighter. I have a Speedboosted Helios, which is f2.14 equiv. And that is perfect for me, so I am trying to find something in that range.

[TheRealOG]

I've been running the EF-FX1 viltrox sans speedbooster with my X-H1. I owned the 23 1.4 and the 35 1.4, the former being my favorite.  I currently own the 16 1.4 and the 27 2.8... The 16 is quite nice, but the Sigma 18-35 really takes the cake. The range is much more suitable for video work, especially for people. I don't care much for AF in video cause I manually focus. Day in and day out, manual focus is what I use. The AF on the 80D was quite superb though! The brighter you open, the shallower depth of field that you have... The more likely you are to miss focus cause of that razor thin focus plane... One recommendation would be to try and improve your coverage too. Technique might help you look at the bigger picture... Wide, mediums, tights, super tights, closeups, action reaction, moments, knowing how to anticipate action, following action, sequencing, composition, etc. I've been shooting professionally for over 10 years, and I had to relearn the basics all over again. I thought more gear would be the answer, but it was re-learning technique that helped me out. 

[thebrothersthre3]

7 hours ago, Inazuma said:

I've heard the old lenses work a lot better on the XT3. But you'll still have to deal with how noisy those fast lenses are, especially the 35mm 1.4 and 18mm f2.  If you're doing a wedding or some other quiet event then I wouldn't recommend it

Is it that loud that it would ruin a wedding shoot?

[frontfocus]

38 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Is it that loud that it would ruin a wedding shoot?

if you use the internal mic to record then yes. But if you do, you probably shouldn't shoot weddings ?

As soon as you move the mic away, it won't pick up the sound.

[Inazuma]

2 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Is it that loud that it would ruin a wedding shoot?

 

2 hours ago, frontfocus said:

if you use the internal mic to record then yes. But if you do, you probably shouldn't shoot weddings ?

As soon as you move the mic away, it won't pick up the sound.

I wasnt even thinking about the microphone pick up but yeh that's another thing to think about. The noise would probably disturb a quiet venue and be picked up by your mic if it's too close. The 18mm f2 is the worst, followed by the 35mm 1.4 and then the 23mm 1.4. I haven't used the 56mm f1.2 so can't comment on that. 

[frontfocus]

14 hours ago, Inazuma said:

The noise would probably disturb a quiet venue

I have photographed many weddings and the 35mm f/1.4 has been there since the Fuji beginnings. The only one who would notice the focusing sound is the photographer himself. If my second shooter used the lens, I never picked up on any sound. 
For video though, external sound recording is absolutely necessary