I love buying new camera gear.  It is a wonderful pleasure to unbox an instrument that will help to facilitate new opportunities in photography.  Increasingly, however, it is difficult to improve upon current levels of technology, which even in modestly priced camera equipment, allows users to capture beautiful imagery in a wide range of settings.

Fujifilm recently teased the imminent release of the X Pro 3, the third version of their now-iconic range finder style camera.  As I have owned and used both of the previous X Pro versions, I was eager to see what improvements Fujifilm might have in store to tempt me into the newest product.  The details that have been released, leave me and with more questions than answers.

We know some details about the camera.  We know that rather than a body made from magnesium, the X Pro 3’s structure is fashioned from titanium, which is stronger, lighter, and more damage-resistant than previous bodies.

There are several new finishes available on the camera which also enhance the resistance to scratches and scuffs.

There is, as almost always with a new release, an improvement to the hybrid viewfinder which is been a signature feature of this line.  Apparently, the electronic viewfinder has a higher resolution, likely a faster refresh rate, and more sophisticated color reproduction.

It appears that the four-way controller on the X Pro 2 has been eliminated, as Fujifilm has done with several earlier releases.  I find for instance, on my XE3, that the joystick is a perfectly reasonable substitute.

Most significantly, we have an unusual change to the rear LCD.  There are actually two rear LCDs now.  The one on the back of the camera is a compact LCD similar to those seen on the top panel of the medium format cameras, as well as the XH 1.  This is mainly to show things like camera settings up.  It can also be set up to display what would have been in the past the end panel of a film box appropriate to the film simulation one has selected.  This will certainly bring back memories to those of us who shot in the film era. 

The actual view screen is hidden in normal use but can be accessed as a hinged panel which one folds down allowing for waist-level photography.  It does not otherwise articulate, however.

What up has not yet been revealed are details about things like Autofocus, video capability, and the sensor though the latter is presumed to be the 28-megapixel Trans X sensor found in the XT3.  At least in that camera, the sensor was not a clear improvement over the previous 24-megapixel sensor, particularly in aspects such as high ISO capability for resolution.

Again were lacking a lot of detail here, but once again I find myself thinking that this upgraded model does not feel like a compelling purchase.

First off, I tend to use the X Pro cameras for weddings and other event photography.  The current body has never felt particularly heavy or burdensome, in fact, it has a very solid well-built feel that perhaps would be lost if the titanium version weighs significantly less.  Also, titanium is quite expensive. Just what will this mean for the retail price of the X Pro 3 remains to be seen.

The rear LCD arrangement I think is a lost opportunity.  I actually like the idea of the compact LCD display new camera settings, and sentimentally, the box label styled indicator of the film simulation.  This is apparently Fujifilm’s little manipulation to keep us looking through the viewfinder and to minimize “chimping”, emphasizing traditional photography. I’m not sure that’s any of their business.

In my camera cabinet, I have a relic of the past, a Panasonic GH1.  I keep it because it has an interesting color signature, and is capable of decent video.  It has my favorite rear LCD of all time, a viewfinder capable of either being displayed on the back of the camera, viewed from above or below, or even from the front of the camera. 

I especially like that it can be folded so the rear viewfinder is against the camera body and protected from scratches.  To me, this style of viewfinder,  perhaps with the small LCD on the opposite side,  would have been a more interesting addition to the new camera It would allow users to work however they wished, rather than having their workflow dictated by Fujifilm.

This new design however, is not that disruptive to my usual workflow as I tend to shoot through the viewfinder. It will likely be a problem for other potential buyers.  It seems like an unforced error.

Fujifilm like everyone else struggles with the problem of upgrading current models that are already excellent.  We do not have all the details of this new camera, but so far I’m not sure I’m going to upgrade my X Pro 2 which is a joy to shoot and is capable of capturing beautiful imagery.

I’d like to be wrong, however. 

I hate to miss an unboxing.

Thanks to the quirkiness of the Trans-X sensor, the topic of the raw conversion remains fertile ground for those who blog on the Fujifilm line of cameras.

