Let’s talk about the X100VI Digital Teleconverter! Beginning with the X100F, Fujifilm has included a Digital Teleconverter on each of their X100-series cameras. The X100VI also has this feature, but it works just a little different. What’s divergent and how it might be useful is something I’ll discuss in this article.
The X100VI, like all the previous X100-series cameras, has a 23mm lens, which is 35mm full-frame equivalent, permanently attached to the front. While 35mm is a very useful focal-length, obviously it is also quite a constraint. You have to embrace the one-camera-one-lens philosophy; since limitations improve art, this can be greatly beneficial. Still, there are times when a little additional versatility is appreciated.
To add some versatility to your X100VI, you could use the WCL and TCL conversion lenses, which can be attached to the front of the camera in order to make it more wide-angle or telephoto. This obviously makes the camera bigger and heavier, and you’ve got to carry a lens or two with you. It’s not an ideal situation, but not really any different than if you had an interchangeable-lens model with a few lenses, except probably still more compact and lightweight.
The other option is a feature built into the camera called the Digital Teleconverter. This is a digital zoom that crops the picture to either 32mm (50mm full-frame equivalent) or 46mm (70mm full-frame equivalent). I have mentioned several times that the 40mp sensor makes sense on an X100 camera because of the Digital Teleconverter; otherwise, 40mp is overkill for most photographers—only those who crop really deeply or print their pictures huge need that much resolution. For most people, 20mp is plenty enough. More resolution can cause storage issues and take longer to transfer and all sorts of other things, so sometimes less is more. Anyway, with the fixed-lens limitation, in situations where additional versatility is needed, the extra resolution can come in handy.
For the Digital Teleconverter on the X100F and X100V, Fujifilm did an upscale trick that increased the apparent resolution of the picture to 24mp or 26mp, respectively. Obviously upscaling can’t add details that weren’t there in the first place, but it appeared to do so. Basically, the camera takes the data from the surrounding pixels, and makes new “pixels” in-between from that information, than applies a little micro-sharpness to crisp it up. The reality is that there is only (for example) 6.5mp of data on the X100V using the 70mm Digital Teleconverter, but it appears that there is a lot more than that, perhaps closer to 12mp—that’s clearly not 26mp, but still significantly more apparent resolution than 6.5mp. I thought it was pretty slick, although the 70mm Digital Teleconverter is definitely pushing the boundary of what could and should be done; the 50mm Digital Teleconverter is much more practical. Yes, one can upscale using software, but I always appreciate when the camera can do something for me, so that I don’t have to sit at a computer and fiddle with software—I have better things to do with my time.
The Digital Teleconverter on the X100VI works a little differently. Gone is the upscale; it’s just a crop. The 50mm Digital Teleconverter crops the picture to 20mp, which is still plenty of resolution for most people. The 70mm Digital Teleconverter crops the picture to 10mp, which is fine for social media and web use, but is limiting for prints—12″ x 18″ is definitely the upper limit of how large you can go. I would like an option, which could be enabled or disabled, that would allow the 50mm Digital Teleconverter images to be upscaled to 40mp, and especially the 70mm Digital Teleconverter images to be upscaled to 20mp. I’d probably disable it for 50mm and enable it for 70mm. Unfortunately, this isn’t an option, but I’m sure Fujifilm could include it in a future firmware update if they wanted to, and hopefully they do (but probably won’t).
On the X100F, the Digital Teleconverter only works when the camera is set to JPEG, and you cannot use it with RAW. On the X100V and X100VI, the Digital Teleconverter will work with RAW+JPEG; you can reprocess the RAW file in-camera with or without the Digital Teleconverter crop. The RAW file is uncropped; however, the thumbnail preview of the RAW file is of the cropped JPEG.
One problem that I have with the Digital Teleconverter is that it doesn’t scale Grain size. If you have Grain size set to Small, on the 50mm Digital Teleconverter it will appear more like Medium (which, I know, doesn’t exist—but it should!), and on the 70mm Digital Teleconverter it will appear more like Large. Grain set to Large appears quite massive when using the Digital Teleconverter, especially the 70mm option; while this can be used creatively, it is otherwise not ideal, and I would avoid using Large Grain with the Digital Teleconverters. One day I hope that Fujifilm will figure out how to scale the Grain so that it appears the same size whether or not you are using this feature.
Invariably, someone will say, “Just carry an interchangeable-lens model.” Of course that’s great advice if 1) that camera plus its lenses can fit into a sweater pocket, 2) it has a leaf shutter and smart fill-flash with high-speed sync, 3) has a built-in ND filter, 4) is weather-sealed, 5) isn’t prone to dust on the sensor, and 6) can change focal lengths as quickly as turning a ring. There are advantages to the X100VI that no other Fujifilm camera can match; however, like every model, there are also some disadvantages. The Digital Teleconverter is a tool to minimize one of the disadvantages.
