Gone all square and wacky with the X-Pro2, some time on my hands and a nice lens.

Scooter mania in the fashion of a Friedlander photo. 

The Frost Bank Tower looks better to me in a square format. 
The 35mm f1.4, used at f5.6 is juicy sharp.

Beer colored photograph. On the "coffee" table in the living room. 
Don't show this to Belinda---I couldn't find a coaster.

Ever fascinated by that gray-haired guy in the mirror. 
But equally fascinated these days by dress shoes. 


MB.Kinsman said...

Fun - that's the word that always come to mind when I'm out with that same combination of body and lens. That handsome gray-haired guy has the same kit as you!

Neil Swanson said...

Yes! The square. I think I must have my XPro in square format more than 50% of the time. And the Acros is very very good. I found that it is best left alone as far as thinking that I know better about how much NR to use or reduce. I found the NR on past rental Fujis to be way too smeary at 3200/6400 ISO (on general color and B&W simulations) so I was "smart" and reduced the NR as a general setting to -2 on my XPro. Thats kind of a mistake especially with Acros because it is adding grain and does so in proportion to the ISO. Things can get nasty. But if you outwit yourself you've always got the RAW to redeem yourself.

So here's a question, if you were to go back out and shoot as you have theses past few posts with the 35mm f2 instead of the 1.4 what if any difference would the experience and results yield. Just curious. You have both lenses and if you are out shooting at say 4, 5.6 or so why use the 1.4, or the f2.

And along sort of similar;ar lines have you every used the XT-3 and thought the AF speed just crushed the other cameras for speed? UYoure shooting doesn't seem to be a thing that relies on super fast AF acquisition and tracking but I'm curious if you see the difference.