Your choice of camera often influences the way you use lenses; particularly in the Fujifilm camera universe.  Though the SLR-like bodies such as the XT-2, and XT-20 are very popular, I came into the X series by shooting their rangefinder styled products, and for the most part, continue to do so.

My main interchangeable lens body is an X Pro 2 (which I use along with my X100f). To me, going back to the M series Leica film cameras, rangefinder-type bodies like the X Pro 2 are shot with prime lenses which tend to perform better anyway. Thus my XF zooms have tended to languish at the back of the cabinet.

 Several weeks ago I was traveling to the Adirondacks, and selecting the photo gear that I would bring along.  Years ago I would pack 2 or 3 bodies (Fuji and Nikon), and several bags of lenses.  Maybe because I have been photographing there so long, and perhaps in my dotage, I’m getting a bit lazy. My tendency now is to streamline things a bit with perhaps 1 or 2 small camera bags.  Along with the X100, I will usually bring the X Pro 2 with several prime lenses, perhaps the 14 mm, the 56mm, and a 90 mm.  This works out fairly well given that the X100 has a fixed 23 mm lens.

 

One complaint I have about the XF lenses is that the lens pouches are virtually identical, without any exterior labels to indicate the lens within.  It’s thus easy to grab the wrong lens.  Rather than the 14 mm lens I was looking for, I found that I had pulled out the 18– 55-millimeter zoom which has similar bulk.  I hadn’t used the lens in some time so I thought: What the hell, let’s give it a try with the bigger sensor of the X Pro 2  and see how it holds up from an image quality standpoint.

In the “Dacks” I shot the lens and liked what I saw.  So I left it on the X Pro 2 for the next several weeks after returning home.

In photo workshops when I am teaching beginners, I’m a big proponent of prime lenses.  This is not only because their image quality tends to be superior (especially for the price).  I also think it’s important for people to understand and then characteristics of individual focal lengths to their photography

If they do utilize a zoom, I suggest that they avoid the habit of zooming to frame an image, and instead treat the lens like a collection of primes.  I have had to remind myself to do the same.  With the zoom mounted, I look at the scene and determine what focal length would be desirable in terms of foreground/background relationship and depth of field.  I then choose a focal length.  Putting my eye in the viewfinder.  I can then step backward or forward when possible to adjust the framing. That’s a lot easier than changing lenses constantly.

Another issue I have had with the X Pro 2 is camera shake.  Perhaps I have been spoiled by the very soft leaf shutter of the X100 series.  I find that I get a fair number of images with the X Pro 2 and it’s more robust shutter action, where there has been movement artifact.  The image stabilization in the little 18-55mm is a big help with this, noticeably reducing the problem.

 

I have forgotten how nice the image quality is.  Used as I am to some of the high-quality lenses in the Fujinon line, I am delighted with the look of images shot with this modest lens.  It’s got good contrast and handles the 24-megapixel sensor of the newer cameras with ease.  It’s capable of obtaining lovely detailed 3-dimensional images, although at the 18 mm end, it  is slightly soft until it’s stopped down.  And like all of the XF lenses it has a solid feel and lovely built quality.

In the weeks since returning home, we’ve seen a variety of weather here in Northeastern Pennsylvania, including bitter cold,  then a sudden thaw that led to severe ice damming and flooding on the Susquehanna River in the Wyoming Valley.  The residual of this has been bank ice of a size and volume I’ve never seen before.

Now, in the mountains, a  winter snowpack is finally building, which for us more and more, seems to be a February/March event.

There was even some snow at Nescopeck State Park for their Winterfest event, something we haven’t seen in some time.  It was fun to see the sled dogs finally get to pull their sled.

I’m aware that there are better short zooms in the XF series lineup, including the 16-55mm f2.8, which is said to be very sharp indeed.  Unfortunately is quite a bit larger and heavier (though it is weather resistant) and has no optical stabilization.  And at $1100, it’s significantly more expensive than the $700 18-55.  And there isn’t an image I have shot over the last several weeks that makes me pine for a more exotic lens.  If I need more sharpness, I will go back to the primes.

I forgot how much I like this little lens.  Like the 60 mm f2.4 I wrote about here, I’m moving it to the front of the cabinet.

 

 Early April in northeastern Pennsylvania is the point where one can realistically hope for the first sporadic signs of spring weather.  Here, temperatures, if we are lucky, are in the mid to high fifties. If it is unusually warm, a few of the maples may begin to bud out. Our predominantly oak forests however, stubbornly resist any show of foliage.  In fact though, is it the oaks that are more prudent; for a limb-breaking snowfall, even now, is not unlikely.