Someone will also say, “Just accept that it is a 35mm lens, and forget about 50mm and 70mm.” I think in many situations this is a good approach, but not in all. For example, the Digital Teleconverter came in quite handy at a local airshow. Also, I think that using the X100VI as a 50mm camera could be a lot of fun, and 20mp is still plenty of resolution. I believe that some people will use the 50mm Digital Teleconverter regularly just for the fun of it, and I think it illustrates that an X100 camera with a 50mm-equivalent lens would be desirable.
The answer to the question I posed in the title of this article—is the Fujifilm X100VI Digital Teleconverter any good?—is: maybe and sometimes. On the X100VI, it’s just a crop, which you could easily do yourself. The 40mp sensor has so much resolution, that cropping is no big deal. I prefer the concept of the Digital Teleconverter with upscaling found on the X100V more than the non-upscaled X100VI, personally. I had figured that the extra resolution would make it more useful, but this change made it only about equally as useful. Since you can crop yourself without any trouble, you might find that the camera doing it for you is unnecessary; however, you might appreciate seeing exactly how that crop will look. I used the Digital Teleconverter quite extensively at the airshow, but I don’t anticipate using it all of the time. I will likely activate the 50mm option occasionally, but I will likely avoid the 70mm Digital Teleconverter, and just crop myself if I need to.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Fujifilm X100VI in black: Amazon, B&H, Moment, Wex, Nuzira
Fujifilm X100VI in silver: Amazon, B&H, Moment, Wex, Nuzira
Good article Ritchie.
In fact since to original X100, I used the WCL and TCL to complement (not real other way at the time when doing SOOC and wanting optical quality). Upgrade to their version II when reselling my X100 to go to the F… Bit at the time it came always with love and hate (indeed more bulky, at the time not WR, etc)… On reselling my X100F to go lighter to the X70, I sold everything. I should not have too!
Now I’m a very big fan and use a LOT the digital converted on my X-T5. Will all the lenses, even with the new 8mm. Just awesome to have built-in crop facility. No post processing, which is the goal.
On going back to the X100V, well with its performances, the hate disappear, giving place to only the love to use the XCL & TCL in conjunction of the Digital Converter (DC). Combo so convenient.
Of course you’re absolutely right, when using DC and having grain setup and go to X2 with high ISO, well, one need to accept to be “creative”. Coming from film with Superia 1600 or Ilford Delta 3200, I do not mind AT ALL. The results are way more pleasant with the V and now the VI I found.
On the contrary I LOVE to play with possibilities offered and use them to push even beyond the original effects… SOOC to the fullest!
I did not mind the upscaling on the F & V, but sometimes too much artifact could come with x2 and WCL / TCL when being at high ISO… So for my taste I way prefer it just a crop on the VI like on the X-T5 taking advantage of the high resolution of the 40MP sensor and the new algorithms.
AND it is indeed A LOT of fun. It is like using the Advanced Filters (love them by the way too and using them a lot especially the Pop, Dynamic and the B&W blue extract ones).
Having played with the DC on the X-T5 for quite a time, it became a habit / drug for me. I programmed the facility on one of the buttons of my X-T5. On the coming of the VI, it was one of the core features along IBIS which make me upgrade without a doubt out of my excellent and superb V…
What I do appreciate a lot on the X100VI (along the F & V) is the use of the ring for selecting extra quickly the conversion (like the ring of a zoom) and the fact that the equivalent resulting focal lens is well and automatically indicated. So with VI and the TCL, you can high without carrying a XF 90mm. More than handy too when using the WCL so to go back and to pass the 35mm. The WCL being much less than the TCL (and use the same hood) I tend now to leave the WCL on my VI when considering going for a small architecture / landscape trip…
I would have wished now, on my part, that on the X-T5 the DC is not simply indicating simply x1.4 or x2. It could do the maths like on the VI! Being spoiled by the VI. But of course here on the X-T5 the philosophy it too stick to the ”real” Tele-Converter (TC) way of handling. I do not mind at all the way it is implemented on both cameras.
Different tastes and usages. The beauty of using and being an owner of Fujifilm cameras.
I think, with the 40mp sensor, the x1.4 is no problem, and, as you said, no post processing is the goal. The x2 is a little much for me, personally, without the upscaling. I’d definitely like an option for that in-camera; maybe Fujifilm will bring it back, or maybe it’s just too much processing with the larger sensor?
