I purchased the original Fuji x100 second hand from someone who received it as a gift and used it once, she preferred her I phone. The camera is one of the most beautiful designs I have ever seen period, gorgeous piece of work, it should be left that way. For the price of both adapters one can get other cameras Sony's rx100 comes to mind. The Fuji X100 is a piece of art work which just happens to take extraordinary photos.
I have a Fujifilm X100F and rather than buy the cumbersome and expensive teleconverter, I make use of the built in digital teleconverter to go to 50mm. I appreciate that with any digital zooming there is a slight degradation of quality but the 50mm image is still 16mp and not noticeable unless a gigantic enlargement is made and occasional zooming to 75mm for portraits is 12mp. Having said that, although the wide angle converter is still a bit awkward, I do like it to be able to attain 28mm.
I have this camera. This camera is perfect in any shape or form. There is no flaw in this camera. Superb picture quality. The jpeg are great. Ergonomics is properly thought out. Good luck if you could find one like this sexy from canon or Nikon. FUJI LA!
At $350.00 US a pop, for my purposes the add-on conversion lenses just do not make sense for me when the camera has built-in 50 and 70 mm 'digital equivalents'. Not only are the conversion lenses ridiculously expensive for what they are, for me they defeat the purpose of having a handy easy to carry camera without having to carry a bagful of lenses, and I'm perfectly happy with the results of using the built-in 'digital zoom' focal lengths.
The color of the 2 adapters seems to be different from the black finish of the camera body? The adapter looks like greenish black ... Is it just me or because of the lighting effect in the video?
Somewhat reminiscent of the Pro-Tessar lenses for the Zeiss Ikon Contaflex (although different in concept, as these actually replace the removable front element of the standard lens) - impressive engineering with questionable ergonomics.
I find it quite funny how different it can be. I have a Canon 6D myself, and together with a few prime lenses I find that setup really lightweight and convenient. A Fuji X-100 is more like a smartphone in terms of size in my eyes (and I'd love to have one myself some day). So hearing you complain about the size of those converters is kind of funny. :'D
Title refers to an X100 (original), but the video is about a Fuji X100F - two very different cameras. In addition, the video makes a serious error concerning the filter size as noted below. Poor factual detail.
Man, just take it off and put it only when you use it... Just de way C-Bresson used to do with the Leica! It was flat and more pocketable without the lens... or with the collapsible one. If not using a collapsible... take it off... exactly as you'll do with interchangeable lenses...
No they are not necessary. Without them you have the 23mm (35mm) lens which is more than good enough most of the time. I have the TCL X100 lens which gives a new viewpoint and a little bit of extra reach for the times when you can't physically get closer but it not necessary to have. If I don't have it with me I don't miss it that much.
Would you be good enough to clarify a couple of things for me. In the video, he refers to x 2 lens as "adapters". To my mind, adapter are those hideous devices e.g. Metabones, which may or may not work when trying to put a brand X lens on a brand Y body? Adding what in fact seems to be a 28mm and 50 mm equivalent lens onto the built in standard 35mm equivalent standard lens , would have the real potential to degrade IQ from both add on "lens"? Btw, what do they cost.
Hey mate, saw no one answered so thought I would butt in. Maybe you have answered your own questions, but yeah, the 'metabones' style and this are both called adaptors, but work in a different way. The metabones style adapts the lens mount, so you can mount lenses designed for one brand's mount on to another. These adaptors, (actually, should really be called conversion lenses IMO) are bits of glass that screw on to the front of a lens and changes the field of view by distorting the incoming light. Adding extra glass, be it filters or conversion lenses or 'up close' lenses will degrade IQ. Im just here doing a little research as I love the x100 and shoot with one, but sometimes miss a 50mm equivalent for street photography so might get hold of the tele convertor. I would suggest that the tele convertor lens is useful, for portraits and street photography where the corner sharpness is less important. For my use, I would not shoot wide for many subjects, apart from landscapes. In this instance you would be better off shooting a panoramic and stitching from the built in lens without an adaptor. A little more fiddly, but will yield better results. Always happy to talk photography! Drop me a message on IG if you need any help! @kitbentleyphotography - more likely to see it there than here (Y) Have a boss day bru!
