RSS
 

Posts Tagged ‘X100F’

Fujifilm X100V vs. X100F lens shootout: A worthy update to a modern classic

07 Apr

When we reviewed the original Fujifilm ‘Finepix’ X100 back in 2010, we noted that the lens offered excellent sharpness within a normal shooting range, but with noticeable haziness and loss of contrast within a meter or so, and substantial veiling softness in the near-macro range. The ‘soft focus’ effect wasn’t always objectionable, but it was impossible to ignore in close-range portraits, especially of pets and small children, where the temptation is always to position them closer to the camera.

As the resolution of cameras in the X100 series increased (from 12, to 16, to 24MP) these issues in the close focus range became ever more apparent. That 23mm F2 lens, with its 8 elements (including one aspherical) in 6 groups, gave sterling service for several generations, but by the time the X100F came around it was clear that optically, it had hit a limit.

Our testing shows that overall, the new lens in the X100V is much improved over the original design

During the planning process for the X100V, Fujifilm’s optical engineers went back to the drawing board. It might look the same to a casual glance, and it might still accept the same wide and tele converters, but on the inside, the X100V’s has been totally redesigned. Probably the most important change is the addition of a second aspherical element, which Fujifilm claims increases corner sharpness, and greatly improves image quality at close focusing distances at wide apertures. In short, it should address those areas in which the older lens was notably weak.

Our testing shows that overall, the new lens in the X100V is much improved over the original design found in previous X100-series cameras. Read on for our full analysis, which compares the X100V against the X100F at four focus positions: Infinity, ‘Medium’ (~1m) ‘Close’ (~0.5m) and ‘Macro’.

A note on all of the images in this article: Images are JPEGs, converted from Raw in Adobe Camera Raw, with sharpening turned to ‘0’, and an Unsharp Mask (amount: 200, radius: 0,6, threshold: 0) added in Photoshop. Raw files are available for download via the links in most of the widgets below.


Infinity

$ (document).ready(function() { ImageComparisonWidget({“containerId”:”reviewImageComparisonWidget-1762411″,”widgetId”:754,”initialStateId”:null}) })

At infinity, it’s clear that both cameras are capable of delivering very good central sharpness$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-5055–1786495829”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(5055); }); }), but the X100V is more consistent across the frame$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-5065–430078908”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(5065); }); }).

And that’s really the story across the two lens’ entire aperture range: The X100V’s lens is not substantially sharper than that of the X100V in the center, but it’s very clear that sharpness and contrast at the extreme edges of the frame$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-5052-1720704258”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(5052); }); }) is improved compared to the X100F. Even at F5.6$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-5053–1644791573”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(5053); }); }) and F8$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-5054–257385516”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(5054); }); }), the X100V has a slight advantage when it comes to definition at the extremes.

It should be noted that focus position has a major part to play in how images from the X100F look, especially at at the widest apertures, at the edges of the frame. This is most likely due to curvature of field. For this comparison, I focused on the green bush$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-5051–1618134941”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(5051); }); }) roughly in the middle of the scene, and selected the sharpest of three shots, at all apertures, on both cameras.

Verdict:

The X100V’s new lens delivers comparable peak sharpness to that of the X100F, but superior sharpness and contrast towards the edges of the frame. Even at F5.6 and F8 the new lens out-resolves the old design across most of the frame, making the X100V more useful than the X100F for landscapes and cityscapes. For optimal cross-frame sharpness at wide apertures though, both cameras (but especially the X100F) reward some experimentation with exact focus position.


Medium focus (~1m)

The medium focus range is where you’d typically take portraits on a 35mm equivalent lens. We shot this scene at a distance of roughly one meter (39.4″), and my cold war-era globe is about 28cm (11″) in diameter. While ideally we’d be showing you a portrait here (currently impossible due to the quarantine measures) we hope that this scene should serve as a reasonable proxy. The film boxes on the left, and the Nikon S2 on the right are positioned on approximately the same plane as the nearest point of the globe. Focus and framing was set using the yellow tape target in the center of the image.

$ (document).ready(function() { ImageComparisonWidget({“containerId”:”reviewImageComparisonWidget-50835486″,”widgetId”:753,”initialStateId”:5037}) })

Images from this scene are a little hard to interpret, and require some explanation. Depending on where you look, the X100V might appear either sharper, or softer than the X100F. In some areas it actually looks like the zone of focus is shallower on the X100V$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-5041–1637164982”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(5041); }); }), almost as if its F2 lens is slightly faster than the F2 lens on the older X100F (which we’ve measured, and it isn’t). Something that is consistent, though, is the higher contrast of images from the X100V.

After analyzing the Raw files, we suspect that the X100V’s new lens has been tuned to deliver a different fall-off from in-focus to out-of-focus areas, which has the effect of giving smoother out of focus areas. You can see this here$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-5038-1407338552”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(5038); }); }) at F2 and here$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-5040-1407338552”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(5040); }); }) at F2.8. This may explain the (small) apparent decrease in the zone of sharpness$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-5041-1015591318”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(5041); }); }) compared to the X100F at equivalent wide apertures.

In terms of central detail wide open, the two cameras are hard to tell apart$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-5042-1848188631”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(5042); }); }).

Verdict:

At a medium focus distance of the sort you might be working at for a typical portrait, the X100V’s lens is a close match to the X100F in terms of resolution at equivalent apertures, but offers higher contrast and slightly smoother out of focus areas. This results in the impression of fractionally less depth of field from the newer lens. In practical use, the biggest challenge to successful wide-aperture portraits on both cameras is focus accuracy.


Close focus (~0.5m)

For this scene, we shot a collection of film boxes from ~0.5m (~20″), shooting downwards using a copy stand. This is the kind of shooting distance from which you might take moderate closeups (food photographs etc.,) or portraits of a pet or young child. A bubble level was placed on the rear LCD to ensure that the cameras were perfectly perpendicular to the arrangement of boxes. There is some difference in the relative ‘height’ of the film boxes, but it’s within 2-3mm (<1/8″).

$ (document).ready(function() { ImageComparisonWidget({“containerId”:”reviewImageComparisonWidget-36125782″,”widgetId”:752,”initialStateId”:null}) })

While central resolution is similar at F2$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-5045-356385092”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(5045); }); }), the X100V’s lens has a slight edge, if only by virtue of its higher contrast. The difference in detail definition at the edges of the frame is obvious, with the X100V clearly delivering more usable images$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-5046–297568247”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(5046); }); }), thanks to a relative lack of the X100F’s characteristic haziness.

It is clear that at this focus distance, the X100V’s lens delivers images with significantly higher contrast than those of the X100F, across the entire frame. By F5.6 and beyond, there is little difference between the two lenses in terms of either resolution or contrast in the center$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-5049-24928001”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(5049); }); }), but the X100V maintains its advantage at the edges$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-5048–1113632447”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(5048); }); }).

Verdict:

Again, the higher contrast and better edge-to-edge consistency of the X100V’s files makes them more attractive than equivalent images shot on the X100F. While neither camera delivers bitingly sharp images when shot wide open, files from the X100V are more consistent, with little of the ‘haze’ at wide apertures which is characteristic of the original 23mm F2 found in the X100F.


Minimum focus

The X100V and X100F offer an impressively close minimum focus distance of 10cm (~4″). With a 35mm equivalent focal length, that works out to a maximum reproduction ratio of roughly 1:4. Not great, (and a long way off ‘true’ macro) but respectable. This is the kind of distance from which you might shoot a collectible item, a flower or – yes, again – your food. At absolute minimum focus, both cameras become fiendishly difficult to focus accurately, so for this setup, I backed off to around 15cm (6″).

Please note that for the purposes of easy comparison against the X100F in the slider below, the 26MP images from the X100V have been downsampled to 24MP and both examples are shown at ~50%. You can download original files from the links below.

F2

The haziness of the X100F’s lens that is visible at wide apertures at 0.5m (~20″) becomes progressively more severe as you approach minimum focus. Wide open at this focus distance, the X100F’s lens is capable of resolving a fair amount of detail in the middle of the frame, but with such strong haze that images are essentially unusable, except for creative effect.

By comparison, images from the X100V demonstrate slightly less resolution but much greater contrast, minus the haze, and with better consistency across the frame. Despite the lack of critical sharpness really anywhere, images from the X100V are more usable simply by virtue of the lack of haziness compared to the X100F. This holds true through to around F5.6 (essentially duplicating the results of the 0.5m test, above).

Verdict:

Ultimately, we wouldn’t recommend either camera for extreme closeup photography, (neither is really ‘sharp’ anywhere until F4-5.6) but for practical purposes, despite its slightly lower peak resolution, the new lens in the X100V is clearly more capable. There’s little of the haziness which X100-series users have come to expect, which makes images much more usable for everything barring critical applications.