In this climate, people search for any touchstone to mark this season.   For many people in our region, it is the first day of trout season.

Now if you are a fly fisherman, you can fish during a great deal of the calendar year.  Pennsylvania proudly boasts some of the finest fly fishing in the country. Whether we’re talking about the upper Delaware River, The big and little Lehigh Rivers, The northern reaches of the Allegheny River, or the limestone creeks of south-central Pennsylvania, the state is a popular destination for anglers.

There is, however, a second culture of fishing in the state.  It is a culture some would call “put and take”, In other words: people who, unlike the fly fishermen, actually tend to eat the trout they catch.  These are the people that show up in force on the first day of the regular trout season.

 

For instance, located at the nearby Nescopeck State Park; Lake Francis is a 9 acre relatively cold water impoundment, which is traditionally stocked with Brown and Brook trout on the week before the season. Now by early May, on a walk around the lake, you may encounter two or three people with a line in the water. But on opening day Saturday, it is not an exaggeration to say that the fishermen are literally shoulder to shoulder. This is true at many other lakes where trout are stocked.

It is the abundance of hatchery trout that draws them, fish that are perceived as being “easy marks” compare to the wily native Brook Trout.  They readily feed on the most mundane of live bait and even canned corn, which is said to resemble the feed they are given in the hatchery (I’ve even seen fly patterns designed to mimic trout pellets).

Now many of the people there are family groups with children. For them, it is a great day to introduce their kids to the joy of fishing with a high likelihood they may actually catch a trout or two. Others are like friends I grew up with: people for whom having trout in the freezer was a way to extend their food budget. 

But there are trout stocked also in the streams and rivers. Even on that day in April, if one explores a bit, it is possible to find isolated riffle, or pool stocked with the same naive hatchery fish. When I have fished on that day I always gravitated towards solitude.

 If it is like my childhood, despite the crowding, one will find the same people at the same spot on the lake or the stream year-to-year.

They’re there for the fish, the tradition, and hopefully, the first bit of spring.

 

I am a creature of habit. Whether it is merchants, restaurants, vacation spots… etc., I derive comfort in familiarity. It is an impulse I endeavor to resist… not always successfully.

It’s also true in terms of camera gear. For I just bought my fourth version of the Fujifilm X100… the X100F.

It arrived in late March, of the latest iteration of an old photographic friend, the newest camera in the X100 series. I have been shooting it since then, in the somewhat sparse scenery of early Spring.

Over the last several years, this camera line has been the one that I reach for the most. I have been looking over archived raw files in preparation for my upcoming photography exhibit. I couldn’t help but notice that particularly in the last 3 years; my X100 series uploads far exceed those of my other equipment. I have grown very comfortable with the camera’s functioning, the image quality, and the range of focal links offered between the native lenses and the lens adapters.

Given this, I may skip other upgrades, but the newest X100 will always be interesting to me.

 

I have no desire to be repetitious and waste the reader’s time. Therefore if you wish, you can read my reviews of the original X100, the X100s, and the X100t which will serve as a basis for this review. My desire is to discuss what I think are the relevant improvements, and what they mean to my workflow in the Fuji system. There are also websites such as DPReview, and The Imaging Resource that can be a source of feature-by-feature descriptions of this product. My mission here will be to describe the effect those changes have had on this user.

The best way to summarize my reaction to this camera is this: that in terms of image quality, controls and features, it now is almost completely in sync with the X Pro 2. This is very important to me as these cameras are my go-to pairing for weddings and events. I now can shoot the same resolution files and film simulation on the X100 style body that I can on the interchangeable lens X Pro 2. And the relevant controls and menu structure are now roughly the same. This means that I can quickly make intuitive adjustments on either camera without thinking.

First and foremost, the camera in hand feels roughly the same as the previous generations. All of the buttons on the back of the camera have been relocated to the right side which does facilitate their operation while looking through the viewfinder. The camera feels extremely well-built, though weather sealing is still not a feature.

 

I have written here and here about my reactions to the new sensor offered in the later Fujifilm cameras. The resolution increase from 16 megapixels to 24 is not trivial, but also not overwhelming. It certainly means you can crop more aggressively, which is certainly helpful on the fixed lens X 100, and the images do seem to have improved “per-pixel” sharpness. In particular, because of my exhibit, I’ve been doing a lot of printing. I remain extremely impressed with the amount of detail on even 17-22 inch prints that even the earlier 16mp Trans-X megapixels can produce without straining. Obviously, the new sensor will be better yet.

