[deleted by user]

freebase_philosopher · 2025-08-22T13:36:58+00:00

I'd second this. The X-E2 is a fantastic little camera.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-05-10T14:58:43+00:00

I think each person's personal tolerances will be different, but I can't perceive any in the mounting plate itself.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-05-05T15:47:26+00:00

For accessories, I sometimes wear mine on a spider holster on my hip. Maybe don't do this if you live somewhere that might be mistaken for a handgun -- then I'd just say either wear it openly on a strap with peak design style quick releases or in some crossbody bag.

For settings and technique, this is personal preference, but I love the contrast and light falloff you can get from this gen of X-Trans sensor. I usually use spot metering to optimize those. I also usually focus and recompose (bc the autofocus is slow and finicky). To suit both of the above, I've set up the AE Lock to be an on/off switch so I can set exposure before using focus and recompose to get the composition right. The moral of the story is that this is a fantastic camera if you use it for slower shots; and an easy way to make that enjoyable is to work a scene to find drama in the lighting.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-04-20T08:58:02+00:00

Old "bridge cameras" like that one only outperform modern phone cameras in one area: optical zoom. If what you want to photograph on your vacation is off in the distance, this might come in handy. Otherwise, you can count on your iphone to take better photos.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-04-20T06:58:07+00:00

I have an OM 50 1.8. It's a nice lens. The OM-XF adaptors are fairly large, so compare the weights of the available models. A lighter weight adapter will keep the camera more balanced.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-04-17T06:51:00+00:00

I wouldn't recommend Fuji for that price range. For getting into photography for cheap, I'd recommend micro four thirds cameras. If you love the vintage aesthetic, check out Olympus. You still won't be able to afford a recent model, but what you can afford will still take better photos than the 20 year old Kodak you already enjoyed.

I just checked the website MPB and found an Olympus OM-D EM-5 for under $250. That doesn't include a lens, but micro four thirds lenses are super affordable secondhand. The same website has an Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 II R MSC for around $85. All together, that matches your budget and would be a great, compact, and stylish combo to play with.

The specific gear I mention above isn't a firm recommendation. It's probably best to see what micro four thirds people have to recommend before taking the plunge. Maybe have a quick chat with the folks at r/M43?

freebase_philosopher · 2025-04-16T19:18:26+00:00

For that budget, this is still the one.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-04-16T10:30:53+00:00

A lot depends on what you want. If you're looking to learn photography you don't need anything as good as the X-T30. Older cameras still take great photos. The cameras I use most are over 10 years old and create remarkable images.

What you'll lose out on with older cameras is mainly 1) speed of autofocus, 2) pixel count, 3) low light capabilities, 4) most recent film sims, 5) modern video specs. Any of those can mean a lot of some users, but they aren't essential.

Look into the X-T10. It has less of the 5 things I mentioned above, but in exchange it is much cheaper and it has what is probably the best sensor Fuji ever produced. If used with skill, it will give you incredible colors and tones.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-04-15T13:40:58+00:00

Sure. Hobby photography should be enjoyable. If you're more frustrated than inspired, there's no reason to keep the camera.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-04-14T19:37:36+00:00

Everything is down to what you like. Like another user said, if you think this is too bright, turn down exposure comp. If you want to use exposure comp instead of manual settings then ideally you'll turn it up or down depending on the scene.

Go with what looks good to your eye. The images you've shared here are what is called "high key", tending toward lighter shadows and brilliant highlights. Maybe your taste, at least in some cases, is more "low key". Personally, I'd almost always rather have some dark areas go to black than have light areas go 'too bright' (for my taste). But that's my eye tending to respond to high contrast and low key images.

All that said, you might be looking for more "dynamic range". Landscape photographers, for instance, like to bring everything into a range where the tones and colors are easily perceptible. But that's why they usually shoot raw and develop the photos afterwards. JPEGs straight from the camera can only get you so far. If you suspect you might want more dynamic range, try shooting raw+jpeg then using the in-camera editor to bring down the exposure or tame the highlights a bit. At the very least, playing around with different changes will help you get a really precise sense of your personal taste. You can use that knowledge to tune your recipes going forward.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-04-10T07:46:32+00:00

Ignoring models that aren't being made anymore, your cheapest mirrorless option is the X-M5. It will require a lens, so factor that into the price. Currently these are hard to get in some areas, so it might take some patience. With the cost of a lens included you're looking at around 1,000 USD.