Download originals:

  • X100V @F2
  • X100F @ F2
  • X100V @ F5.6
  • X100F @ F.6

Summing up: is the new lens in the X100V really improved?

On balance, yes. Definitely.

At infinity, the X100V’s lens is not appreciably sharper than that of the X100F at optimal apertures in the center of the frame (which was never a weak point of the older model), but it’s noticeably more consistent edge-to-edge, being sharper and more contrasty at the extremes of the frame at all apertures.

The differences between the two lenses that are visible at infinity become even more apparent at closer focusing distances. If you’re a fan of relatively close-range portraits you can expect higher contrast from the X100V at wide apertures, and somewhat smoother bokeh, too. Meanwhile for copy work (or for taking pictures of your dinner) the superior edge definition from the X100V’s lens at all apertures might make the difference between a shot that you can actually use, versus one that you can’t.

If you’re a fan of relatively close-range portraits you can expect higher contrast from the X100V at wide apertures

In the truly closeup range, neither camera is at its best, but despite delivering slightly lower resolution, the X100V wins again by virtue of the higher contrast and near-total lack of ‘haziness’ compared to the older X100F. This difference is especially noticeable wide open, but holds true until around F5.6.

For those X100F owners considering an upgrade that want to use their WCL and TCL converters on the X100V, our shooting on the wide converter suggests that you can expect better performance than you’re used to, especially towards the edges of the frame. You can see the difference that the new lens makes to image quality at 28mm equiv., in the slider below (which shows a 100% crop from the upper right of the ‘Infinity’ scene, above) and you can see the full thing in a dedicated widget here.

28mm WCL converter (upper right detail)

We don’t have access to a TCL tele converter to check, but given the improvements in image quality in the close focusing range of the X100V’s lens, we would not be surprised if it gives similarly superior results on the newer camera, especially for portraiture. If you have one, and you’ve tried it on the X100V, leave a comment and let us know how it performs.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Fujifilm X100V vs. X100F lens shootout: A worthy update to a modern classic

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Fujifilm X100F versus Ricoh GR III: Which is better for you?

10 Jun

Fujifilm X100F vs. Ricoh GR III: Which is better for you?

The Fujifilm X100F and Ricoh GR III are two very different cameras, but they’re broadly aimed at the same audience – camera-savvy enthusiast photographers who want a high-quality compact camera without sacrificing manual control or sensor size.

As you’d expect, the X100 and GR lineups each have a hugely loyal user base, built up over several years, and upgrades come slowly. But with the recent launch of the Ricoh GR III, and the continuing success of the X100F (with no signs of it being replaced any time soon) this seemed like a good time to compare the two models, to help you decide which one better suits your needs.

Focal length

Let’s deal with perhaps the most fundamental difference between these cameras first – the Ricoh GR III offers an equivalent focal length of 28mm, whereas the Fujifilm X100F provides a 35mm equivalent medium wideangle. Which of these focal lengths suits you better is of course down to personal taste, and your preferred style of photography.

As a very rough, casual comparison, 28mm is a loose proxy for a human being’s widest field of vision, whereas 35mm more closely matches your field of attention. As such, 28mm is great for images where you need to fit more in, or provide more context for your subject. Being slightly tighter, 35mm is more of an everyday ‘do everything’ focal length. It’s wide enough to make framing pretty easy for casual snapshots, but not so wide that your subject gets lost in the frame.

Verdict: Tie (depends on preference)

Adapters

But wait – it’s not quite as simple as all that. While the X100F and GR III offer native equivalent focal lengths of 35mm and 28mm, both can be paired with adapters to increase their lens’ versatility further. Fujifilm’s $ 349 screw-in WCL-100 II 28mm adapter is excellent, and increases field of view with very little image quality penalty. Another adapter, the TCL-100 II (also $ 349) can be used to magnify the lens’ effective focal length to 50mm. You might find that sharpness drops a little when the 50mm adapter is used (especially at close focusing distances) but if you enjoy shooting at 50mm, the added versatility might make the resolution penalty worth it.

Meanwhile, the GR III can be paired with the GW-3 wide converter ($ 149, plus adapter ring) to take its native 28mm equivalent lens all the way out to 21mm. We haven’t used the new adapter yet but performance of the older GW-2 adapter for the GR/II was excellent, which is encouraging.

The downside to adapter solutions for both cameras is that they add considerably to the size and weight of the cameras, not to mention additional cost.

Verdict: X100F wins for the added versatility of 28mm + 50mm equiv. converters.

Lens speed

Aside from their native focal lengths, another key differentiator between these two cameras is the speed of their lenses, expressed in terms of their maximum apertures. The Fujifilm X100F offers an F2 maximum aperture (equivalent to ~F3 in full-frame terms) while the GR III’s lens is slower, at F2.8 (~F4.2 equiv).

The difference in maximum aperture has a couple of important effects. For one, you’ll have more ability to blur backgrounds and isolate your subject from the faster lens of the X100F, aided also by its longer focal length. You’ll also be able to shoot at lower ISOs in lower light with the Fujifilm without resorting to a tripod. On the other hand, the wider lens of the GR III, and its stabilized sensor (more on this in a minute) mean that the low-light disadvantage is somewhat mitigated (assuming static subjects) and you may not need a tripod except in very dark conditions.

Verdict: Tie. Too many variables.

Stabilization

Ah yes – about that. Perhaps the most impactful upgrade to the GR III compared to its forebears is the addition of sensor-based image stabilization, which allows hand-held shooting down to at least 1/10sec without any trouble, assuming normal conditions (i.e., you’re not shooting from a helicopter or standing outside in a strong gale).

The addition of stabilization mitigates the limitations imposed by the GR III’s relatively slow lens when it comes to low-light shooting, and allows for creative options like creatively introducing blur (from flowing water, traffic, people walking by, asteroids striking the earth, etc.). The Fujifilm X100F has no such system, either optical or sensor-based, which is a major plus point in favor of the Ricoh.

Verdict: Ricoh GR III’s in-body stabilization means more options in low light.

Sensor

As a casual glance, the sensors in the Fujifilm X100F and Ricoh GR III look like they could be the same. And in fact, at a hardware level that might actually be the case. Both provide 24MP worth of resolution and on-sensor phase-detection autofocus pixels, and image quality is broadly comparable. Image quality is also in line with many of the best 24MP APS-C cameras on the market when it comes to Raw detail and dynamic range.

The difference is in the filter arrays. Ricoh uses a conventional bayer-type filter array, whereas Fujifilm uses its own proprietary X-Trans design. If you’re a JPEG shooter, there’s a definite – albeit subtle – advantage to X-Trans when it comes to critical detail retention, across most of the X100F’s ISO sensitivity range. And the X100F is well-suited to JPEG shooting, thanks to its suite of excellent Film Simulation modes, which replicate the look of classic Fuji film emulsions. We’re less enthusiastic about the JPEG output from the GR III, particularly in terms of color.

On the other hand, the more conventional design of the GR III’s sensor means that its Raw files play rather better with third-party Raw converters than those from the Fujifilm. While the difference isn’t massive, and Capture One deserves a mention as one of the software suites that actually does a great job. It might make a difference if you’re a Raw shooter with (for example) an established Adobe Raw workflow.

Verdict: Ricoh GR III’s more conventional Raw files are more flexible.

Body size

The Fujifilm X100F is styled after the classic rangefinder cameras of the 1960s and 70s, and it’s around the same size as a Canonet or Yashica rangefinder (if you’re old enough to remember either). It’s a small camera, and will fit comfortably into a jacket pocket or handbag but it won’t slip into a shirt or trouser pocket. You’ll probably need either a hand strap or conventional neck strap to keep it secure when shooting.

On the other hand (no pun intended), despite having a sensor-based stabilization system built into the body, the GR III is an impressively small camera. Compared to the X100F, the GR III is genuinely shirt-pocketable, and when turned off it takes up remarkably little space in a pocket or bag. Annoyingly, the GR III lacks proper strap lugs so it won’t accept just any conventional strap, but the slim (included) hand strap is probably all you’ll need. Obviously if you enjoy shooting with a viewfinder attached, the GR III becomes a lot less compact, which leads me on to my next point….

Verdict: Ricoh GR III is genuinely pocketable.

Viewfinder

…the GR III does not have a built-in viewfinder, whereas the X100F does. And in fact, the X100F’s viewfinder is one of its best features. Unique to Fujifilm, the X100F features a ‘hybrid’ finder which can be switched between a high-resolution electronic view, and an optical view with exposure and focus information overlaid. Personally, I use the X100F almost exclusively in EVF mode, but a lot of photographers swear by the immediacy of the optical view. Impressively, the X100F can offer a version of the classic rangefinder focus aid by overlaying a portion of the live view feed in the optical finder. It’s hard to describe in words, but works well if you’re a fan of manual focus.

