These two recipes aren’t actually new, they’re just new to the app. I’ve created so many different film simulation recipes over the last few years, sometimes it’s hard to keep track of them all. Right now there are 135 different ones on the app! The two that I just added were somehow overlooked. By request, they’re now included on the app.
Let’s take a look at these two new (yet old) film simulation recipes!
Pointing Towards the Sky – Layton, UT – Fujifilm X-T30
My Kodacolor film simulation recipe is quite popular as it produces a great vintage-analog aesthetic that’s easy to love. Kodacolor film has been around for a long time—the name was first used by Kodak in 1942—and many different emulsions have had this brand name on it. Interestingly, Kodacolor was the first color negative film intended for making prints.
Stephen Shore shot a lot of Kodacolor, mostly Kodacolor-X and Kodacolor II, but also likely the original Kodacolor, Kodacolor 400, and Kodacolor-VR. While Shore did shoot 35mm film, he is most known for his medium-format and large-format photographs. Something I learned is that medium and large format Kodacolor film is more saturated than the 35mm emulsion. The only difference between the original Kodacolor recipe and the Stephen Shore Kodacolor recipe is that Color is turned up a little, otherwise they’re identical.
Smiling Jonathan – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X-T30
When Fujifilm introduced the Eterna film simulation on the X-H1, I received several requests to create a recipe that mimics it for cameras that don’t have Eterna. At the time, there weren’t many example pictures captured with Eterna, yet I made an attempt anyway, but it turned out to be inaccurate. Once I had a chance to use Eterna, I created this Faux Eterna recipe, which is much closer to the film simulation.
I’ve been wanting to create a new Velvia recipe for awhile now. The previous version is bold, but sometimes produces too much contrast. This recipe is actually a little closer to my original Velvia recipe, but with even less contrast yet with more saturation. This Velvia v2 recipe doesn’t closely mimic any specific version of Velvia film, yet it still retains an overall Velvia-like aesthetic.
Velvia is a high-saturation, low-ISO color reversal (slide) film introduced in 1990. I’ve shot many rolls of it, mostly the original ISO 50 version, but also the “new” Velvia 50, Velvia 100F and Velvia 100 emulsions. Of those films, this recipe is probably closest to Velvia 100, but not exactly like it.
Brown Reflection – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-T30 – “Velvia v2”
This film simulation recipe is intended for the Fujifilm X-T30 and X-T3 cameras. If you have “newer” X-Trans IV cameras, you might consider Color Chrome Effect Blue set to Weak, Grain set to Weak and Small, and Clarity set to +2 perhaps. If you have an X-Trans III camera, which doesn’t have Color Chrome Effect, you can still use this recipe, but the results will be slightly different. Those with GFX cameras can also use this recipe, and it will look very close but not exactly the same.
Velvia Dynamic Range: DR200 Highlight: -1 Shadow: -1 Color: +4 Noise Reduction: -4 Sharpening: 0 Grain Effect: Weak Color Chrome Effect: Strong White Balance: Auto, 0 Red & 0 Blue ISO: Auto up to ISO 6400 Exposure Compensation: +1/3 to +1 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs, captured using a Fujifilm X-T30 with this Velvia v2 film simulation recipe:
March Reeds – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-T30
Reeds in Evening Light – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-T30
Water Under The Bridge – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-T30
Muddy Water – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-T30
Ducks in the Shallow Water – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-T30
Flying Seagull – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-T30
Evening Gull – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-T30
Utah Reeds – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-T30
Evening Cloud Over The Ridge – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-T30
Grass, Pond & Mud – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-T30
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
I recently decided to create a compact kit for Fujifilm X cameras (specifically, the upcoming X-E4)—something that is versatile yet can fit into a small bag, that’s convenient for travel. An important part of this kit will be pancake lenses. It didn’t take me long to discover that there aren’t very many of these lenses available for Fujifilm cameras. There are only two Fujinon pancakes: the 27mm f/2.8 and 18mm f/2. There aren’t a whole lot of tiny third-party lenses, either. The Pergear 10mm F/8 Fisheye, which was released just a few weeks ago and retails for only $79, is an inexpensive ultra-wide pancake option that I knew I needed to try.
At 2/5ths of an inch thick, the Pergear 10mm F/8 Fisheye lens isn’t much bigger than the Fujifilm body cap. It’s super small and lightweight. I doubt there are many lenses available that are thinner than this one. It appears to be mostly made of metal and the build quality seems pretty solid. It has five elements in four groups. The minimum focus distance is about one foot, and manual focusing is done via a small lever on the bottom-front of the lens. On Fujifilm X cameras, the 10mm focal-length is full-frame-equivalent to 15mm.
Legendary photographer Weegee coined the phrase, “F/8 and be there.” Due to its fixed f/8 aperture, the Pergear 10mm F/8 Fisheye epitomizes this saying. You literally can’t do much more than “f/8 and be there.” This allows the lens to be so small, but it also limits its usefulness; it’s not a good option for low-light situations.
Pergear calls this a “fisheye” lens because there’s a lot of barrel distortion, which isn’t unusual on such wide-angle lenses. It reminds me a lot of SuperView on GoPro cameras, if you’re familiar. Straight lines won’t be straight, which you can either fix in software or try to use creatively.
I found the Pergear 10mm F/8 Fisheye lens to be sufficiently sharp in the center—not Fujinon prime tack-sharp, but sharp enough nonetheless. There’s some noticeable corner softness and vignetting. I did spot chromatic aberrations in extreme contrast areas. This isn’t the greatest glass, but, considering the price, it’s surprisingly decent.
Due to its focal length, fixed aperture, and barrel distortion, this is a challenging lens to use. It’s not for most situations; however, it can be used to capture some dramatic and creative pictures in the right situations. If you embrace the challenge you’ll surely be rewarded. I found the Pergear 10mm F/8 Fisheye fun to use—more enjoyable than I expected.
There are definitely better ultra-wide-angle lenses (both Fujinon and third-party) that you could buy instead of the Pergear 10mm; however, you won’t find any as inexpensive or as small as this one (at least I didn’t find any). That combination of size and value make the Pergear 10mm F/8 Fisheye an intriguing option. If you plan to shoot ultra-wide often, this isn’t likely the lens for you, unless you really appreciate how it renders pictures. If you think it would be fun to occasionally use a 10mm lens but don’t want to spend a bunch of money or make room in your camera bag for a bigger option, this Pergear lens is certainly worth a try.
This review contains affiliate links, and I will be compensated a small amount if you make a purchase using my links. Amazon $79
Example photographs using the Pergear 10mm f/8 Fisheye lens on my Fujifilm X-T1:
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
There are five Fujifilm cameras that you should never, ever own. Don’t even think about it! These cameras have qualities that are downright awful. If you should buy one, you’ll certainly regret it. How do I know? Because I have personally used all five of these Fujifilm cameras, and trust me, you should never own one. Ever. They’re the worst!