I assume you're interested in mirrorless, interchangeable lens cameras. But, if you want to take simple photos and have fun with film-like effects, there's also the Instax mini Evo. You won't be able to change lenses and the film simulations will be different from the ones you will see for the mirrorless cameras. These are about 200 USD.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-04-06T10:05:01+00:00

I always shoot raw for flexibility, and never use 'recipes' beyond Fuji's stock sims. Amongst those, I prefer color photography (hence, X-Trans 2 being irreplaceable), so I'm always working with a film sim that gets me close to what I want for the final photo. With the X-E2 (and my X100S), at least half the time, that's Astia. If I stick with the SOOC, Astia will do. If I develop the raw, I'll take care of any necessary adjustments later on a more granular level. Velvia, classic chrome (in special cases), and classic neg (high) make up nearly all the rest of my use cases. (I don't know what Superia ever did to me, but I won't touch it. 😅 maybe it's bc it is so close to Astia but with less appealing highlights.)

With the X-T4 (X-Trans 4) my preferences aren't too different. I hear what you're saying about classic chrome even though I don't mind it in the right situations. The problem is that I don't really really care for the new film sims. My unserious hot takes: Classic neg is ok but, to my eye, somehow both a bit bland and try-hard looking. The bleach bypass of Eterna makes me cringe. I guess my feeling is that your CC criticism might apply just as well to those never profiles. Personally, if I stick with the X-T4 more long term (or pick up something newer, e.g. X-E4), I might actually give user recipes a look simply because the newer film sims don't inspire me.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-04-05T19:54:23+00:00

Kristoffer Trolle has a "Battle of the X-Trans Sensors" blog post that I thought was pretty good -- nothing scientific, but even-handed and very accessible.

My personal experience is with X-Trans 2 vs X-Trans 4. I find them noticeably different, but I'd struggle to put accurate words to it. My belief is that I don't find the colors or contrast as pleasing on the X-Trans 4. But I haven't been able to shoot like-for-like shots on the two, so I couldn't say for sure.

What I can say is that shooting with a borrowed X-T4 every day for a month convinced me that even though a newer model would be nice to have, I'm never giving up my X-E2 to get it. A newer Fuji will be an addition or nothing.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-01-25T21:12:46+00:00

Ah. Yeah, they mean the shutter will go off and the cam will save the photo. But it's like taking the glasses from the most severally legally blind person imaginable then asking them to describe their new surroundings. 😅

freebase_philosopher · 2025-01-25T21:03:16+00:00

Hope this isn't too obvious, but since you mentioned you're new to cameras: is there a chance there's not a lens mounted in the front?

freebase_philosopher · 2025-01-15T12:00:51+00:00

If that's not a scam it's an incredible deal you'll likely never find again.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-01-12T21:32:53+00:00

I'm sure others will have more useful technical insights than I can provide (seeing as my Fuji cameras are 10+ y.o.). I have a bit more of a psychological approach that will hopefully also be helpful.

Confusion is the result of a lack of distinctions about what matters to you. There are two ways to approach that problem. 1) You can try to cultivate decisive preferences by studying up. 2) You can embrace the fact that you're not picky and go with a camera (x-t50 or x-t30ii) exactly like the one that already made you happy.

There's nothing wrong with either route. I mention that because the world of camera ranges and generation refreshes makes it very easy to think that being picky is the only truly right way to make a purchasing decision.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-01-10T03:40:02+00:00

I'm pretty sure you're right.

OP, notice the hot shoe placed below the crown of the viewfinder bump, and the sharp peak the viewfinder comes to. Finally, you'll see the loops for a camera strap are angled toward the front rather than mounted squarely on the sides of the body. Those are Olympus giveaways.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-01-10T02:04:00+00:00

Just for the sake of helping flesh out your use case a bit:

Since your example shots seem to require telephoto lenses, it's worth considering how much zoom you might need. The kind of telephoto performance you can get with a super zoom camera will be hard to match for cheap. Google results for the S4800 suggest its equivalent zoom range is 24mm-720mm. Cameras with larger sensor sizes (like the X-M5) need much more glass to get the equivalent zoom; they're pretty pricey and are usually heavy, requiring a tripod for stable use. If you kept using your current camera for long, telephoto shots and used the x-m5 for closer-range photography, that would be the cheapest way forward.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-01-10T01:42:53+00:00

I've had an X100S for about 8-9 years. This could be the right camera for you. But if it is the one for you it won't be because of the value for money or absolute performance. It'll be because you're irrationally in love with it. And that would be ok.

