So what's all the fuss with Fuji then?

boyfalldown said:
Bet a pro didn't say that. We'll shoot whats appropriate at the time
Click to expand...

I can't remember as it was quite a few years ago and I think the original source came from an artical someone found, as for what's appropiate at the time, can you define this a bit more?
 
hashcake said:
as for what's appropiate at the time, can you define this a bit more?
Click to expand...


a couple of very quick examples - (cause its been done to death, and risks sidetracking an interesting thread)

1. Shooting a wedding. Probably using raw because I have time to process, file size is less of a concern, i want the highest quality etc etc

2. Shooting an event, probably jpeg, speed matters as does file size. etc etc
 
3. shooting sports and wiring shots direct to the newspaper, jpeg every time
 
X100 is the perfect camera for me. I have to confess, I've not sold my 5DII yet, it's been sitting in my cupboard for many months now.

The magic for X100 is not only that images are sharp, it has a dreamy film feel to it. Also the controls are just perfect, I've rarely had to slow down and check the numbers in the viewfinder display. The aperture number can be found out by feeling the aperture ring, the shutter speed and ISO are automatic at 1/80s rather than 5DII's 1/focal length. The X100 is really as simple as point, compose and shoot.

But then, if you are into wildlife photography. Perhaps a DSLR is a better bet.
 
wuyanxu said:
X100 is the perfect camera for me. I have to confess, I've not sold my 5DII yet, it's been sitting in my cupboard for many months now.

The magic for X100 is not only that images are sharp, it has a dreamy film feel to it. Also the controls are just perfect, I've rarely had to slow down and check the numbers in the viewfinder display. The aperture number can be found out by feeling the aperture ring, the shutter speed and ISO are automatic at 1/80s rather than 5DII's 1/focal length. The X100 is really as simple as point, compose and shoot.

But then, if you are into wildlife photography. Perhaps a DSLR is a better bet.
Click to expand...

I'm also into landscape and general nature photography as well and I have seen some really impressive photos taken with a mirrorless system, this thread is a certainly an eye opener for me.
I will be keeping a close eye on this tech because once they start producing longer reach lenses and people start posting good wildlife photos, I think I will be sold on the idea.
I have to say I really am stunned at people like yourself who were using a full frame system and moved or moving over to a mirrorless system as this obviously shows how impressed you are with Fuji.
 
hashcake said:
A few years ago there was a thread on here about how some pros only shoot in JPEG when using a DSLR and that they could produce perfect photos without any editing.
Quite a few of you have mentioned how good the JPEGS are that the Fuji X system produces.
Now, just as with a DSLR you have control over exposure, aperture, ISO etc, how have Fuji managed to gain an advantage over the likes of Canon and Nikon at producing such good JPEGS?
Everyone I know and quite a lot of people on here only use RAW then spend a lot of time doing pp / editing and personally I find nothing more boring and tedious than having to sit using lightroom with every photo I take.
I remember only using JPEG when I first started this hobby and after posting a few photos I received some really good advice on here about using RAW and I am sure that I have probably spent more time pp photos than I have had hot dinners in my life.
I have quite photos from a few years ago that I have archived the RAW images as I just couldn't be bothered with the effort of editing them.
Click to expand...

Fuji and olympus have always wiped the floor with the rest when it comes to JPEG processing. The very fact that you got better results processing rawfiles testifies to the fact that JPEG processing in the main is poor, be that awful contrast curves that can't be adjusted, highlight clipping, iffy saturation, plain wrong colours or even if all that is good maybe iffy sharpening of noise reduction.

Fuji colour profiles are great, not as great now as they were in the S3 and S5 but still great and coupled with the large range of different adjustments not just (+1 and -1 for contrast!) you can get a look that is consistently great, plus being a mirrorless system you see what you're going to get at time of capture, which of course you can't with normal use of a DSLR.

Fuji also employ what they call 'Lens Modulation Optimizer', which basically compensates for diffraction as the aperture decreases, and very well it works too - and is in part why raw processors can't match the detail that fuji can do with their jpegs.

Now of course it's worth noting that the majority of pros who use JPEG are in the sports or news category. These are cases where images are generally going to be printed small, so what would be completely unacceptable to a large format fine art landscaper can be overlooked, the content of the shot is far more important than any technical quality. Fuji can make JPEGs good enough for printing big, really big.