What are these five foul Fujifilm cameras? What makes them so bad? Read on to find out!
Never judge a book by its cover. The X-E1 might be one of the most stylish cameras ever made, but on the inside you’ll find sluggish low-light autofocus and an unbearably antiquated menu. Where’s the focus joystick? There isn’t one. You won’t find any film simulations with the name Classic in it, either. The camera is almost 10 years old, which in digital terms is ancient. It received plenty of criticism when it was brand-new, and cameras weren’t nearly as good back then as they are now, so it must be especially awful when judged by today’s standards.
Besides, are 16 megapixels really enough? I mean, we’ve got 100-megapixel cameras now! Nobody is making cameras nowadays with such low resolution. They’re all going to laugh at you with a measly 16; that’s barely enough for social media posts, and not nearly enough for pictures of fluffy the cat. If you’re serious about photography, you need more resolution than this camera has. Lot’s more.
It’s best to avoid the Fujifilm X-E1, even though you can find it sometimes for super cheap. You get what you pay for, so it’s better to spend as much money as possible on your gear. The more you spend, the more successful you’ll be, or at least the more successful other people will assume you are. Remember, perception is reality.
Barn by the Tetons – Grand Teton NP, WY – Fujifilm X-E1
Snake River Fog – Grand Teton NP, WY – Fujifilm X-E1
Fujifilm X-A cameras are essentially cheap X-E copycats. You can buy Lucky Charms or you can buy Marshmallow Mateys; they might look similar, but do they taste the same? No. The X-A3 might resemble an X-E3, but don’t be tricked! X-E is X-Trans, yet X-A is Bayer, which might as well be Sony, and Sony isn’t Fujifilm.
When you judge books by their covers you are usually right. The X-A3 has a lot of plastic on it, and plastic cameras are basically toy cameras. No serious photographer would ever use a toy camera, because toys are for kids. The X-A3 might as well be a Holga or Diana; unfortunately, the Fujifilm model doesn’t have any of that lo-fi sugary goodness that attracts lomographers. This camera sits in a weird spot: too cheap on the outside to be loved by real photographers, too good on the inside to be loved by hipsters.
Feeling Blue – Canyonlands NP, UT – Fujifilm X-A3
La Sal Through Mesa Arch – Canyonlands NP, UT – Fujifilm X-A3
The X-M1 is an X-E1 trapped inside the body of an X-A1.
What happens when you combine the worst parts of an X-E1 with the worst parts of an X-A1? You get this Frankenstein camera. Fujifilm took all of the bad points of #4 and #5 on this list and mixed them together in what can best be described as a mistake. There’s a reason why Fujifilm never made an X-M2.
Trust me, you’ll regret putting a charged battery inside this camera to bring it to life.
Vibrant Autumn – Fruit Heights, UT – Fujifilm X-M1
Lit Autumn Leaves – Fruit Heights, UT – Fujifilm X-M1
The XQ1 is a pocket zoom. Remember those? They were all the rage eight years ago. Were is the keyword. Nobody uses cameras like this anymore. It was trendy for a time (not necessarily this particular model), but they’re just not cool anymore.
Besides, it has a 2/3″ sensor. Yeah, yeah, I know it’s X-Trans II, and produces results similar to the much larger and heavier and more expensive X-T1, but the sensor is so itty bitty. A postage stamp looks large in comparison! Nobody will suspect you’re a photographer if you use it—they’ll just ignore you as an out-of-town tourist or an out-of-date amateur. What’s the point in being a photographer if nobody knows it just by looking at you?
Reaching Leaves – Mirror Lake, UT – Fujifilm XQ1
Logs in the Lake – Mirror Lake, UT – Fujifilm XQ1
#1 – Fujifilm AX350
“Changing the film simulation is pretty much all you can do….”
The AX-what?! This pocket point-and-shoot is a camera you likely don’t remember, because it’s entirely forgettable. Intended for the tenderfoot, the AX350 was made obsolete by the cellphone. You might find one at a thrift store for the same price as a cup of coffee. Maybe a friend or relative has one in the back of some junk drawer or at the bottom of a storage box in the attic. If you find one, just leave it be. If someone offers to give you theirs for free, politely decline. Not even those who it was made for want it, and neither should you.
If you had to choose between this camera and your cellphone camera, you wouldn’t choose this one. I mean, what kind of image quality could you possibly get from such a cheap, amateurish, old, obsolete piece-of-junk? It’s best that the AX350 remains a forgotten relic of a time long past, the good ol’ days when only expensive DSLRs were capable of capturing good pictures, and you knew who was a pro (and who wasn’t) by the gear they carried.
Green Summer Leaf – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm AX350
Red Trike – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm AX350
This, of course, is satire. You probably figured that out awhile ago. I’m poking fun at negative articles and videos with titles like: The Absolute Worst Camera, Cameras You Should Never Own, Top Cameras To Avoid, The Most Hated Camera, Things I Hate About This Camera, Why I’m Disappointed With My Camera, Why I’m Selling My Gear, etc., etc.. Negativity is popular, and titles like those get views.
Any camera in the hands of a skilled photographer is a capable photographic tool. As Chase Jarvis coined, “The best camera is the one that’s with you.” Do the best you can with what you have, and you’ll be surprised at the results. It’s more important to have photographic vision than expensive gear. It’s better to invest in experiences than new things.
All five of the cameras mentioned above—the X-E1, X-A3, X-M1, XQ1 and AX350—are fully capable artistic tools. Even the AX350 can produce beautiful results. There’s nothing wrong with using any of them. No matter what your camera is, it’s plenty good enough. Spend less time worrying about the gear you own, and spend more time considering what you can create with it.
There’s a new Patron early-access film simulation recipe on the Fuji X Weekly app! It’s called Vintage Negative and is based on some old photographs that someone shared with me. If you’re looking for an aged analog aesthetic, this recipe might be for you! It’s compatible with the Fujifilm X100V, X-Pro3, X-T4, X-S10 and the upcoming X-E4.
The Fuji X Weekly app is currently only available for iOS, but progress is being made on the Android version. I think it’s not that far from being finished. As long as there are no unforeseen delays, it will be available by March 1st, hopefully sooner. The app is free, and some features and functionality can be unlocked by becoming a Patron, which is a great way to support what’s going on here. There’s some wonderful stuff in the works, and I can’t do it without you. I want to give a big “Thank You” to all of the Patrons for your support!