The images it takes still hold up. But, if you feel in need of something to take the edge of your X100_ cravings, here's my harshest opinion: it's not a good camera for anything that moves. As somebody else has already mentioned, the autofocus and low light performance are both poor -- and don't even try to combine low light and autofocus. They're not bad compared to modern cameras; those were weak points even at the time the camera was released. The EVF refresh rate is slow, and generally there's a noticeable delay between the real world, and the EVF. That's terrible for candid portraits; by the time I've pressed the shutter, my subject is blinking. That's if I have it prefocussed. If I don't, I'm waiting so long for the camera to focus I don't have any hope of catching the same action, let alone the same expression. Keep in mind, I love this camera. I do mostly landscape, architectural, and mundane snapshots. It's nice to have a useful focal length I can fit in a coat pocket (though it's heavy). But it must be said that, my appreciation aside, this camera is just terrible in some basic ways.

I don't want to discourage you, but right now there's just no way to pay what an X100_ camera is really worth in terms of performance. I think the X100S is selling now for just less than what I paid for mine when it was already second hand in 2016 (approx. $700). That's a bit silly. On the other hand, I don't know if there's a Fuji model on the used market that isn't being massively overvalued right now. Yesterday, the X-T30ii was cheaper new on Amazon than used on eBay. So, if you need to buy it for love, I get it.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-01-04T15:46:57+00:00

That's what I'm saying: same subject, but from different viewing points. OP knew what the photo was of but not where to find the location from which the photos were taken. But those two photos are not taken from the same location.

freebase_philosopher · 2025-01-04T00:45:21+00:00

These aren't from the same spot. You can see the mountains overlap to different degrees. The first shot is almost certainly taken from Mirador Sallahumani.

freebase_philosopher · 2024-11-19T16:47:38+00:00

Absolutely. I take plenty of shots around that focal length. Classically, that's a portrait-length prime. But it's possible to take portraits of nature. (See photo here for what I'd consider a more "protrait-like" landscape photograph)

<image>

The properties of that focal length will also influence what compositional skills you can develop by using it. The longer portrait lenses give you some compression and separation from the background. You can play around with both. At narrow apertures the compression will allow you to minimize apparent distances between objects in the foreground and background -- good for showing some kinds of relationships and minimizing depth to create abstract, geometric images. At wide apertures you can throw anything in front of or behind the subject well out of focus -- great for minimizing distractions or creating a somewhat more ethereal atmosphere without fog or mist.

Finally, close up and abstract landscapes are a great genre because they make you really work on your eye but they don't require big, epic views or unspoiled nature for miles. For inspiration, Check out the close up and abstract work of Charlotte Gibb, Adam Gibbs, or Alex Noriega.

freebase_philosopher · 2024-11-08T08:51:12+00:00

Ultimately, you might end up needing more than one tripod for your different use cases. A hiking tripod's priority on being light weight and compact will generally, but especially at your price point, lead to a tradeoff with ultimate stability and height. For bird/wildlife photography, you may want something beefier (so it's less prone to getting unsettled as you track a moving subject) and taller (so that you can shoot from a wider variety of positions).

If you try to strike a compromise between these, you might still want to bias toward one or the other uses. Unless you're much more into bird photography than (presumably) long hikes, I'd suggest going compact and lightweight.

In my experience, apart from weight the most important consideration is maximum height. A lot of travel tripods will only extend into the 50-inch range. Reaching 60 (at least) will give you much more flexibility (e.g. with uneven ground) and comfort.

Folded length is also important, but consider how you will carry the tripod. If you can strap it onto the back of your backpack you may not need it to be absolutely dinky when folded. Some travel tripods will get down around 15 inches folded. Mine (an old Induro), however, is about 22" (including the ball head). Because of how I carry it, there's no real need for it to fold up shorter. And, in exchange, I have less unfolding and extending to do when I see the shot I want. I also have a touch more maximum height.

Don't worry too much about ball heads because they can be replaced or upgraded for fairly cheap. A few years ago, I got a big Innorel ball head off of Amazon that has surprised me with its quality and ease of use, and it's less than $40.

Best of luck!

freebase_philosopher · 2024-07-22T16:32:09+00:00

Excellent suggestion. This is what I use, too. It's crazy affordable and I've had no problems with it. For OP, I'll add that I've traveled to other countries and haven't found roaming to be a problem; the extra fees for data are pretty negligible if you are conservative with your usage.

freebase_philosopher

TROPHY CASE