With the GR III, on the other hand, you don’t have the same options. While simple optical finders can be attached (and Ricoh will sell you one, for quite a lot of money) you miss out on in-view focus or exposure information, and there’s no option to add an external EVF.

Verdict: Fujifilm X100F’s built-in hybrid optical / electronic wins by a mile.

Flash

Another thing missing from the GR III compared to the X100F (and in fact previous GR models) is a flash. Possibly for internal space reasons, possibly for battery life reasons (or a combination of both) Ricoh deleted the internal flash on the GR III, and own-brand external flashguns add considerably to the size of the camera. The Fujifilm X100F on the other hand features a small built-in flashgun. It isn’t the most powerful in the world, but is useful for low-light social photography and fill-in purposes when shooting in daylight. And both cameras have leaf shutters, allowing flash synchronization at very high shutter speeds.

Verdict: The Fujifilm X100F wins.

Touchscreen

What Ricoh’s engineers took away with one hand, they gave back with the other – in a significant upgrade compared to older GR models, the rear screen is touch-sensitive, and can be used to quickly place the AF point, and scroll through / zoom in to captured images. Some traditionalists might be tempted to disable the touchscreen (and the camera’s physical controls are there to take over if you’d prefer to go that route) but we’ve found that the addition of touch sensitivity makes a positive impact on the GR III’s handling experience.

The X100F is a more control and dial-heavy camera, and offers a conventional, non touch-sensitive screen. Whether this makes a huge difference to your purchasing decision is as much about personal preference as anything else, but with the camera held out away from your eye, it is easier to quickly position a focus point by touch on the GR III than it is with the AF joystick on the rear of the X100F. If you’re typically a viewfinder shooter, the lack of touch-sensitivity on the X100F might not bother you all that much.

Verdict: The Ricoh GR III’s touch-screen does make some key operations easier.

Control interface

The Fujifilm X100F is the fourth in a line of X100-series cameras which really set a template for the X and G-series mirrorless cameras that came later. A key part of the appeal of the original X100 was its (for the time) novel ‘retro’ styling, and every subsequent model in the lineup has shared a consciously old-fashioned hands-on design philosophy, with physical dials for key exposure settings, alongside the usual modal buttons and rear controls.

Arguably, you don’t really need all those dials, and personally I think the X100F is over-endowed with control input points. I haven’t used a physical shutter speed dial since the Nikon F4, so when I shoot with the X100F, mine stays locked to ‘A’, but some people swear by it. And they look great, which I suspect is part of the point. The downside to the X100-series’ distinctive styling is that the cameras do tend to attract attention. Be prepared to be asked, ‘is that a Leica?’.

Control interface (con’t)

The GR III on the other hand offers a simpler, more subtle, less cluttered control interface which arguably better suits its specifications. A simple exposure compensation toggle on the rear doubles as a modal control for quick access to key shooting settings, and a dial on the upper right of the top-plate serves as the main input for exposure settings. Meanwhile, a lockable exposure mode dial provides a simple (and visually clear) means of moving between PASM and automatic exposure modes. As as already been mentioned, the touch-screen on the rear of the GR III helps to simplify some actions, like setting the AF point and navigating through captured images.

In the end, the choice comes down to two things – how you like your cameras to work, but also how you like them to look.

Verdict: Personal preference (but the Ricoh GR III is more streamlined).

Battery life

This one is pretty straightforward – while neither offer spectacular stamina, battery life from the X100F is pretty ok, whereas battery life from the GR III is decidedly less ok. Both cameras will probably get you through a day of shooting without any issues, but we’d be much less confident about leaving the house without a spare battery for the GR III. One of the most welcome upgrades in the X100F over its predecessors was a more powerful battery, and its CIPA rating compared to the GR III speaks for itself (390-330 shots compared to 200).

In reality, in a single shooting session with minimal image review, both cameras should be able to capture a lot more shots per charge than the CIPA figures suggest, but there’s no escaping the fact that the GR III’s battery is on the skinny side.

Verdict: The Fujifilm X100F wins with roughly twice the battery life of the GR III.

Movie mode

Arguably, neither of these cameras is really suited to serious movie shooting, but of the two, the X100F is a far more convincing video camera. While not spectacular, its maximum video resolution of 1080/60p is fine, with a good degree of control over exposure. Focus is AF-C or manual only, but it’s still usable, and there is a socket for an external mic.

The GR III on the other hand offers a very thin video feature set. Although it also boasts 1080/60p resolution, exposure is locked to ‘P’ and there is no option for adding an external microphone.

Verdict: The Fujifilm X100F is the better of the two (but neither are great).

Summing up

So which of these two cameras is best for you? Aaaaaaall together now: It depends.

Obviously that’s the answer – that’s always the answer! You know how this works by now. If you value compact size over the convenience of a viewfinder, go for the GR III. If you’re one of those people that just doesn’t ‘get’ 28mm for some reason, go for the X100F. If you like to shoot a lot in low light but you don’t carry a tripod, the GR III is a better choice. If you want the camera to shoot video, frankly I think you’d be mad to consider either of them, but in a pinch the X100F is the less terrible of the two. Etc., and so on.

At the end of the day, both are excellent cameras with their own strengths and relatively few serious weaknesses. They’re just different. If you have the money, there’s actually a pretty good argument to made for buying both the X100F and the GR III, and using them alongside one another. Both cameras together will still take up less space in your bag than most mirrorless ILCs with a zoom lens.

Ultimately, you’re a grownup. You know what you like, and you know what you need. You’ve got this! Feel free, as always, to share your thoughts in the comments and let me know if I missed anything!

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Fujifilm X100F versus Ricoh GR III: Which is better for you?

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Fujifilm releases firmware updates for X-H1, X-E3, and X100F

28 Apr

It looks like Fujifilm’s software engineers have been working overtime the past few weeks. Today, the company has released firmware updates for three of its X-series cameras: the brand new X-H1, as well as the older X-E3 and X100F. In all cases, the new software addresses some user-reported bugs and improves camera performance.

Version 1.20 of the XE-3 firmware is the biggest of the three and comes with the following improvements:

  • Support for Fujifilm X Raw Studio: camera users can now convert Raw files, including batch processing, with the free Fujifilm X Raw Studio software.
  • Backup and restoring of camera settings via Fujifilm X Acquire: when connecting the camera to a computer via USB, photographers can now use the Fujifilm X Acquire software to backup camera settings to a file and restore them. It is also possible to copy settings from one camera to another.
  • Compatibility with the Fujinon XC15-45mm F3.5-5.6 OIS PZ lens: when using this lens the focus ring function now switches automatically. In focus modes S and C it is used for Fine Zoom adjustment. In focus mode M it controls the manual focus. In addition the zoom position of the lens is now memorized when the camera is powered off and maintained while switching into playback mode.
  • Improved radio flash controller operation: users can now shoot with compatible third party studio flash units in high speed sync. or TTL mode, using radio controllers.
  • Enlarged and customizable display indicators and information: users can now enlarge indicators and shooting information displayed in the viewfinder or on the LCD monitor. You will also be able to customize the location of the information on the display.
  • Enhanced Bluetooth connectivity via Camera Remote app: with the Fujifilm Camera Remote app user can now update the camera firmware via bluetooth and remote-trigger compatible cameras.

Version 2.10 of the X100F firmware offers the same capability to enlarge and customize display information and backup and restore of camera settings via X Acquire as the update for the XE-3.

The update to firmware version 1.02 for the Fuji X-H1 is fairly minor, simply fixing a bug that could cause image files to be overwritten when an image folder is selected through the Select Folder function in the Setup menu.

Follow the corresponding links above to get the latest versions for yourself.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Fujifilm releases firmware updates for X-H1, X-E3, and X100F

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Why a Nikon Shooter Bought a Fuji X100F as a Second Camera

31 Jan

In this article (I don’t want to call it a review because) I’ll share my thoughts on why I picked up a Fuji X100F as a second camera alongside all my Nikon gear. And why I love this little camera!

My journey into serious digital photography began in the spring of 2012 when I realized my little pocket camera wasn’t cutting it anymore. After consulting with some friends, my wife and I picked up a Nikon D200 and 50mm prime lens and the rest, as they say, is history.

Over the years our collection of gear has grown to include three Nikon bodies, several lenses, and a host of accessories all of which have come in handy with our family/child/high school senior photography hobby we run on the side. However, after much research and soul-searching (or perhaps you might say goal-searching), I recently added a Fuji X100F to my collection of gear and I thought I’d share some of my reasons why in case you might be going through the same thought process we did.

