Jump to content

EricaSerena

Members
  • Content count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About EricaSerena

Camera Gear

  • Camera List
    Fuji XT2
  • Lens List
    16-55mm f2.8
    90mm f2
  1. An update for everyone. I know it's been a while, but I only finalised this issue today. To give you a quick run down... I had focussing problems with my 16-55mm. The camera store I purchased it from sent it back to Fuji in Oct/Nov. It came back with them saying there was nothing wrong with the lens despite the hundreds of soft photos. I sent it back again on Jan 6th again with raw files so they could see there was definitely something wrong with it. It got sent off with my XT2 as well. My gear has been with Fuji ever since, and just now I've found out the lens has actually been replaced under warranty, and is now ready to be collected with my camera body. So it looks like they got it wrong the first time, and it's now taken them 6 weeks to find the issue. I still don't know what the problem wass exactly, (I'll see if I can get more info when I collect everything), but yeah, obviously it was the lens and not me or the focussing modes I was using! Grrrr... happy to be receiving a new lens though! I'll definitely give it a good test run this weekend with 2 weddings
  2. No, I'm in Australia. I'm not sure if they'll fix it or replace. You're welcome. If anything not so good comes up when I cull yesterday's wedding, I'll let you know. I'm culling it tomorrow. The 30 or so pics I looked at were all fabulous though, so off to a great start
  3. I'm not sure. I'll take the loan lens back Monday and let them know obviously, and see what they say. It's brand new, so still under warranty. I'm just not sure if they will try to fix whatever the problem is, or just give me a new one...
  4. UPDATE: I took my lens into the store yesterday, and took home one of their rental 16-55's to test it out at today's wedding. I've only had a quick look, but everythingI've looked at so far is PIN SHARP. So I think it's safe to say, I have a dud lens!
  5. I couldn't make it down there today, so I'm going in Friday morning instead now
  6. Testing done. Still lots of soft images, so I'm taking it back to the store on Wednesday to show them some examples. I'm thinking I have a dud lens :-/
  7. @roryp, I will do some testing and check out the results. I was under the impression (after lots of research) that the 16-55 is fairly on par with the canon 24-70 (I have the latest version and it's a fabulous lens for a zoom). If this is the case, it's so far off the quality of the Canon it's not funny! So maybe I do have a dud lens. I'll see what my results come up with, and then take it back to the store and see what they say. Considering I've been shooting weddings professionally for 16 years, I'd like to think I don't have a sloppy technique!
  8. So, K1W1, what WOULD you use then? The 3x3 focus grid is what I've been using so far with continuous tracking as I was advised on not using single point focus. And bear in mind shooting at F8 in a church on a fast shutter speed is more often than not, not possible. You're assuming I'm shooting an entire wedding's worth of photos on a Fuji with majority OOF images, which is absolutely not the case. I did some testing before taking it to a wedding, as well as side by side comparisons with my other camera on the first wedding I took it to, so I could see the differences. Once I was more confident using the camera, I used it more at the next wedding, and am now finding this issue with the one lens. So I'm here to get advice and suggestions on what the problem could be and how to fix it. Especially if it is a settings/user issue. So far, I've decided I will give face detection a try, and as artuk suggested, I will have a play with manual focussing on far away subjects at different focal lengths and see what happens. I still haven't ruled out that maybe this lens is simply not as sharp as I thought it would be.
  9. I meant focussing modes. Not metering modes. I am on continuous AF when shooting moving subjects. I move the focus mode selector to C for continuous. The 9 point zone, is basically a larger area where the camera focuses. So out of the 91 single points, it now chooses from an assigned area of 9 so larger area to choose from. I think we're using different terminology for describing the same thing. In your case, zonal focusing. Face detection I'm yet to try. I have tried both lenses, and I'm not having problems with my 90mm. Thanks for the detailed description. I don't think that's what's happening. it just seems soft all over.
  10. Yes, it's under warranty. I haven't had it long. I'm thinking I might need to do some tests on it at different apertures and focal lengths... I'm just trying to figure out how much of an influence the different metering modes would also have on this.
  11. What's a de-centering issue? I'm not sure what that means. I've uploaded more photos of both moving subjects and stationary subjects where I think shutter speed and camera shake can be ruled out. Thank you
  12. My general settings are single point focus (91 points), single shot. Face detection off (wondering if I should switch it on to see what happens). When taking walking shots, I switch the lever to C and change the focus point to a 9 point zone. This is what I was recommended. I was advised leaving it on single mode would cause more photos to be OOF as the focusing point would be too precise. I find focussing very quick, but after looking at photos, obviously not accurate. There just seems to be an overall softness to the entire image. I only have 2 lenses for now. My 90mm I mainly use for close up stuff, so it's hard to compare as I don't have any issues with close up photos. I did a handful of further away shots on f2.8 on my 90mm, and they're sharp, so it's just this lens. I'll try to attach more photos so you can see a variety. It's not just this wedding either. More photos Last example of a non moving subject and fairly close up shot, yet still soft.
  13. Yes, the couple were walking. BUT, I've just looked over a bunch of other photos from the same wedding and shot on that lens and I'm finding similar issues. There's shots on 16mm which are pin sharp and they were walking. Not particularly fast, I might add. A set of completely stationery posed photos on F4 are also soft (on 22.7mm). Other walking shots (on 55mm) in the church at F4 and on AF-C were practically all out of focus even though I had it set to track the subject. The bride walking down the aisle was better, but it could be because she was walking slower maybe. Couple walking back down the aisle at end of ceremony shot on 16mm are all sharp except ones with movement. Shot on 1/100th sec so some are blurry, but you can see it's because of the shutter speed. The others are sharp. So I'm starting to think this lens performs better at certain focal lengths and aperture combos. The sample shots I posted were shot on 2.8 probably because I simply forgot to change the aperture ring since I'm still getting the hang of this new system. Regardless though, I often shoot below F5.6 for the majority of my work. This wouldn't have happened on my Canon, hence why I'm trying to get to the bottom of this.
  14. Hey all. I'm new to the Fuji system. I recently bought the XT2 and a couple of lenses (16-55 and 90mm) for travelling, and felt it was a bit of a waste to only use on holidays, so I've been shooting on it at weddings these past few weeks and loving it. BUT.... I'm struggling to figure out whether the out of focus images I'm getting on my 16-55mm with far away subjects in particular, are due to the camera, the limitations of the lens or focal length choice, the focussing modes used, or if it's just me not nailing focus? So I'd love some insight from more experience Fuji users. I have one photo which is very far away from this set and shot on 16mm and it's pin sharp. Then the rest of this set was shot around 30-ish mm and all are very soft. Even the closer up ones, but definitely not as bad. This makes me think it's the focal length, but I'd love to hear opinions. Photos attached are of the zoomed in version. You can see to left how much it's been zoomed in by. At full frame they all look fine on screen, but zoomed in, definitely not harp. Keen to hear what people think the issue is. Thank you!
×