One of the perks of being a Fuji X Weekly Patron is that you get early-access to some new film simulation recipes. This new Vintage Negative recipe is one of those Patron early-access ones. It will eventually become available to everyone once a new Patron early-access recipe replaces it. There were seven of these recipes on the app, but I’m increasing that to ten. So far, two of the original early-access recipes have been made available to everyone, but eventually they all will, including this one. My cameras’ custom presets are chocked full of upcoming recipes and various experiments.
If you have an iPhone or iPad, be sure to download the Fuji X Weekly app—it’s free! You can get early access to the Vintage Negative film simulation recipe by becoming a Patron.
Water Tower – Salt Lake City, UT – Fujifilm X100V – “Vintage Negative”
Troller Square – Salt Lake City, UT – Fujifilm X100V – “Vintage Negative”
Yellow House Evening – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V – “Vintage Negative”
The upcoming Fujifilm GFX100S has a brand new film simulation called Nostalgic Negative. Even though this camera hasn’t even been released yet, I’ve had many requests to create a film simulation recipe for it. That’s a tough challenge because there’s so little about Nostalgic Negative that’s known and very few sample pictures floating around the internet.
Back when Eterna was new—before I had a chance to try it myself—I made a faux “Eterna” recipe, and it turned out to be not particularly close. Even though it didn’t faithfully mimic Eterna, it’s one of the more popular recipes on this website. When Classic Negative first came out, I made a faux “Classic Negative” recipe, and even though it also turned out to be not particularly close, I’ve had several people tell me that it’s their favorite recipe. There’s two important points to this: 1) this “Nostalgic Negative” recipe will likely turn out to be an inaccurate facsimile to the real Nostalgic Negative film simulation and 2) there are people who love it anyway. With that disclaimer out of the way, let’s get into what Nostalgic Negative is and how you can achieve a similar aesthetic on your Fujifilm X camera.
Watch and Jewelry – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V – “Nostalgic Negative”
Fujifilm stated that the Nostalgic Negative film simulation is based on “American New Color” photography of the 1970’s. They studied photographs by William Eggleston, Stephen Shore, Joel Sternfeld and Richard Misrach in order to create it. Eggleston and Sternfeld largely shot on Kodachrome—II and X in the early 1970’s, 25 and 64 in the late ’70’s—while Shore shot mostly Kodacolor, and Misrach shot a lot of Vericolor. All of those are Kodak films, but with different aesthetics. These four photographers had different styles and different darkroom processes, and they each had a unique look; the commonality that Fujifilm found was an “overall atmosphere based on amber.” That’s a basic explanation of what Nostalgic Negative is.
I didn’t count, but I’d estimate that I found about 20 examples of the Nostalgic Negative film simulation on the internet. I noticed that there were some large discrepancies between the pictures, as some looked much different than others. I wondered if the default settings were used on some images and not others, and if some of them weren’t straight-out-of-camera but had received some level of post-processing. I also wondered if Nostalgic Negative behaves similarly to Classic Negative in that the aesthetic changes a little depending on the exposure. There’s a lot of uncertainty to what exactly the new film simulation looks like. Overall, I think you can expect something along the lines of Eterna gradation, the Classic Chrome color palette (however, with a warm shift), and vibrancy a little beyond Astia. Low-contrast, high-saturation and warm is a quick synopsis of Nostalgic Negative.
Reflected Red – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V – “Nostalgic Negative”
Interestingly, there are some already existing film simulation recipes that come close to Nostalgic Negative. My Eterna recipe (and there are versions for X-Trans II, X-Trans III and X-Trans IV cameras) is almost identical to one of the aesthetics that I found in the sample pictures. The contrast is likely slightly too high in those recipes, but it’s very close. For some other sample pictures, I thought that the Kodachrome 64 recipes (the X-T1 recipe, the X-T30 recipe and the X100V recipe, but especially the X100V version) are pretty darn close. For some other pictures, the Kodak Vision3 250D recipe looks quite similar, while this Kodacolor recipe looks close to some others. I think that my Kodak Gold, Kodachrome II, Kodak Ultramax (both for X-Trans III and X-Trans IV), Kodak Ektar, Kodak Portra 800, Kodak Portra 400 (both X-T30 and X100V), Kodak Portra 400 v2 (both the X-T30 recipe that’s only available right now to Patrons on Fuji X Weekly App and X100V), and Polaroid (although perhaps increase Color) have some similarities to Nostalgic Negative. If you have an X-Trans II, III or IV camera, you already have some options that are in the neighborhood of this new film simulation, so don’t fret that your camera doesn’t have it. You’ll just have to decide which option you like best.
Speaking of your camera not having Nostalgic Negative: it’s not coming to X-Trans IV, in my opinion. Fujifilm said, “For Nostalgic Negative, Fujifilm needs a large sensor. It can’t be implemented simply to APS-C. Fujifilm needs time to develop Nostalgic Negative for the APS-C system.” To me, that’s code-speak for, “Expect it on X-Trans V cameras.” Of course, Fujifilm hasn’t announced that sensor yet, so they can’t talk about it, but that’s where I would expect to see it.
I don’t know if this new recipe that I created will turn out to be accurate to Nostalgic Negative. Most likely not, but I hope that you like it anyway. I chose Clarity -5 because that’s the best I could do for imitating the gradation of Eterna, but feel free to use -4 or -3 if you feel that -5 is too much for your tastes. On cameras that can adjust by .5, I would consider setting Shadow to -0.5 instead of 0. This recipe is only compatible with the Fujifilm X100V, X-Pro3, X-T4, X-S10 and (the upcoming) X-E4.
Classic Chrome Dynamic Range: DR200 Highlight: -1 Shadow: 0 Color: +4 Noise Reduction: -4 Sharpening: 0 Clarity: -5 Grain Effect: Weak, Large Color Chrome Effect: Strong Color Chrome Effect Blue: Strong White Balance: Auto, +3 Red & -5 Blue ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400 Exposure Compensation: +1/3 to +1 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs using this new “Nostalgic Negative” film simulation recipe on my Fujifilm X100V:
Red Soccer Ball – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Suburban Sky – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Sky & Garages – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
JP Elect – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Bear in the Snow – Layton, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Boy & Bear – Layton, UT – Fujifilm X100V
RedBrick Building – Salt Lake City, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Waiting Girl – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
City Fountain – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Last Light Through Reeds – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Mirror Image – Orem, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Window Light on Chair – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Joshua’s Space – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
X-T1 on a Shelf – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Film Drawer – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Colorful Pens – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Garage Globe – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Jon’s Hands – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Evening Park Joy – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Rainbow Rays – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Autumn Sun – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
Fujifilm recently announced the 102-megapixel medium-format GFX100S. This camera is already making big waves because of the the high-resolution sensor and because of the “small” price-tag of “only” $6,000 (body only). A lot of people are talking about this upcoming camera—in fact, I visited a local camera store, and the GFX100S was a hot topic that was being discussed by those in the store.
