Tim Sewell

... elected president of the USA!

I used new batteries. I wonder if it's to do with the fact that buying old phones brand new means you get the original firmware, with any updates no longer being available. Mind you, it's mainly been the screens that have failed, so maybe they deteriorate if they're unused for such a long time.

The problem you find is that the non-smartphones on sale currently are of very poor quality. I tried to get around this by buying older Nokias - of which there are many, brand new, still around - but none of them has lasted more than a few months and I'm not sure why.

CAnon does seem to have - as we say here in England - dropped a bollock on this occasion.

Ahem. Feet are most definitely an English unit of measure, @Ed_David, old chap!

This is great and everything, but really only in an emergency. Most smartphones don't have removable batteries, so you're left with a choice of some kind of USB powerbank (adding weight/bulk) or running your phone down in the field - where you're most likely to need a cellphone.

There's quite an in depth review here of all 3 Quattros - and the guy has some other Sigma camera reviews/videos on his site: http://photomadd.com/sigma-dp-quattro-review-dp1-dp2-dp3/

I use a number of OM. M42 and Pentax K/KA lenses with thin ring adaptors on an EF to FX focal length reducer. I used to do the same with a Metabones EF to M4/3 Speedbooster XL. As @Cinegain says - with some lenses you won't get infinity focus, on others you will. On my Tamron Adaptall 70-210 f3.5 Pentax KA fit, for instance, infinity focus is slightly before where it should be on the focus ring.

Should that occur I will have no need of your tears. But thank you for posting without unpleasantness.

You may not agree with what Ed has to say, but he has been unfailingly polite in saying it. Perhaps you should dial back your aggression and disdain, as it is of no use to anyone and paints you as an unpleasant individual. And I agree, by the way, that administrators should abstain from approving posts containing aggression and profanity aimed at other users.

Didn't Sonny Bono assassinate Kubrick?

Heh - your video must have had an effect on the market as - right now - I can't find a DP1 for less than GBP220 on ebay UK!

Sorry to confuse. As per my original post, I'm intending/expecting initially to focus on getting stills work as that is where I have a portfolio (from when I did it before my children arrived) and the experience to (I hope) generate commissions. That's why I need to swap my C100mk2 for 2 stills/video bodies. I hope however (also per my initial post) to gradually add video work as I gain clients who are happy with what I've done for them (this actually happened to me in the days of Hi8, where a number of wedding clients ended up asking me to do video as well as, or instead of, stills - not that I'll be touching any weddings with a bargepole this time around!). Since I love the Fuji colour science and handling for stills work the purpose of my post was to find out if any members could confirm that I would be able to fulfil such requests with the Fuji bodies.

Yeah - I gave up the X-Pro2 idea almost as soon as I had it. I've found a seller who has multiple new X-T2s at GBP1099 body only. They're grey market - obvs - but the seller has a 99.8% rep on ebay over thousands of sales and someone on a Fuji X forum, who bought some, reported that he had spoken pre-purchase to Fuji UK who confirmed *in principle* that they'd honour the warranties. When the cameras arrived it turned out they are US stock. So in my budget I should be able to go for 2 x XT-2s with grips for both. I considered the X-T20 but as my main usage initially is going to be for stills I'm more attracted to the former - also the video comparison posted by @BTM_Pix clearly shows mushiness and artefacts on the X-T20's 4K output that I wasn't keen on.

In the light of today's news I'm wondering if the ideal combination might be one X-T2 and 1 X-Pro2.

Well - I've decided to go ahead:

You'll see the main differences in scenes with lots of movement and/or lots of fine detail - use of a low compression codec results in far fewer motion artefacts, better cadence and less smearing of detail. You'll also - as you surmised - have a lot more flexibility in post and be able to place much more extreme grades (should you need to) on the output. You'll also be able to do much higher quality green screen, if that's your bag.