For those of you not familiar with this issue, the color pattern of the Fujifilm Trans-X sensor, is more complex than that of a more conventional Bayer sensor used in pretty much every other digital camera.  For many years, we have sought the best method for the conversion of raw files from this unique sensor.  I’ve written on this multiple times in the past.  Now in 2019, we are faced with some new choices and options,several of them free. I though I would do an informal comparison.

There has been, and always will be, Adobe’s raw conversion software either in Lightroom or Photoshop versions.  This converter has been accused of less-than-stellar performance with the Trans-X sensor.  But lo and behold, Adobe has included a new feature, in their latest Photoshop version called “Enhance Details”.  This is said to be aimed in part, at the Fuji sensor problem.

Phase One, whose “Capture One” software, has always performed somewhat better with Fuji raw files, has been updated to version 12.  More interestingly, they have released a free Fujifilm only version, which presumably replaces the former Silkipix software that was bundled with the Fuji cameras.  The latter software performed very well, but because it was in no one’s workflow, it always felt kludgy and uncomfortable to use.

Another free software workaround for Fujifilm raw files comes from Irident Digital.  Though the company offers a fairly reasonably priced raw development package, many of us frugal types, have taken advantage of their free “Irident Transformer”.  This is a simple application that transforms Fujifilm raw files into another raw file, in this case, the ubiquitous .dng files championed by Adobe.  It does this in a clever way so that they may be processed more easily, particularly by Adobe Products.  This has proven to be an excellent way to avoid the muddled details, and “wormy artifacts”, often seen in straight Adobe Camera Raw conversions.

I thought it would be interesting, to compare files, converted in as close a manner as possible, for different methods, in this case straight Adobe camera raw conversion, then a conversion using the “enhance details” feature.  These can then be compared to conversions done by Irident/Adobe, and by the free Fuji version of Capture One 12.

I decided to use 24-megapixel X-Trans 3 files from both my new Fujifilm XE3, as well as the 16-megapixel files of the previous X-Trans 2 sensor from its predecessor, my now departed X-T10.

Now right up front, this is an inexact comparison.  I did play around to try to obtain the best image possible from the different conversion software, but I don’t think things like sharpening and clarity for instance, can be directly correlated between Capture One, and Photoshop.

A word about the workflow.  Perhaps because of familiarity, there’s no doubt that for me that Adobe Bridge, Camera Raw, and then Photoshop make for an extremely comfortable process.  I’ve used Capture One for many years, but even now I’m a little vague on some of its features.  This may be my fault in that I have probably not been as diligent as possible watching their tutorials.

Adding Irident Transformer conversion to the Adobe workflow ads exactly one step, and works pretty well.  Conversion is quick, and I have set up a file called “Irident conversions” on my computer to receive them.  One then the open is a converted, you can open file in your raw conversion software of choice.  My only gripe, would be that there does not seem to be a way to have the image open automatically in Photoshop after it is converted to a .dng file which would be handy.

Oddly enough, the Adobe “enhance details” feature is less conveniant inthat it seems to take forever to process a file.  It can take up to 2 to 3 minutes to run on my fairly high-end Intel I7 desktop.

So how do they perform?  Here first is a representative file from the XE3 at 200%:

I think it’s fairly obvious that the straight Photoshop version, even given the limitations involved in these jpegs, is inferior to the image processed using either of the other methods. I was hard-pressed, even looking at the original files, to decide on a winner among these though I settled on the Capture One conversion as slightly more detailed than the others. I was initially unhappy with my original Irident conversions which looked “harsh”. I came to realize however that there is some sharpening occurring in that during the .raw to .dng conversion. Once I backed off on the sharpening in Camera Raw, things improved markedly.

Also, I didn’t attempt to convert the Irident file using Capture One , Though it is certainly possible, given that the .dng file format was created by Adobe , I assume their software will convert it as well or better than anyone else .

Now let’s have a look at the X-T10 files, again at 200%

In posting these, I fear that, the JPEG compression of the files, plus the compression inherent in WordPress, has somewhat minimized the differences between these files.  Yet I can tell you that on my monitor, there is a clear difference between the straight Camera Raw conversions and the other methods.  I would say that between the Enhanced Detail, Adobe conversion, Irident plus Camera Raw, or Capture One 12, there is no clear winner.