I'm with Alexander H. (below). I shoot a Canon 5D Mk IV with Canon L lenses and an X100T. The X100T with the 50mm converter feels more like an ID lanyard hanging around my neck than a camera. I guess its just a matter of what one is used to. I have the Vivitar conversion lenses which are pretty good but will upgrade to the X100F and the Fuji converters. Does anyone have experience with both the Vivitar and the Fuji converters? Would appreciate any input. Also, I invite viewers to watch Ted Vieira's TH-cam video on the effects the converters have on the OVF. Good video but maybe mix in a few images to demonstrate the converters? Cheers!
A word of advice to you: Your review is seriously lacking. As a potential purchaser of those items, image quality is my primary concern of any over lens adapters. Without you showing images taken with these adapters, and enlarged to 100 percent, your review is very lacking. Of the things you discussed size and form factor play about 20 percent vs. 80 percent image quality in any decisions I would make.
Who are these people that buy a nice compact fixed focal length camera, then decide to screw a clunky conversion lens on it? If you can't live with a fixed focal length, don't get a fixed focal length camera. Get a X-T20 or X-E3 instead.
I did. I finally got the Tele lens. I've had the x100 line from the very beginning. I wanted the option of shooting with a 50 fov for portraits. I also want to be able to do hypersync and have my on board ND filter. Now I can easily convert it for portraits and still crush ambient light. That's my reason and I'm sticking with it :p
Keeps on mentioning the FF equivalent of the focal length but stays on the aps-c aperture. You’re not reviewing a FF so just say that the WCL gives you an 18mm fov and the TCL gives you a 35mm fov in aps-c terms. sheesh!
soundofenigma yes I wish people would stop using the full frame equivalent as most people don’t know or never had a full frame and just stick to the APS-C what it is and stop confusing us.
For some reason, the TCL-X100 tele conversion lens that I bought will NOT directly screw onto my Fuji 100S. It does not match up. The internal thread diameter of the primary lens will not permit the threads of the tele conversion lens to thread onto it. When the accessory lens is brought towards the front of the 23mm lens, it just meets the ring of it and sits there. It does not allow the outside threads of the accessory lens to screw into the inside threads of the 23mm lens. How do I fix this situation?
Exactly as Litotes10 says, there is a ring on the front of the 23mm lens that you need to remove first. I think I even do it in the video at one point.
Yes, you were right. I was not sure what ring you were referring too and was afraid of damaging the camera. The first few attempts were futile turning the ring behind it and also the front ring. It did not move but eventually it did...the manufacturer must have overtightened it. It did come off and I was able to put on the telephoto lens. Thanks. An annoying thing with this big lens is that it cuts off the bottom portion of the built-in flash making flash pictures with it useless. A supplemental flash unit is needed so it sits above and projects light over the top of the larger lens. My Contax RTS and Canon F-1 (35mm) cameras required this anyway, so no big deal. Is there an internal setting needed to tell the camera to "read" the external flash and how does the camera know how much light is put out by the flash so as to create a correct exposure?
I don't use an external flash, I know the X100F works with TTL. Join the X100F-group on Facebook, there are a lot of users who can help you: facebook.com/groups/1811921405697141
You said the magic thing here mentioning TTL (Through-the-Lens) metering. I remember when newer 35mm cameras adopted this feature in the 1980's it was revolutionary in using a metering element in the camera to read the flash as it struck the film or as it passed through the lens. It eliminated relying upon the flash sensor and having to make aperture adjustments manually. I can probably just fire off any flash at full power or half power and be fine, as the camera will make the needed lens aperture adjustment.
What a ridiculous concept. For a start the X100F has no business having a "standard" 35 mm equivalent lens. That "standard" was from the 1950s. It should have already been a 24mm or max 28mm lens with an included adapter to provide portrait focus lengths. These two lenses effectively increase the price of the camera by $500. What a waste. That brings the total price up to $1500, or more still in Europe. For that much cash you could buy a much better or equivalent camera with a much larger range of focal lengths and still have the image quality.
No god damn images! This is a very lop soded review. Take the damn thing out and shoot something with those adopters and show me what it does? It’s not a trophy for the case!
The 23mm lense on the x100f is the full frame equivalent of 35mm. The wide angle adapter will change the field of view from 35mm equivalent to 28mm equivalent.
Love it when theres no bloody sample images
The filter size on both the X100F's 23mm and the WCL adapter is 49mm, not 52mm.
You're right. Thanks
I came to the comments to look for exactly this - having ordered a variable 49mm ND and the WCL-X100 which haven’t arrived yet :)
I purchased the original Fuji x100 second hand from someone who received it as a gift and used it once, she preferred her I phone. The camera is one of the most beautiful designs I have ever seen period, gorgeous piece of work, it should be left that way. For the price of both adapters one can get other cameras Sony's rx100 comes to mind. The Fuji X100 is a piece of art work which just happens to take extraordinary photos.
I have a Fujifilm X100F and rather than buy the cumbersome and expensive teleconverter, I make use of the built in digital teleconverter to go to 50mm. I appreciate that with any digital zooming there is a slight degradation of quality but the 50mm image is still 16mp and not noticeable unless a gigantic enlargement is made and occasional zooming to 75mm for portraits is 12mp. Having said that, although the wide angle converter is still a bit awkward, I do like it to be able to attain 28mm.
No sample images. Waste of time people
Hi, what is your idea on this setup compared to buying an X-E3 with 18mm 2.0 AND 23mm 2.0 fixed lenses?
the background photo at right, is Cambodia temple. it called Prasat Pram , located Koh Ker temples group , Preah viha province.
I have this camera. This camera is perfect in any shape or form. There is no flaw in this camera. Superb picture quality. The jpeg are great. Ergonomics is properly thought out. Good luck if you could find one like this sexy from canon or Nikon. FUJI LA!
Love the camera, but ergonomics are weak, no hand grip at all, I have small hands and I struggle alot at the very least you need a thumb grip.
I was looking for an optical performance review!
Hi, what is the filter that you use ?
At $350.00 US a pop, for my purposes the add-on conversion lenses just do not make sense for me when the camera has built-in 50 and 70 mm 'digital equivalents'. Not only are the conversion lenses ridiculously expensive for what they are, for me they defeat the purpose of having a handy easy to carry camera without having to carry a bagful of lenses, and I'm perfectly happy with the results of using the built-in 'digital zoom' focal lengths.
The color of the 2 adapters seems to be different from the black finish of the camera body? The adapter looks like greenish black ... Is it just me or because of the lighting effect in the video?
Wooow is that a photo of the banyan tree roots covered the temple wall in Cambodia. Nice photo.
Saying it looks comical is a bit OTT with the TCL attached. Other reviewers don't seem to share that view.
Hi sorry the video is as much use as an ashtray on a motorbike..... where are the sample images?
Is there any difference in the focusing speed when attached the WCL or TCL onto the X100f?
Somewhat reminiscent of the Pro-Tessar lenses for the Zeiss Ikon Contaflex (although different in concept, as these actually replace the removable front element of the standard lens) - impressive engineering with questionable ergonomics.
I find it quite funny how different it can be. I have a Canon 6D myself, and together with a few prime lenses I find that setup really lightweight and convenient. A Fuji X-100 is more like a smartphone in terms of size in my eyes (and I'd love to have one myself some day). So hearing you complain about the size of those converters is kind of funny. :'D
i own a 1D X and i was thinking the same. haha
is this the first x100 from 2011? Still looks nice!
Hi, i have question. If i using WCL or TCL converter on X100F, can i take phote on RAW files? Thanks
Title refers to an X100 (original), but the video is about a Fuji X100F - two very different cameras. In addition, the video makes a serious error concerning the filter size as noted below. Poor factual detail.
i can use this TCL on other camera with 49mm filter thread?
