Ritchie Roesch

Leaf Shutter & Flash & X100F – Oh, My!

Posted on September 6, 2017 by Ritchie Roesch

36129060424_c0600e2e43_z

The Fujifilm X100F has two built-in shutters: electronic and mechanical. The electronic is a silent focal-plane shutter and has a maximum speed of 1/32,768. The mechanical is a nearly silent leaf shutter and has a maximum speed between 1/1000 and 1/4000, depending on the aperture. You can choose one or the other or have the camera automatically choose which it thinks is most appropriate for the situation.

When I purchased my X100F I didn’t think that the leaf shutter would be a big deal. I don’t do a whole lot of flash photography. I figured it would be a rarely used feature. Boy was I wrong!

A leaf shutter works more like an iris. There are blades, similar to aperture blades, inside the lens that open and close. It opens from the center outward. For this reason you can sync it to the flash at much higher shutter speeds. A traditional focal-plane shutter (which is found on most cameras) rolls across the frame, and doesn’t pair particularly well with flashes.

The Joy of Fishing – Huntsville, UT – Fujifilm X100F w/Flash

Leaf shutters are typically found on expensive medium-format gear. You rarely see them on other cameras. The exception is that Fujifilm has included leaf shutters on their X100 series, such as the X100F.

The Fujifilm X100F has a great built-in flash. There is a hotshoe should you want to add an external flash, but the fill-flash is more than adequate for most pictures. And Fujifilm has programmed the camera to perfectly balance the built-in flash with whatever lighting is available.

It’s truly amazing! The camera almost never gets it wrong. It just seems to know the perfect amount of light to add to the scene. The results are very natural looking. The pictures don’t scream that a flash was used.

Man In The Straw Hat – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F w/Flash

I wasn’t much of a flash-photography guy, but now I am. I find myself frequently using the built-in flash on the X100F. The flash and the leaf shutter are key features of this camera!

It makes anything from family snapshots to portraits to back-lit scenes to dim-light situations a breeze to shoot. Any setting with unwanted shadows can be made better by using the flash built into the camera.

There are many things to love about the X100F. The retro look. The classic controls. The film simulations. The camera’s exceptional ability to balance fill-flash with the rest of the frame is perhaps the best part of it. And it is all made possible by the leaf shutter.

Let’s Roll The Moon Across The Sun – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F w/Flash

Trip To The Treehouse – Visiting The Treehouse Museum With My Kids

Posted on September 5, 2017 by Ritchie Roesch

Silly Face – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

There’s a fun place in Ogden, Utah, for young children called the Treehouse Museum. The idea behind the museum is that kids 12 years old and younger can become a part of a story through interactive and educational exhibits. It’s like learning through play.

My kids absolutely love going to this place! They have a blast. And when it’s time to go home they don’t want to leave.

Last week I took my young kids to the Treehouse Museum, and I also brought along my Fujifilm X100F. It’s not a great place for photography because the light is dim and mixed, but the camera handled it like it was no big deal. The fill-flash is just incredible, made possible by the leaf shutter. The compact size meant that the camera didn’t get in the way, which is critical when you are trying to keep tabs on a toddler. For family snapshots, nothing beats the X100F!

I used Classic Chrome Film Simulation for these photographs. All of them are straight-out-of-camera JPEGs. Enjoy!

Joy At The Rodeo – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Bull Riding – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Castle Calligraphy – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Going Down – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Playing Medieval – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Royal Chair – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Looking Over The Menu – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Working Behind The Counter – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Acting President – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Fujifilm X100F – The Best Aperture

Posted on September 4, 2017 by Ritchie Roesch

35191782074_2699a7ac0c_c

Permanently attached to the front of the Fujifilm X100F is a Fujinon f/2 23mm Super EBC Aspherical lens. It’s an excellent 35mm (equivalent) prime, but, like all lenses, it’s not perfect.

I’ve owned many different lenses by different brands over the years. One thing that I have learned is that every lens has its sweet spot. There is an aperture where the lens is at its peak performance.

Ever since my X100F arrived two months ago, I’ve been trying to figure out just where the lens is at its best and worst. I wanted to know its strength and weakness so that I can maximize the one and minimize the other. I discovered pretty quickly where the “worst” apertures are, and that’s f/2 and f/16.

