I got my XF23mm f/2

I have had my XF23mm f/2.0 for about a week now, so here is an example of a
Jaguar public service road sign.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xf00ayp1c8vwsaw/DSCF5048-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/inbrrz2yfrxtg17/DSCF5049-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/w7hqsjwn1xfspp6/DSCF5050-E.jpg

--

Regards,
Savageduck

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:17:26 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

I have had my XF23mm f/2.0 for about a week now, so here is an example of a
Jaguar public service road sign.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xf00ayp1c8vwsaw/DSCF5048-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/inbrrz2yfrxtg17/DSCF5049-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/w7hqsjwn1xfspp6/DSCF5050-E.jpg

Nice photos - all very sharp. I assume these are SOOC? As the file
numbers ascend, they become more underexposed. Also, aren't you
supposed to show this type of lens off wide open? Are those next?

I do think that planter on the package shelf is a nice touch...

On Jun 22, 2017, RichA wrote
(in ):

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 17:17:34 UTC-4, Savageduck wrote:
I have had my XF23mm f/2.0 for about a week now, so here is an example of a
Jaguar public service road sign.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xf00ayp1c8vwsaw/DSCF5048-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/inbrrz2yfrxtg17/DSCF5049-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/w7hqsjwn1xfspp6/DSCF5050-E.jpg

--

Regards,
Savageduck

It's sharp. The 1st car shot was startling, buried like that.

I was stopped down to f/8. It seems to have a pretty large sweet spot between
f/2.8-f/11. Wide open there is a barely perceptible softness in the corners,
but for the most part that is irrelevant. For a $449 lens I am impressed, and
I think I am going to use this as my walk-around street prime for a while.

I can but think of the contrast between my Nikkor lenses, and my Fujinon
X-lenses. Amongst my Nikkor lenses used on my D300S I have a few real dogs,
and some which are surprisingly good performers. I have no complaints with
any of my Fujicon lenses. Now I have five, the 14mm f/2.8, 23mm f/2, 35mm
f/1.4, 18-55mm f/2.8-f/4, and 55-200mm f/3.5-f/4.8. I have my eye on a few
more to round out the weaponry for my X-T2.
All I can say is Fujifilm makes some very good glass.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

In article .com,
Savageduck wrote:

I have had my XF23mm f/2.0 for about a week now, so here is an example of a
Jaguar public service road sign.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xf00ayp1c8vwsaw/DSCF5048-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/inbrrz2yfrxtg17/DSCF5049-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/w7hqsjwn1xfspp6/DSCF5050-E.jpg

You should work with your focusing...

Besides that: Did the Jag plant itself or was it placed there after
pronunciation?
--
teleportation kills

On Jun 22, 2017, Bill W wrote
(in ):

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:17:26 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

I have had my XF23mm f/2.0 for about a week now, so here is an example of a
Jaguar public service road sign.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xf00ayp1c8vwsaw/DSCF5048-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/inbrrz2yfrxtg17/DSCF5049-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/w7hqsjwn1xfspp6/DSCF5050-E.jpg

Nice photos - all very sharp.

Thanks.

I assume these are SOOC?

Nope! They are slightly tweeked RAFs, mostly some lifting of shadows and
contrast.

Here is the SOOC JPEG of the first one.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/di9q6ipfdeducn4/DSCF5048.jpg

As the file
numbers ascend, they become more underexposed.

That was due to me walking around to the shady side without making any
aperture adustment. I was using Auto ISO 200-1600. The first two were at ISO
200, and the third jumped to ISO 400.

Also, aren't you supposed to show this type of lens off wide open?

I wasn’t actually thinking of showing off the lens, but more of the
quirkiness of the subject.

Are those next?

Yup!
Here is a quick SOOC JPEG, I shot 10 minutes ago. ISO 200, f/2.0, 1/40 sec.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2k83352fnbp7ibl/DSCF5051.jpg


I do think that planter on the package shelf is a nice touch...

--

Regards,
Savageduck

On Jun 22, 2017, android wrote
(in ):

In iganews.com,
Savageduck wrote:

I have had my XF23mm f/2.0 for about a week now, so here is an example of a
Jaguar public service road sign.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xf00ayp1c8vwsaw/DSCF5048-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/inbrrz2yfrxtg17/DSCF5049-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/w7hqsjwn1xfspp6/DSCF5050-E.jpg

You should work with your focusing...

....er, OK!

Besides that: Did the Jag plant itself or was it placed there after
pronunciation?

I believe it was an odd sort of artistic expression.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

On Jun 22, 2017, Savageduck wrote
(in iganews.com):

On Jun 22, 2017, Bill W wrote
(in ):

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:17:26 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

I have had my XF23mm f/2.0 for about a week now, so here is an example of a
Jaguar public service road sign.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xf00ayp1c8vwsaw/DSCF5048-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/inbrrz2yfrxtg17/DSCF5049-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/w7hqsjwn1xfspp6/DSCF5050-E.jpg

Nice photos - all very sharp.

