Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,691   Posts: 1,482,382   Online: 737
      
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    205

    Has anyone used the Fuji X-series SLRs?

    I recently got a Fujica AX-3. I hadn't even known that Fuji offered a line of bayonet-mount 35mm SLRs, after their M42 cameras.

    The AX-3 seems like a handsome camera, even if it does not possess top-grade specifications (1/60 sync speed, and a top speed of 1/1000.)

    I am curious about the lenses. They seem hard to find, but are they worth looking for? Do they possess any particular quality, especially to recommend them against my current stable of Pentax and Nikon manual focus lenses?

    I do think that it's strange Fuji would recycle the name of a lens mount -- part of why it's hard to find information about these x-mount lenses is the preponderance of information about Fuji's NEW x-mount lenses.

    When my AX-3 sits beside a Canon AE-1 Program, there is a very suspicious resemblance. I wonder if this model was a rebadging effort by Fuji of a Canon platform?

    Did any of you use the Fuji system? Any thoughts or memories?
    My other camera is a Pentax

  2. #2
    onepuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Scotland
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    92
    A Fujica STX-1n was the first SLR camera I bought new back in the 1980s and the couple of Fujinon lenses I had for it were excellent. I had it a couple of years before I became an Olympus OM convert but there was nothing wrong per-se with the Fujinon lenses. I had a friend with a Nikon system at the time and I wouldn't say the ones I had (28mm and 50mm) were better than the Nikon but the results were no worse. I think most of the lenses from the major manufacturers in the 80s were much of a muchness barring low-end ranges and very exotic designs - lens design by then had pretty much reached it's Zenith.
    " ... a cook who relies on nothing but a sharp knife has no guarantee of producing excellent dishes." - Yoshihisa Maitani

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    405
    Well I have the STX-2 with 50mm f1.9......and EBC T 100mm, 135mm and 200, and they are nice lenses but nothing extra special to set them apart from other good lenses from well known makes.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Hartford, Connecticut USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    369
    I'd have to agree with Excalibur2's assessment. Nothing legendary -- but optically fine lenses, that are as good as the big names overall. They never had the range of lenses that Nikon or Canon did, however. The lenses marked "EBC" (Electron Beam Coating) are multicoated and worth checking out. The Fujinon lenses are the better grade; the Fujinar line might be single coated.

    The cameras themselves are well made, but definitely not meant for the rigors of professional use. But they're generally not gimmicky and the controls are very intuitive.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Plymouth, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    297
    I have an X10, does that count?

  6. #6
    David Lyga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,165
    The ST series was the original M42 body and they gained a reputation for being very solidly made and somewhat compact. The change in mount to Fuji-X is rather noteworthy because Fuji offered one of the few adapters in the industry (I think Rollei also) that allowed M42 lenses to be mounted while retaining the auto stop down feature. This was achieved by having a little lever attached to the adapter that would be kicked by the lever in the body. The flagship series were the STX-1 and STX-2.

    These Fuji cameras leave little to be desired: they are simply great, but usually unheralded. As far as the optical quality is concerned, they might not have the comprehensiveness of the Canon, Nikon, Minolta system, but the optical quality is great. The only bad part is the later normal (2.2/55) lens had a cheap aperture ring around the lens that often cracked and fell off. This could be prevented from happening with due care and a bit of tape or glue carefully placed at the points where the tiny screws held that ring in place. - David Lyga
    Last edited by David Lyga; 05-30-2013 at 04:57 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    241
    The 50 1.2 and 19 3.5 were sought after by collectors at some point
    Too bad it wasn't a popular system



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin