As I write this, I am sitting on my back porch in the Adirondacks. I am wonderfully relaxed: after a morning of hiking and shooting, the smell of balsam, and the soothing sound of a nearby cascade tempts me into taking a mid-afternoon nap.

Back in the day, I would have arrived here with several large camera bags with all sorts of gear including multiple DSLRs with multiple lenses, several heavy tripods, and flashes. I would have spent considerable time on the choice of lenses to bring. I would, days before leaving, begin the process of charging the multiple battery types I would need.

This was not necessarily frivolous. 15 years ago, if I wanted images that would print big, I would need to bring my best equipment, which meant big DSLRs and lenses. Nowadays. with mirrorless Fujifilm gear with lots of megapixels, my gear choice is much less critical, and my camera bags are far less cumbersome.

For this trip, as for other recent trips, my choice was straightforward. In one small bag I have my X100f with two teleconverters, and a polarizing filter for the main lens.

In truth, this set up alone would probably satisfy 70-80% of my needs at this point. The 28-50mm FOV offered by this gear, along with the soft leaf shutter, make it a very capable landscape camera. With the built-in neutral density filter, it is a clear choice for moving water.

One might imagine that my other camera bag might contain my Xpro2. You would be wrong. Though I enjoy that camera and value its stout construction and weather sealing, it doesn’t usually make the cut for personal travel. My interchangeable lens travel camera is generally its little brother, the XE3.

There are several reasons for this. First of all, is the smaller size, and lower weight of the XE3. This is despite the fact that it has the exact same imager and thus picture quality, as the XPro2. The lack of weather sealing is a slight issue, but as most of my lenses are not similarly robust, and I’m reasonably careful, I’m not sure it matters much.

Finally, for some reason, USB charging, a feature of both the XE3 and later X100 series cameras, was omitted in the X Pro 2. This makes no sense to me given the latter camera’s larger size. This charging function eliminates the need for a separate battery charger. As both the X100f and the XE3 use the same batteries, everything works out nicely.

As for lenses, my choices vary, but on this trip, for the sake of simplicity, I grabbed both “kit” zooms the 18-55mm f2.8 t0 4.5, and the 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 both of which are image stabilized and wonderfully sharp. I also packed the Laowa 9mm f2.8 and the Fujifilm 60mm f2.4 just to have a few primes lenses along.

The resultant kit is unobtrusive, very light and fun to shoot. It is also convenient that the two camera bodies have nearly identical control layouts. With this gear using a light tripod, I can easily capture images that will make beautiful fine art prints, to 17×22 inches and beyond.

It’s fun that light and easy to use photography gear has become so capable.

I hope I still am.

 

It has been an unusual summer for the Pocono region of Pennsylvania, if not for most of the mid-Atlantic region.  Brief periods of muggy partially sunny weather have offered inadequate solace for the long periods of days of gloomy skies with intermittent downpours that flooded our basements as well as our creeks and rivers.  Unusual for August, the Susquehanna River came near the top of its banks, and flooded many low-lying areas.

Despite this, summer goes on.

I am of an age, where the children of my contemporaries are now getting married.  I had 2 such ceremonies this year where I could be the guest, and not the photographer.

 Weather-wise the first wedding came off without a hitch, occurring during a rare appearance of pleasant sunny weather. The second wedding, which was held in a gorgeous lakeside lodge in Bucks County, was thoroughly rained out.  It was kind of sad to look out at the teeming rain, and see the archway, and the white chairs still forlornly waiting to be occupied.  Nonetheless it was a lovely ceremony, even held indoors.

The weather this year has certainly affected my photographic output.  Often the rainy periods occurred over weekends when I have time to shoot. Even when it wasn’t raining, the warm muggy air seemed to egg on the biting flies and particularly the mosquitoes.  The latter are breeding profusely given the persistence of vernal ponds and other areas of standing water.

This weekend, given the extravagant run off, I thought it would be interesting to photograph moving water.  How naïve.  I grabbed my X100f and a tripod, and gamely hiked out into the nearby State Forest intending to visit a hidden glen I know well.

It took about 5 minutes to figure out, that this wasn’t the day for unhurried tripod work.

I was almost instantly set upon by hordes of mosquitoes who would likely exsanguinate me, if I stopped long enough to set up a tripod.  They certainly provided me the incentive for a brisk walking pace.