Why a Nikon Shooter Bought a Fuji X100F as a Second Camera

The Fuji X100F might just be my favorite camera of all time. (Note the camera also comes in retro silver)

Know your needs

Almost any time a club, business, or other organization sets out to improve a particular aspect of its operation the key stakeholders involved perform what’s known as a needs assessment. This is a formal process that aims to help organizations understand gaps or areas of deficiency which can be addressed. They help to guide the improvement so that it is done in a way that matters most. In similar fashion, a needs assessment can make all the difference in the world to photographers as well.

When my wife and I bought that D200 years ago we weren’t exactly sure what our needs were, other than that we wanted better pictures of our newborn son. That camera and lens worked beautifully for a while but soon we started to realize that it had some issues which were hard to overlook.

We learned that the 50mm lens was too restrictive indoors and images that were taken at ISO 800 and above were quite noisy which limited our ability to use this set of gear in challenging lighting conditions. These deficiencies led us to buy a Nikon D7100 and a 35mm lens which enabled us to take pictures at wider angles and in lower-light conditions, and once again our needs were met. For a while.

Why a Nikon Shooter Bought a Fuji X100F as a Second Camera

The Nikon D200 + 50mm lens worked fine, but before too long its limitations started becoming much more apparent and I wanted something more. And as this photo shows, I also needed to work on my photography skills such as composition and light!

Know when to upgrade

As time went on and we became more invested in the Nikon system, I started to once again see some significant limitations of our camera gear. My wife and I were doing more portrait sessions which necessitated the purchase of an 85mm lens and external flash. But at the same time, we felt as though we didn’t quite have the right gear to take the type of pictures of our kids with which we were really happy.

The 35mm lens was nice, but on a crop-sensor body like the D7100 or D200 it wasn’t wide enough for everyday casual use and I often found myself in low-light situations where the high ISO performance of the D7100 just didn’t cut it. Enter the full-frame Nikon D750.

Bear with me, I’m getting to the Fuji X100F!

As we examined our own particular photographic needs we realized that the D750 ticked all the boxes that we had at the time: great low-light performance, superb image quality for portraits, tougher build quality, a larger image buffer, and the list goes on. The D750 seemed like a good logical choice and over time it has only grown more useful. Even my 35mm lens specifically designed for crop-sensor Nikon DX cameras works fine as long as I shoot at about f/4 and don’t mind a bit of vignetting in the corners.

Why a Nikon Shooter Bought a Fuji X100F as a Second Camera

The D750 and a 70-200 lens make family portraits like this possible.

More gear, more problems

Ironically, despite getting more gear, the more limited I still felt in terms of taking everyday photos of our kids – which was the whole reason my wife and I got into digital photography in the first place!

My favorite camera/lens combination quickly became the D750 + 35mm and I found myself using that particular setup almost every time I wanted to just go out and shoot candid pictures of my wife and kids. I took that camera and lens whether we were on vacation, in the backyard, or even on a visit to the park.

The problem was that it is so big and heavy I often found myself leaving it at home and using my iPhone instead, which works fine as long as there’s plenty of light. As soon as the sun goes down or you move indoors, the quality difference between a mobile phone and a larger camera quickly becomes apparent.

Why a Nikon Shooter Bought a Fuji X100F as a Second Camera

The Fuji X100F with 23mm lens is almost exactly the same as a Nikon D750 and 35mm lens, but the sheer size and weight of the Nikon meant I often left it at home. The Fuji gives me almost the same image quality and I can literally take it almost anywhere.

Is yet more Nikon gear the answer?

Professionally, our growing collection of gear brought with it some headaches too. I found myself using the D750 + 70-200mm f/2.8 lens on most of my paid client shoots, but it is really heavy and not at all conducive to close-up shots in small spaces. I had other cameras and lenses but nothing that gave me really good shots with a wider field of view, so for a while, I contemplated getting another D750 and a true full-frame 35mm lens.

However the idea of adding even more gear to my bag, while still not really having a good all-purpose camera I could use with my family, threw me into a bit of a mental slump. I had a clear need that was unmet, but I didn’t want the Nikon gear required to solve the problem.

And then I found the Fuji X100F!

Why a Nikon Shooter Bought a Fuji X100F as a Second Camera

The D750 and a 35mm lens are great for more intimate shots like this, but the size and even the clack-clack-clack sound of the shutter make it somewhat conspicuous.

Form following function

The more I looked at my needs as a photographer the more I realized I was going about things all wrong. Instead of asking myself, “What needs to I have and how can I meet them?” I was stuck in the mindset that I had to stay with Nikon gear because that’s what I already had. I was putting form (i.e. Nikon) over function (what I wanted my gear to do).

Professionally, I had the midrange and telephoto focal lengths covered but I didn’t have anything on the wider end. Personally, I knew I didn’t have a truly portable go-anywhere camera. I was looking for a way to solve these issues with my mind firmly planted in Nikon’s pastures, all the while not realizing that other camera systems might have a much better answer.

Look outside the box

When I discovered the Fuji X100F I realized that it ticked off every single box on my list. Professionally it allowed me to get the kind of close, wide-angle, intimate pictures I couldn’t get with any of my other gear. It was also small and light enough that I could be discrete at events and even carry it as a second body with my heavy D750 and 70-200mm lens doing the heavy-lifting.

The 23mm lens paired with an APS-C sensor meant I would have almost the exact same field of view as shooting at 35mm on a full-frame camera. The wide f/2.0 lens aperture meant that I could get great shots in low light, and even the price was right since the cost of the X100F was less than another Nikon D750 and full-frame 35mm lens.

Why a Nikon Shooter Bought a Fuji X100F as a Second Camera

Finally – the answer was the Fuji X100F

Personally, the Fuji X100F became my go-to camera for almost any situation I found myself in with my family: birthday parties, playing in the yard, going to friends’ houses, taking trips to visit family, and even going on vacations. Prior to getting the X100F, my D750 and 35mm lens were what I used in almost all of those situations. Not only was it heavy and cumbersome, I also felt highly conspicuous taking pictures in casual settings. It’s hard to ignore someone who is wielding a giant DSLR and pointing it in your face!

As an added bonus the leaf shutter in the X100F is almost silent which makes picture-taking in quiet situations much less worrisome. Further, if you want to be really quiet you can enable a fully electronic shutter which lets you take pictures in complete silence. No DSLR can do that, even in Live View, and it’s something I have really come to appreciate about the X100F and other mirrorless systems.

Why a Nikon Shooter Bought a Fuji X100F as a Second Camera

Shot using the X100F’s built-in ACROS black and white simulation mode.

Finally, the wealth of manual buttons and dials on the X100F has been nothing short of a revelation for someone like me who cut his photography teeth long after digital cameras had supplanted most film cameras. Being able to look at my camera and see separate dials for shutter speed, aperture, and ISO means that I no longer have to hunt through menus or assign functions to control dials to get the shots I want.

Add to this the film simulations like Classic Chrome and ACROS, tough-as-a-tank build quality, and the choice to use either an LCD screen or electronic viewfinder and you end up with a camera small enough to take anywhere yet versatile enough to excel in almost any situation.

Finding your solution

I often read articles online about switching from DSLR to mirrorless or vice versa, and there seems to be a persistent debate about which one system better. After my experience with adding a Fuji mirrorless camera to my Nikon DSLR kit, I’ve come to the realization that it’s not about which is better but what gear can meet your needs.

I think the problem that some photographers have, myself included, is that we aren’t good at honestly identifying what problems or needs we have and then working from there to find our answers.

Why a Nikon Shooter Bought a Fuji X100F as a Second Camera

There’s no bad choice – only the right choice for you

Cameras today are so good it’s almost impossible to not get one that doesn’t have great image quality, autofocus, high ISO performance, dynamic range, and so on. What’s much more difficult is finding a camera, lens, or another piece of gear that solves whatever problem you currently have.

There are a time and place for big DSLR cameras, small mirrorless systems, micro-four-thirds models, even mobile phones and computational photography. Each has its own benefits and drawbacks, and each can meet different needs and work fine for you as long as you take the time to find out what your needs really are.

Why a Nikon Shooter Bought a Fuji X100F as a Second Camera

High ISO performance of the X100F isn’t quite as good as a full-frame camera, but it’s not too shabby either.

Conclusion

Going forward I see myself using my Nikon gear for more professional shoots and the Fuji camera as a daily driver that will be more for casual shooting, but it’s not an either/or situation. My old crop-sensor D7100 paired with the 70-200mm f/2.8 lens is fantastic for getting pictures of my kids playing sports, while the Fuji X00F is ideal for indoor family sessions or times when I just don’t want the heft of a DSLR.