Back in June I published an article, Shrinking Camera Market: What Fujifilm Should Do In 2021 & Beyond, and I suggested that Fujifilm should make a camera like the GFX100S (although I said it should be rangefinder-styled). I think it’s a good move for Fujifilm, and this camera will be highly successful. Already preorders have apparently exceeded expectations, and you might have to exercise some patience if you want to get your hands on one and you didn’t preorder on the day it was announced.
I don’t have a lot of experience with GFX cameras. Fujifilm recently loaned me a GFX-50S, which is four-years-old now and surely about to be discontinued. I’m grateful to have been give the opportunity to briefly try a GFX camera—a dream come true, really! For the most part the benefit of medium format is only truly realized if you crop really deeply or print very large. Still, I hope to one day try the GFX100S myself, although it won’t likely be anytime soon, and will likely only happen if Fujifilm lets me borrow one for a few weeks. The GFX100S, even though priced very low for what it is, is still significantly outside of my budget. I’m sure many of you can relate.
The GFX-50S that Fujifilm sent me has been used by so many other photographers. If you’ve read reviews of this camera or watched YouTube videos about it, you’ve probably seen this exact camera before. It’s difficult to know precisely who has used it—there are a lot of people who have reviewed it and probably a couple different bodies floating around—but I know for certain that Julien Jarry is one because he put a sticker on the bottom. Well played!
Julien is a talented photographer and videographer, and a friend of mine. I had the pleasure to photograph with him this last summer out at Antelope Island State Park, and you’ll notice him in a couple of pictures in the Kodak Portra 400 v2 film simulation recipe. It’s an honor to use the same gear that Julien used.
If someday Fujifilm loans me a GFX100S, you know that I’ll publish several articles about it on the Fuji X Weekly blog, and create some film simulation recipes, too! It might be a long time before that happens, if it ever happens. I hope it does, and I will be grateful for the opportunity, because I’m certain that the GFX100S is an amazing camera.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
The reason why we—and by “we” I mean mostly Amanda—created this short film was to test the Pergear 50mm f/1.8 lens for video. I already published a review of the Pergear lens for still photography, but I thought this lens might be a good inexpensive option for cinema. I needed to put it to the test.
Amanda recorded A.M. Flight on her Fujifilm X-T4 with a Pergear 50mm f/1.8. All of it was handheld, no tripod or gimbal was used. The 50mm focal-length, which is 75mm full-frame equivalent, is telephoto, and camera shake is exaggerated because of this. The X-T4 has in-body-image-stabilization (IBIS)—the X-S10 and X-H1 are the only other two Fujifilm X cameras with IBIS—and even with the stabilization there’s still a fair amount of shakiness to the clips. We recommend the use of a tripod or gimbal to help reduce shake; if your camera doesn’t have IBIS, a tripod or gimbal is a must with this lens.
The Pergear 50mm f/1.8 is all manual, which means you’ll have to manually focus. A.M. Flight has a lot of fast movements in the film, and nailing focus manually proved to be very difficult; this lens might be better suited for projects that don’t have quickly moving objects. The focus ring is smooth, a positive for sure! The aperture ring is click-less, which is great for video because you can change the aperture while recording a clip, either increasing or decreasing the depth-of-field.
The f/1.8 aperture is fast, but the depth-of-field is shallow (making nailing focus even more difficult) and image quality isn’t the best when wide-open. It was nice to have f/1.8 as an option when filming in dark locations, but it’s definitely better to stop down a little (at least f/4 is you can) to maximize image quality whenever you can.
When light hits the lens just right, there’s something special about the results. There’s a particularly nice quality to some of the video clips, thanks to the Pergear lens. There’s a certain character that you just won’t find in most modern lenses; if that’s something you want in your video, this lens is for you.
The Pergear 50mm f/1.8 lens is challenging to use for video because it is all manual and because it doesn’t have any stabilization. Cameras with IBIS, like the Fujifilm X-T4, make it a little easier to use, and it’s possible to get away with not having a tripod or gimbal, but if you don’t have IBIS you’re going to want to do something to stabilize the clips. This lens is not the most ideal option for video, but if you are on a tight budget or want the special character that this lens can give you, it’s a good one to consider.
This review contains affiliate links, and I will be compensated a small amount if you make a purchase using my links. Amazon $79
I wasn’t intending to write this article. I had other things that I wanted to talk about. There are a couple new film simulation recipes I’ve created that I plan to share. I want to give my thoughts on the new GFX100S. I want to talk more about the GFX-50S that Fujifilm sent me to use. There are a couple of lens reviews that I’ve been procrastinating on. The Android version of the Fuji X Weekly App is edging closer to being finished. But, the upcoming Fujifilm X-E4 has been turning inside my brain all day, so that’s why I’m writing about it instead.
I think a lot of people had high hopes and expectations for the Fujifilm X-E4, and nobody really predicted what it ended up being. It’s like when the X-Pro3 was announced, and everyone was scratching their heads. With the X-Pro3, even though so many didn’t understand it, I think there was a pretty large curiosity towards it, and a lot of people came around to it after awhile. The X-E4 has a similar lack of understanding surrounding it, but it doesn’t carry that same curiosity, so it will likely be fairly ignored. It’s already been overshadowed by other gear announcements.
There was a post I published back in July called Shrinking Camera Market: What Fujifilm Should Do in 2021 & Beyond. I suggested that Fujifilm should make a less-expensive 100MP GFX camera. Guess what? They did! Another thing I suggested is that Fujifilm should do more to differentiate the X-E4 from the X-T30 (and the eventual X-T40) because the X-E3 and the X-T20 were so very similar (aside from camera shape). Well, it looks like they did that, too. My apologies.
The question is: what was Fujifilm thinking when they designed the X-E4? What was their vision? That’s tough to know until the tell us, if they tell us, as they might not. Until then, we’re left guessing, and most of the guesses seems to be along the lines of, “They cheapened the X-E line.” I really don’t believe that was their intention.
As I’ve thought about this, I believe the X-E4 is intended to be a minimalist’s “just shoot” camera. Looking at all of the aspects of an X-E3, the designers asked themselves, “Is this necessary?” If the answer was yes, it stayed, perhaps repositioned or redesigned. If the answer was no, to the chopping block it went! I question if the rear wheel and focus-type-selector were really unnecessary, because I think they’re both quite handy. But someone obviously didn’t think so. An ISO dial on the shutter knob (like the X100V) would have been a great addition, but that didn’t happen, unfortunately. I do believe the design of the X-E4 was very intentional, and there was a purpose to the decisions, even if I don’t fully understand them myself.