Also it is intriguing to me how similar the detail is when comparing between the 16-megapixel, X-Trans 2 files, and the 24-megapixel X-Trans 3 files.

I must say, given the effort required to optimize X-Trans files, and that diminishing value of the technology as time marches on, I can certainly be convinced, that at some point, perhaps this sensor type should be abandoned.

On the other hand, those of us who have been Fujifilm shooters for a long time know that a portion of the brand’s appeal has always been unique sensor technology (remember the SuperCCD of the S3pro?).

In summary, I would say that Adobe has finally given us the ability to process with Fujifilm files at a level that matches the best rival conversions.

I just wish it wasn’t so slow both in coming, as well as in use.

I haven’t posted in a while. This is mainly because WordPress decided that they would completely change the functioning of the blog editor, and it took my rapidly aging brain some time to figure it out. Well, in the immortal words of Jack Torrance: “I’m Baaaaaaaaaack…”

I don’t know whether it’s the crappy photography conditions we’ve had, or my general satisfaction with the capabilities of my current equipment. It is even remotely possible, that finally, maturity and fiscal responsibility has settled on me perhaps 30 years late. For whatever reason I no longer yearn for the newest and best.

I no longer scour the pages of Dpreview for the latest equipment reviews.  I’ve stopped visiting the various Fujifilm forums. I dropped my subscriptions to Reid Reviews and the Luminous Landscape (though in the case of the latter site, it’s not really the same since Michael Reichmann died).

Nonetheless, new Fujifilm gear is likely in the pipeline, and probably not far from introduction. I’m not talking about The XT or XH lines, which have obviously been updated more recently. I’m talking about the cameras that I prefer to shoot, namely the X100 and X Pro lines. Both I think will be due soon for an update. What really bothers me, is that I’m not sure that I care.

What is happening???????

I currently shoot an X100F and an X Pro 2. In the case of the X100 series, I have owned all of the various versions starting with the original X100. It seemed to me that each time a new model came out, there was a fairly compelling reason to update the camera. This was also true of the X Pro 1 to X Pro 2 evolution. I am truly satisfied with my current equipment which has benefited from the constant evolution and improvement not only in the new models, but with subsequent firmware upgrades.

So what new features/ capabilities would an X100 “G” or an X Pro 3 need to offer in order to move up once again. I think part of the problem, is that I’m not a particularly demanding shooter. I’m not generally shooting sports, or wildlife. Most of the landscape I do is fairly deliberate. so what new features/ capabilities would cause me to upgrade? I suspect the next camera up will be the X100 series, so this will be where I focus in this article.

So, what might Fujifilm do to entice X100F owners to upgrade?

Well, there is the new sensor introduced in the XT3. At 28 megapixels there is slightly more resolution than the X100F’s 24 megapixels. High ISO performance is said to be the same or slightly worse than the previous sensor, with perhaps a gain in dynamic range, partly from the new lower base ISO. The latter feature would be useful, to slow shutter speeds for moving water, but overall, to me,the new sensor is not a huge draw.

How about weatherproofing? In a fixed lens camera, one would think this is easier to accomplish than in an interchangeable lens body. My sense is that it wouldn’t add much in the way of weight or bulk, and would be a nice addition to a camera used extensively for street photography. On the other hand, I use my cameras all the time in wet weather. Exercising some caution, I’ve never really had a problem with the X100 series.

A new lens might be interesting. The current 23mm f2.0 lens has been unchanged since the X100 introduction in 2011. It is a lovely optic, but it is known to be soft wide-open particularly close up. I would be interested, and an upgrade with a new lens, perhaps F1.8.  A deal breaker however, would a lack of compatability with the two lens converters Fuji currently offers ( for which  I spent good money on and use all the time).