Heh - I wouldn't be too sure. I've ordered business cards and set up a Smugmug site and I have to dig out all my old weddings/events/portraiture/music stuff from 8 years ago and upload it. Then I have to get some marketing going - I'm not expecting to do any paid work until next year (and that will more likely be stills). I'll probably find a couple of kooky businesses (I live in Brighton - there are plenty of them) to do free promotional vids for... we'll see. Thing is, I'm limited to weekends initially as to do anything on a weekday it has to pay a pretty large day rate to make it worth my while taking a day off from my main work - a calculation made necessary by my 3 children and the yuuuge mortgage I'm on the verge of taking out.

Nice. I have to say that any waxy skin I saw in that I would attribute more to the use of a trowel in applying make up than anything in the camera - but maybe I wasn't looking closely enough. Some of the shots had a very filmic quality to my eyes. There's certainly nothing in that video that would put me off using the X-T2 for the kind of video work I would be going after.

Ah. Well, to be fair, he does come across as one in the comments thread below.

@jonpais - I read you review and it was informative. As @meanwhile infers (and I can't find where he called you 'stupid' BTW) none of those shortcomings (and shortcomings they are) would be a deal breaker for me. The waxy skin thing could be. After reading the PetaPixel article I went through my own (still limited) collection of Fuji shots looking for the phenomenon. I found some - but they would fall into the category of shooting conditions where I wouldn't expect pristine results from any digital, or film for that matter, camera. I've also trawled the internet for Fuji-related stuff since I dived in to this system a couple of months ago and I've got to say that, on average, the (stills) visual content I've seen has been more consistently superior than I've seen basing my searches on other camera platforms - although that could just be that because of the system's niche appeal and usual prices it mainly attracts more accomplished photographers. I can't say that I've seen enough video footage to reach any conclusions about skin in that - so I'll have to do some more research.

But why would that be your advice?

Two things are combining that result in me needing to get some good answers from people who are doing client video work with Fujifilm cams. 1) I've decided to take the plunge and start offering photographic and video services part-time, for pay. I used to do quite a bit of pro stills work, so I'm pretty confident I can get going with that - the video I'll take more gradually. 2) I've fallen deeply in love with the X-Trans sensor. My quandary (if you can call it that) is this: I couldn't conceive of doing any kind of pro work with only a single body. At the moment I have a C100 mkii and a Fujifilm X-E2. I have a bunch of Samyang lenses, a bunch of EF and EF-S lenses and all manner of lights and grip stuff. I reckon that if I sell the 2 cameras and the 2 STM lenses I bought to go on the C100, plus a couple of other bits and bobs, I can raise around GBP3500, which should be enough to get me 2 X-T2 bodies and a lens or 2 (I already have the 18mm f2). Realistically I'd be mainly using the Samyangs for most of the sort of video work I'll be seeking, but I'd like a couple of AF X-mounts for the stills side of things. Now I love my C100's image and ergonomics - and I know I could always rent a second one for paid work; but there's no way I could afford to buy the X-T2s unless I sell it and the idea of renting for stills work doesn't appeal as I like to get really familiar with cameras I use for that sort of thing. For the avoidance of doubt - I'm fully sold on the Fujis for the stills side of things, it's the video I'm unsure about. So I'm hoping someone can answer a few questions to help me: 1) I understand that the X-T2 gives full manual control of all settings for video - is that correct? 2) Does the Fuji lens-based IS measure up to that in the EF-S STM lenses (the 18-135 and the 55-250)? 4) What kind of focusing facilities are available on the Fujis during video recording. 5) A lot of the X-T2 video I've seen has had poor motion cadence - can that be remedied? Can anyone point me to samples where it isn't in evidence? 6) The 4K looks great - what's the HD like? 7) I'm a little confused about the differences between the X-T2 and the X-T20. Is it just the weather sealing? Can they be easily matched (one of each would leave more cash for lenses)? Does the X-T20 have the new sensor/processor combination? 8) How are the X-T2s in use, ergonomically-speaking? 9) Is there anything I'm missing? Thanks in advance if anyone can help me out with these.

THe guy who did the one I posted used SOOC JPGs. But, y'know, Fuji....

Google is your friend: https://www.canneslions.com/