The main reason I bought an x100v is because of the portability and fixed lens. If I need another focal length, I would switch to my Nikon.
Thanks!
Man, just take it off and put it only when you use it... Just de way C-Bresson used to do with the Leica! It was flat and more pocketable without the lens... or with the collapsible one. If not using a collapsible... take it off... exactly as you'll do with interchangeable lenses...
what kind of grip is that?
Nearly 8 minute video with no sample images? That would have been a useful disclaimer.
Can someone please helt me. Are the lenses really neccesary? I'm just an amateur.
No they are not necessary. Without them you have the 23mm (35mm) lens which is more than good enough most of the time. I have the TCL X100 lens which gives a new viewpoint and a little bit of extra reach for the times when you can't physically get closer but it not necessary to have. If I don't have it with me I don't miss it that much.
Nope. at the end of the day if you put more shit in front of your camera the image quality will get lower, not significantly, but yeah.
Would you be good enough to clarify a couple of things for me. In the video, he refers to x 2 lens as "adapters". To my mind, adapter are those hideous devices e.g. Metabones, which may or may not work when trying to put a brand X lens on a brand Y body? Adding what in fact seems to be a 28mm and 50 mm equivalent lens onto the built in standard 35mm equivalent standard lens , would have the real potential to degrade IQ from both add on "lens"?
Btw, what do they cost.
Hey mate, saw no one answered so thought I would butt in. Maybe you have answered your own questions, but yeah, the 'metabones' style and this are both called adaptors, but work in a different way.
The metabones style adapts the lens mount, so you can mount lenses designed for one brand's mount on to another.
These adaptors, (actually, should really be called conversion lenses IMO) are bits of glass that screw on to the front of a lens and changes the field of view by distorting the incoming light.
Adding extra glass, be it filters or conversion lenses or 'up close' lenses will degrade IQ.
Im just here doing a little research as I love the x100 and shoot with one, but sometimes miss a 50mm equivalent for street photography so might get hold of the tele convertor. I would suggest that the tele convertor lens is useful, for portraits and street photography where the corner sharpness is less important.
For my use, I would not shoot wide for many subjects, apart from landscapes. In this instance you would be better off shooting a panoramic and stitching from the built in lens without an adaptor. A little more fiddly, but will yield better results.
Always happy to talk photography! Drop me a message on IG if you need any help! @kitbentleyphotography - more likely to see it there than here (Y) Have a boss day bru!
Good video very informative
What L-Case is that?
No photo sample!
LOL I think your crazy !! In NO ONE's definition are those lenses large LOL. They are tiny
Yep. And you can throw them in a jacket pocket and carry with you.
Well, if I only get cameras to manipulate dials and put filters on maybe this review had been useful. But, alas, I use my cameras to take photos :/
Thanks for showing those... Wow, they're large to say the least o_O
Hmmm, this video was a bit like the Curate's Egg.
IKON ZEISS?
I'm with Alexander H. (below). I shoot a Canon 5D Mk IV with Canon L lenses and an X100T. The X100T with the 50mm converter feels more like an ID lanyard hanging around my neck than a camera. I guess its just a matter of what one is used to. I have the Vivitar conversion lenses which are pretty good but will upgrade to the X100F and the Fuji converters. Does anyone have experience with both the Vivitar and the Fuji converters? Would appreciate any input. Also, I invite viewers to watch Ted Vieira's TH-cam video on the effects the converters have on the OVF. Good video but maybe mix in a few images to demonstrate the converters? Cheers!
A word of advice to you: Your review is seriously lacking. As a potential purchaser of those items, image quality is my primary concern of any over lens adapters. Without you showing images taken with these adapters, and enlarged to 100 percent, your review is very lacking. Of the things you discussed size and form factor play about 20 percent vs. 80 percent image quality in any decisions I would make.