What is nice about the Fuji’s in general, and the X100F, in particular, is that all this resolution is very usable. Again in reference to my upcoming exhibit, I had identified an image shot with my D800E for inclusion. This is a 36mp DSLR, and given this, I have always been aware that camera technique must be perfect in order to avoid shake artifact, (which is much more evident the higher the resolution). For this reason, I shot this image from a stout Gitzo tripod, and with a remote release.

When I printed the image, however, I discovered that there was camera shake, which essentially ruined the image for me. Undoubtedly this came from the impact of the mirror as it swung out of the way of the sensor. I shoot all the time with the mirrorless Fuji bodies, and particularly X100, on a much smaller tripod, and essentially never have this problem. Because of its leaf shutter, the X100 is particularly forgiving in this regard. So bring on the resolution!

 

I remain underwhelmed with the purported improvements in high-ISO performance for the new sensor noted on some other websites, but on the other hand, I don’t really do formal tests on this. I was already pretty darn happy with the earlier cameras. It’s certainly no worse than the earlier chip and may be a smidge better. I’m certainly content continuing to use ISO 6400 as the upper limit on my auto ISO setting.

Then there is the matter of the mechanical ISO dial which it also has in common with the X Pro 2. Many people were unhappy with this feature when it first appeared. From my style of shooting, however, it is very convenient. So good are the trans X sensors that I generally shoot in auto ISO without much worry. But if, for instance, I’m shooting moving water, or daytime fill flash, the ISO dial makes it easy to quickly switch to ISO 200, and then switch back when I’m done.

 

Several improvements do really alter the relationship between the cameras. The X 100F now uses the same battery as all of the other Fuji bodies. This really simplifies keeping a good collection of batteries charged and ready to go, it also means when I change camera bags, I don’t have to worry about which type of extra battery I have stowed there. Also, since the X100 series has an onboard USB charging, in a pinch it can charge batteries to be used on my other Fuji bodies. The battery indicator apparently now displays a more accurate representation of the percentage of power remaining. Oh, and hopefully battery life will be longer, though this was never really a problem for me.

I’m a big fan of the Acros black and white film simulation, which given the new sensor and processor, is now finally available on the X100 series. I like the fact that I can set the film simulation, but shoot the camera in RAW alone, but still see the film simulation in the viewfinder. I later apply the film simulation in post processing, as it now is available in Adobe Camera Raw.

 

Then there is the focus point joystick, which again appeared in the X Pro 2. Now that it’s available on the X100, I feel as though I can begin relying on it. For those of you who unfamiliar with the feature, it allows direct access to focus point adjustment without first pressing any other buttons. It thus frees up a programmable button on the camera for other functions. It is a feature that is long overdue.

Another really likable improvement in the camera is its ability to recognize when one of a new series of lens adapters is mounted. With the older cameras, I was forever forgetting to change this adjustment manually, which theoretically results in some distortion in the image. I did acquire the 50mm field of view TCL X100 II (the adapter I most often use). The old version sold on eBay for surprisingly good money, which is heartening.

 

 

Every time there is a new version of a particular model in the Fujifilm lineup, auto focus has been improved. Before I sold it, I compared the “T” model to its replacement. There did seem to be a slight improvement in focusing speed, particularly in low contrast areas, but again these cameras of gotten good enough that for my style of shooting such improvements are not that impactful.

There is an increase in the number of focus points from 49 in the X100 T, to 325 and the newer camera. This is the same as on the X Pro 2.There is a little wider screen coverage, but in general, to me, the larger number of points seems to increase the amount of time it takes me to move to the right part of the sensor. I tend to keep these cameras set to show a lower number of points in the viewfinder.

 

I’m sure as time goes on, I will have additional comments as I gain more experience with this instrument. Overall I am quite content. In most ways, this is a superior camera than its predecessor (which happily also sold for decent money on eBay). Who knows what is yet to come in future firmware upgrades.

Yes, I am definitely a creature of habit.

But if you find something that works, why not stick with it?

 

 

Among Fujifilm “X” users, the unique characteristics of the Trans-X sensor used in most of the camera line is a very familiar topic. This sensor was developed in 2012, and was one of the first sensors to not include an  anti-aliasing filter,. These filters, which slightly blur the image (thus reducing apparent resolution) had been included in most digital imagers up to that time to prevent the phenomenon of moiré. The Trans-X sensor used a less symmetrical color filter array to prevent moiré effects.