Thanks for the input!
Welcome Ritchie.
Well to my taste I prefer definitely the crop over the upscaling.
But I agree with you it would be cool if we had an option for upscaling.
I do not think it a processor / algorithms problem / need of more computation. The camera can already do in-camera process its raw. So you have definitely enough processing power for doing it and quickly (responsiveness as would like FujiFilm and users).
It is more of out of willingness / thinking that this option will be considered useful by Fujifilm. Perception / marketing / cost of conception matter more so.
Like having no DC on GFX bodies (here the cropping facility is more than superlative and every body know how crazy you can crop with either a GFX 50 or 100 MP). Samwise having no advanced filters on GFX…Firmware wise not an issue at all. The code is already there since a while. Simple matter of adaptation it to the GFX format…
So all GFX cameras could have both of them, but simply does a “real” GFX photographer and more so pro will even consider using them / wanting them ??? Doing jpeg / SOOC only with such cameras ???
Common / general answer: No of course! (Well for me absolutely yes, but I’m not the norm for sure !). Hence nor marketing / sales value, so Fujifilm who need human resources for building all those firmware and maintain them will never bother implementing it. And everything has a cost…
But this upscaling option could / may come through in the future if a lot of users (along pros) are asking for it Then Fujifilm may consider implementing it.
From gen 1 to current gen 5, we have already received a bunch of goodies and tweeking thanks to the fact that Fujifilm is usually listening to its (pro) users.
It is like the forthcoming of Reala ACE for this summer on other Gen 5 cameras than the GFX100 II and X100VI. Before, several film simulations that could go onto the same gen cameras were never brought through firmware updates. Every time, even if fully possible with no loss of performance / responsiveness due to the extra computation required (which is Fujifilm best argument for not doing so on previous gen cameras), you were forced to upgrade. Good for the sales. A very big change from Fujifilm! (another win from the engineers over sales & marketing, like for the big firmware update of the original X100 way after the S came out?). Anyhow good for us as maybe at last Fujifilm is really putting extra manpower and effort back on Kaizen updates as they have promised us in last X Summit.
Yeah, I think the best solution is the option to enable or disable it, and let the user decide which they prefer. I hope to someday have a conversation with Fujifilm about many things—I’ve been wanting that opportunity for a long time—and if I ever do, this might be one thing on my long list to discuss with them. 😀
Hi Ritchie,
I know you know it and hopefully most of us do, but there will be some people who don‘t: It is just a crop. And not a zoom. A real 50/70mm lens will give you a totally different look. The perspective changes. The entire field of view gets compressed. I find that quite important. And to be honest, people are being a bit fooled by Fuji. By the way, Apple is doing the same marketing nonsense with the iPhone 15. The 15 crops and the 15 Pro actually has a zoom lens. Both are claimed to have a 2x optical zoom.
It is just a crop.
Sorry for the rant. 😎
“The perspective changes. The entire field of view gets compressed. I find that quite important.”
This is actually not true. In fact only the dof effect changes at wide apertures where it’s noticeable.
You can’t beat a TCL at 50mm equivalent and F2 aperture with a digital zoom that comes from a 35mm equivalent F2… Try that in portraits… Or close-ups. @Holger is right in what he is trying to say. Absolutely a different feeling.
In portraits, see how perspective and object compression looks with 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 135mm real optics, and you will understand. I used those words intentionally… in the end it means nothing, if you can’t see the difference, then digital crop is all you need. Technically 😀
The compression cannot be replicated by cropping. Also, the 70mm crop is something like a 3x crop factor similar to Super 16 film, which means that f/2 from cropping will have a completely different depth of field compared to using a f/2 on a 70mm (equivalent) lens. There are indeed some differences between using a 50mm (equivalent) lens and cropping to that focal length, but if someone is using an X100-series camera and cropping makes the picture stronger, one should feel free to make the crop and not worry that it isn’t exactly the same thing as using a longer lens. Or, if they are worried about it, then maybe consider using a different camera for that situation. At least that’s what I think. Thanks for the input!
A longer focal length lens will compress (bring closer) the background, and cropping doesn’t do that. So it’s true that it’s not exactly the same thing, but does that really matter? If it does, they should perhaps avoid significant cropping, or maybe an X100-series camera isn’t for them (which is fine: different strokes for different folks). If it doesn’t matter, then crop and don’t worry that it isn’t exactly the same thing. I’m not personally worried about it; as they say, it is what it is.
True, it’s not exactly the same. Cropping will never compress the background like a telephoto (or a lens that’s less wide angle)… I suppose that the aperture should be opened, too, for an equivalent depth-of-field.