I have another wedding to attend, this time for my niece Alex, in Jersey City this weekend.  The weather it is said, will have turned by then, providing bright blue skies, cool temperatures and low humidity.  I will probably shoot a few images, and try hard, as always not to get in the way of the hired gun.

 I am happy that she will not have to come up with a plan B.  And I am hopeful that this weather change portends a more hospitable late summer and fall.

 And hopefully, less mosquitoes.

 

The winter of 2017-18 is over.  At least chronologically.

As I write this, it is the first full day of spring.  For the third time this March, a Nor’easter has formed off the coast of the Outer Banks and is making its way north.

It is now spreading snow over the Appalachians, and points east.  Forecasts for this storm have been wavering, but I think that between 2 and 6 inches over the elevation or I reside is likely (5″ eventually fell).  Though I do yearn for spring, the upcoming weekend is forecast to be sunny and pleasant.  It will likely offer one more opportunity for cross-country skiing before I put my equipment away.

It has been a strange winter.We had a little snow earlier in the year, and then extremely warm February.  By groundhog day it seemed likely that we would drift right into spring (though the groundhog disagreed).  Winter is cruel that way.

Then came March with its storms which in our part of the Poconos have maintained an adequate snowpack for recreation.  Today’s storm continues that trend.  And the warm weather, at least according to the meteorologists, is not yet in sight.

The last several months have been a busy time.  Given my position as a pulmonary physician, this winter’s flu epidemic kept me on my toes, running between patient rooms, gowning and re gowning to avoid the spread of the virus to other patients and hospital staff.  I have been overseeing some renovations at my home, including a new home office and photo studio.  Earlier in March, I spent my usual late winter week in the Adirondacks.  There was plenty of snow for skiing and snowshoeing as well as photography.   This will serve as my excuse for the lack of attention to the site over the past month or so.  Now happily, the flu epidemic has waned, and my renovations are largely done. It’s time to put pen to paper (so to speak).

In the time since my last article, mindful of my good experience with the rather modest XF 18–55mm zoom legacy lens, I focused my attention on its bigger brother, the XF55-200mm f3.5-4.8 OIS zoom that hearkens from the same time period.  I have written about this lens before.  Ironically, I published its original review almost exactly the same time of year back in 2014.   Now with the higher resolution sensors available on newer Fujifilm bodies, it was worth digging out of my roomy new equipment cabinet for a second look.

Over the years, this is proven to be a fairly rugged lens. Though I used it fairly frequently in its early years, cosmetically it looks roughly the same as when I took delivery.  At 55mm, and without its deep lens-shade, the lens is fairly compact, though it telescopes awkwardly as one increases the focal length.  It tends to look weird on a rangefinder style body such as the X Pro 2, though it handles just fine.

The focus and aperture dials remain smooth after 4 years of ownership.  The lens continues to exude high-quality.  Though it is not officially weather-sealed, I have used it multiple times in rainy or snowy conditions without any difficulty.

 

In my normal photography with the Fuji system, I tend to favor mild wide lenses like the 23 mm lens in my X100 series cameras, combined with a mild telephoto such as my XF 56mm f1.2.  With the 50-200mm I tended to shoot from its short end, out to about 160 mm, because as it approaches 200 mm, sharpness is known to deteriorate slightly.  It thus tends to be an outdoor lens, as it is not nearly fast enough, (nor razor sharp wide open like the Fuji primes ) for natural light indoor photography.

Particularly on a “long” lens. the addition of optical image stabilization (OIS) is extremely convenient. It definitely increases your “keepers” if your subject is static.

Now I love being a prime lens snob. To be honest, though, the quality of both of the original “kit” lenses is somewhere between more than adequate to awesome, Used within their limitations (good light, slowly moving subjects) they are no impediment to producing quality prints of landscape subjects. This suits me fine.  If I want to go back to shooting sports and fast-moving wildlife, I would probably invest in a use or refurbished Nikon D7XXX body to use with the  70-200 f2.8 VR Nikkor that still lurks in my studio.  For what I do, this Fuji telephoto zoom works just fine.