Besides being a “just shoot” camera, I think the X-E4 was intended to be a smaller pocketable-ish camera, like the X100V or the X70. Remember the X70? It was the short-lived baby-brother to the X100T, with an 18.5mm fixed-lens. Sony suddenly stopped production of the X-Trans II sensor, which the X70 used, and that killed the camera. The X-Trans III sensor was too hot to place inside the small X70 body, so an X80 never happened. Is the X-E4 actually an interchangeable-lens X80? Maybe. Attach one of Fujifilm’s pancake lenses—the 18mm f/2 or 27mm f/2.8—to the X-E4 and it could pass as an X70 successor. It wasn’t very long ago that Fujifilm said there would be no X-E4, that the X-E3 was the end of the line, so maybe the initial vision of this camera wasn’t X-E at all. Just a thought.
Where I think the Fujifilm X-E4 makes the most sense is as a lightweight, compact, carry-everywhere camera. It could nicely complement the X100V. It might be a good option to replace an aging X70. Or, if you never purchased an X70 but always wanted to, this might be a solid alternative. Maybe the XF10 never interested you because of its sluggish performance, Bayer sensor, and PASM dial, but you’d love a compact X-Trans option. Well, now you have one.
My opinion is that if you can make peace with the minimalistic redesign, and you get yourself the 18mm f/2 and/or the 27mm f/2.8—maybe even use a wrist strap instead of a neck strap—this camera could be a very nice travel/street/have-with-you-wherever-you-go option. Is it perfect? No, but what camera is?
Like a lot of you, I’m disappointed that the Fujifilm X-E4 isn’t the camera that many of us thought it could or should be, but as I’ve pondered what it is exactly that Fujifilm created, I can see its place and it does make some sort of sense. If you embrace it for what it is, and perhaps think of it more as an interchangeable-lens X80 than an X-E camera, than I think the X-E4 could actually be a wonderful and fun option.
I say all of this, but I’ve never used or even held an X-E4, so this rant should be taken with a grain of salt. I was initially bummed by the camera because my expectations were off, but now that I’ve had time to dwell on it I’m actually beginning to warm up to it. I think the X-E4, like many of the X-E cameras that came before, will go under the radar and will be under appreciated, but for those who own one, it will be a joy to use.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Fujifilm just announced the brand-new X-E4. This will be the smallest interchangeable-lens camera in the X series, and comes in at a modest $849 (body only) price tag. Plenty has been said about it, and I wanted to add my own quick opinions.
The X-E4 is a camera that I am excited for. Why? Because my Fujifilm journey began with the X-E1, and I love the X-E line. I appreciate the size and design. The X-E4 is the X-Pro3’s and X100V’s little brother; sometimes little brothers get overlooked. I could be wrong, but I bet this will be last camera with the X-Trans IV sensor, and the next Fujifilm X camera will feature a new X-Trans V sensor.
This latest version of the X-E camera, which will be released on March 11, is the smallest. It’s also the first with a tilting screen. There are some curious design choices. I’m not surprised that the D-Pad was removed, but I am surprised that the back wheel and some other buttons have been taken away. Fujifilm really embraced a minimalist camera back, which I suppose fits a philosophy that helps to separate this camera from the X-T30 and X-S10, but I wonder if that was actually a good idea. I’m personally disappointed the shutter speed knob doesn’t have an ISO dial like the X100V. It’s still such a beautiful camera body!
The GFX100S, which was announced the same day and really has received most of the attention online, and perhaps deservedly so, was given a new film simulation, called Nostalgic Negative. Strangely, the X-E4 won’t have this new film simulation (but it will have Classic Negative and Eterna Bleach Bypass). This puzzles me because 1) my assumption is that the majority of GFX users shoot RAW and not JPEG (although there are certainly many who do) and 2) this could have been a selling point for the X-E4 and would have generated more excitement for the camera. It would have made more sense to me to have included this film simulation on both cameras, or if it was going to be on only one it should have been the X-E4. My guess is that we’ll start seeing Nostalgic Negative on whatever X series camera comes after the X-E4.
I haven’t preordered the X-E4, but I’m considering selling my X-T30 and replacing it with the X-E4. I don’t think that’s necessarily an upgrade (maybe arguably in some sense, and maybe arguably a downgrade in some other sense, but mostly roughly a lateral move overall), but I just love the X-E line. I haven’t decided yet what I’ll do.
The X-E4 is a compact, lightweight Fujifilm X camera that embraces minimalism, simplicity and retro goodness. It seems like such a fun camera that’s especially great for travel or street photography. Introduced at the same time is the new 27mm f/2.8 pancake. This one is weather sealed (the X-E4 isn’t) and has an aperture ring (both are great upgrades!) yet with the same great image quality, so it’s a lens that I hope to add to my collection someday. You can buy the X-E4 bundled with the Fujinon 27mm pancake lens for $1,050.
If you’d like to preorder the camera, you can use the links below:
This is a big deal because they’ve had some really big names, not just in the Fujifilm community, but the photography community, on their show. You’ll find episodes with Pete Souza, Kevin Mullins, Jack Graham, Adam Gibbs, and many, many more. I’m very honored and humbled. Thank you, FujiLove, for having me on your show!
Fujifilm X-T4 & Fujinon 90mm – Photo by Amanda Roesch
My wife, Amanda, has a Fujifilm X-T4. She uses it for both stills and video. Amanda pretty much runs the video side of Fuji X Weekly, as that’s something she’s good at, but she also does some occasional portrait and product photography. A few days ago she borrowed my Fujinon 90mm lens, attached it to her X-T4, and on a snowy morning captured some pictures of our kids sledding at a local park (I was shooting with a GFX-50S, you can see some of those pictures here).
Amanda showed me the photographs that she had captured, and I liked the picture aesthetic, so I asked her what settings she used. She told me she just picked some that she thought might look nice, and went with that. She made her own recipe! It’s based on Classic Negative, which is such a great film simulation. I asked her if I could share her pictures and recipe here, and she agreed. Thanks, Amanda!
Fujifilm X-T4 & Fujinon 90mm – Photo by Amanda Roesch
This film simulation recipe is only compatible with the Fujifilm X-T4 and X-S10 (most likely the X-E4, too, when that comes out next month). If you like this recipe or these pictures, be sure to let Amanda know by leaving her a comment.
Classic Negative Dynamic Range: DR200 Highlight: +1 Shadow: +1.5 Color: +3 Noise Reduction: -4 Sharpening: +1 Clarity: 0 Grain Effect: Weak, Small Color Chrome Effect: Strong Color Chrome Effect Blue: Weak White Balance: Auto, 0 Red & 0 Blue ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400 Exposure Compensation: +1/3 to +1
All of the pictures in this article are camera-made JPEGs captured by Amanda Roesch using this Classic Negative film simulation recipe on her Fujifilm X-T4.