(I use JPEG + Raw, though use the raw ile less than 5% of the time and if I do it will be because of a cock up on my part originally, most of the time the raw will be processed in camera to get the correct image)
 
I know it's slightly off topic but with regards to mirrorless and wildlife you also have the samsung nx1 which has 15fps and continuous focus tracking, with the next firmware samsung have said they will increase the tracking performance by 100%(!) And With the new 300 mm s 2.8 they are going to release there could be a good possibility mirrorless will soon be more then capable for wildlife photography
 
DuncanDisorderly said:
Last night I was out shooting twilight landscapes, and it was demonstration of why the Fuji X cameras do so well.

It was an issue on the X10, but the X20, X30 uses a different sensor arrangement and the Adobe RAW converter does a much better job.
Click to expand...

I have found Adobe only really does canon and Nikon well, I get much better results with sony, olympus, panasonic and fujifilm raw if I convert them into tiff using their own raw editing software and then loading them up into lightroom.
 
Biggest problems...

1) RAW support
2) Base ISO of 200
3) 1/4000
4) Usable High ISO of 6400
5) Focus lock speed in low/tricky light
6) AF tracking

And no, Im not a fanboy of any kind, Ive had the X10, X100, X100S, XE1, XP1 and XT1, all cameras have their flaws.
 
Last edited:
Would that there was a perfect camera!!! Horses for courses and if you can afford a Clydesdale, a thoroughbred and a pit pony, have 'em all!!!
 
twist said:
Biggest problems...

1) RAW support
2) Base ISO of 200
3) 1/4000
4) Usable High ISO of 6400
5) Focus lock speed in low/tricky light
6) AF tracking

And no, Im not a fanboy of any kind, Ive had the X10, X100, X100S, XE1, XP1 and XT1, all cameras have their flaws.
Click to expand...

1) I haven't had much problems with using raw files while editing :-/
2) agreed :)
3) X-T1 firmware update enabled Electronic Shutter speeds 1 sec. to 1/32000 sec so better than the previous 4000 limit now :)
4) agreed 6400 is usable :)
5) Yea it can be hit n miss
6) On the X-T1 I found it better than alternative CSC choices at the time with tracking.. Since tried the A6000 which was better yet id have a X-T1 with Fuji lenses anyday over a A6000.
The X100s isn't upto much on tracking though.

I only have the Fuji X100s which for what it is it's great in the 2 week I've owned it ive not touched my 5D3, not that it's going replace it but it's just really nice camera that fits inside my coat fine and it produces excellent images.

I sold X-T1 to fund getting the 5D3 yet i would be tempted get another X-T1 at some point ! :)
 
:)To answer your question Darren, as the Nikon fanboy you refered to in the OP, I swapped to Fuji as I thought it would make me more attractive to the ladies, but sadly for me. I'm too old and ugly. On the plus side, my photos haven't got any worse! (Although I have a low standard to start with)
 
I find that the X-T1 with the 18-135 makes my willy look bigger compared to the D750 with the 70-300 extended...
 
feek said:
:)To answer your question Darren, as the Nikon fanboy you refered to in the OP, I swapped to Fuji as I thought it would make me more attractive to the ladies, but sadly for me. I'm too old and ugly. On the plus side, my photos haven't got any worse! (Although I have a low standard to start with)
Click to expand...

:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
One reason for the attraction of mirrorless is that there are now so many different types with different features and sizes being brought out all the time, that the choice and variety is great. So people get to choose one suits their particular needs. Some want an EVF. Some want super compactness. Some like the looks. Some just do stills. For others, video features are important. Different people. Different preferences.
 
Last edited:
Base ISO of 200 isn't really a problem as it's actually 100 in disguise!

Fuji cook their raw files but in terms of outright exposure times ISO 200 = iso 100 on a.n.other camera.
 
feek said:
:)To answer your question Darren, as the Nikon fanboy you refered to in the OP, I swapped to Fuji as I thought it would make me more attractive to the ladies, but sadly for me. I'm too old and ugly. On the plus side, my photos haven't got any worse! (Although I have a low standard to start with)
Click to expand...
LOL Rob! :D
I did wonder if you would see this thread and being serious for a moment (I know, me being serious, who would believe it) what made you decide to move over to Fuji as I've just remembered (well I am old and senile) that I haven't asked you this question.
Oh and for the record, I called you 'die hard Nikon fan, not a fanboy (I only use that term for people who think everything they own has to be made by Apple).
And as more attractive to the ladies is concerned, I am telling your wife :p
 
Last edited:
Brazo said:
Base ISO of 200 isn't really a problem as it's actually 100 in disguise!