Who knows, my next camera might be something totally different or it might not be a camera at all and instead be some lessons or even just a trip to see and photograph different places.

Why a Nikon Shooter Bought a Fuji X100F as a Second Camera

Shot using the Fuji X100F’s built-in Classic Chrome film simulation mode.

After hearing my story I’d love to get your input too. What kind of gear do you use, why do you use it, and what steps are you planning to take next to address any issues you might have? Please leave your thoughts in the comments below.

The post Why a Nikon Shooter Bought a Fuji X100F as a Second Camera by Simon Ringsmuth appeared first on Digital Photography School.


Digital Photography School

 
Comments Off on Why a Nikon Shooter Bought a Fuji X100F as a Second Camera

Posted in Photography

 

Top 10 sample galleries of the year #3: the Fujifilm X100F

22 Nov

$ (document).ready(function() { SampleGalleryV2({“containerId”:”embeddedSampleGallery_9737454830″,”galleryId”:”9737454830″,”isEmbeddedWidget”:true,”standalone”:false,”selectedImageIndex”:0,”startInCommentsView”:false,”isMobile”:false}) });

We’re counting down our top 10 most popular sample galleries of 2017 and at long last we’ve reached our top 3 galleries. Holding it down with the bronze medal is the Fujifilm X100F.

What do you say about a camera like the X100F? It’s a staff favorite for sure – we gave it a gold award in our review. Even after publishing that, we found ourselves taking it on road trips and using it to photograph Seattle’s famous cherry blossoms. We were even fortunate enough to get our hands on an early version of the X100F prior to its release and shot a beta sample gallery as well. Check that out below:

$ (document).ready(function() { SampleGalleryV2({“containerId”:”embeddedSampleGallery_7972459793″,”galleryId”:”7972459793″,”isEmbeddedWidget”:true,”standalone”:false,”selectedImageIndex”:0,”startInCommentsView”:false,”isMobile”:false}) });


Top 10 most popular sample galleries of 2017:

#10: Sigma 14mm F1.8 Art
#9: Fujifilm GFX 50S
#8: Nikon D7500
#7: Olympus Tough TG-5
#6: Sigma 85mm F1.4
#5: Fujifilm X-T20
#4: Leica M10
#3: Fujifilm X100F
#2: To be revealed on 11/23
#1: To be revealed on 11/24

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Top 10 sample galleries of the year #3: the Fujifilm X100F

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Roadtrip Review Redux: The Fujifilm X100F

28 May
Beautiful flowers in golden sunlight along the southern California coast

I had to leave all my musical instruments in Cincinnati when I first moved to Seattle three years ago. Recently, I found the time to road trip back and collect them. Seattle is about as far removed from the rest of the United States as a major US city can be, while still being part of the ‘lower 48’. This means that if you’re headed a great distance East, there are a number of ways you can go. And when you work at DPReview, there are also a number of cameras you can take. 

Welcome to my journey down the West Coast, where I have decided to discuss one of my favorite cameras from the past couple of years to use as a point and shoot. That ‘point and shoot’ bit is very important. This is my vacation. All of these photos have been taken in a state of total relaxation, focused much more on enjoyment and capturing places I have traveled. With enjoyment in mind, I take you to where my journey began:

This photo was shot alongside the 101 in Washington state, where it all began.

Highway 101 is a road that circles the Olympic peninsula and runs all the way down Washington, Oregon, and California, with large sections of it skirting the Pacific coast. My plan was to avoid the interstate freeway entirely until I made it to Los Angeles two days later. It turned out to be a good decision. 

Now, to the camera: the Fujifilm X100F. 

The first time I impulsively decided to drive cross-country it was right around the end of 2012. I had a week of time off to burn and decided it would be a great opportunity to rent a camera I was considering purchasing: the original X100. 

The X100-series is perfect for road trips. The 23mm, 35mm equivalent field of view lens handles a variety of duties well: it can be wide enough for landscapes, tight enough for environmental portraits, and the minimum focus distance allows the capture of close-up details. Its size encouraged me to bring it absolutely everywhere. It even fit perfectly in the pocket of my car door, ready for action whenever the road got interesting. 

The result was a camera that I looked forward to using at every stop. It led to the eventual purchase of an X100S, which I loved up to the moment it stopped working (full disclosure: it was my fault).

The Astoria-Megler bridge crossing the mouth of the Columbia River. The total length of the bridge is a staggering 4.1 miles.

While making my first stop in Astoria, OR, the X100F was igniting the romance all over again, even in the dismal grey that had fueled my wanderlust since last October.  One of the biggest differences between all the X100 cameras are their sensors. We start at 12MP with CDAF only with the X100, then to the 16MP X-Trans with Hybrid AF on the X100S, then the 16MP X-Trans II in the ‘T’, and finally the new 24MP X-trans sensor from the X-T2 and X-Pro2 in the ‘F’. 

Meandering about the docks of Garibaldi, OR was great for stretching out the legs and showing off the X100F’s Acros mode

Not everyone agrees that the move to the X-Trans style of color filter array was the best for the X100 series. I, for one, wasn’t always a huge fan of the JPEG output of the X100S like I was with the X100. Sure, there was an improvement in sensor performance, but without changing the default noise reduction settings, things would start to look a bit waxy at higher ISOs. 

The X100F still uses X-trans, but the 24MP sensor and updated processor combination is a significant step forward for the series. While in the northern parts of Oregon I switched the camera to Acros, one of my favorite JPEG modes, to try and make the most of the grey overcast conditions by adding a bit more contrast.

Combining this mode with the optical viewfinder is a real treat, blending nostalgic elements of film photography with modern convenience. Plus, it made it way easier to sit and wait for seagulls to fly through the emptiest part of the frame before releasing the satisfyingly quiet leaf shutter. 

‘Combining this mode with the optical viewfinder is a real treat, blending nostalgic elements of film photography with modern convenience.’

Somewhere south of Tillamook, the grey suede blanket of clouds that covers the Northern parts of the coast ended. So far for in 2017, Seattle has been posting record rainfall and a record lack of sunshine along with it. After crossing this meteorologic divide between blue and grey, I didn’t see a cloud for three days. It was time to take the camera out of black and white and choose a color film simulation to bring the best out of the new found daylight. 

The Oregon coast of the Pacific Ocean under some welcome blue skies.

Velvia brings out the blue in shadows too much for my taste, and can look cheesy when used outside of landscape duty. While Classic Chrome has its moments, I think I’ve moved past the shifted blues and crushed shadows. For this trip and the already vibrant environment around me, Provia worked perfectly. 

When I shot with the original X100, I mostly used focus and recompose in AF-S and rarely used the optical viewfinder due to focus not being a sure bet. AF improved with each iteration of the camera, though. And with the X100F, armed with improved PDAF coverage on the 24MP sensor, I feel comfortable shooting with the optical finder because of how reliable AF is.

When AF-C is turned on, the camera depth tracks using a single point (in good light) with ease. It also repositions the AF box in the viewfinder to help keep framing corrected for parallax. This means that if I am waiting for the perfect moment, I don’t need to worry about subject distance changing as long as I have kept my subject under the focus point.

As the sun raced for the horizon I found the X100F’s focus slowing down, although its pace is still miles ahead of the early generations of the X100

Good AF-C also meant that when shooting close-up subjects, like a leaf in the sunset, I didn’t have to worry about my body rocking back and forth or a gentle breeze moving my subject, as I would if I were shooting in AF-S. This wasn’t a scenario I ran in to too often on my trip, but it is something that makes the X100F much more versatile than previous iterations.

The final sliver of sun from my amazing first day on the Pacific coast.

The camera’s autofocus abilities aren’t perfect though, due to two main issues. First, when using AF-C, focus acquisition (the time it takes for the box to turn bright green, confirming focus) is delayed compared to AF-S. Second, as light decreases, or if the lens is stopped down past a certain point, focus can hunt, slow down or fail entirely. In spite of these issues, I still feel that this is the X100 camera I like best since the original.

One day for the Oregon coast isn’t enough. Plan two, or maybe three, if you ever intend to visit.

As my first day of sunshine came close to an end, I came close to the end of Oregon and the start of California. The former’s coast, with its rocky shores and blue waters, adds to what has become my favorite state in the ‘Lower 48’. I have only began to glimpse the surface of Washington’s downstairs neighbor and hope to spend more time exploring its corners. My last moments basking in a sunset on the beach simply cemented my conclusions.

The second day started brilliantly with a walk around a sunny farmers market and several of the best grilled oysters I’ve ever had.

Growing up landlocked means I was never around delicious seafood like these spicy grilled oysters from Humboldt County. The close focus capabilities of the X100F allowed me to capture all the spices and pieces of dill floating in those beautiful shells.