When I was learning photography in college many years ago, it was at the tail end of a photography movement where cropping was considered “bad” and shouldn’t be done. Photographers would grind the edges of the negative holders so that the unexposed sides of the film would project onto the paper during printing, to prove that the picture wasn’t cropped. It was a point of pride, I think. In retrospect, it was silly. Crop if you want, there’s nothing wrong with it, especially if by doing so one gets a stronger picture.
Cropping to get a 50mm equivalent image isn’t exactly the same as using a 50mm equivalent lens, but that should not prevent someone from cropping if it makes the picture better by doing so. That’s my opinion, anyway.
Cropping is totally fine. In fact thats the only post editing I do since I use some of your great recipes. The only thing I don‘t like about the so called 50mm converter is that people will get fooled by the name of it. Call it auto-crop or whatever. But it has nothing to do with a different focal length than 23mm. It‘s just marketing nonsens to convince people who hesitate buying a camera with a fixed lense.
I think the most correct way to think about the 50mm Digital Teleconverter on the X100VI is that it is equivalent to using a 24mm lens on a 20mp Micro-4/3 camera.
> A real 50/70mm lens will give you a totally different look. The perspective changes. The entire field of view gets compressed.
The perspective on a certain scene is determined by where you’re standing. If you’re standing far away you get a compressed (flattened) perspective due to narrower viewing angles and due to depth dimensions becoming smaller relative to your distance from the scene (hence distant objects don’t look so faraway from each other anymore). Of course standing far away also makes the scene smaller in your view.
If you keep standing in the same spot, then all that a longer focal length does is that it makes that scene larger in the image and (which is the same thing) puts everything else outside of the frame, essentially zooming in on what might otherwise be just a background detail. Cropping does the same job but at the expense of image quality.
The misunderstanding here is very common and comes from blindly applying the correct rule to a wrong variable. The rule you’re mentioning assumes that the size of the object in the image remains the same, in which case different focal lengths (or crop factors) require you to stand at different distances from the object. It is the distance from the object that changes perspective and this is what your example images in another comment demonstrate. You could just as well do the same demonstration with different crop factors: the larger the crop factor the further away you’ll have to stand and the flatter perspective will become.
It is for this reason that you also need to translate focal length numbers between different sensor sizes by what is called a “sensor crop factor” if you want to achieve the same resulting image. You could ultimately think of it this way: cropping an image is effectively reducing the size of your sensor. A certain focal length on a smaller sensor will produce the same image as a N-times longer focal length on a N-times larger sensor. By the same principle using N crop factor will produce the same image as using N-times longer focal length on that sensor.
Note that we’re talking about focal lengths and perspective alone. There are also other variables like depth of field, where again the same principle applies as comparing different sensor sizes.
@Holger
The entire perspective / field of view is identical, whether you digitally crop, post crop or zoom.
You have to move your feet (length) to get a different field of view.
Only optical lens differences come into play here.
Try for yourself.
No trickery at all.
I‘m sorry to say it, but you are absolutely wrong. Different focal lengths results in different images.
Look at this example and you will (hopefully) see the difference
https://images.app.goo.gl/3x79Fche8eJt42w56
The compression of the scene (the background appearing closer) cannot be replicated by cropping, but that’s not a big deal to me, personally. If there’s an instance where that does matter to me, I’ll use my Fujinon 90mm on my X-E4 or X-T5, instead of the X100VI; otherwise, it is what it is, and I’m not bothered by it.
It is also how the head change in shape….
Ritchie, do you say that the TCL cannot be used on VI?
You can use the conversion lenses. They just add extra size and weight.
@Vasile Guţă-Ciucur WCL & TCL in their version II (only !) can be used on the X100VI. Fujifilm stated that version II of those complement lenses are able to resolve without problem the 40MP of VI.
On my trials I see no degradations indeed.
But I’m not a pixel / 400x pipping guy. And like Ritchie I’m not bothered at ALL!
It is like the old debate of APS-C vs Full Frame…
If you want to achieve the (your) desired result, then just pick the primes and a X-Ty body instead or do raw!
DC is more than a nice option to have. And more having the facility right on the spot especially with the X100VI when configured with the ring, so with it you have the shot done instead of swapping of lenses at the decisive moment…
Adding the XCL & TCL v2 with the DC and you have a pretty neat combo with a very wide range of focals up to the 110mm equivalent. And to a reduce price compared to selected primes (and we are still lacking 120mm primes)!