 

Fujifilm makes several other long zooms including a robust 50–140 millimeter f2.8 which would also suit my focal length needs, and allow more light for fast action and dusk/dawn shooting.  It is $1500 new and weighs more than twice as much as the 55-200, attributes that are not particularly interesting to me.  Like my Nikkor 70-200mm, it has sufficient size/weight to require a tripod mount. Thus, for me, it would be likely relegated to shooting from the car. That kind of shooting I tend to do with my heavier Nikon gear.

I still prefer prime lenses, both for their inherent quality and for the discipline they instill in my shooting.  But I can see maintaining a camera bag, with the 2 zoom lenses, and a more SLR-like camera such as an X-T10/20 body. This would be fairly light, and a very easy “grab” when headed out into the outdoors for some impromptu exercise. 

Given the quality of images I have seen these two lenses, such a gear bag would likely spend a lot of time by my side.

 

It has been almost 4 months since the UPS man walked up my driveway, and dropped off my X100f.  It has become, as was its predecessor the X100t, my most used camera body.  And over that period of time, I have definitely formed some opinions on the camera particularly compared to its predecessors.

I posted my initial review of the X100f here.

The “f” model  X100 some ways is the most revolutionary new model, at least since the “s” version of this small range finder-like body.  It slightly larger than its predecessors, mainly to accommodate the larger battery of the other cameras in the “X” series.  I was concerned that this would alter the physical joint using the camera, but over the months the differences mean nothing.  And the convenience of packing one battery type for a photography job or trip is well worth whatever additional girth the camera brings.  I also like the idea that in a pinch, the camera can serve as a charger for the pool of batteries either in a car or at home.

I have been using the camera a lot with the TCL  X100 Mark II, which automatically changes the camera setting to reflect the change in the field of view (35–50 millimeters).  This lens, like its predecessor, is optically excellent, and now I don’t forget to change the camera setting.

I’m pleased with the autofocus performance in general, but I am sometimes frustrated by the facial recognition, which is somewhat inconsistent even shooting multiple images of the same scene.  Sometimes it just won’t pick up the face.  It would probably be better, to turn it off and just use a focus point.  This is especially true since we now have the advantage of the joystick control.

I’ve noticed a few other things.  The focus mode switch on the side of the camera seems to have had its actions stiff and somewhat.  On the camera’s predecessor, I actually had some gaffer tape over the switch to keep it in the “S” setting as I often found that it would move unbeknownst to me (I generally only use manual focusing for panoramas, and almost never use continuous focusing).

I have never been overly impressed in the past with the resolution improvement of the new 25mp sensor relative to its 16mp predecessor, but I think I’m noticing more shake artifact in images with the newer camera.  Maybe as I age my hands aren’t as steady as they used to be.  Still, in all, I don’t remember this with the previous bodies.  Nothing in the leaf shutter mechanism is changed to my knowledge, and the camera still has a nice soft shutter sound.

I was already a fan of the Acros black-and-white film simulation on my X Pro 2, and though I shoot in raw, I often develop images in photoshop with this profile.  To my eyes, it is relatively close to the camera-generated image.

Overall I’m extremely pleased with my new camera.  The X100 series has become like an old friend to me, and in my collection, even among the other Fujifilm products, it is the easiest to reach for what I’m going out and about.  It remains discrete and non-threatening and wonderful for event and street shooting, and with the extra resolution wonderful for landscapes.  Also with its soft shutter and built-in neutral density filter, it remains my favorite camera for moving water.

It’s,  going to get a lot of use over the next several years.

.

 

Here it is mid-February, in the middle of another unusual winter in Pennsylvania. Ten days ago there was a crusty cover of snow on the ground here in the Pocono region. Unfortunately, an altitude related ice storm seven days ago wrecked the brief period of cross-country skiing we had enjoyed after a 9-inch snowfall.   This week, a 5 day period of >50-degree weather finished things off, cruelly teasing us into thinking that spring is around the corner (it is most certainly not).

I am somewhat heartened that this heat wave will not be fully expressed up in the Adirondacks, where I hope to be recreating in several weeks. Nonetheless, these lackluster winters can be very discouraging to those of us still enjoy snow sports and the photographic opportunities that “normal” winter provides.

Unfortunately, at this latitude, it appears that for at least this year, winter will be a cold damp brown and gray season with occasional teases of snow. I am starting to hate winter, but for different reasons that most of my friends.

