I gave up an a6500 after years of frustration waiting for a 70-350, ie semi decent quality tele zoom. Im really impressed by the quality of the IBIS, you can run and gun the video, of course a gumbal will make it completely still, but I find a little motion ads some reality to film. I see the xs10 as 90% of an XT4 for a lot less money, it misses the dual cards for recording, although you can record 4k HDR in 10 bit with the external recorder. I was hoping to find a FF with the qualities of a Sony A7 iii.

One of the things the EOS offer is those 600 and 800 primes which whilst not crystal clear are pretty good value. The only real advantage the RP has is the low-light/High-ISO performance, and that's not too much, tbh.

Personally, the X-S10 is offers FAR more camera than the RP. Probably something I will concentrate on commercially once I get closer to retirement etc. But Im not giving up my day job just yet haha. I would like to find a topic to become that brilliant over that people pay $2000 for a print one day, the money isnt the key, more the feedback of what that represents, I think success is rewarding for anyone right. There is a guy in NZ who does prints of surreal art, which is a collection of NZ birds and NZ themes on small islands, things are sized disproportionately, absurd to some perhaps, but that is the theme. But underwater and seascapes lend themselves to eye popping fluro colours out of the darkness perhaps or a fish of bizarre surreal fluro colourings, a neon blue whale. Im just struggling for inspiration for a niche or collection of prints. I would like to get really good at surreal seascapes and apply colours and have eye blistering sharpness in areas I can use a brush to apply. Just basic raw file work applicable to any camera. Ive mostly just shot HDR or Exp multi shots in the past and lifted shadows if needed etc. How does the -2 Shadows work in dr400, I would have thought logically -2 means less DR for shadows etc? Sounds like a handy tool. Depth of field and blur are more complicated than just aperture size, and many more variables should be taken into account, but this is a good starting point to look at when comparing different focal lengths.I have not been good with PS for more than a decade, it is a bit daunting at first, but I think you learn tools based upon what you use a lot. That award will go to the yet‑to‑be‑released XF200mmF2, with an aperture that is over two times as wide as the XF56mmF1.2. The 56mm ƒ/1.2 is the fastest lens in the Fujifilm X line up, it isn’t the largest aperture, meaning there are lenses that will give you more blur. To learn more about equivalence, please read this excellent article by DPReview. It can be deceiving buying a crop sensor lens and thinking you will get the same amount of background blur as the full frame equivalent with the same f‑number. A 56mm ƒ/1.2 APS‑C (1.5x crop factor) lens is equivalent to an 84mm ƒ/1.8 full frame lens, not an 84mm ƒ/1.2 lens. Simply doing a conversion of the focal length will give you an understanding of what the field of view will be, but one thing manufacturers don’t like to remind you of, is this also affects the f‑number. Today, when buying a lens for a crop sensor, like the one found in the Fujifilm X system cameras, a 35mm or full frame equivalent focal length is usually listed.Īnd this is how we get to the real point of this article.

This became the baseline for manufacturers to compare their lenses too.

With the immense popularity of the 35mm film format, photographers were already familiar with the given look of a focal length on that film size. Fujifilm X‑T2 to the left of a Sony α7 II, comparing sensor sizes

Fujifilm xs10 full frame