Fujifilm X-T4 & Fujinon 90mm – Photo by Amanda Roesch
Fujifilm X-T4 & Fujinon 90mm – Photo by Amanda Roesch
Fujifilm X-T4 & Fujinon 90mm – Photo by Amanda Roesch
Fujifilm X-T4 & Fujinon 90mm – Photo by Amanda Roesch
Fujifilm X-T4 & Fujinon 90mm – Photo by Amanda Roesch
Fujifilm X-T4 & Fujinon 90mm – Photo by Amanda Roesch
Fujifilm X-T4 & Fujinon 90mm – Photo by Amanda Roesch
Fujifilm X-T4 & Fujinon 90mm – Photo by Amanda Roesch
Fujifilm X-T4 & Fujinon 90mm – Photo by Amanda Roesch
Fujifilm X-T4 & Fujinon 90mm – Photo by Amanda Roesch
Fujifilm X-T4 & Fujinon 90mm – Photo by Amanda Roesch
Fujifilm X-T4 & Fujinon 90mm – Photo by Amanda Roesch
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
Ektachrome is a brand of Kodak color transparency film that’s been around (off and on) since the 1940’s. There have been several eras of the film, and even more variations; the name Ektachrome has been given to many different emulsions. While Kodachrome was more iconic, Ektachrome was more widely used, thanks in part to its easier development process and (typically) faster ISOs. While Ektachrome was more popular, it was much more prone to color fading. Kodachrome was a tad warmer, while Ektachrome was a tad more vibrant, depending on the version, of course. I shot plenty of rolls, and several different versions, of Ektachrome back in the day.
The Classic Chrome film simulation is, I believe, largely based on Ektachrome; set to defaults, Classic Chrome has a similar aesthetic to the film. I tweaked the settings so that Classic Chrome would more closely resemble Ektachrome, but I used my memory of the film and didn’t study actual examples of it. Fujifilm has a term for this: memory color. It basically means that it’s more important to have the right feel than to be perfectly accurate. I’m not exactly sure how accurate this recipe is to the film, or which exact emulsion it would be closest to (maybe 100G? 100GX?), but it feels right to me.
Winter Tree – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S – “Ektachrome”
This Ektachrome film simulation is intended for GFX cameras. I know that it’s compatible the GFX-50S and GFX-50R, and I believe that it’s compatible with the GFX100, but I’m not 100% certain. You can also use it on the Fujifilm X-T3 and X-T30, and it will produce nearly identical results; on the X100V, X-T4, X-Pro3 and X-S10, set Clarity to 0 (or -2 if you prefer), Color Chrome FX Blue Off, and Grain to Weak Small.
Classic Chrome Dynamic Range: DR400 Highlight: +1 Shadow: +1 Color: +3 Color Chrome Effect: Weak Sharpening: +1 Noise Reduction: -4 Grain Effect: Weak White Balance: 7100K, -6 Red & +5 Blue ISO: Auto up to ISO 6400 Exposure Compensation: +1/3 to +2/3 (typically)
Sample photographs, all camera-made JPEGs, captured with a Fujifilm GFX-50S using this Ektachrome recipe:
Forest Creek – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Log Chair Boy – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Three Poles – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Pole Twists – Layton, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
End Post – Layton, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Boardwalk in the Marsh – Layton, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S – “Ektachrome”
The Roundabout – Layton, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Signs Along the Boardwalk – Layton, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Ice Tracks in the Reeds – Layton, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Marsh Ice Tracks – Layton, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Hairpin Curve – Layton, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Birdseye View – Layton, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Rural Boardwalk – Layton, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Fence in the Grass – Layton, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Tiny Islands in a Frozen Pond – Layton, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Winter Grass – Layton, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Frozen March Water – Layton, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Cold Marsh – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Reed & Snow – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Snow Day Girl – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Sled Hill Photography – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Needle Snow – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Winter Pine – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
760 – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V – “Ilford Ortho Plus 80”
Many years ago I used to develop my own black-and-white film. It required removing the film from the cassette, winding it around a developing reel, and placing the reel into a developing canister—all in complete darkness! It was very tricky. If you didn’t get the film wound onto the reel quite right, it could ruin the film during development. When people think of darkrooms, they often think of dipping photosensitive papers into tubs of chemicals in dim amber light. This red light is called a safelight, and it’s safe for photographic paper, but not safe for undeveloped photographic film—that’s why you have to get the film from the cassette to the canister in complete darkness.
Ilford Ortho Plus 80 film is different, as it’s orthochromatic, which means it’s sensitive to blue and green light but not red, making it possible to transfer the film from the cassette to the canister under a safelight. This film was introduced in 2019, so it hasn’t been around very long. It produces sharp, fine-grain images that are fairly contrasty for a low-ISO film, and reds will be rendered dark. I’ve never used this film myself, so I relied on pictures I found on the internet to create this recipe. With film, how it’s shot, developed, and printed or scanned can have a big impact on how it looks, and that’s certainly a challenge for creating a facsimile on Fujifilm cameras, but I think this one is pretty close from the pictures I’ve seen. It also seems to be in the neighborhood of Washi S 50.
Monochrome Country – Salt Lake City, UT – Fujifilm X100V – “Ilford Ortho Plus 80
I set Monochromatic Color (Toning) to WC +1 because many of the examples that I found had some warm toning (not sure if it’s in-software after scanning or from toned prints or both), but it’s completely optional, you can set WC to 0 if you prefer. This recipe is intended for newer X-Trans IV cameras, such as the Fujifilm X100V, X-T4, X-Pro3 and X-S10, and isn’t compatible with other cameras; however, if you disregard Clarity you can achieve something similar on the X-T3 and X-T30, but it won’t be exactly the same (feel free to try).
Monochrome+G Dynamic Range: DR400 Highlight: +2 Shadow: +3 Noise Reduction: -4 Sharpening: +2 Clarity: -2 Toning: WC +1, MG 0 Grain Effect: Weak, Small Color Chrome Effect: Strong Color Chrome Effect Blue: Off White Balance: 7000K, -5 Red & 0 Blue ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400 Exposure Compensation: +1/3 to +1 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs using this Ilford Ortho Plus 80 film simulation recipe on my Fujifilm X100V:
Thorns of Nature – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Monochrome Berries – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Icy River – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Zipping – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Playground Boy – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Silhouette Playground – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Canvas Moon – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Cat & Salmon – Salt Lake City, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Fedex Delivery – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Locked Box – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Emotion Through Glass – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
Cradle Tree Branch – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1 – “Provia”
There’s a new Fuji X Weekly Patron early-access film simulation recipe available now on the Fuji X Weekly app! If you are a Patron, you can use it today! This new recipe is for X-Trans I cameras (X-E1, X-Pro1 and X-M1), and it replaces the Classic Analog recipe, which was a Patron early-access recipe, but is now available to everyone. Yea!