Man In The Straw Hat – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F @ f/4

Not that f/2 is necessarily a bad aperture, but it is indeed noticeably softer than the others. Not just at the corners, but center sharpness, too. It lacks the crispness at f/2 that one expects from a Fujinon lens. But I’ve used plenty of other lenses, primes and zooms, that were just as soft if not softer. So just because it’s a soft aperture for this lens doesn’t mean that it’s an aperture that should be avoided. In fact, Fujifilm actually calls this softness a “feature” in the manual, so perhaps it is something you might find useful for some images. You can also find some chromatic aberrations at f/2.

Things get better as you stop down. There’s significant improvements by f/2.8, although there is still some noticeable corner softness. By f/4 the lens is crisp all over.

I noticed diffraction when the aperture is smaller than f/8. It’s not really pronounced until smaller than f/11. The smallest aperture is f/16, and I would avoid it because the diffraction is pretty obvious.

Ilford Harman Technology – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F @ f/4

My opinion is that the sweet spot on the Fujifilm X100F lens is at f/4, including the intermediate stop on either side (f/3.6 and f/4.5). At this aperture the lens is corner-to-corner sharp, and at its sharpest in the center. It produces lovely images, and bokeh, while not heavily pronounced, is still very nice.

I would also say that image quality is excellent between f/2.8 and f/11, and I freely use these apertures without thinking twice about it. I don’t go higher than f/11. I do sometimes go lower than f/2.8, albeit not often.

The lens on the X100F is excellent. If it were an interchangeable-lens camera and the lens could detach, I imagine that you’d proudly use it often. Like all lenses, it has its strengths and weaknesses, and you get the most out of it if you understand what those are. With this lens, the strengths are many and the weaknesses few. Still, if the situation allows, keep it around f/4 and you’ll see the best that it can do.

Train Watching – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100F @ f/4

Digital Film – Why I Shoot JPEGs With The Fujifilm X100F

Posted on September 4, 2017 by Ritchie Roesch

36903843415_22ece33072_z

I don’t shoot RAW with my Fujifilm X100F. I rely on camera-made JPEGs.

Wait! Don’t click the X in the corner! Let me explain.

Those who shoot JPEGs have been unfairly stigmatized. It’s kind of crazy. You will find on message boards, social media posts, and in the comment section of websites this argument that RAW is for pros and JPEG is for amateurs.

And it’s not true. Or not completely true. But it’s touted as if it’s common knowledge.

There are many professional photographers who don’t use RAW. Perhaps they don’t have time to mess with it (constantly off to new assignments or their photos are needed immediately). Maybe their clients demand straight-out-of-camera JPEGs (think photojournalists). Or they simply like the look of their camera-made JPEGs (mostly, this is Fujifilm users). Whatever the reason, there are many pros that prefer JPEGs over RAW. No, really, this is a fact.

35259047543_78c855da1e_z

And vice versa. There are plenty of amateurs that shoot RAW because someone on the internet said that they should. They don’t know what they’re doing or why, but they’re doing it anyway because they don’t want to be thought of as amateurish.

So if professional photographers are using JPEG and amateurs are using RAW, what does this do for that argument that RAW is for pros and JPEG is for amateurs? It shows that it is poppycock–empty words by people who try to make themselves seem superior.

“But, really, you should learn how to use RAW,” someone is saying in their heads right now. If that’s you, here is something you should know: I’ve been shooting and editing RAW files for a decade. I’ve shot tens of thousands of RAW exposures. I know all about RAW. I might even have more experience with it than you. So stop.

It’s ridiculous that I have to qualify this before I even begin to type the rest of this article. But if I don’t, everything else that I want to say will be dismissed. People will tune out.

Digital Film

Sitting Large – SLC, UT – Fujifilm X100F

It’s been well known for several years now that Fujifilm has the best JPEG engine in the business. Yes, Canon and Nikon both make good JPEGs, but there is just something about those from Fujifilm cameras–that Fujifilm look!

With the X100F, Fujifilm has elevated the camera-made JPEG to a whole new level. They made several significant improvements. They added a new monochrome setting and film grain. This is a big deal!