Having the ability to shoot both wide and close-up shots is one of the great things about the X100F and its 35mm equivalent focal length, even if the lens is a bit soft wide open at the close end. Having a close minimum focus distance helps fill the frame with smaller subjects, and as mentioned before, the improved depth tracking in AF-C helps keep these shots sharp when snapping handheld.

Reviewing my images the night before revealed some of the lens’ sharpness shortcomings in regards to fine detail in landscapes, which isn’t a huge deal to me personally. For me, the camera’s biggest downfall became apparent when I was in tight quarters, surrounded by massive trees towering above me. I couldn’t help but long for something a bit wider (I did not have the wide angle adapter with me). 

The Avenue of the Giants

Even so, I think if I were stranded with one camera, the X100F would be one of the contenders for my choice. Leave it in full auto mode, and it works almost flawlessly. Of course classic ergonomics and physical controls have always been part of the X100-series DNA. But robust continuous autofocus has not. Fortunately, with the X100F, suddenly the camera’s autofocus can keep up with the movement of a quickly approaching subject. Combine that with the ultimate timing precision of an optical viewfinder, and you are left with a simple and fun camera that can easily capture that ‘decisive moment’ – even if that decisive moment is just a seagull entering your frame.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Roadtrip Review Redux: The Fujifilm X100F

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Fujifilm X100F Review

17 Mar

The X100F is the fourth iteration of Fujifilm’s well-respected X100 series. It still uses the same 35mm equivalent 23mm F2 lens, still has the ‘classic’ design cues, but almost everything has changed under the surface.

The biggest change between the X100F and its predecessors is the move to the use of the 24MP X-Trans sensor. We’ve been very impressed with this sensor when we’ve encountered it in the X-Pro2 and X-T2. We think it’s a much bigger step forward than the pixel count hike implies.

We looked in more depth at the difference between the two models in this article, but here are the key features of the X100F:

Key features

  • 24MP X-Trans CMOS sensor
  • Hybrid Optical/Electronic viewfinder
  • 35mm equivalent F2 lens
  • Joystick for setting AF point
  • ISO control via dial (lift and turn the shutter speed dial)
  • Twin push-in control dials, front and rear
  • Focus ring customizable when not in MF mode
  • Revised menus
  • Finer-grained image parameters
  • Higher voltage NP-W126S battery with percentage usage indication
  • Digital Teleconverter Mode (offers 50mm and 70mm equiv crops, resized to 24MP)

The X100 series, perhaps more than any other camera, has seen the results of the philosophy of continuous improvement. Whether it’s in the firmware updates that turned the original, fascinating but deeply flawed X100 into a likeable, usable camera, or the iterative approach that has seen across-the-board improvements with each successive model.

In its fourth incarnation, it’s increasingly likely that a lot of the people who might want an X100-type camera already own an X100 model of some sort. Which leads to the question: has Fujifilm done enough to make it worth upgrading, from the X100, from the X100S and from the X100T?

Generations of iteration

The X100 series has been the result of an iterative process of continuous development. This has prompted a thousand internet wags to snipe that ‘I’d rather wait until they make a finished camera.’ But, other than the original model running initial firmware, which fell heavily on the wrong end of the endearing/unusable end of the ‘quirk’ spectrum, each model has been an excellent camera in its own right.

The defining feature of the X100 series: its hybrid viewfinder. This, along with the small body, large sensor and fixed focal length lens, is core to its shooting experience and its appeal.

Technology improves and Fujifilm has, step-by-step, reworked, tweaked and refined most of the camera. The length of this table alone should point to how many changes have been made, and that’s without mentioning smaller details such as the more precise focus ring sensor, automatic detection of wide/tele conversion lenses (if used with the Mark II lenses) and revised user interface.

However, many of the core features have remained: variations on the original optical/electronic hybrid viewfinder and a leaf shutter in a 35mm-equivalent 23mm F2 lens. This allows shutter speeds (and flash sync) at up to 1/1000th of a second when wide-open, increasing to 1/4000th of a second by the time you stop down to F8.

  X100F  X100T X100S X100
Lens 23mm F2 23mm F2 23mm F2 23mm F2
Sensor 24MP X-Trans 16MP X-Trans 16MP X-Trans 12MP Bayer
Wi-Fi? Yes Yes No No
Autofocus Hybrid Phase and Contrast Detection Hybrid Phase and Contrast Detection Hybrid Phase and Contrast Detection Contrast detection 
Selectable AF points / PDAF points 325 / 169 91 / 49 91 / 49 49 / 0
AF Joystick? Yes No No No
Viewfinder Hybrid OVF/EVF Hybrid OVF/EVF Hybrid OVF/EVF Hybrid OVF/EVF
EVF resolution 2.36M-dot
LCD
2.36M-dot
LCD
2.36M-dot
LCD
1.44M-dot
LCD
Preview tab in OVF Yes Yes No No
Custom Fn buttons 7 (inc 3 posn. on 4-way controller) 7 (inc 4 posn. on 4-way controller) 2 2*

*with f/w 1.2

Dials Shutter Speed
Aperture
ISO
Exp comp
Front/Rear dials (Clickable)
Shutter Speed
Aperture
Exp comp
Rear dial (Clickable)
Shutter Speed
Aperture
Exp comp
Rear jog switch (Clickable)
Shutter Speed
Aperture
Exp comp
Rear jog switch (Clickable)
Exposure comp range +/– 3
+/– 5 in ‘C’ position
+/– 3   +/– 2  +/– 2
Apeture ring precision 1/3EV 1/3EV 1EV 1EV
Rear LCD 3.0″ (3:2)
1.04M dots

3.0″ (3:2)
1.04M dots
2.8″ (4:3)
0.46M-dot
2.8″ (4:3)
0.46M-dot 
Max ISO
(JPEG/Raw)
ISO 51,200/
ISO 51,200
ISO 51,200/
ISO 6400

ISO 25,600/
ISO 6400

ISO 12,800/
ISO 3200

Max shutter speed (mechanical/
electronic)

1/4000
1/32,000
1/4000
1/32,000
1/4000
n/a 
1/4000
n/a

Continuous shooting

8 fps
(60 JPEG)
6 fps
(25 JPEG)
6 fps
(31 JPEG)
5 fps
(10 JPEG)
Film simulations 8, including
Classic Chrome and Acros
7, including
Classic Chrome
6  6
Movie capability 1080/60p  1080/60p 1080/30p 720/30p 
Mic input Yes (2.5mm) Yes (2.5mm) Yes (vis USB) No
Battery
(Voltage)
NP-W126S
7.2V 
NP-95
3.6V 
NP-95
3.6V 
NP-95
3.6V 
Battery life (Viewfinder/CIPA) 390  330 330 300
USB charging? Yes Yes No No

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Fujifilm X100F Review

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Fujifilm X100F vs X100T, what’s new, what’s changed and is it enough?

30 Jan

Apparent similarities

Glance too fleetingly at the X100F and you might think nothing had changed, compared with the X100T. Or the X100S, the original X100 or the film rangefinders their styling harks back to. But, in keeping with continuous improvement approach (‘Kaizen’ if you must) Fujifilm appears to be adhering to, just about every aspect of the camera has been updated in some small way.

But is the sum of those changes enough to make it worth upgrading or to attract new customers?

New Sensor

The single biggest change to the X100F is the use of the latest 24MP sensor. As we’ve seen the the X-Pro2 and X-T2, it’s capable of some excellent results and is a bigger step forward from its 16MP cousins than the 22% increase in linear resolution would suggest.

Arguments still rage about the merits of X-Trans, especially now that Bayer sensors are reaching high enough pixel counts that manufacturers can cut out the costly AA filter without too many downsides/complaints. Clearly X-Trans strikes a different balance of luminance/chroma resolution than the Bayer design and isn’t as universally well supported, when it comes to Raw processing, however, we’ve seen the 24MP version and Fujifilm’s latest processing give some great results, so we find it hard to get that worked-up about it.

What hasn’t changed?

The X100 series’ core features are, broadly speaking, unchanged. The OLED panel in the hybrid optical/electronic viewfinder is being run at a faster refresh rate, but it’s still essentially the same spec as on the previous model.

Likewise, the lens is unchanged from the X100F’s predecessors. This means that it’s still a increasingly soft when shot close-up and wide-open but also that it’s not exactly fast to focus (though this is the snappiest X100 yet). The good news, though, is that the the lens seems to me more than sharp enough to resolve the higher-res sensor at all but the closest working distances, and remains as impressively small as ever.

Handling differences: Joystick

Many of the differences between the X100T and F come down to small changes in the cameras’ handling. The first thing to note is the addition of the AF joystick that first cropped up on the X-Pro2.