Below are a few examples of this new recipe, which is simply called Provia, captured with a Fujifilm X-M1. Bricks in the Wall (below) was captured by my daughter, Joy, who I let use the camera.
Sun over Country Horses – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1
Target – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1
Bricks in the Wall – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1 – Photo by Joy Roesch
I wanted to create a Portra recipe for X-Trans I cameras, such as the Fujifilm X-M1. All of my Portra recipes are based on the Classic Chrome film simulation, but X-Trans I cameras don’t have Classic Chrome. I did create a recipe for mimicking Kodachrome without Classic Chrome, but that’s intended for X-Trans II cameras, and, while the results are similar, it doesn’t look exactly the same on X-Trans I. This recipe was my attempt at Portra without Classic Chrome, but it’s not quite Portra enough for me to name it Portra. It’s close but no cigar, but it does look nice nonetheless, and I like how it renders pictures on my X-M1.
This was a Patron early-access recipe on the Fuji X Weekly app. Fuji X Weekly Patrons have had the opportunity to use it since December 1st, but now it’s available to everyone! There’s a new Patron early-access recipe for X-Trans I on the app in its place. If you have the app, go check it out!
E.T. – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1 – “Classic Analog”
This recipe also marks the first one that includes a photograph captured by my 11-year-old son, Jonathan. I let him use my X-M1, and I liked one of the pictures he made, which you’ll find further down this article, entitled Frozen Pond Scum. The Fujifilm X-M1 can be found for cheap, and would make a great “first real camera” for a kid. Maybe I’ll give him mine at some point in the future.
Provia/STD Dynamic Range: DR400 Highlight: -2 Shadow: -1 Color: -2 Sharpness: 0 Noise Reduction: -2 White Balance: Daylight/Fine, +1 Red & -6 Blue ISO: Auto, up to ISO 3200 Exposure Compensation: +1/3 to +2/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs made using this Classic Analog film simulation recipe on a Fujifilm X-M1:
Thin Ice – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1
Falling Water – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1
Autumn Overcast – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1
Night at the Lake – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1
Frozen Drain – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1
Frozen Pond Scum – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1 – Photo by Jonathan Roesch
Irrigation Cover – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1
Quadruple U’s – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1
Improbable – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1
Evening Euonymus – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1
Blue Sky Reeds – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1
Yellow, Lamp – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-M1
Help Fuji X Weekly
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
January Forest – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S – “Classic Negative Industrial”
One of my favorite film simulation recipes is Fujicolor 100 Industrial, which is intended for Fujifilm X-T30 and X-T3 cameras. X-Trans IV recipes for the X-T30 and X-T3 plus X-Trans III recipes are compatible with the GFX-50S, but the results seem to be very slightly different. I programmed the Fujicolor 100 Industrial recipe into the GFX-50S. Later I updated the firmware, which added the Classic Negative film simulation; it just so happened that the Fujicolor 100 Industrial recipe was selected, and I changed the film simulation from PRO Neg. Std to Classic Negative with this recipe still programmed. I immediately loved the results!
This film simulation recipe, with Classic Negative instead of PRO Neg. Std, doesn’t mimic real Fujicolor 100 Industrial film as well as the original recipe, I don’t think, but the results are pretty nice nonetheless. It can be magical! It’s not a recipe for every situation, but it is indeed beautiful in the right situations. It’s a very happy accident!
Forest Creek – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S – “Classic Negative Industrial”
I believe that this film simulation recipe is compatible with all GFX cameras, although I’m not completely sure about the GFX100 (it should be). It cannot be used on the X-T30 and X-T3 because those cameras don’t have Classic Negative, but it can be used on other X-Trans IV cameras (X100V, X-Pro3, X-T4 and X-S10) by selecting Color Chrome FX Blue Off, Clarity 0 (or maybe -2), and Grain Weak + Small; however, results will be slightly different. I tried it on my Fujifilm X100V and it did, in fact, look good, but it’s really intended for GFX cameras.
Classic Negative Dynamic Range: DR400 Highlight: +1 Shadow: +2 Color: +1 Color Chrome Effect: Weak Sharpening: +1 Noise Reduction: -4 Grain Effect: Weak White Balance: 3200K, +8 Red & -8 Blue ISO: Auto up to ISO 6400 Exposure Compensation: +1/3 to +2/3 (typically)
Sample photographs, all camera-made JPEGs, captured with a Fujifilm GFX-50S using this Classic Negative Industrial recipe:
Tunnel Silhouette – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Pedestrian Tunnel – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Manhole Cover – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
No Parking Any Time – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Flasher – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Fallen Tree on Frozen Lake – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Smiling Jo – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
January Sun in the Forest – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Backlit – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Creekside Trail – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Vines on Trees – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Spiky Leaves – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Sunlight Trail – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
Brown Among Green – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
Fujifilm North America sent me a GFX-50S medium-format camera and Fujinon 23mm lens to go with it. The camera and lens aren’t mine; I get to use them for a few weeks, then return them to Fujifilm. The camera is $5,500 (it was $6,500 when it came out four years ago), and the lens is $2,600, so just over $8,000 altogether. This is the most expensive camera and lens that I’ve ever put my hands on!
There are two questions that I want to answer: how much better is medium-format GFX over the APS-C X cameras, and which film simulation recipes, if any, are compatible with GFX. By the way, this isn’t my review of the camera. I’ll write that after I’ve had it for longer. This article is the first step towards a review. I’m simply trying to answer a couple of questions about the GFX-50S camera.
Yesterday I did a little survey on my Instagram account: can you tell the difference between pictures captured on my Fujifilm X-T30 with a Rokinon 12mm lens (a $1,200 combo) and those captured on a GFX-50S with a Fujinon 23mm lens? By far, most photographs are viewed on social media. People post their pictures on Instagram and Facebook and other platforms, and that’s how we see them. Printed photographs are far less common. That’s just the way it is. I wanted to know: on social media, is it even possible to tell the difference between pictures captured using $1,200 gear and $8,000 gear?