Those a few that are unfamiliar with this topic can find more information here.

Because of  the unique design of this sensor, programs to convert the raw files generated by these cameras have at times struggled to optimize the resultant files. Part of this may have been at least in the beginning, Fujifilm was not particularly forthright with information on the sensor.

Over the years we have looked at the different raw converter options for the  Fujifilm cameras and in my case those compatible with a Windows environment (definitely not a Mac person).

For many years it seemed clear that Phase One’s Capture One software was then programmed to beat, besting Adobe Camera Raw, and even slightly better, then Fujifilm’s on Raw file converter, based on the Silkypix photo management product.

Ultimately Adobe refined its raw conversion process for X-trans, and Photoshop and Lightroom became more competitive. Recently the differences in conversion quality, though still favoring Capture One, have not been worth the workflow interruption required.

Then there was Irident X Transformer. This was a Fuji specific raw file converter, exclusive to IOS, that has long been said to produce the best, most detailed images, from Fuji raw files. But alas, it was unavailable to those of us in the Microsoft world.

Now a version of Irident has been released for the Windows platform. I was excited to give it a try.

This is a very simple product with one mission, to convert a photo file from the Fuji raw format to the Adobe native DNG format( which Adobe understands very well), where it then can be further processed into a Tiff, jpeg or other file type. In the process of conversion, the program also applies a unique sharpening algorithm, as well as noise reduction, and lens correction, all of which can be controlled by the user. There is also Irident developer, a full featured photo program for IOS and Windows, selling for US$99.00.

 

 

X Transformer is roughly analogous to Adobe’s own digital negative converter, a program they offer for users of older Photoshop versions, who now wished to convert files from newer cameras not compatible with their versions of Photoshop.

I was eager to apply the program, to raw files from both the 16mp and 24mp X-Trans sensors, and compare them to Adobe Camera Raw conversion alone. I also converted files from the original conventional sensor X100 to see whether there was any advantage with that camera’s output.  I also converted Raw files using Capture One, and Adobe digital negative converter (which then I finalized in Photoshop much like one needs to do with the Irident DNGs) for comparison.

I tried to pick images with a variety of color mixes mindful of the effect the X-Trans sensor is said to have on green foliage.

I processed all images using equivalent amounts of sharpening. I turned sharpening to low on the Irident converter.

Below is fairly typical of the differences in the 16 mp files, the Irident conversion pulling far more detail than ACR alone, with Capture 1 (version 9) in the middle. So you know, the jpg conversion needed to post these actually tends to minimize the differences.

 
Below is a file from my X Pro 2. Here the differences between the various conversions are more subtle, though the original TIFFs still favor the Irident workflow. Look at the small patch of lichen on the branch which is more detailed on the Irident version. I actually think that the Capture one version lags behind the ACR conversion, but I may have under sharpened that file slightly.

Out of curiosity, I dug out a file from the Bayer sensored X100. Here I could detect little advantage for adding an Irident conversion first.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     

 

Now this is not scientific, but I have formed the following conclusions:

Pre-converting the raw files with Irident X Transformer into DNG seems to be helpful to extract the most realistic and detailed X Tran images from Adobe Camera Raw. This effect, however, is to me, more noticeable for the 16 mp imager where Irident is quite helpful. The advantage of Irident seems to be some less dramatic with the newer 24mp imager though not negligible. Is this because Adobe has done a better job in their algorithms for the Trans-X III? Or has Irident not quite figured things out for this sensor?

Also, Capture One remains a step ahead of ACR for 16mp Trans-X though not as good as Irident +ACR. For the 24 mp imagers is seems to have less advantage though I have not upgraded yet to version 10. All of this suggests to me that Adobe has done a better job with analyzing and coding for the new 24mp sensor. I did not test Capture One with the Bayer-sensored X100 because in the past I have noticed little difference between ACR and C1 with conventional sensors.

Finally, I should say something about the Workflow using Irident X Transformer. It certainly adds an extra step to processing. In my case the program wouldn’t display thumbnails, requiring me to go back to Adobe bridge and get the file #. This is annoying.

So, in summary, I would say if you want the simplest workflow with X-Trans files, go with Adobe products such ACR or Lightroom. Capture One is certainly an alternative with the potential to reveal a smidgen more detail, but for me, it is less streamlined. Finally, for big prints and critical results, adding Irident X Transformer to Adobe definitely allows you to extract more detail from your images.