Thanks.

I assume these are SOOC?

Nope! They are slightly tweeked RAFs, mostly some lifting of shadows and
contrast.

Here is the SOOC JPEG of the first one.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/di9q6ipfdeducn4/DSCF5048.jpg

As the file
numbers ascend, they become more underexposed.

That was due to me walking around to the shady side without making any
aperture adustment. I was using Auto ISO 200-1600. The first two were at ISO
200, and the third jumped to ISO 400.

Also, aren't you supposed to show this type of lens off wide open?

I wasn’t actually thinking of showing off the lens, but more of the
quirkiness of the subject.

Are those next?

Yup!
Here is a quick SOOC JPEG, I shot 10 minutes ago. ISO 200, f/2.0, 1/40 sec.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2k83352fnbp7ibl/DSCF5051.jpg

Here is a tweaked RAF at ISO 400, f/2.0, 1/60 sec.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ohka2vg57oxdy77/DSCF5052-E.jpg



I do think that planter on the package shelf is a nice touch...

--

Regards,
Savageduck

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 20:18:49 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On Jun 22, 2017, Bill W wrote
(in ):

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:17:26 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

I have had my XF23mm f/2.0 for about a week now, so here is an example of a
Jaguar public service road sign.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xf00ayp1c8vwsaw/DSCF5048-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/inbrrz2yfrxtg17/DSCF5049-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/w7hqsjwn1xfspp6/DSCF5050-E.jpg

Nice photos - all very sharp.

Thanks.

I assume these are SOOC?

Nope! They are slightly tweeked RAFs, mostly some lifting of shadows and
contrast.

Here is the SOOC JPEG of the first one.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/di9q6ipfdeducn4/DSCF5048.jpg

As the file
numbers ascend, they become more underexposed.

That was due to me walking around to the shady side without making any
aperture adustment. I was using Auto ISO 200-1600. The first two were at ISO
200, and the third jumped to ISO 400.

Also, aren't you supposed to show this type of lens off wide open?

I wasn’t actually thinking of showing off the lens, but more of the
quirkiness of the subject.

Are those next?

Yup!
Here is a quick SOOC JPEG, I shot 10 minutes ago. ISO 200, f/2.0, 1/40 sec.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2k83352fnbp7ibl/DSCF5051.jpg

Still sharp in the middle. I know this was talked about here in the
past, but what, again, are all those ovals/circles mostly near the top
of the photo? Something to do with highlights peeking through the
trees?

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 20:25:29 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On Jun 22, 2017, android wrote
(in ):

In iganews.com,
Savageduck wrote:

I have had my XF23mm f/2.0 for about a week now, so here is an example of a
Jaguar public service road sign.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xf00ayp1c8vwsaw/DSCF5048-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/inbrrz2yfrxtg17/DSCF5049-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/w7hqsjwn1xfspp6/DSCF5050-E.jpg

You should work with your focusing...

...er, OK!

Besides that: Did the Jag plant itself or was it placed there after
pronunciation?

I believe it was an odd sort of artistic expression.

Jaguars (or in this case, a Daimler) seem to attract this kind of
attention. https://www.dropbox.com/s/xuvu1srznc...-2997.jpg?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/p4c1qfpwct...-3000.jpg?dl=0
An exhibit on a local 'art trail' a few years ago.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Jun 22, 2017, Bill W wrote
(in ):

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 20:18:49 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On Jun 22, 2017, Bill W wrote
(in ):

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:17:26 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

I have had my XF23mm f/2.0 for about a week now, so here is an example of
a
Jaguar public service road sign.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xf00ayp1c8vwsaw/DSCF5048-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/inbrrz2yfrxtg17/DSCF5049-E.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/w7hqsjwn1xfspp6/DSCF5050-E.jpg

Nice photos - all very sharp.

Thanks.

I assume these are SOOC?

Nope! They are slightly tweeked RAFs, mostly some lifting of shadows and
contrast.

Here is the SOOC JPEG of the first one.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/di9q6ipfdeducn4/DSCF5048.jpg

As the file
numbers ascend, they become more underexposed.

That was due to me walking around to the shady side without making any
aperture adustment. I was using Auto ISO 200-1600. The first two were at ISO
200, and the third jumped to ISO 400.

Also, aren't you supposed to show this type of lens off wide open?

I wasn’t actually thinking of showing off the lens, but more of the
quirkiness of the subject.

Are those next?

Yup!
Here is a quick SOOC JPEG, I shot 10 minutes ago. ISO 200, f/2.0, 1/40 sec.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2k83352fnbp7ibl/DSCF5051.jpg

Still sharp in the middle. I know this was talked about here in the
past, but what, again, are all those ovals/circles mostly near the top
of the photo? Something to do with highlights peeking through the
trees?

That is Bokeh, or shallow DoF OoF rendering.
Light filtering through trees/leaves can emphasize the effect most typically
demonstrated with fast lenses shot wide open.

--

Regards,
Savageduck