The worse thing about this has to do with living on a dirt road. For most of the winters over the last 25 or so years, the road will freeze in mid-to-late November and then remain frozen, and often snow-covered, until sometime in March when we get our first extended bout of above freezing weather. There will then be a roughly 2 week period, where the road becomes soft and unstable. Driving on it can feel as though he will sink down to your axles; it leaves our cars coated with splats of red shale mud. Then one day the road dries and compacts, and is all is well for the remainder of the year.

This year, the road has been through maybe 3 cycles of freeze/thaw which is getting rather irritating. Freeze/thaw also leads to large potholes in the paved roads. I really hate this.

I sometimes think I should either move permanently to the Adirondacks for January-March, or give up on the whole winter thing, go south, wear shorts with black socks, and gradually prepare for death.

On a happier note, I pretty much have determined that I will purchase a new X100f along with at least the TCL X1 100 mark II teleconverter (I use this much more than the wide converter). It will be extremely pleasant not to forget to adjust the camera when the lens converter is on (the phase II versions of the converters talk to the camera so it adjusts automatically). I’m hoping to use it in the Adirondacks, so I am waiting to see whether it goes on back order after the introduction date. At some point, my used (but not too used) X00t will go up on E Bay.

 Boy o’ boy, May feels a long way off.

 

 

Back in the days before digital imaging, it was much easier to keep your gear current. I think back to 1980s vintage Nikon F3 which was produced (admittedly in multiple forms) for perhaps 20 years. The camera featured very simple technology, with little pressing reason to update. There was finally an auto focus version of the camera in the last several years of its twenty-year lifespan, but for the most part there was little change over its long history.

Nowadays things are radically different. Cameras are far more sophisticated, and photographers now expect fairly frequent updates to them, even though they long surpassed the performance of those older cameras long ago. I think also the fact that the technological advances of new models involve not only exposure and focus, but the actual film stock (the digital sensor) that the camera uses increases the interest in upgraded models.

In the last week, Fujifilm has announced replacements for 2 cameras that I currently own. The X100F replaces the X100T model in a somewhat confusing nomenclature scheme. And the X-T10 is replaced with the X-T20.

As always the question of whether to and when to upgrade comes up.

Let me first acknowledge, that photography is not my main source of income.  I have always tried to be rational about equipment purchases.  Every once in a while I find myself with a bloated collection of gear which needs to be thinned.  I am there now.  Soon, I suspect I will once again become a frequent visitor to my FedEx drop-off point.

I see that I am not the only one who faces this dilemma. A Fuji photographer I very much admire, Zack Arias, writes about gear simplification here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

First my thoughts on my current X-T10 currently the budget version of the SLR style X-T1 interchangeable lens camera. This for me as a modestly used device (I have learned that I prefer rangefinder style cameras and I already own a nearly identically spec’d  XE-2). The main improvement in the newer camera is, of course, the sensor, which is now 24mp.  I already own a version of this sensor in my X Pro 2.  In my experience, the real resolution boost offered by the newer chip is modest, and the high ISO performance is roughly the same.  Still, more resolution is not a bad thing.

Whereas I do enjoy the Acros film simulation that is only offered in the 24 mp cameras I can typically get pretty close to the same profile with a custom RAW conversion I have set up in Photoshop. There are autofocus improvements I suppose, but I’m not grossly unhappy with the current camera (and perhaps there is more to come in a firmware upgrade). Finally, while I think the enhanced video capabilities are interesting, they are not important to my workflow. 

Thus I probably won’t upgrade this camera anytime soon.  In fact after this analysis, as much as I like the little X-T10, I would consider putting it on E Bay list, and waiting for the rumored rangefinder style XE3 to be introduced.

The X100T to “F” upgrade is slightly different for me. I like the fact that the battery will now be the same as all of my other Fuji “X” cameras though the older battery was fairly cheap(and I have a lot of them). I hope the camera will still be chargeable through its USB port. Once again the new sensor (the same 24mp sensor of the XT-20) is not really a draw for me, but not a detriment either.  Apparently, unlike a lot of other people, I do like the new ISO/shutter speed dial (same as on my X Pro 2).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I do wonder however whether the incremental improvement in auto focus in this model line will be greater (the X100T had earlier auto focus technology than the X-T10). To me, a very significant improvement is the autofocus “joystick”. It was a very useful addition to the X Pro 2.