Fuji cook their raw files but in terms of outright exposure times ISO 200 = iso 100 on a.n.other camera.
Click to expand...

AFAIK that's not quite right, they cook the file but its more like 1\3 stop not a whole stop. Iso 6400 is like 4200.
 
ianp5a said:
One reason for the attraction of mirrorless is that there are now so many different types with different features and sizes being brought out all the time, that the choice and variety is great. So people get to choose one suits their particular needs. Some want an EVF. Some want super compactness. Some like the looks. Some just do stills. For others, video features are important. Different people. Different preferences.
Click to expand...

It's totally understandable that there are various reasons why the mirrorless system appeals to people but I was initially intrigued as to why so many DSLR users had started moving over to the Fuji X system, I now understand the reasons a lot more before starting this thread so it's opened my eyes.
 
Nod said:
I find that the X-T1 with the 18-135 makes my willy look bigger compared to the D750 with the 70-300 extended...
Click to expand...
Surely a macro lens would have done a good job? :D
 
twist said:
AFAIK that's not quite right, they cook the file but its more like 1\3 stop not a whole stop. Iso 6400 is like 4200.
Click to expand...

I've measured it at 0.59 stop at higher ISO, if this is consistent throughout the range then ISO 200 is more like ISO 140 or so :)
 
Love my canon DSLR's and big telephotos for wildlife , great autofocus, tracking sped etc... and full frame is full frame .
Love my little fuji XT1 and 100s for out and about, easy to carry, great image quality, and old fashioned controls fabulous.

I have invested in both systems to get the benefits of both, would not give up either unless i stopped wildlife photography and then fuji would be the choice, quality and portability.

Only my personal views of course
 
twist said:
Others have had other results but I'm not really fussed if we split the difference its still not iso 100 or iso 6400.
Click to expand...

I guess it also depends what you are testing against :D I measured against a 6D. I'm not a fan of the weird way Fuji works out its ISO figures.
 
My X-T1 is my fun camera and the one I take on holiday. it's great to use and I love the manual controls and takes me right back to the 1980s when I was using Nikon FMs F3s etc. The JPEGs are good but I shoot in RAW so for me that wasn't a deal breaker. However, for me the Nikon D810 / D750 Combined with quality, low light ability and superior AF and tracking eclipse the X-T1. One of Fujis strengths is the XF optical range, the 23mm being an outstanding lens. Fuji are only let down by their poor quality flash system.
 
hashcake said:
Surely a macro lens would have done a good job? :D
Click to expand...

Yes, but the Fuji 60mm only offers 1:2 reproduction! (Actually, the other reason I kept the Nikon system is that the 105mm Nikkor Micro is a lot better than the Fuji offering IMO. [Having compared them side by side.])
 
Blank_Canvas said:
..... Fuji are only let down by their poor quality flash system.....
Click to expand...
I have noticed that Fuji's EF-X20 is almost the only flash you can buy with a dial for selecting power output manually - even high end flash units from nikon or canon do not appear to have an output dial and require the user to use menus and buttons.
 
The Nissin i40 has a dial to control the power on manual or TTL, and is available for Fuji. It's also very compact. Meaning it's a good match for a compact camera.
 
boliston said:
I have noticed that Fuji's EF-X20 is almost the only flash you can buy with a dial for selecting power output manually - even high end flash units from nikon or canon do not appear to have an output dial and require the user to use menus and buttons.
Click to expand...

The lack of power, battery duration and off camera TTL is the main issue. The dials are actuary quiet nice other than that there isn't much going for it. It's as if Fuji can't really be bothered to develop a decent flash system. Definitely an area for development.
 
hashcake said:
LOL Rob! :D
I did wonder if you would see this thread and being serious for a moment (I know, me being serious, who would believe it) what made you decide to move over to Fuji as I've just remembered (well I am old and senile) that I haven't asked you this question.
Oh and for the record, I called you 'die hard Nikon fan, not a fanboy (I only use that term for people who think everything they own has to be made by Apple).
And as more attractive to the ladies is concerned, I am telling your wife :p
Click to expand...