In its own way, it’s as big an upgrade as the 24MP sensor. It speeds up AF point selection immensely (which is needed, since the X100F can offer up to 325 individually selectable points). Or, at least, it does once you’ve got out of the habit of trying to use the four-way controller to do so.

The other thing the joystick does is resolve the tension between using the four-way controller as Fn buttons or to directly access AF points. This means that, while the X100F still offers the same number of customizable buttons as its predecessor, it’s more likely that you’ll be able to use them all.

Handling differences: Buttons

There’s been a considerable re-shuffling of buttons between the X100T and the F though, as already mentioned, the net result is still that there are still seven customizable control points.

The buttons to the left of the rear screen, which date back to the original X100, have been eliminated, with most of them being pushed across to the right. There’s also an extra function button at the center of the viewfinder mode switch on the front panel, to make up from the one lost on the rear plate. The ‘Drive’ mode function is now irrevocably assigned to the four-way controller, while the function of the rear dial’s push-in button can now be re-configured.

For most users we think it’s likely to be a case of swings and roundabouts, unless there’s some very specific but vital combination of buttons that we’ve not been able to envisage. Generally it seems likely that the certainty of being able to use the four-way controller (or, at least, three of its buttons) as Fn keys will be enough to keep most users happy.

Handling differences: Extra dial

The bigger change to the camera’s handling is the addition of a clickable dial set into the camera’s front plate. By default, this does nothing while shooting, and is primarily used for jumping between images in playback mode. However, there is a menu option that allows its use to control ISO if the top plate ISO dial is set to ‘A.’

While this makes it possible to use the rear dial to set shutter speed (by setting the shutter speed dial to ‘T’), and the front dial for ISO, there’s no way to use anything other than the aperture ring to control aperture value. We’re not sure why you’d want to, but if that’s something you were hoping for, you’re out of luck.

The final big change is the use of the focus ring as a control ring. There are four settings for this: Standard, White Balance, Film Simulation and (if you’re shooting JPEG-only), Digital Teleconverter, all of which are overridden if you switch to manual focus mode. Personally I found that assigning anything to the focus ring just meant that I’d inadvertently make a change, every time I changed the aperture, so I just left it on ‘Standard’, which leaves the ring inactive in most drive modes.

Handling differences: ISO Dial

The final two changes in the X100F’s dial behavior are modifications that were introduced with the X-Pro2. Note that I say ‘modifications,’ rather than ‘improvements.’

The first, which I’m all for, is the addition of a ‘C’ position on the Exposure Comp dial. Set to this position, the newly added front command dial takes charge of Exposure Comp and extends the controllable range from ±3EV to ±5EV.

The other modification is the arrival of the pretty-but-pretty-impractical ISO control set within the shutter speed dial. I don’t hate it, but, given that I change ISO more frequently than once every 36 frames, I just don’t think that lifting, turning and dropping a dial is the most sensible way of controlling sensitivity. Thankfully there are two effective workarounds: pushing ISO control to the camera’s front dial or, better still, setting a couple of Auto ISO presets and switching between them.

Finer control

The X100F has the latest ‘X Processor Pro,’ which not only sees the addition of the more-detailed black-and-white ‘Acros’ film simulation, but also the option to control the JPEG output with a higher degree of precision.

Whether it’s for straight-out-of-camera JPEGs or for subsequent in-camera Raw conversions, the highlight and shadow portions of the tone curve can now be adjusted between +4 and -2, while most other parameters, including sharpening, noise reduction and color (saturation) can be adjusted on a ±4 scale.

Latest UI

As you might expect (assuming you’ve been reading our recent X-series reviews, start-to-finish), the X100F gets Fujifilm’s improved menus.

The latest version of the menu system breaks the options down into sensible categories with icons to distinguish between them, as opposed to the numbered tabs in the older scheme.

On top of this, there’s a ‘My Menu’ tab that can be populated with your most-accessed menu options. Add to this a wider range of flash control options, for use with external flashguns and the X100F manages that rare trick of being both more powerful and easier to operate.

In the moment:

The thing that’s most noticeable when you pick up the X100F is that it’s quicker than the T or any of the previous models. It’s the little things: start-up time, especially from sleep mode, or a focus re-acquisition if there’s been very little change of depth, they all add up.

Continuous focus still isn’t going to help you win any sports photo competitions but it too is noticeably improved. Overall, then, the camera just feels responsive to an extent that the series hasn’t really done, previously. Hell, even the Wi-Fi connects faster, making it that bit more likely that you’ll use it.

This newfound responsiveness is something that will be almost immediately apparent to existing X100 series owners and, perhaps just as importantly: unnoticed by new users whose expectations have been set by contemporary cameras.

Overall

Fujifilm’s approach to the its X-series cameras has been one of constant improvement, which has meant that each generation of camera is better than the last (bickering about X-Trans notwithstanding). However, while this has made it easy to recommend which model a new customer should buy, it’s meant it’s not always been clear-cut whether the sum of the differences is sufficient to prompt existing owners to upgrade.

Obviously the specific decision will depend on the needs, expectations and level of satisfaction of individual users but, even in pre-production form, this feels like more of a step forwards than the bare specs led me to expect. We’ll revisit this question as part of the full review, once we’ve spent more time with the camera, but our initial impressions are pretty positive. Well, except for my bank account.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Fujifilm X100F vs X100T, what’s new, what’s changed and is it enough?

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Interview: Fujifilm talks GFX, X100F and getting serious about video

24 Jan
 Makoto Oishi, Billy Luong and Yuji Igarashi from Fujifilm

Following the launch of the GFX 50S, the X100F and the X-T20, we spoke to Fujifilm executives about their models, their ambitions and what we might be able to expect in the future in terms of medium format, the XE range and video. 

We spoke to Makoto Oishi, manager of Fujifilm’s Sales and Marketing Group, Optical Device and Electronic Imaging Products division, Yuji Igarashi, general manager of Fujifilm’s Electronic Imaging Division, and Billy Luong, Manager for the Technical Marketing and Product Specialist Group. They answered our burning questions as best they could: Will the GFX series gain phase detection AF? Will it ever have a fixed lens model? How is the X-E series faring?

GFX 50S: who is it for, and what’s next?

As you’d expect, we started by discussing the GFX 50S and who it’s for. ‘Fashion, commercial and landscape photographers are the main targets,’ says Oishi. ‘And especially when it comes to landscape, it’s not just professional photographers, but also amateur photographers.’

‘The tonality and dynamic range also mean it’ll appeal to wedding photographers,’ adds Luong. ‘And architecture,’ says Oishi: ‘But you can see from the weather sealing that we want landscape and outdoor photographers to feel confident using this camera.’

Consequently, these users groups will direct which lenses the company creates for the system. ‘We’ve already announced our first six lenses but we’re thinking about what comes next,’ says Oishi: ‘We have some ideas but haven’t decided yet. For example maybe a wide-angle zoom for landscape photographers or maybe something like a 200 or 250mm and so on. We want more feedback from users about what to make next.’

Image quality and autofocus

In the early days of the X-mount system, the company said it had chosen to prioritize image quality even if it that meant using a design with slightly slower focus. This compromise wasn’t necessary with the GFX, Oishi says: ‘The first priority must be image quality, of course. After our experience with the X-series we’ve developed a series of technologies in lens design as well as autofocus motors.’

The GFX 50S is designed to be relatively small and swap easily from being a studio camera to a field camera. The 50mm-equivalent 63mm F2.8 lens focuses pretty quickly despite the absence of phase-detection elements or a linear motor to drive focus.

‘Some of the first [GF] lenses have linear motors, whereas the 63mm has a different motor, more like the one used in the 23mm F2. The autofocus speed is already very good: we haven’t had any complaints. Instead we’ve had some users surprised by how fast the contrast-detection system is.’

This doesn’t mean the GFX series will never have phase detection, though. ‘This is our first development of this sensor,’ says Oishi: ‘we’d have needed more time to develop on-sensor phase detection. The image quality of medium format is our first priority. From a technical point of view, maybe in the future we might incorporate phase-detection pixels. On the other hand, we’re already developed advanced CDAF algorithms.’ There’s no image quality cost to using phase detection, he says.

‘We’re designing all our GF lenses to work with 100 megapixels, so there’s just as much of a challenge of resolution’ – Makoto Oishi

This need for optimal image quality got us wondering: which is more difficult to design, an F1.4 lens for APS-C or an F2.8 lens with the IQ expectations but less dense sensor of medium format? ‘The fundamental design doesn’t change,’ says Oishi: ‘things like the availability of an appropriate autofocus motor to deal with bigger, heavier lenses in medium format always adds problems. They’re both difficult, both to design and manufacture.’