 

 

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Every December on the second weekend of the month, my lovely wife and I participate in a rather, em convivial, Christmas event, the annual caroling trip run by Cavanaugh’s Grille, which is our local pub.

It’s a non-paying gig, but nonetheless an interesting photographic opportunity, given the colorful holiday clothing, the festive spirit, and the inevitable breakdown in inhibitions as the night proceeds.

For you see, the trip`s premise is that we will visit and sing in most of the other pubs in the area. And professional singers these folks are not. They do know a thing or two about pubs, however.

The other local pubs are welcoming and appreciative as you might expect when 40-50 or so thirsty customers show up on a sleepy winter evening. They will often provide us with offerings of food and spirits.

 

Over the years I have utilized the X100 series to shoot the event, and they have never let me down. The combination of the fast 23mm (35mm equivalent) lens, the excellent low light capability, the quiet shutter and unobtrusive form, work perfectly. My only wish would be weather sealing, given the likelihood of a splash or spill as the night proceeds.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As with shooting any event, it pays to scout the venue(s). Knowing the bartender helps, particularly if you need to have them bump up the light level a bit. As we tend to visit the same institutions each year, I have come to know which spots in each place produce good lighting for images.

We have a Santa on the trip who functions as our leader, sort of. If we enter a place where there are children with families, he tends to get pressed into service, reviewing their Christmas wishes. If only they could see him later that night…

 

 

But I digress. With the X100s and t models, I leave the camera on RAW plus Jpg, with the auto ISO set to 6400, and try to keep the aperture at f2-2.2. This seems to work well. Where mixed color temps in the setting are unappealing or the light is low, I convert the images to black and white, which people seem to really like.

At the end, we repair back to Cavanaugh’s for the last thing people need…more drinks. Billy, the owner typically arranges to have food, and live music. Things then go rapidly downhill. The camera gear is put away as ethics demand.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As Christmas traditions go, it`s not exactly Currier and Ives.

 

It is, however, a whole lot of fun.

 

For additional images of  this and other Cavanaugh’s caroling trips throughout the years, visit my Smugmug site here. 

 

I have just returned from a trip to Baltimore, Maryland.

Often in June, depending where it is held, I attend the American Academy Of Sleep Medicine meetings.  This year they were scheduled for Baltimore, which is a surprisingly short drive from my Northern Pennsylvania home.

I’ve had many pleasant trips to the city in the past.  Though I initially hoped that my wife would accompany me on the trip, her work schedule prevented her from joining me, and I was forced to go alone. Thus I would need something to do with my free time.

Early June is a pretty good time to visit the Chesapeake region, as often the temperatures and humidity have not risen to uncomfortable levels.  Such was the case on my trip.  I arrived Sunday, shortly before a cold front came through, which on the back side yielded bright blue skies and temperatures in the seventies.  It was cool enough, at least on the water, for a light jacket.

Though this was not purely a photographic trip, I knew that I would want some gear along to occupy my off hours.  I decided on the Fuji X Pro 1 with multiple lenses for more deliberative photography, and the Fujifilm X100s, as my companion for street shooting.

I pretty much carried the X100s everywhere, including into the conference.  I took a lot of images even in the product exhibition hall, before discovering there was a strict rule against this, to the point where they would threaten to eject you, and confiscate your “film”.  The problem with enforcing this is that everyone had a camera in the form of their cell phone, and I saw many people photographing new products, that perhaps they wanted to remember, or even included a presentation.  Hell, one of the exhibitors had a Nikon DSLR in hand, and appeared to be shooting a lot of images.  The X100s was wonderful in this setting because of its stealth and its low light capabilities.

I have noticed, that compared to its predecessor the X 100, the X100s appears to have a decreased battery life.  This had been annoying to me before the trip, but I learned that if you keep the camera off (and not rely on the auto shut off feature), that the battery life was quite tolerable.  I did not need to change a battery over the three days of the trip (probably shooting 150 frames).

Anyone remotely interested photography who sees the Fuji X cameras, is fascinated by them.  They often assume that I am shooting film.

I took the opportunity to travel about.  Part of this was in search of meals, as the locals I encountered would generally send me out of the “Inner Harbor” neighborhood for the best restaurants.  Perhaps they are “seafood snobs” as I did have several good meals in restaurants overlooking the Harbor, including perhaps the best mussels I’ve eaten my life.  I don’t believe I’ve never had a bad seafood meal in the Chesapeake region.