Before I get ahead of myself, I want to talk a little about how Fujifilm rethought the whole camera-made JPEG concept. They approached it differently, and it shows in the results.

You are probably well aware that Fujifilm was a popular film manufacturer well before digital photography was big. They still make film. The soul of the company is analog film photography.

Fujifilm took their knowledge and experience with film and applied it to their digital cameras. They designed and programmed that analog soul into their modern cameras.

Hair & Lips – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Instead of traditional JPEG settings, Fujifilm made Film Simulations, which mimic the look of different 35mm films. My favorites are Acros and Classic Chrome. They even have fake (yet convincing) film grain as an option. They tried to make their JPEGs look less digital and more film-like.

You can see this in how they process digital noise. It looks completely different on Fujifilm cameras. They did their best to make the noise look less digital and more organic, more like film grain.

Fujifilm also came up a neat little trick for maximizing dynamic range. Basically, the camera underexposes to prevent clipped highlights, then increases the shadows and midtones to the appropriate level. It’s very seamless, but the results are far superior to the narrow dynamic range found on typical camera-made JPEGs.

Because of things like that, Fujifilm JPEGs are better than everyone else’s. I call it Digital Film.

RAW Because You Have To

KeyBank Building – SLC, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Let’s face it, the reason that almost everyone who shoots RAW does so is because they have to, and not because they want to. Their cameras make JPEGs that aren’t good enough. If their JPEGs didn’t stink so bad, they’d certainly rely on them. But since they aren’t reliable, people choose RAW format instead.

But camera-made JPEGs don’t have to stink. Your camera could be programmed in such a way that the strait-out-of-camera JPEGs look like how you would make them look if you shot RAW and post-processed them on your computer. The technology exists. Camera makers just haven’t included it in their products.

If the JPEGs produced by your camera matched the look of your post-processed RAW files, why would you continue to shoot RAW? Why wouldn’t you save a whole ton of time and money and shoot JPEG instead?

The Fujifilm X100F is the first camera that I have ever used that I feel produces JPEGs that match how I would edit my RAW files. It creates in-camera the look that I want. That’s why I don’t shoot RAW. That’s why I am now a JPEG only guy.

Consistency

Lightning Strikes Antelope Island – Layton, UT – Fujifilm X100F

When I shot film (I still do occasionally), and I shot a lot of it, I had my go-to options. I used Velvia 50, Ektachrome 100VS and 100SW, and Kodachrome 25 and 64 for color. I used Ilford Delta 100 and 400 for black and white. I used plenty of other films over the years, but those were my main options.

When you shot film, you exposed a whole roll of it, typically 24 or 36 exposures. All of the images you captured had a consistent look because they were captured using the same film. When you embarked on a project, you used the same film for the entirety of that project.

Even thinking long term, my images had a consistent look because most were captured with one of a handful of different films. Over the course of years, even decades, there was a uniformity to the look of my pictures.

Ilford Harman Technology – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

That’s a lot harder to accomplish digitally because there are so many options and ways to customize each image. For example, Alien Skin Exposure X2 has over 500 one-click presets that can be heavily customized. With so many choices, it takes some serious discipline and restraint to stick with just a few. Creating and applying an undeviating style to your RAW workflow is something that’s rarely realized.

I think it’s better to have a consistent look that you can easily recognize. Especially within projects. It shouldn’t be all over the place. It looks incoherent if its inconsistent.

By shooting JPEG and relying on the Film Simulations found in the X100F, I can get back to the consistent look that I achieved as a film shooter. I have a few custom recipes that I use, and because of that there is a uniformity that my pictures lacked for a long time.

Authenticity

Haugen – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100F

There’s been a lot of controversy lately with photographer’s use of Photoshop. Some very big names have shown up in the news. There’s been many debates on how much editing is too much. It’s all subjective, and so the line will always remain grey. Besides, people have been manipulating pictures since the early days of photography.

But there is a point when a photograph loses its authenticity. Its not hard to move from photography into graphic design or digital artistry. Photography is less believable now than it used to be.

I get asked often, “Is that how it really looked? How much did you Photoshop this?” People look at photography as a mix of reality and fantasy. They don’t take it at face value anymore. It lacks truth, it lacks authenticity.

