Forgot your password?
Or sign in with one of these services
aardvark, August 24, 2014 in Photo Gallery
Very nice. Were you using the macro adaptor?
Thank you. I wasn't aware there was a macro adapter. What is that? These were taken just with the XC 50-230 lens by itself, no adapters of any kind. If you know of a macro adapter of some sort I'd appreciate a link if you have one
Wow - this is a really strong combo. I'm impressed with this lens and body's output - and of course, the photographer using them.
Thanks for the explanation and link, milandro and franco, appreciate your comments.
well, done, by the way!
Thanks a lot, milandro.
more photos with the Fuji X-A1
taken with Vivitar 55mm 2.8 MF
taken with Nikon Nikkor-S 50mm 1.4 MF
OP,very nice series. thanks for sharing.
Excellent results with what some call a cheap lens! However, the optics are right on par.
Thanks gryphon 1911 and PhoTom for your comments, they are greatly appreciated. Yes, I find the 50-230 to be a very capable lens. Here in Canada the 50-200 runs at almost double the price and although I know the build quality may be higher and telephoto is at 4.8 vs. 6.7 I don't feel it's worth the difference. In general I feel Fuji lenses are considerably overpriced, but at the moment there are very few(if any, that I'm aware of)3rd party lenses for the X-system. The X-A1 is a real bargain considering the output it can produce.
There are also macro tubes available but quality isn't consistent and mine have proven fiddly recently. (reliable electrical connection)
You must be talking about the various brand name 16 and 10 mm tubes I see being advertised through ebay, etc.I've read some horror stories and yet some folks swear by them. I guess it probably comes down to quality control and people's familiarity in using tubes. I wanted to get a set but decided to wait until someone else manufactures a different version. In the mean time I've used a set of old Vivitar Nikon tubes with my Nikon-X-mount adapter. No electronics but...
Macro extension tubes are nothing more than tubes with lens mounts. There is no point at all in trying to get ones with electronic connections because they won't work properly.
Get a decent manual focus lens with an aperture ring s/hand for peanuts, get some macro tubes (and in the case of Fuji an appropriate lens mount adapter), put the camera on a tripod, mount the lens to the camera and shoot away to your hearts content happy in the knowledge that you can use the EVF with it's zoom ability for focus rather than having to try to use an optical viewfinder at an odd angle on a DSLR.
Yes, thanks, I realize all that; I was just responding to PhoTom's comments about difficulties he was apparently having with his electronic tubes. If you read my response all the way through you would have seen that personally I use Vivitar Nikon tubes and Nikon-X-mount adapters, all of which are manual focus only.
some more with Fuji X-A1 and XC16-50:
10 image vertical stack
Even on my crappy work laptop screen, these images look spectacular. Really well done. I think the only thing putting me off the X-A1 personally is the lack of an EVF, otherwise I think this would be the perfect way in to the X-Series interchangable lens system.
Thanks Richard, yes, if I'd had the money when I purchased the X-A1 6 weeks ago I would have seriously considered the X-E2 or bank balance willing, the X-T1. I would dearly love an EVF as I've been a Nikon DSLR user for many years and it's an awkward transition doing without a viewfinder although I enjoy the clarity and tilting aspect of the X-A1's screen. From the photos I've seen posted on the Internet I believe the X-A1 can more than compete with the higher-end X-model Fuji's in terms of image quality; naturally, as with any camera a photographer's skill level, familiarity with his camera and/or choice of lens will make a far greater difference in results over the long term.
A big +1
These look incredible on my 2009 46" Toshiba HDTV. Even stunning!
Amazing photos and definitely proof that, if you don't need the extra stop of light, the 50-230mm is so good that if your photos are bad it's probably you (the photographer) and not the lens.
I'll also add one more to the chorus of people amazed that you didn't need an adapter to get those dragonfly shots. I have the Raynox DCR-250 and combining it with the 50-230 promises to get me into disgustingly close territory
Thanks PhoTom and jeremyclarke for your generous comments. No, there was no adapter for those dragonfly shots. I did try two (2) Canon 250D close-up lenses mounted together with an adapter a couple of times but found, as you are suggesting, that combination brought me so close to my (stationary) subject that I touched the front of it with the lens. Of course dragonflies are notoriously skittish unless you catch them early morning so I'd never have a hope of getting that close to one with that setup. I love my XC16-50 but my only complaint is that the close focusing distance is below par in my opinion. The 18-55 VR that I use on my Nikon focuses about 4 1/2 inches from the front of the lens, twice as close as the Fuji.
more Fuji X-A1 with a variety of lenses:
Vivitar 135mm 2.8 MF, ISO 800, 1/3500sec
Vivitar 135mm 2.8 MF, ISO 800, 1/4000sec
Vivitar 55mm 2.8 Macro MF, ISO 800, 1/900sec
Vivitar 55mm 2.8 Macro MF, ISO 800, 1/120sec
Vivitar 55mm 2.8 Macro MF, ISO 800, 1/320sec
XC16-50, F8, ISO 200, 1/600sec
You can post now and register later.
If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead
Only 75 emoji are allowed.
Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead
Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor
You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.