It was a modest walk from my hotel, to the Federal Hill neighborhood of the city.  There, a large park occupies a flat-topped hill overlooking the Harbor, once used as a vantage point for cannons, which would have been the final defense for the city from the British in 1812.  The neighborhood features brick row homes, of an early 19th century vintage, quite similar to my old neighborhood in the Society Hill section of Philadelphia.

The neighborhood was positively festooned with quaint cafes and public houses (which is never a bad thing). Having stopped in a restaurant in the neighborhood,  I was reminded by my server  that in the Chesapeake region, they were having a particularly good soft-shell crab season.  She served me an appetizer that deliciously proved her point.

The above image was shot inadvertently at ISO 1250 which required a shutter speed of 1/10th with the lens at f2.8.  This points out some good and bad features of the X Pro 1.  The good: that the combination of lens stabilization, and the lack of a mirror, allowed me to shoot a sharp image, at relatively slow shutter speeds.  The bad: the lack of an effective auto iso control on the X Pro 1 (as opposed to the feature on the X100s) means that I have to pay attention when switching cameras, remembering to alter the iso setting manually on the X Pro 1 as the lighting changes.

On another day, I made use of the water taxi service, both to gain another photographic vantage on the harbor, but also to visit Fort McHenry, which is preserved by the National Park System, for its role in the war of 1812.  As you may well remember, the fort served as the primary, outer perimeter defense of Baltimore Harbor.  It was the sight of the American flag being raised over the fort, after the British Fleet was sent packing that inspired Francis Scott Key, to write the Star Spangled Banner.  The fort served many purposes since that battle, including as a hospital for wounded in World War One.  Sometime in the early part of the 20^th century, it was restored to a condition near to that, when the famous battle occurred.

In order to get to the fort, you have to stop to change boats at Fells Point, a neighborhood of Baltimore famous in the early 1800’s for privateers: civilian ships and crews, who were sanctioned by our government to raid British shipping. This is another quaint historic neighborhood that if anything, looks a little older than that at Federal Hill.

It was also quite gentrified, again with bars, B+B’s art galleries, and quite honestly more bars.  Your water taxi ticket gives you two-for-one beer coupons for many of the establishments.  This makes it extremely important to remember that there are no “facilities” on the boat for the ride home.

As a whole , this city is a wonderful location for photography.  It is obvious that it has been developed in such a way that it is pleasant to view from the water, in a much more intimate way than for instance, New York.  There is a varied architectural themes throughout the city, all of which makes it visually stimulating, and quite interesting to photograph.  And the people are very friendly and proud of where they live.

Baltimore is a lovely place to visit.  I think the best months for a trip, might be mid to late May, and for September/October, all months when the schools are still in session, the crowds reasonable, and the temperatures moderate.

And, best of all, it’s soft-shell season.

Right now, at least from a photographic standpoint, life is pretty damn good.

It has been several weeks since my initial discussion of the brand-new Fujifilm X100s.

Not infrequently people are asking, “Is it worth trading up to what on the surface is an almost identical camera.  Now as I have said before, I tend to be cheap. And not all upgrades are worth the money.

So my best answer is this: my beloved X100 has found a new home somewhere in northern Minnesota, having sold on eBay for a reasonably good price, but certainly still at a loss.

Yes, the X100s is that big an improvement.

Because there was no one was due to be at my home during the week the camera was to be delivered, I shifted to delivery my father‘s address nearby, where there would be someone available to sign for the package.  I stopped off at the end of the day, and opened the camera in his den.  I inserted a battery, and an SD card.

Now, it should be said that my father is somewhat bemused by my interest in photographic equipment. The whole “unboxing” thing is lost on him (which means he’s not crazy like his son).

I was fairly familiar already with the camera and quickly set it up to my preferred configuration, composed an image involving my father, and snapped a picture.  The camera selected iso 3200 and then opened the shutter.

When I finally got home and download the memory card, I realized that X 100s. was probably going to work out pretty well.

So what are the real differences between this camera and its predecessor?  So far, for my use I’ve noticed several real improvements.

The first change that I noticed, right off the bat,  had to do with start-up speed.  The previous camera was extremely unpredictable in this regard.  Sometimes I would turn the camera on, and it would be ready instantly.  Other times (like when I would see a great shot and tried to grab it quickly) the camera would fail to activate until after the moment had passed. I cannot tell you how frustrating that was (note to Fuji: I forgive you, but just this once).