Ironically, I have actually avoided using it on that camera for fear of it becoming reflexive when it is not available for focusing on my other bodies.  Currently, if one is to retain the largest number of function buttons on the camera, moving the autofocus point, requires you to first press the lower button of the four-way pad, which then tells the camera that the keypad  is to be used for autofocus.  This means an additional step and occasionally results in lost opportunities.  With the joystick, moving the autofocus point can be done instantly.  Adding it to the X100F means that I will be more comfortable relying on it in both cameras. In fact the lack of the joystick on the X-T20 means that it will be more difficult to integrate that model line in the future.

I hope the XE 3 will have a joystick.

 One new development I am both frustrated and intrigued by is the improvements in the lens converter system for the X100F. the new converters communicate with the X100F, allowing the camera to automatically adjust when they are mounted (I often forget to do this on my current camera).  This is wonderful, except that I have pristine copies of both of the older lens converters for the X 100 series which I understand are optically identical. I would probably first upgrade the TCL (50 mm FOV), as that is the one I use far more frequently than the WCL(28 mm FOV).  I could really save some money here if only my interaction with the camera was a little more disciplined.

As this is my most commonly used camera, I believe it makes more sense to upgrade this instrument, given that I will obtain the most benefit and enjoyment from the money spent.  And my fairly pristine X100T, on eBay, seems to have decent residual value.

This explains my thought processes, on upgrading equipment.

Feel free to offer your comments and ideas.

 

 

 

 

There is a different and wonderful culture in the Adirondacks. It is one where outdoor activities feature prominently.  Events such as the Wooden Ski Race, and Full Moon Madness that I have described elsewhere on this site, as well as the Saranac Winter Festival, all display a physicality and an embrace of the season that is lacking for instance, in my Pennsylvania hometown.

On a recent trip to Lake Placid, I attended one of my favorites; namely the Broomball tournament, held at The Cottage, a waterside/ pub restaurant, that is part of the spectacular Mirror Lake Inn; a luxury resort hotel in the village.

The Cottage is the pub and informal dining venue for the resort. In summer can be very pleasant to paddle a kayak or canoe to the restaurant’s dock , and stop for a bite of lunch.

For much of the winter, however, with Mirror Lake firmly frozen, an area of the ice is plowed behind the restaurant, and an informal hockey rink is set up. Then in January, the restaurant sponsors a tournament for the somewhat arcane sport, which is apparently the winter version of softball for many people.

Broomball, is a sort of proto hockey. The rules are similar, but the equipment, at least in the case of the local variety is much less sophisticated. As I understand it was often played in tennis shoes, though there is actually a specialized shoe to wear which gives more friction to the icy surface. In the Lake Placid varient, the predominant “stick”, was an actual broom, with the bottom cut off about halfway up, then wrapped in duct tape. There is an actual broomball that is used, a little bigger than a softball.

While some of the teams, had actual matching hockey Jerseys (and apparently padding), most people played in heavy outdoor clothing sometimes with whimsical touches. Everyone plays with some sort of helmet. In this multisport town, I saw players sporting rock climber’s helmets, skiing helmets, and even hockey helmets. Though it was quite mild (high 20s F) this year, I have seen it proceed enthusiastically with temperatures in the minus teens.

Now to be sure, Broomball, apparently in Canada, and parts of the US, is a serious sport with a governing body, and specialized equipment, and national tournaments. Not so much in Lake Placid. Though obviously a lot of serious competitive athletics goes on in town, this one is not so intense. Like many activities in the North Country, my impression over the years from this event, it is that it is first and foremost an opportunity to socialize and be convivial on a dark cold evening in January. It is only secondarily a competition.

The large crowd gathers both in the restaurant, where windows allow the games to be followed, or down on the ice around a warming fire built for the occasion. As the festivities continue, the bar gets rowdy, but never unpleasantly so. Many of the older folks, who prudently no longer play, share great memories of their own time on the ice.

It is one of the small events, that over the year makes Lake Placid a truly unique placed to visit.

Man I hate progress. Just when you think you have the perfect camera body (or audio gear, or smartphone, or automobile); just when you think your little automotive or electronic universe is perfect, some snooty set of engineers, employed by a busybody manufacturer, goes ahead and makes an improved version of your toy.