‘The medium format lens is physically bigger which seems like it should be easier to manufacture but you have to pay just as much attention to how sensitively each element is aligned. I’d say they’re both difficult. Differently difficult.’

‘One thing to remember is that we’re designing all our GF lenses to work with 100 megapixels, so there’s just as much of a challenge of resolution.’

‘As the sensor becomes bigger, that means chromatic aberration becomes bigger: it’s proportional to the size. In GFX we’ve minimized aberrations optically and the used digital compensation only to refine the final result, and it depends on lens.’

Makoto Oishi shows-off the GFX 50S’s 44x33mm sensor

As with the X series, Fujifilm has decided not to use in-body image stabilization. ‘Some of the lenses we’ve already announced have OIS built in,’ Oishi points out: ‘but basically our image circle is perfect for the 44 x 33mm sensor size.’

The undeniable appeal of the X100 series

The discussion then turned to the X100 series and its role in the company’s lineup, now that a 23mm F2 lens is available for the X-mount system.

‘Of course using the 23mm F2 on one of our X-mount cameras, you get the same sensor, the same processor, but they’re two different things,’ says Oishi. ‘The X100 lens and sensor are optimized to work together, [whereas] on the ILCs, the sensor has to work with every lens. This means the X100’s image quality can be very good but the lens remains small. The 23mm F2 [XF] lens is also good, the size is a bit bigger but the autofocus can be a bit faster. Then, of course, the X100 series has the optical viewfinder.’

‘A good proportion of our customers are saying the X100 brought back their passion for photography’ – Billy Luong

‘The X100 also has a leaf shutter and built-in ND filter, which make a big difference,’ says Luong: ‘The faster sync speed is an important difference for anyone using flash. Then there’s the silent operation.’

But the appeal is about the format, as much as the specs, suggests Oishi: ‘The X100 series presents a great opportunity: the body size means it works as a second camera for anyone: not just Fujifilm users. If they fall in love with your system then maybe they’ll consider your cameras in future.’

Luong concurs: ‘It’s an iconic shape, it has a distinctive style. Some customers are at the point where they’re done with interchangeable lens camera, they just want the one focal length.’

 ‘The X100 series continues to perform well. In the US, each generation has sold better than the last,’ says Yuji Igarashi.

So who is the X100 series customer? ‘Normally 30% of buyers are people who already use an X100 series camera. But we’re always attracting new customers, too,’ says Oishi.

‘We look at how we retain our customers,’ says Luong: ‘the X100 is often photographers’ first foray into the Fujifilm system. The size, the weight, the image quality. A good proportion of our customers are saying the X100 brought back their passion for photography. That type of person is very much part of the equation.’

Could these same benefits be applied to medium format, we asked. ‘Of course it could be an idea for medium format,’ says Oishi: ‘it depends on demand and the market. The GFX 50S is one style: the ‘S’ means ‘SLR-style.’ Another way to do it would be a rangefinder style camera. Maybe an ‘R’ could be a rangefinder: we’re always considering other options and possibilities.’

‘If mirrorless interchangeable lens camera is too big as a rangefinder style, a fixed lens camera could be smaller, like the GF670.’

X-T20: putting X-T2 image quality in a smaller body

The SLR-style has wide appeal, Luong explains: ‘The SLR style targets a wider audience. We find pro and enthusiast photographers gravitate towards the SLR-style camera. Back to the GFX camera, that’s why we went with the SLR style.’

What does this tell us about the X-T20 target customer, then?

‘There will be a lot of X-T2 and X-T1 users wanting a second body,’ says Luong. ‘Then, of course, there’ll be people wanting X-T2 image quality in a more compact body. It could be a step up from the X-A series or a step over from an entry-level DSLR to a mirrorless type camera.’

‘We wanted to expand the range of users with the X-T10,’ says Oishi. ‘The X-T20 has more capability than ever before, in autofocus, for instance. For casual users, AF speed is important, especially compared with other cameras, such as DSLRs.’

Touchpad AF

However, the X-T20 doesn’t offer the increasingly popular ‘touchpad’ function to control the AF point with the camera to your eye. Mr Oishi explains why: ‘It’s possible. We know some people have difficulty with their nose operating the focus. We think our eight-way joystick is better in many circumstances but we’ll listen to feedback about a camera like the X-T20.’

The FujiFilm X-T20 offers X-T20 image quality in a smaller body. Despite having a touchscreen, it can’t offer touchpad AF control. For now…

This makes us wonder how the company decides which models feature touchscreens and which don’t. ‘It’s a question of the customer response,’ Oishi says. ‘The X100 has an optical viewfinder so it doesn’t make sense to put a touchscreen behind that. Maybe the joystick is better. With the X70, though, it’s a much smaller camera and you have to use the screen so it made sense to control with the screen.’

‘On the X-T20, we were trying to keep the camera small, so there wasn’t room for a joystick. So it depends on the product. It’s not about whether it’s seen as professional or not: the GFX has one.’

‘Product design for each model is focused on certain priorities,’ explains Luong: ‘X100 is about design. Even making it a couple of millimeters thicker to incorporate a touchscreen or tilt screen would make a big difference. It could change the design completely.’

‘We always think about the real target user’s priorities,’ says Oishi. ‘What does the target user want to use?’

Don’t count the X-E series out

The release of three SLR-style cameras in a row (X-T2, X-T20 and GFX 50S) doesn’t mean the company is abandoning the rangefinder style, though. ‘XE is an important series for us,’ Oishi says: ‘There are so many XE1, 2 and 2S users in the world. We are always thinking about the next model, whether that’s XT, XE or X-Pro. Obviously we can’t confirm anything at this point but we are aware there are many requests for this type of camera.’

Unmet needs?

With the X-series lineup looking increasingly mature, both in terms of lenses and bodies, what unmet needs remain?

‘Video is a big growth area for us,’ acknowledges Luong: ‘Our latest cameras such as the X-Pro2 and X-T2 show there’s a lot we’ve learned.’

 The Fujifilm X-T2 is a significantly more capable video camera than we were expecting.

And there’s an audience for video, he says: ‘If you look at who’s producing material, there’s a generation of YouTube content providers. People are increasingly watching content on their computers, on YouTube, rather than traditional TV.’

‘In Japan the developers worked very closely with production studios. A lot of their feedback shaped the outcome of the X-T2’s video quality and the way it operates.’

‘Features like Film Simulation, taking them from stills to video they found really useful but things such as bitrate, file format and compression, that came from us listening to feedback.’

‘Video is a big growth area for us, the X-Pro2 and X-T2 show there’s a lot we’ve learned’ – Billy Luong

There are challenges, though, says Oishi: ‘Movie AF is very difficult: it depends on the subject. Sometimes you want it to be quick, other times you want it to be slower and smooth.’

‘Whether it’s an algorithm that recognizes a tap on the screen should be a smooth focus pull, or potentially a custom setting, we’re very serious about getting it right,’ says Luong.

Does this mean we could expect an even more video-centric camera, given that all the X-series lenses are essentially in the Super 35 format?

‘We already have cinema lenses that are Super 35,’ Luong reminds us. ‘We’re continuing to develop video features, so we’ll continue to investigate.’

‘There’s a market there,’ Luong says.

Listening to customer feedback

Since the idea of user feedback had come up so often in the discussion, we ended by asking what the company’s process was for collecting feedback.

‘Our X Photographers: professionals who use the camera day in, day out, that’s the first line of feedback,’ says Luong: ‘It’s quite a large group. With the GFX we had something like 50 photographers around the world using pre-production cameras.’

‘We also monitor the comments on our YouTube channel and I personally scour through DPReview and try to work out which things are a must and which are ‘would be nice’.’

‘We don’t systematically seek feedback from our existing users,’ says Igarashi: ‘but we try to listen to everyone and evaluate those opinions.’

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Interview: Fujifilm talks GFX, X100F and getting serious about video

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Fujifilm X100F pre-production sample gallery

23 Jan
Fujifilm X100F at ISO 320, 1/125 sec, F3.6. Photo by Richard Butler

The Fujifilm X100F is the fourth iteration in the company’s series of compact-yet-capable fixed lens cameras. Though this model carries over the previous iterations’ 23mm (35mm equivalent) F2 lens, the lens takes on new life in front of a 24MP X-Trans CMOS III sensor found in the X-Pro2 and X-T2.

In the span of one weekend, our beta X100F has traveled from the east coast of the United States to the west, from candid street portraits to puppies, and there is an awful lot in between. Enjoy, and keep an eye out for an updated gallery with a full production model in the coming weeks.

Samples shot with a beta X100F, so many not exactly represent final image quality.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Fujifilm X100F pre-production sample gallery

Posted in Uncategorized