They could improve the video performance, but I suspect, most X100 series users wouldn’t really care. Unless there have been big strides in technology, I don’t think there is adequate heat dissipation capacity in the small X100 frame for 4K (It’s borderline in the larger X Pro 2). You can always buy an XT3 if you want to shoot “Movin’ pitchures”.

Lens stabilization is always a welcome feature in a camera body. Given the size constraints with this line, I suspect it’s not possible to add it without increasing bulk. Ditto dual Card slots, or a separate memory card door like the X Pro 2

Better autofocus which is always claimed for upgraded cameras would also be useful, but I am relatively happy with the current performance of the “F”.

In short, because we’ve already had a look at the new sensor, the prospects for the upgraded X100/X Pro series aren’t very compelling from my limited viewpoint. The improvements that were so lauded in the XT3
(video and tracking autofocus) are not really that germane to these two camera series (at least in my hands).

I guess time will tell.

I’m writing this on December 5. I’m sitting at my desk, at about 7:40 AM, the sun has just risen in the east-southeast, as it does at this time of year when the sun’s arc is short. A straight shaft of sunlight pierces the window to my left and gently warms me on this cold winter morning. It is a welcome sensation that I have missed over the past 4 or 5 months given the abysmal weather we have been experiencing.

For the first time it seems since the early summer, meteorologists are predicting a prolonged period of dry, clear, if cold weather. For people prone to the “winter blues”, this is a welcome development.

When I last wrote back in early October, we had not really experienced any real autumn color. As it turned out, it was a long time coming. Usually, so-called “peak leaves” occurs around October 15, with the foliage largely off the trees by the end of the month. This year, the days around Halloween were probably the most colorful.

If only the weather cooperated. It seems like every day I was off and available to shoot, it was pouring rain. This was true through most of the weekends in the last several months, which initially got very discouraging. I got about when I could. I found myself relying on the X Pro 2 when shooting between raindrops given that it is relatively weatherproof.

Perhaps the only weekend in the fall that I remember there being favorable weather was in early November. At that time, my wife and I traveled to New York City to support a good friend who was running in the New York Marathon. Both Saturday and Sunday were clear, with mild temperatures.

We walked the city extensively and were quite surprised by the level to which New Yorker’s turned out for the event, and the extraordinary organization involved.

My wife and I watched the race in the upper east side, from a neighborhood pub which is frequented by a good friend of mine. It was a welcome respite from the rain and fog of the Pocono plateau.

Alas, on Monday morning when I woke to take a last photographic sojourn around Manhattan, it was raining again. Drat. I didn’t even get to make my usual walk to B+H photo.

 Back at home, whatever was left of the fall visuals, was pretty much eradicated on the 13^th of November when a rogue, early season nor’easter dumped snow over the region. At the altitude where I reside, we got about 13 inches of very dense snow that was quite challenging to remove, particularly given that I had not yet converted my equipment over to winter mode.

The snow hung around for several weeks, but then, a long period of warm rainy/foggy weather finally has returned us to our late fall landscape.

So now we are looking at a prolonged dry spell, and hopefully, the end to this weather pattern which has plagued us since at least June.

We’ll see…

 

Every once in a while, it is stimulating to leave what is familiar and comfortable, and venture into a place where we are challenged to adapt and extend our abilities.

In pursuit of this, some people travel to novel destinations, or take on a new physical challenge.  In photography, this can mean trying a new form of photography or working with new equipment. Recently, my exercise has been to shoot in a very unfamiliar format with the Laowa 9 mm f2.8 ultra wide lens.

We all have our comfort level.  In terms of focal lengths, I tend to work within a range of 35 mm to about 150mm (full frame equivalent).  These days I favor my Fujifilm equipment. So the X100 series 23mm f2 fixed lens( 35 mm field of view), the TCL-100 adapter(50 mm field of view) and the XF 56mm f1.2(roughly 85 mm field of view) get the bulk of my use, with the XF 55-200mm zoom available when required.

A 9 mm lens (13.5 mm field of view) is radically more wide angle than anything I typically shoot.  But I was intrigued by some images I saw online, shot with this Chinese-sourced lens. Curious,  I purchased one from the company website.