With X 100s, on means ON, and right now.  So far I have not missed any shots because of the delay in “boot up”.  For a professional user, this alone is probably worth the cost of the upgrade.

Probably the most important upgrade for my style of shooting has  to do with the operation of the auto focus.  Finally there is an X-body where selection of the auto focus point can be done with one’s eye to the viewfinder.  This was accomplished by moving the  AF button to the top of the multidirectional control, where he can be easily accessed by your right thumb.  Once selected, you can then use to control to move the square throughout the frame.  This is a huge improvement for those of us who rely on  auto focus.  This is the way it should have been designed originally.  I wish my X Pro-1 had the same feature.

The auto focus also does seem faster.  Before I sold my  X100 I did compare the 2 cameras side-by-side, and it did seem that the newer camera was more capable of locking onto poorly lit objects, and was somewhat faster.  I really didn’t mind the old system however.  None of these cameras focus like a good DSLR, but given what I use them for they don’t really have to.

Manual focus too has finally been perfected.  The focus ring finally moves the point of focus fast enough to be useful, and the new focus aids include a split screen function, and focus peaking.  I find that the former feature is more difficult to use.  Focus peaking however is extremely useful and seems very accurate.

It is true that the exposure compensation dial seems to be less prone to inadvertent changes.  I also like having the “Q” button available on the back of the camera.  I grown to find this feature useful in my X Pro-1 and is nice to have it here.

The lens is essentially the same as the X100.  As I understand it can focus closer than on the old camera but otherwise to my eye it looks the same.  Like its predecessor the lens is fairly sharp wide open, but really gets interesting at f4.0 and beyond.  And the leaf shutter is just as silent as before.

In terms of image quality, basically it’s an X Pro-1 with a 23 mm lens (35 mm equivalent).  That is to say that the files are very good, with wonderful Fuji color, and excellent dynamic range (I can easily recover the highlights in the window behind my father).  There is lots of resolution for big prints.

It is somewhat vexing that as of this writing, Capture 1 does not support the X100s files, but I’m sure they will soon.  In the meantime ACR and Raw File Converter can both be used to convert the X100s raw files.  I’ve come to realize that for detailed landscape images, Raw File Converter is preferable because of the superior detail that it can reveal. I prefer ACR for a high ISO images and portraits, where it has a very nice smoothing effect on skin, and grainy images.

The camera definitely has better low light capability than its predecessor:  enough that I now set the auto-ISO control on ISO 6400 (rather than 3200 on the X 100).

Now more than ever the camera is an ideal companion to one of its interchangeable lens brethren.  I love to shoot with the X pro-1 mounted with the 60 mm f2.4 lens, in the bag along with X 100s.  These cameras are very complementary to each other, with similar controls and essentially identical image quality.  And remember, the very useful X100s. focal length is currently unavailable in the XF lens catalogue(at least at f2.0).

All of this has made me very happy.  I wish I thought the auto focus button placement on the X Pro-1 could be upgraded through firmware, but so far there is no sign of this happening so far.  I imagine an X Pro 2 with the X100s focus improvements, and perhaps an even more improved sensor and I find myself salivating like a Pavlovian dog.

eBay I think, has not seen the last of me.

I am usually a late adopter.  If a new piece of equipment comes out, I’m cheap enough that I will generally wait until some time has elapsed and enough people have published their experiences with the equipment, before I make the purchase decision.

But when the Fujifilm X100s was introduced I was intrigued.  I love its predecessor, even for all its quirks, a few of which remain even after the latest firmware update. I have never enjoyed a piece of gear more, nor been more pleased with the images it produces. I sold my D 700, in part because the X100 replaced it for indoor event shooting.

I used the X100 all the time (for the year I owned it).  So when the update came out, I was not immediately interested.  But as I read reviews, I realized that this was a favorite camera now optimized.  I decided that rather than wait, I would place a preorder through B +H Photo.  They have a  strong return policy and I wasn’t worried that I’d be stuck with it if I were unimpressed.

It seemed to take forever for delivery, but my new camera finally arrived about three weeks ago. I’ve been shooting with it  ever since.

 

So far I’m extremely happy with the X100s.  I will have a more complete report once I have a chance to shoot in a few more environments.  I am particularly excited to try out something that is also possible with its predecessor, high shutter speed flash synchronization.

So far however I am enjoying the hell out of the X100s, so much so that I have listed my X100 on eBay (Item number:321117326639).

So bear with me.  It was the X100 that shook me out of my photography doldrums.  Testing the “S”, particularly as spring erupts here in The Pocono region of Pennsylvania is a pure joy.

