cthahn

You do not bother to indicate how the pictures were taken. The pictures are different. How well do you understand the basics of photography?

SonyBug

After looking at the Fuji picture downloaded and expanded, it looks like camera movement. That would make it look like color fringing but is due to camera motion. The camera sees the edge of the flower and moves and then sees the green in the same spot.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

What I see is camera shake. Here is a detail crop from your photo compared with a detail at the same magnification from my XT-2.. See what you think!

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

I see no camera movement in this shot. Everyone, please keep in mind that the Depth Of Field for Fuji's 23mm lens is VERY slim - a narrow sliver will be captured sharply, but a larger part of the image will be blurred.

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

Dupplicate post

suntouched Loc: Sierra Vista AZ

Don't get discouraged. It takes time to adjust to a new camera. I have the XT-2 and 23 mm f 2 lens and it is a good combination. The 23 mm lens is the one I always grab first for landscapes. All lenses have a "sweet spot" that they perform best at. To reassure yourself, reshoot that flower (with the Fuji) at different apertures starting at f2 up to about f10. All images need to be at the same distance from the flower and at the same approx effective distance as was the RX10. This will give you a much better comparison to work with.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

The DOF of a 23mm F2 at 3 feet is 0.41 feet. Not a narrow sliver. It should have the entire flower in good focus! On the other hand, this detail SHOWS unmistakable movement !

leftj Loc: Texas

Need more information but the key thing I see in the Fuji pic is the aperture must be wide open. Note the the one flower is in focus but everything else is out of focus which means you have a very shallow depth of field.

leftj Loc: Texas

MtnMan Loc: ID

Sorry but DOF of a 23 mm lens isn't thin when using a proper f-stop for this type image; i.e. F16. For example focused at 3 ft DOF is 1.5 to 6 ft.

It is camera movement.

If it were focus point or DOF something would be tack sharp. All edges are blurred.

magpix Loc: St. Michaels, MD

The DOF of the 23mm (35mm equivalent) is not VERY slim. On the contrary, this medium-wide angle lens provides a deep DOF, as indicated by others here. Camera shake looks like it's the culprit here. I would also suggest using manual focus with focus peaking when shooting flowers up close.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Camera shake has a very characteristic appearance - like a double exposure slightly out of register. Its presence is unmistakable in the photo of the pink Calla lily. The 23 mm is not the ideal lens for flower portraits- which need very similar treatment to people portraits. A short tele is a better choice, using a wide aperture for shallow depth of field and a defocussed background, and a fairly fast shutter to eliminate camera shake. Alternatively, a tripod or subdued flash.

IreneAC Loc: San Diego

Hi – I appreciate everyone’s input (well, most everyone’s) to my question. I will try the some of the suggestions made to improve and try not to get discouraged so easily.

FYI: I know I needed to post similar photos to make a real comparison, but I was so disheartened by the initial results that I didn't bother to go back and re-shoot identical photos – my bad.

I think the real issue (for me) is that the Sony RX10’s really great IBIS has spoiled me. With that camera I can take a photo off-balance with the wind blowing and there will be no evidence of camera shake or movement in the photos.
I thought the fast shutter speed used with the Fuji would allow for some movement (there was a slight breeze blowing when the photos were taken), but I guess I was wrong.
Or, as someone suggested, it is a DOF issue and not movement. Regardless, looks like I need a lot more practice with the Fuji. :-)

By the way - the 23mm lens I have is this one: Fujinon XF 23mm (35mm) F/2R WR Lens, Black.
I misread the description as I thought it did have IS, but it doesn’t. The lens got great reviews and Adorama offered $100 off if I purchased with my camera, so I did.


This morning I read that Fuji will be bringing out a new X-body with IBIS, maybe I should wait for that one… I know we can’t post links in this thread so just put https: in front of the forward slashes in the following url and it will take you to the article
//petapixel.com/2017/07/05/fujifilm-bring-body-stabilization-x-series-report-says/

I want to enjoy shooting photos and not have to worry about a little bit of movement be it from the wind or my subject matter or me.

My hats off to those of you who can get those super-sharp photos using cameras/lenses without stabilizers!

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

You don't need IBIS. You just have to learn how to shoot. A rifle range is a great place to learn. Just a few sessions with a 22 target rifle with iron sights and a decent instructor will have you doing your own Image stabilization! It is all timing and breath control.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Actually, we can post links:
https://petapixel.com/2017/07/05/fujifilm-bring-body-stabilization-x-series-report-says/

If it's anywhere as effective as the Olympus IBIS it will be awesome!