You find yourself staring at the brochure (or more likely now the web page) for the new creation.  You breathlessly review the device’s new specifications and capabilities and just hoping that its ancestor, which you currently own, has not been made completely obsolete by the new arrival.

Unfortunately, the manufacturer has no desire to take you off the hook, or to give you any comfort in the knowledge that you currently possess a device that is still adequate to the task.  Their marketers want very badly to convince you that it is absolutely essential to sell your current device and possess their new offering which is so much more advanced, that you might as well not even own your current camera (or audio gear, or Smartphone, or automobile).

And it works.  One by one the pages of eBay sprout multiple new auction offerings of the old device, as their owners work to raise the capital so that they acquire the new model. And generally, it will be a model, that if you’re lucky, is perhaps 5% better overall than the device it replaced.

But when the UPS man finally arrives with your new toy, for you the consumer…no, the aficionado, your universe is complete. You’re back on top.

Now, we’re all I think, to some degree or another subject to these impulses.  You wouldn’t be reading this blog if you weren’t interested enough in camera gear and photography to waste a portion of your day perusing these articles.

And I wouldn’t be writing these articles if the subject didn’t interest me.  But it’s important to keep one’s head squarely on one’s shoulders.

Nikon has just released the D7100.  I’ve written extensively on its predecessor articles which you can read here and here.  I thoroughly enjoyed the D7000 and it will continue to hold a valuable place among my collection of camera gear.

The new camera has several interesting advances:

It sports a 24 megapixel Toshiba sensor, which  is similar to the 36 megapixel sensor of  the D800e in that it lacks a “low pass” filter.  It should thus have noticeably better resolution than the D7000, which has only 16 megapixels with a filter.  Nonetheless, the current resolution has proven to be very adequate for most of my needs ( the image above for instance, was significantly cropped).

Though more megapixels can be useful,  they  will be so only if they do not if adversely affect the low noise levels, and particularly the wide dynamic range of the current D7000 sensor. In fairness however, most often with Nikon sensors, the newer ones are strikingly better than their predecessors in most attributes.

The D7100 has a new autofocus system which is said to be more sensitive than the old one.  The autofocus points are also more broadly spread across the frame.  That’s a good thing.

There’s some improvement in burst speed, add a new crop factor (1.3x) which yields an image reduced to 15 megapixels, but allows you to access the camera’s highest burst speeds (seven fps in the crop mode, as opposed to six fps for the D 7000 in full resolution).

There are improvements to video capture including the addition of stereo microphones.

And like the D600, there is now a lock button on the mode dial.

To me, as a landscape photographer, the usefulness of upgrading to the D7100 would entirely depend on the sensors characteristics.  If the increase in resolution is accompanied by simultaneous dramatic improvements in high ISO performance (an achievement Nikon does tend to pull off) then the newer camera may be worth acquiring.  If the gains are in resolution alone, that I suspect I might acquire one when the market is right, i.e.; when the used market for the D7000 is still good, and the 7100 refurbs or discounts start to appear.  Time will tell.

Remember I own a D 600 which makes resisting this new offering much easier.

Obviously we need  fo people  to purchase goods, if we’re ever to improve the economy of our country, and for that matter, that of the globe.

But as always I urge caution when new models of our beloved equipment become available.

For unless they offer significant improvements in capabilities, specific to your usage patterns, then the newest model is unlikely to be a good investment.

Now, none of this applies to you if you own a much earlier camera body, particularly one that is a couple of steps below the 7000 series.  If you need what the D7100 offers, and can afford it, then by all means enjoy.  I believe you’ll be buying a fine photographic instrument.

However always remember that the addition of a new model does nothing to alter the quality and function of its predecessor.  I suspect we could all improve our output as much, by better utilizing the features of our current camera gear as by buying the newest model.

Take a deep breath and think, before you push that “confirm purchase” button on the screen.

Faithful readers of this site are aware of my affection for the Fuji X series cameras, both the X100 and the X Pro 1.

I think perhaps the one characteristic shared by both cameras is the very high quality lenses Fuji has designed for both devices. This includes the fixed 23 MM lens on the X100, and the three original prime lenses offered with the X Pro 1.  Still and all, there are times when a zoom lens is helpful, particularly in circumstances where “zooming with your feet” is impossible.  And although these cameras seem to have less propensity for motion blur then say, a digital SLR with the big moving mirror, it still an issue. It is particularly a problem when I use the cameras while hiking, when my vigorous cardiac contractions can cause camera shake.  With all this in mind, I was very eager to try the 18 -55 mm f2.8-4 image stabilized zoom lens Fuji announced with the X E1.  I was hopeful that the high quality of the prime “XF” lenses, would carry over to the new zoom.