Darren, I moved over to Fuji because they make cameras I want to use. I love the compact size and looks with all the features. I still have three Nikon bodies and various lenses, but am saving these for heirlooms for the kids to sell to museums. The fuji cameras make going for a wander around a pleasure and I don't think about weight or what lenses to take. I'm not into any particular genre of photography, or make my living from it, so the current line up of lenses suit me. For the last few months I've been using the 10-24mm and have really enjoyed the experience. I now have four Fuji cameras and my XT-1 is probably my favourite of all time. As to telling my wife, she ran off with a minolta dynax collector, so what does she know! Next time we meet up I'll let you have a play with a Fuji, and you'll forget about the dark/light side, come over to the fun side.
 
feek said:
Darren, I moved over to Fuji because they make cameras I want to use. I love the compact size and looks with all the features. I still have three Nikon bodies and various lenses, but am saving these for heirlooms for the kids to sell to museums. The fuji cameras make going for a wander around a pleasure and I don't think about weight or what lenses to take. I'm not into any particular genre of photography, or make my living from it, so the current line up of lenses suit me. For the last few months I've been using the 10-24mm and have really enjoyed the experience. I now have four Fuji cameras and my XT-1 is probably my favourite of all time. As to telling my wife, she ran off with a minolta dynax collector, so what does she know! Next time we meet up I'll let you have a play with a Fuji, and you'll forget about the dark/light side, come over to the fun side.
Click to expand...

Rob I can't argue with your reasons for switching and of course there has been a major jump in camera tech the last few years but as I dropped of from this hobby, it's a whole new learning curve to me.
However, I remember the banter we use to have on meets and back then, we both know how each other liked the kit we used, was just a surprise to me that you had moved away from the DSLR.
I have learned a lot more via this thread than I could from reading a zillion reviews and I do understand a lot more why people have switched to the Fuji X system.
As I don't have much in the way of Canon kit at the moment, I am considering a longer reach telephoto lens just to get back into wildlife photography but I am not prepared to pay out again for something like a 100-400L at the moment.
I am going to keep a close eye on Fuji's development with mirrorless technology as the idea of being able to produce good photos straight form JPEG really does appeal to me.
Hopefully I will catch up with you on a meet or two this year and I will take up your offer of playing with the Fuji :D
 
ShinySideUp said:
Since reading this thread I had a look in detail at the X system from Fuji. It looks very interesting for street photography (as I find with my X20) but for long-range photography I'm not so sure. See this picture...holding this lens on this ca mera might turn out to be a little awkward.

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujinon_lens_xc50_230mmf45_67_ois/
Click to expand...

Have look at post #39, ukaskew has given the link to his flikr, he has used the 55-200 fuji lens quite a lot and has some stunning photos, I can only presume they were all taken hand held. He also mention the 100-400 that Fuji are releasing (details here about planned lenses http://www.fujirumors.com/new-lens-...-macro-35mmf2-100-400-and-1-4x-teleconverter/).
When a couple of TP members let me try their 100-400L lenses with my gripped 40D, I said to myself that there was no way I could hold this kit and expect to get decent photos even with IS.
I ended up with a 100-400L on a gripped 50D and was well impressed with the hand held shots I captured of birds in flight.
However, I can see your point and even though a DSLR with a grip and super zoom lens are quite heavy, I found that the use of the grip balanced the weight out well.
I've not looked to see if Fuji do grips for the X system but as I am in no hurry, I will sit back and wait to see what users here have to say and show us photo wise when these new lenses are available.
 
Further to that, I suppose it's horses for courses. My own camera, a D810, complete with a 24-70mm F2.8 weighs in at over 2.5 kg and I find the weight very helpful for steady shots but then the camera design, with the deep grip, is well-balanced.

Having said that, the other day I used my wife's D5000 with a 50mm lens on it and it felt like a toy! But it was also a very pleasant change to handle something so light and manouverable.
 
It's also important to understand that it's not just Fuji there's generally been a move toward mirrorless by a lot of people particularly over the last couple of years as they've got closer and closer to DSLR performance. In fact the micro four thirds setup from Olympus and Panasonic is probably the most popular choice as a mirrorless system at present rather than Fuji and the Sony NEX along with their newer Full Frame A7 series have been great for full frame users looking to shed the weight of their kit.
 
I wonder when canon and nikon will join the game properly? I know they don't want to lose the sales from their dslr ranges but surely with dslr sales dropping and mirrorless rising they can't ignore it forever?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top