Before I get into the responses to that survey, I want to briefly talk about the technical stuff—the why. The reason that I chose the X-T30 is because its JPEG settings are very similar to the GFX-50S’ JPEG settings. I used the same film simulation recipes, Kodak Ultramax for color and Kodak Tri-X 400 for black-and-white, on both cameras (this also allowed me to see how similar or dissimilar recipes are rendered on these cameras). I chose the Rokinon 12mm lens because it has the same 18mm full-frame-equivalent focal length as the 23mm lens on the GFX camera. I used f/8 on the Rokinon and f/16 on the Fujinon (to better match the depth-of-field) and adjusted the shutter speed to compensate; otherwise, the settings on both cameras were identical.
Here are the pictures that I posted to Instagram, in the same order:
Fujifilm X-T30
Fujifilm GFX-50S
Fujifilm X-T30
Fujifilm GFX-50S
Fujifilm X-T30
GFX-50S
Fujifilm X-T30
Fujifilm GFX-50S
Now to that survey! The majority of the comments were something to the effect of, “I can’t tell which camera took which pictures.” There were 10 people who took a guess, and five got it right and five wrong. I was actually surprised that five people figured it out—some of you have very keen eyes! There were three sets of two pictures to allow for direct comparisons, but the final two pictures weren’t a set, and those two pictures tripped up a few people who otherwise figured out the rest. Even a couple of those who guessed correctly said that they weren’t certain on those last two. The takeaway is that, on social media, if you study the pictures carefully and can side-by-side compare, there is a barely noticeable difference between images captured on GFX cameras and those captured on X cameras, but otherwise you can’t tell.
Of course, you’re not spending $8,000 for good-looking social media pictures, but for good-looking prints. So I printed the pictures! All of the prints were 8″ x 12″, but I made some crops that would be about 16″ x 24″, 24″ x 36″, and 40″ x 60″ if the rest of the picture was there. Here are a few of those crops:
Fujifilm X-T30
Fujifilm GFX-50S
Fujifilm X-T30
Fujifilm GFX-50S
Fujifilm X-T30
Fujifilm GFX-50S
The prints!
I studied the prints, then I had my wife, Amanda, look at them. We both came to the same conclusion: printed at 8″ x 12″ it’s really difficult to tell which camera captured which picture; at 16″ x 24″ it’s a little easier to tell but still very tough; at 24″ x 36″ it’s more obvious, but the X-T30 still looks pretty good; and at 40″ x 60″ the GFX is the clear winner, but the X-T30 image isn’t awful.
The Fujifilm GFX-50S costs six times as much as the Fujifilm X-T30. Does it produce six times better image quality? No. Does it produce twice as good image quality? No. Is it a pixel-peeper’s dream? Yes! If you like to zoom into your images and admire the fine details that can only be noticed when you look closely, the GFX-50S is a great option. If you need to crop deeply and still have good-looking pictures, the GFX-50S will deliver. If you print really, really big, the GFX-50S is indeed a fine photographic tool. Outside of that, there’s not a big advantage to the medium-format camera. In fact, there might be as many disadvantages as there are advantages, but that’s a discussion for another time. Did I mention that those files look really nice when you look really close?
Forest Creek – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm GFX-50S – Classic Negative
I have seven different film simulation recipes programmed into the GFX-50S right now, and here’s my probably-too-soon opinion: X-Trans III recipes and X-Trans IV recipes that are compatible with the X-T3 and X-T30 are usable on the GFX-50S… but they don’t look exactly the same. One difference is that the JPEGs from the GFX-50S are slightly less saturated and a hair less warm; it’s very minor but noticeable when side-by-side comparing. The GFX-50S has a larger dynamic range, which not only gives you more latitude for highlight and shadow recovery, but also produces a more flat picture; that’s not necessarily bad, just different. The GFX-50S has Classic Negative—yea!—but not the other JPEG options, such as Clarity and Color Chrome FX Blue, that the newer X-Trans IV cameras have.
I look forward to shooting more with the GFX-50S, and I know it will be difficult to send back. Using it reaffirms that X series cameras are fantastic and that the gap between APS-C and medium-format isn’t as big as what one might think. There are people who would benefit from the larger sensor and higher resolution that the GFX-50S offers, and those people likely know who they are. If I could, I would definitely own this camera, but it’s not a big deal that I don’t because my other Fujifilm cameras are pretty darn good, too.
Here are the Top 20 most popular film simulation recipes of 2020! I used page views to rank these recipes. Those with Kodak, Kodachrome or Portra in the name are quite popular. More than half of these use Classic Chrome as the base. It’s interesting to compare these to the 12 most popular recipes of December 2020. Only one black-and-white recipe made this list, which isn’t too surprising because color is more popular than monochrome. No Bayer, X-Trans I or X-Trans II recipes found their way into the top 20, only X-Trans III and X-Trans IV.
Without further ado, here are the Top 20 most popular film simulation recipes of 2020:
Signs, Poles & Wires – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V – “Classic Monochrome”
For some reason, black-and-white film simulation recipesaren’t as popular as color, but Fujifilm cameras are capable of some great monochrome images straight-out-of-camera. This new “Classic Monochrome” recipe was made by Thomas Schwab (B&W Instagram), who has created several of the film simulation recipes on this website and collaborated on several others. He’s a friend of this blog, and I’m honored that he allows me to share his recipes here!
Thomas said that he started with one of the Ilford recipes, and this evolved from that. It’s called “Classic Monochrome” because it has a great old-school B&W print feel. The only change that I added was Toning, which is optional, but it seems to look nice with these settings. This recipe has quickly become one of my favorite black-and-white options! It’s most similar to Dramatic Monochrome, so if you like that recipe you’ll like this one, too. Thank you, Thomas!
This recipe is contrasty and clean. It reminds me of Agfapan 25 printed using a high-contrast filter (maybe a #4, or even split-filtered). It’s not intended to look like it, but that’s what it reminds me of. It does have a limited dynamic range, and it’s easy to clip highlights, so the exposure should be carefully considered, or perhaps try DR-Auto if you are concerned. It’s compatible (as of this writing) with the Fujifilm X100V, X-T4, X-Pro3 and X-S10 cameras.
Monochrome (+Y, +R, +G) Dynamic Range: DR100 Highlight: +4 Shadow: +2 Noise Reduction: -4 Sharpening: +1 Clarity: +4 Toning: WC +1, MG 0 Grain Effect: Weak, Small Color Chrome Effect: Strong Color Chrome Effect Blue: Strong White Balance: Auto, 0 Red & 0 Blue ISO: Auto, up to ISO 12800 Exposure Compensation: -1/3 to +1/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs using this Classic Monochrome film simulation recipe on my Fujifilm X100V:
Marks the Spot – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Main Line Trail – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Empty Box – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Empty Bench – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Joshua Biking – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Girl & Bike – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Horses & Ducks – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Country Road Bus – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
No Motor Vehicles – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Weed 1 – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Weed 2 – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Ice Abstract 1 – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Ice Abstract 2 – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