I finally received word several weeks ago that the lens was in stock at B and H so I ordered one.  I’ve been shooting with it in a number of settings and would offer these observations.

Obviously this is less than a formal review.  There’ll be no resolution charts or other such technical data (I lack both the equipment and the inclination).

The lens arrived in the usual black Fuji packaging.  Included with the lens, is a scalloped lens hood and a pinch lens cap.  Unlike some of the prime lenses, the hood and lens cap function much like more conventional lenses (the hood can be reversed and stored on the lens).  The lens also comes with the familiar XF mount lens pouch which is larger than the lens, and closed by folding the end flap over itself (I’d really rather a drawstring).  Happily the build quality of the lens seems identical to the prime lenses.  The lens is mainly metal with very precisely machined ridges on the zoom and focus rings. Happily it is not much bigger than the 35 mm prime with its rectangular lens hood.

Unlike the prime lenses, the aperture ring has no markings and the aperture is determined by looking at the viewfinder, or rear LCD.  There is a separate switch which determines whether the aperture ring functions, or whether the aperture is set to automatic (allowing shutter priority shooting).  The movement of all the rings is very smooth.  I don’t use manual focus very much but the amount of travel required of the focus ring to go from near too far, seems fairly modest.  In my experience autofocus with this lens is fairly quick, perhaps roughly as good as the 35 mm.

One great feature of this lens is that it is image stabilized.  It’s always hard to know how well this feature works.  I become fairly adept at shooting the non-image stabilized Fuji lenses without much motion blur.  Reportedly the feature is good for keeping the image sharp for 3-4 stops of longer exposure.

This lens is really meant to be used with the electronic viewfinder.  At shorter focal lengths, the optical viewfinder can be useful, but as the lens is zoomed, the bright frame delineating the actual image, shrinks to a point where is roughly the size of the focus box, and thus essentially useless for framing.  I just keep the viewfinder set to electronic, which for me works fine.

I had the lens with me for a recent model shoot, and for a trip to the Adirondacks.  It is fairly fast (maximum aperture at 55 mm is f4.0).  For portrait work, I obviously used the long end of the zoom, but even with the slightly tighter aperture, background blur, I think was quite pleasing and the lens was very sharp.  I would have to say however, that the 60 mm f2.4 really shines in this setting.

The lens really comes into its own for landscape photography.  Fitted to the X Pro 1, the combination easily fits in my small Mountainsmith fanny pack.  Particularly in the middle of its focal range, the lens is fairly sharp corner-to-corner and quite contrasty, much like its prime brethren.

I was curious to compare the lens to a known standard.  Unfortunately the only lens that I have in the XF line within the zoom’s focal length range is the 35 mm f1.4 so I shot them against each other using my usual tabletop scene, both at f3.6.

These crops are taken from the periphery of the image, as I think the center image is fairly close between the two lenses in terms of sharpness.  I think you’d have to agree that the 35 mm is better at the periphery, hardly a surprise.  I would say however that the 18-55mm has many of the same positive attributes, of the 35mm, and 60 mm I already possess.

It will be tempting to leave it on the camera most of the time.

With this lens I have no burning desire to obtain the 18 mm prime lens.  The 14 mm f2.8 and the upcoming 23 mm however still interest me, and I will look to acquire them.

In summary, this is a really nice addition to the XF lens line.  It appears to continue the reputation of the Fuji lenses for great optical quality at a very reasonable price.  If I had to do over, I might have bought an XE 1 with this lens (which makes the lens an even better bargain) and then acquire the primes over time.

Adding it to my X Pro 1 has made the system a lot more versatile and fun.

I have an image on my den wall of a rhodora bloom.

It is a flower that grows in the scrub oak barrens adjacent to my community here in Northeastern Pennsylvania. I have been told by naturalists that this is an anomaly, because it’s only supposed to exist much further north.