This is a small lens, smaller than anything I currently have for the Fuji lens mount.  It looks old-fashioned, it is made of metal with a metal lens cap and seems quite sturdy. There is a handy depth of field scale on the aperture ring. It interfaces securely with the Fuji X lens mount.

Setting the aperture and focus are  done manually  as there are no electrical contacts on the mount.  The body must be set to “shoot without a lens” in the menus to allow the set up to work.  One simply sets the shutter speed on “A”, and the light meter will set appropriate exposures on whatever aperture is selected. For the most part, this seems to work pretty well.  Exposure compensation also seems to be usable.

Ultra wide-angle lenses require specific framing if you are to obtain an interesting image.  I had very little experience with their use, so I went online and watched a variety of tutorials.  Pretty much everybody says the same thing:  first, you need to set the aperture fairly tight to maximize your depth the field.  On the lens this wide, at roughly f11, everything from about 1 feet and infinity is in reasonable focus. You need to pick a subject in the foreground and then get extremely, almost uncomfortably close to it. Then need to pay close attention to the background, as this focal length is very inclusive.  If your composition is right, then this should result in an interesting, fairly three-dimensional image.

With focal lengths this short, sometimes you have to get very low to the ground or shoot at unusual angles to frame a compelling image, or to exclude something unpleasant-looking.  A tripod is helpful, especially since any small movement of such a wide lens tends to alter significantly perspectives and angles of the seen.

I quickly found that if I could not get sufficiently close to an interesting subject, the resultant image would usually be completely uninteresting and flat. Every once in a while though, you can break the rules, and still end up with an interesting photograph. 

This was my first experience with a Chinese made lens.  Both the aperture ring and the focus ring rotated smoothly, and the former had click detents at 2 stop increments. The front element has a hydrophobic coating said to resist water droplets and mist.  The lens however, is not billed as weather-sealed. From the standpoint of built quality  it certainly felt like pretty good value.

Image quality was interesting.  This is not a fisheye lens and is designed to be rectilinear.I rarely found the need to set the aperture wider than perhaps f5.6 and found that from there to perhaps f11 the lens is not only very sharp in the center, but acceptably so in the corners. I have very little expectation that a modestly priced, ultra wide lens would be sharp edge to edge.

What was surprising was the light fall-off.  There is considerable corner shading even at tighter apertures, though obviously this can be easily corrected in post. I think this is particularly noticeable, because unlike my Fujifilm lenses, the camera has no lens information to use to correct optical aberrations “in camera”. 

I tended to shoot this lens on my XT 10, as the articulating screen of that camera was useful to frame images in some of the unusual angles required for wide angle photography.  I found the best way to deal with focus, was  use the focus peaking feature of the camera, but most of the time to bunch the sparkly bits towards the foreground, to prioritize sharpness there.

I did not shoot people with this lens. An optic this wide tends to do unflattering things to faces, particularly if you are close enough to fill the frame.  And most casual subjects will be uncomfortable with the proximity that the lens requires. Stay tuned, though.

This brings up what for me at least,  is  a major disadvantage of shooting at this focal length.  In situations where I am not shooting professionally, I am particularly wary of invading of peoples privacy and their property,procedure this for the sake of what is essentially my hobby. 

Particularly in rural areas, when armed with an ultra wide lens, you simply cannot take advantage of every scene.  In a cityscape though, where more interesting subjects are more freely accessible, things get somewhat easier.  Sometimes however, no matter where you are, it may just be impossible physically to get close to a subject or location to the degree the focal length requires.

I have been shooting the lens for several weeks.  I’m starting to develop a better sense of what will work with an ultra wide and what will not; my percent of “keepers” is going up.   Now, when I’m opening up a card in Photoshop, I am seeing images that often intrigue me, but don’t look like my previous work.

Which I’m pretty sure was the goal of this exercise.

 

As a photographer, it is natural to want to display your work for others to see.  Obviously, with social media, you can offer essentially the world (or, at least your followers), your latest efforts.  But what about your guests at home?  Printing and framing, are expensive and for me, impractical for the number of images I  would like to display throughout the year. 