Stay tuned, there’s more to come.

I am not a generally a wide angle shooter. When many years ago, I began to get serious about outdoor photography  I, like many other photographers just starting out, assumed that proper landscape photography was most appropriately done with short focal length lenses encompassing a wide field of view.

It seems to me this is a very common beginner’s mistake. I quickly found out that capturing scenes that are attractive to the naked eye using such lenses, often created a visually uninteresting, unfocused image. Too wide a field of view can leave an image without much of a focal point, with which to draw the viewer “into the picture”. Wide angle lenses also offer little magnification of distant objects, and can make a scene, for instance with a backdrop of mountains, appear uninteresting relative to the photographers own visual viewpoint.  Longer focal lengths work better for this.

But ” wide’s” have certain advantages.  They can make linear objects appear longer and more dramatic.  They do this in the same way they  deemphasize distant objects; by making the end of a fence line, or road appear further away.   They have better depth of field than longer lenses.  This can all be used to one’s advantage.

I have noticed over the years, that a lot of my truly wide-angle lenses like my Tokina 12-24 mm for DX, did not get much use. I seemed to gravitate into shooting mid-range and mild telephoto zooms and primes for landscape, which in my mind allows better isolation of the subject, and improves with prominence of the background  as well as the bokeh  of most of the photos I produce.

Nonetheless, when Fujifilm introduced its XF 14mm f2.8 R optic, I just sold some equipment, and had a little extra cash. Because of the affection I have for the system, and the excellent reviews of this lens,  I figured it would be reasonable to acquire one for myself, and perhaps reinvigorate my wide-angle photography.

I ordered one up from B&H in New York, and as it often is the case, it arrived on the next day.

The lens itself is fairly large. If anything it’s a bit larger than the XF 18-55 mm midrange zoom lens with which it shares its petal shaped sunshade . It has a detented aperture ring, a fairly broad focusing ring, and in a touch reminiscent of my Tokina glass, a slip clutch that allows a quick switch from auto focusing, to manual focusing.  It also has a focus distance scale embossed in the front of the lens.  It is the best finished of the XF primes that I own.

Like all the XF lenses, it feels extremely well-built, and balances nicely on my X Pro 1.

You can read the reviews. Pretty universally, the lens is thought to be quite sharp, pretty much edge to edge by f4. Also in different from other XF lenses, its native and distortion is very low, and there is little, if any correction required in software.  This is great for architecture, but sometimes leaves one wanting, if you’re looking for that slightly fish eyed perspective that can make some portraits and street shooting visually interesting.

I do not intuitively shoot with wide-angle lenses.  For me it is a challenge, but certainly a joyful one. Given the drab browns of early spring. I find myself looking for unusual patterns particularly in shadow and light, and opportunities to find color in the bland surroundings.

My copy of the lens seems as sharp as advertised.  Autofocus is slightly slow, but again you’re not going to use this lens for sports or action photography.  I think it is better specified for deliberate shooting.  Flare is extremely well controlled.

The time of my testing of the new lens, was coincidental with the availability of Camera Raw version 7.4, the final release. I had already played with the release candidate, and was eager to see whether the final version offered additional benefits.

I developed a number of X Pro 1 images, with Capture 1 Express, and then again with the newest version of ACR. I didn’t notice much difference between the release candidate, and the final version, but I agree that Adobe has clearly improved the raw file extraction since its earlier efforts, probably to a point where in most situations the differences between its capabilities, and those of competitive raw converters, are minimal.

Trust me, I spent a lot of time on the sharpening of both images. Still, particularly in looking at prints, I think for fine detail, looks more natural and dimensional in the Capture 1 (and the Fuji Raw File Converter) results.

Yeah, I know, the ACR image has a different color signature, than the one done on Capture 1.  Try as I might in ACR, I had a really difficult time duplicating the color balance on the second image which to me  were the colors that I was seeing at the time the image was shot.  I think this is an idiosyncratic situation, and not typically a problem for ACR.

You can be the judge, but to my eye, color aside, the second image looks much better,  slightly in terms of detail perhaps, but with significant improvements in micro contrast.  To me it just looks more real.  And it prints that way also.

All this aside, I think this additional lens, and the improving  options for raw file conversion are really great enhancements for the Fuji X interchangeable lens bodies.  I continue to love shooting with them.

Oh, and I’ve pre-ordered an X 100s.

It’s going to be a fun Spring.