Who are these people that buy a nice compact fixed focal length camera, then decide to screw a clunky conversion lens on it? If you can't live with a fixed focal length, don't get a fixed focal length camera. Get a X-T20 or X-E3 instead.
I did. I finally got the Tele lens. I've had the x100 line from the very beginning. I wanted the option of shooting with a 50 fov for portraits. I also want to be able to do hypersync and have my on board ND filter. Now I can easily convert it for portraits and still crush ambient light. That's my reason and I'm sticking with it :p
don't tell me what to do
Keeps on mentioning the FF equivalent of the focal length but stays on the aps-c aperture. You’re not reviewing a FF so just say that the WCL gives you an 18mm fov and the TCL gives you a 35mm fov in aps-c terms. sheesh!
soundofenigma yes I wish people would stop using the full frame equivalent as most people don’t know or never had a full frame and just stick to the APS-C what it is and stop confusing us.
For some reason, the TCL-X100 tele conversion lens that I bought will NOT directly screw onto my Fuji 100S. It does not match up. The internal thread diameter of the primary lens will not permit the threads of the tele conversion lens to thread onto it. When the accessory lens is brought towards the front of the 23mm lens, it just meets the ring of it and sits there. It does not allow the outside threads of the accessory lens to screw into the inside threads of the 23mm lens. How do I fix this situation?
You first have to remove the ring from your camera.
Exactly as Litotes10 says, there is a ring on the front of the 23mm lens that you need to remove first. I think I even do it in the video at one point.
Yes, you were right. I was not sure what ring you were referring too and was afraid of damaging the camera. The first few attempts were futile turning the ring behind it and also the front ring. It did not move but eventually it did...the manufacturer must have overtightened it. It did come off and I was able to put on the telephoto lens. Thanks. An annoying thing with this big lens is that it cuts off the bottom portion of the built-in flash making flash pictures with it useless. A supplemental flash unit is needed so it sits above and projects light over the top of the larger lens. My Contax RTS and Canon F-1 (35mm) cameras required this anyway, so no big deal. Is there an internal setting needed to tell the camera to "read" the external flash and how does the camera know how much light is put out by the flash so as to create a correct exposure?
I don't use an external flash, I know the X100F works with TTL. Join the X100F-group on Facebook, there are a lot of users who can help you: facebook.com/groups/1811921405697141
You said the magic thing here mentioning TTL (Through-the-Lens) metering. I remember when newer 35mm cameras adopted this feature in the 1980's it was revolutionary in using a metering element in the camera to read the flash as it struck the film or as it passed through the lens. It eliminated relying upon the flash sensor and having to make aperture adjustments manually. I can probably just fire off any flash at full power or half power and be fine, as the camera will make the needed lens aperture adjustment.
Wow! what a narrow and short sided opinion for a photographer to have about lenses. Too bad really
Photos taken using these adaptors.. For the love of God! Otherwise good overview of the parts.
Useless review!! Your complaints are not valid as you have no experience using these conversion lenses. Where are the photos?
On his website shuttermouse.com of course :) the image of the 28mm is impressive
Can fit it all in a fanny pack.
What a ridiculous concept. For a start the X100F has no business having a "standard" 35 mm equivalent lens. That "standard" was from the 1950s. It should have already been a 24mm or max 28mm lens with an included adapter to provide portrait focus lengths. These two lenses effectively increase the price of the camera by $500. What a waste. That brings the total price up to $1500, or more still in Europe. For that much cash you could buy a much better or equivalent camera with a much larger range of focal lengths and still have the image quality.
Waste of time with no images
No god damn images! This is a very lop soded review. Take the damn thing out and shoot something with those adopters and show me what it does? It’s not a trophy for the case!
Why change 23mm to 28? Barely any difference, no point lol
The 23mm lense on the x100f is the full frame equivalent of 35mm. The wide angle adapter will change the field of view from 35mm equivalent to 28mm equivalent.
28mm x 1.5 = 42mm
No. The wide adapter gives it a 28mm full frame equivalent.