Now you can certainly show work on a computer monitor, but this isn’t something that house guests think to seek out.  Coaxing someone to review your work on your computer always seem to me to be akin to breaking out the slide projector after dinner.  It makes most people cringe.

So I was on the website Luminous Landscape recently.  They posted a review, of two fairly novel products that looked really interesting to me, especially as I re-decorate, my home office workspace.  As it turns out, one can now purchase large digital display devices which are very appropriate for the wall display of photography.

Now digital picture frames have been around for a long time.  I have a 5 x 7 version sitting on the table in my den, which is pleasant for a slideshow of snapshots.  It is obviously too small and has insufficient resolution for serious work.  But there are apparently several manufacturers making display-worthy larger digital frames that offer a convenient and easy way to show one’s work (and other artistic works) in a gallery style.

The most aggressively marketed of these is the Meural.  This is a 27 inch, 1920 x 1080 resolution flat panel screen mounted to look like a matted framed object.  It is actually marketed along with a subscription service that allows you to display a huge variety of artworks licensed by the service.  It can be controlled from your computer or your mobile device.  It can also be loaded with your own images.  It has a unique motion sensor that allows you to swipe in front of the screen to change the artwork.

I, however, chose another product: the Memento Smart Frame.  It too looks like a matted frame, but for me, it has several advantages over the Meural product.  First, it has significantly higher resolution at 3240 x 2160 which also gives it a 3:2 aspect ratio rather than the 16:9 aspect ratio of the Meural.  It comes in two sizes: 25 and 35 inches, sold at US $599 and $899 respectively.

On both the Meural and the Memento products, it is possible to display other aspect ratios with the rest of the screen masked.  I find the images look much better if they can be displayed full screen.  Given this, most images work better at the 3:2 format (the native format of most sensors) than in the wider ratio.

The Memento Smart Frame is mounted to a wall using a specially designed bracket.  The 35-inch frame is capable of being mounted both horizontally and vertically.  I have the 25 inch which is only designed to be mounted horizontally. It is connected to an electrical outlet by a thin power wire which is relatively easy to hide.  You can also buy an optional flat power wire that can be taped to the wall and painted over.

The frame is activated by downloading an app to a mobile device, or your computer.  You can then connect the frame to your WiFi.  The app allows you to create different folders with images for display.  It will store up to 3000 images as jpgs.

You can decide to display 1 image or a variety of images which will display whatever time interval you select.  I will typically allow about 5 minutes between images so they can be appreciated, but a slideshow-like presentation would also be possible.

It also has the capability of having images uploaded remotely.  Thus it can be a sort of upscale version of those smaller digital frames marketed to seniors so their offspring can upload images of the grandchildren.

Another appreciated feature is the timer and light sensor which allows the frame to be off for prescheduled periods (like when I’m at work).  The frame can also be set to go off at night, and/or when there is no ambient light.  The frame also adjusts to the light level, and its color signature, contrast, and brightness can be adjusted in the app.

So how do images look?  From my point of view very nice indeed. I keep most of the controls near neutral, but it is important to adjust the brightness of the display so that the impression of backlighting is minimized. Once this is done, images are not immediately distinguishable from an actual framed print. Colors are vivid, and detail is excellent.  When displaying black-and-white in particular, the graduations are very pleasing, and blacks are deep.

I am so enjoying the Memento frame, I am thinking about buying a second one, perhaps a 35-inch version so that I can display vertically oriented images.  I also think of their other potential uses.

For instance, my last gallery show cost upwards of $2200 just for framing roughly 30 works.  In time when the price of these devices comes down a bit, I can imagine organizing a gallery show using four or five of these frames, each displaying perhaps 5 images sequentially.  Over the long run, this would save a lot of money and trouble (bubble wrapping and transporting framed prints is a nuisance). As opposed to the many hours it takes to create a standard display of prints, setting up this sort of show would be a breeze. I would only have to print the images I sell.

The Memento Smart Frame is a wonderful example of how technology is changing the nature of photography, and the display of artworks. And, it will only get better.

 

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.

 

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.