Even if the TCL is adding bulk and weight (adding a thumb grip and / or hand grip helps a lot in this case), it is less awkward with a X100 series than putting a XF90mm or XF80mm + TC x1.4/2 converter on a X-E or X-Tyz lines body! But it is still a lot fun to do so with such little cameras. Like Ritchie is doing. I even tried on my former X-T20 and now X-E4 or X-Pro3 my XF50-140 (way over kill thought).
You can go into a full trip with X100VI and its 2 complement lens with a small bag. You keep WR too. Really cool combo / option.
But still do take extra batteries! As even the new processor is more efficient, the NP-W126S is still drained quickly when using all the option for optimum performance (including AF & visualisation) + IBIS + automatic image transfer to phone over what gives the NP-W235. Not at all an issue for old-timer Fujifilm users when used to deal with the original NP-W126… Hence here too I’m not bothered at ALL not having the W235 on the X100VI. I prefer the form factor has been kept but do include IBIS!
And the WCL & TCL do not consume at all any battery power of course.
I have been using “Sports Finder Mode” on my X-T3 to crop images in-camera (I even have it mapped to a button), even though that’s not the purpose of that setting. On my model that’s a 1.25x crop, so for zoom lenses it simulates just a bit extra reach when I need it. Although I wish that it worked with EF+M+E shutter type (Sports Finder Mode is incompatible with full electronic shutter, but then the camera could theoretically just default to EF+M when in that mode).
I didn’t even know some Fujifilm cameras have a function intended exactly for that use and that it’s called “Digital Teleconverter”. Glad to hear from Horus above that they also added it to X-T5.
Oh, interesting. Never thought to use Sports Finder Mode for that purpose.
Somehow this was literally the perfect post for me to read! I’ve been messing around with the DTC on my X-T5 (never touched it before last week) in anticipation of getting my X100VI thinking that it might function mostly the same with the same sensor and I’ve got the 23mm f2 WR, so I could mimic it pretty well. AND, I’m going to see the Thunderbirds the first week in April! 😬 this was the first in depth discussion I could find on this topic, thanks.
I think I’ve been too hung up over resolution for far too long (left over from the DSLR days of 12mp-ish sensors), the 50mm crop seems to be quite useful on my X-T5. Unfortunately it doesn’t look like my X100VI will ship before the air show so I’ll have to just test it out by carrying a camera bag ugh. Thanks again for the timely post!
Glad that the timing was perfect! The Thunderbirds put on a great show, it had been awhile since I last saw them.
Funny story regarding the Thunderbirds: I’m friends with this guy who is incredibly smart, and he used to work for the USAF, and was in charge of the Automatic Ground Collision Avoidance System program for the F16. When it was finished and implemented, he was in his office feeling good about it all when he received an angry call from the chief Thunderbird pilot: “What the hell did you do to our airplanes?!” Apparently they can’t do their stunts with it, so it had to be disabled in the Thunderbirds’ F16s. 🤣
Uhhhh wow that’s amazing! I’m looking forward to seeing the show, I haven’t seen it in a while either.
Does the physical tele lens change the compression like it would if swapping from 28 to 35 on lets say a xt-5?
The physical TCL lens does, the Digital TCL (crop) does not.
Is the digital teleconverter just a crop? Sure.
But a lot of the benefit of Fuji is doing things in camera rather than in post, so an in-camera crop makes a tonne of sense.
I think the best way to think about it is something like this:
Fujifilm actually gives you three cameras. The first is 40mp APS-C with a 23mm (35mm equivalent) lens. The second is a 20mp Micro-4/3 with a 24mm (48mm equivalent) lens. The third is a 10mp 1″-sensor with 25.5mm (69mm equivalent) lens. You choose which of these three cameras you want to shoot with simply by turning the ring. Obviously, the 10mp 1″-sensor option will be selected the least.
The image is the same if you use the teleconverter or the digital one. I’ve tested it and so have some on youtube. No difference other than image size (and therefore noise).
Some also seem to be saying on here that the digital teleconverter would give a different image to a lens of that focal length, which isn’t true. They’re the same other than image size. “Compression” is the same.
I have been using all versions of X100 and I initially thought I would not use the crop mode (Digital Zoom) on the VI, but it turns out that I like it a lot.
The only regret I have regarding this feature is that when I import my raw files in Lightroom, the original framing (i.e. choice of zoom factor mode) is lost.
I wish there was a way to easily and quickly restore it in Lightroom (like for example an import option), or maybe a new firmware that would offer an option that would allow – only for those would choose to activate it – to crop the raw…just like it works for images taken using the Sports Finder.
I’m not sure how or how not that could work, but I believe (if I’m not mistaken) that the Leica Q2/Q3 RAW files work with their digital crop as you wish that Fujifilm’s would work, so it definitely seems possible.