I shot that image with a 4 megapixel Nikon Coolpix 4500, which some of you may recall, was the final high-end iteration of the original twist body Coolpix. I have printed it at 8”x11” and larger, and love the image. It looks good to me even 7 years after it spit out of the Epson 2200 that I used in those days. And I have become very critical of images over the years.

Now I have owned a large number of compact and bridge cameras over the years. I printed and enjoyed many landscape images captured with non DSLRs in years past. Nowadays, I am somewhat unhappy with using a compact camera for this purpose, even the so-called “premium” compacts such as my Panasonic LX 5. I get many less images nowadays from small imager cameras that I would consider using, let’s say, in an exhibition, whereas in the past, I have used such cameras to confidently decorate gallery walls (and make sales).

Given some discussions I have been involved in various photographic forums, I have begun to wonder just how much better off we are , in terms of small-sensored cameras, than we were in the earlier period in the digital photography, when there were less pixels on small sensors than now.

I shot over the years with many “bridge” cameras in those days, sometimes side-by-side with DSLRs in the 6 MP range. My memory is, that whether it was a Nikon Coolpix, 900/4500 (3 and 4 megapixels respectively), my 4/5 megapixel Olympus E10/E20 or an Olympus C 5050, the files (I shot in those days mainly JPGs) were usable for landscape images, and that the images were pleasing to the eye, even printed at 11×16” or even occasionally at 13x 19”.

Now it seems to me small sensors seem lousy, not only relative to larger sensored DSLRs but even compared to older imagers with half the resolution. I can’t tell if I’ve become spoiled by the likes of my D 700, or whether packing those tiny sensors with as little as 10 MP is having a deleterious effect on certain,  intangible measures of image quality.

Obviously, this discussion should be limited to base ISO. Even a 2/3” sensor such that came with the Olympus E 20, was horrible above ISO 200. A Canon S 100, LX5 and certainly the new Fuji X10, would wipe the floor with them at higher sensitivities.

But I do wonder whether there are other advantages of bigger pixels, even big old technology pixels, have characteristics that make up for the advances that have come since.

This is a 100% crop of an image shot with my Olympus C 5050 from a kayak in 2004. It makes a nice 11’x 16’ print, like many others from that camera. And, it was shot in RAW at ISO 200, miraculous for a bridge camera of that era. My other cameras at the time included a Fuji S2 pro. I often printed and sold images from the Olympus, again limited somewhat  in size relative to the Fuji. In this image I particularly notice the lack of noise, and reasonable detail.

Here are two images: one from my 2005 vintage Fujifilm E 900 which at the time was considered a marvel at high-resolution, High ISO (800 ASA max) shooting in a compact

.

It sports the same size 1 1/6” inch sensor as the LX5 which I used to take the other image. These were shot at ISO 400 in raw format, had the same exposure settings at f4, were corrected with the same settings in ACR, and sharpened with the same unsharpen mask settings in Photoshop.

I’m not saying that there’s no difference. I think the Fuji noise is coarser, and there could be a smidgen more color noise. Detail seems about the same. Now the E 900 sensor is 9 MP and of the so-called “SuperCCD” design, so famous in the F 30/31 Fuji compacts These were the cameras that arguably started the craze toward lower resolution, higher sensitivity sensors ( I still have one). I do feel however, that given the 5 years between models, the differences are modest. I’m pretty sure that the E 900 would compete nicely with many other modern imagers.

It should also be said the ergonomics of the LX-5 are significantly better than the older camera making it much more usable. Oddly enough the E 900 may have the first compact that disappointed me with it’s image quality (maybe because the size of the megapixels).  I did get some keepers( see December 2013)

Now that having said all that, the Panasonic can render details nicely, if shot right. Here’s a 100% crop of an image I took with the LX5 recently, also at ISO 400 .

What’s my point? I ‘m not sure there is one, except perhaps that as photo gear enthusiasts, we are seduced by the power of industry marketing,  which is aided at times by enthusiast websites who are connected to photo gear suppliers. Imagers are getting better, but perhaps more slowly than we think.

If you’re going to buy a new camera or camera body, make sure it functions better for you. Test it against the gear it’s set to replace. If it’s not truly more functional, don’t be afraid to send it back. And make sure that you buy  from reputable dealers that will allow you the privilege.

Also once in a while, If you have an older camera on your shelf, pick it up and shoot it. Print an image. You might be shocked just how much you like it.