In the highlands of Northeastern Pennsylvania, meteorological summer has passed by, without stopping to say hello, or even waving as it drove past.

I can’t say there was no hot weather, but for the first time in many years, I don’t remember any even slightly uncomfortable nights sleeping in my non– air-conditioned bedroom (most summers we have a week or so of nighttime temperatures in the mid-70s).

I suspect that my friends with boats and/or swimming pools were disappointed. I, however, loved the pleasantly warm days, and crisp nights. So the climate trend that I described in June, which helped to abort a gypsy moth infestation, continued for the next 2 months.

For a variety of reasons, I have not had a great deal of photographic output over the summer. I think that the summer season often distracts me from photography with a number of different diversions, and discourages me from photography in a number of ways. From the biting insects that plague me when I try to I set up my tripod, to the monotonous green landscapes, and the sunrises that are inconveniently early, I tend to lose some enthusiasm over the warmer months.

Usually, my interest in a new piece of gear stimulates me to get out and shoot, but at this point, I’m extremely content with the gear that I have. This is particularly true of the X100F, and the X Pro 2. I really don’t crave the next upgrade in focusing or sensor resolution.

I read with interest the introduction of the Nikon’s new flagship DSLR, the D850.  I should really be lusting after this camera, with its state-of-the-art backlit 47mp sensor, its 9 frames per second speed, but I’m not.  Two generations old now, my 36mp D800E still looks new, works beautifully, and produces gorgeous files that look great in as large a print size as I am likely to create.

Maybe I’ll buy a refurbed one in a couple of years.

  Also though, I can’t escape the feeling that big bulky DSLRs are like dinosaurs at the end of the Cretaceous; about to be overwhelmed by the smaller, more convenient and increasingly capable mirrorless cameras which are becoming a more dominant force in the market.

Meanwhile, things photographically are looking up.

 Here in the Poconos, the leaves are beginning to change color, and the sound of katydids punctuates the crisp night air. The big cinnamon ferns in the forest are beginning to change to a sort of golden brown, while the deer transform from the red coat of summer to their cold weather coat of gray. Sadly, the humming birds have disappeared south.

For my wife and I, there will be an upcoming trip to the Adirondacks, to enjoy Oktoberfest, and “peak leaves”.

There is also the fresh introduction of the Fujifilm XE-3. Hmmm.

There should be plenty to write about, and photographic in the upcoming months.

Stay tuned.

 

 

It has been a quiet summer here on the Pocono Plateau. The weather has been quite pleasant since mid June, though in the last week or so we’ve had several runs of severe afternoon thunderstorms that resulted in power outages  in our small community.  Otherwise the weather has been lovely.

I have noticed that my postings tend to fall off during the summer months. I think part of this is due to a certain contentment I feel with the onset of the season .

We had the usual march of summer flowers including honeysuckle, black-eyed susan’s, mountain laurel, foxglove and finally rhododendron.  Now the first cardinal flowers have appeared alongside stream beds.  I noticed yesterday that goldenrod is beginning to bloom.

In our neighborhood we had an abortive gypsy moth outbreak, but a fortuitous run of cool wet weather in early June encouraged several pathogens, which wiped out the caterpillars before they could do much damage. This undoubtedly saved several old Chestnut oak trees on my property who are already relatively marginal.

We have had the usual run of community events, including our Fourth of July celebration, summer cocktail parties, and the very pleasant wedding of the friend’s daughter that I help to photograph. I am really enjoying the combination of the X 100f, and the X Pro 2/56mmf1.2 for events like this.

The house is empty this summer. My daughter of course lives in Seattle, and my son, who is a graduate student, is doing an Google internship in that city. It is nice that they can be together.  We did meet up with them in State College, when they flew into attend a wedding.

Equipment wise, I have acquired a DJI Mavic Pro drone, and have been trying to master shooting smooth aerial video. Once I have something to show for it, I will share my experiences on these pages. It turns out there is definitely a learning curve to this.

Mostly though, I am enjoying the summer season. I am looking forward to some events with the potential to provide some content for these pages as the summer goes on.

So bear with me.  I’ll be back.