Man In The Straw Hat – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

It’s like the old saying, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” I think people are tired of being fooled and tricked by pictures that have been heavily manipulated.

Many news outlets have begun requiring that only straight-out-of-camera JPEGs be submitted. There have been too many examples where some photograph in a big story turned out to be significantly edited. Now many news outlets want only what the camera captured, no manipulation please! This is to save the integrity of the genre, which has lost significant credibility.

Shooting JPEGs allows you to answer, “This is how the camera captured it. I didn’t use Photoshop or any other software. This is straight from the camera unedited.” This isn’t for bragging rights. There is value in creating authentic pictures, and this is becoming more true every day.

Conclusion

Yashica Rangefinder & Fujicolor – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Several weeks ago I was asked to photograph for someone, and he needed the pictures immediately. He paid me a higher premium for this service. I made my exposures and, using the screen on the back of my X100F, deleted the ones that weren’t good. After I was finished I uploaded the pictures directly to his laptop. From the moment that I arrived to the delivery of the finished pictures was about an hour–photoshoot completely finished and check in my hand.

As I was driving away, I thought that this is how it should be every time. In the past I would have spent a day post-processing the pictures. But since the straight-out-of-camera JPEGs look so darn good, I felt more than comfortable delivering them to the client unedited. And this person contacted me twice afterwards to tell me just how pleased he was with the pictures. “They were perfect,” he said.

I save so much time and money by not shooting RAW. There are plenty of good reasons to choose JPEG instead, all of which I laid out above. All of the photographs in this article that were captured using the X100F are straight-out-of-camera JPEGs. I just wish that there wasn’t such a stigmatic attitude towards it. But times are changing, and technology is advancing, and I think that the lowly camera-made JPEG will see new life in the upcoming years.

What Film Simulation Should Fujifilm Create Next?

Posted on September 3, 2017 by Ritchie Roesch

The Wonder of Film Photography – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X-E1

Fujifilm uses Film Simulations instead of traditional options for their JPEG settings. They use their vast experience with film to make their digital images look less digital (than other camera brands). Choose between Provia, Astia, Velvia, Acros and others. Essentially you are mimicking a film look with your camera-made JPEGs. If you shoot RAW, you can approximate this in post.

On the Fujifilm X100F my favorite Film Simulations are Acros for black-and-white and Classic Chrome for color. I use several of the other options occasionally, but I would be perfectly happy using only those two.

Fujirumors has said that Fujifilm is developing (or “investigating”) the next Film Simulation. Today Fujirumors asked what the next Film Simulation should be. What film should the Film Simulation emulate? By the way, if you don’t visit Fujirumors regularly, you should start doing so today–there’s a ton of useful information found there.

I thought it was an interesting question, so I’m going to explore it a little here.

Kodacolor – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

The Film Simulation options that Fujifilm has included in their current camera lineup are pretty darn good. They can be manipulated to simulate all sorts of different films. For example, if you wanted a look similar to Fujicolor Pro 800Z, you could start with Pro Neg Hi, increase the saturation by one and add a strong grain effect. You might have to shift the white balance slightly cooler. That would get you in the ballpark.

So I would want a Film Simulation that couldn’t be approximated by simply adjusting a few settings on a current option. And most films can. For instance, Classic Chrome is a great starting point for several Kodak films.

At the top of my list would be Fuji Velvia Cross Processed. It’s a fun experiment if you’ve never cross processed film. In the case of Velvia, which uses the E-6 process, you develop it using the C-41 process instead. The results are bold with high contrast, shifted colors and pronounced grain. It just looks cool and vintage.

Ax & Ladder – Boron, CA – Fujifilm Velvia 50 Cross Processed

Another that I would like to see is Fuji 400H Overexposed. People would purposefully overexpose 400H film a couple of stops because the colors would turn pastel with a low-ish contrast. It just looks beautiful.

How about Acros Push Processed? It would have lots of contrast and grain. You can get close to achieving this by setting highlights and shadows to the maximum level and adding a strong grain effect, but it doesn’t quite get the look right. The contrast is a little wrong and the grain (the look of it) is a lot wrong. That’s why I suggest a whole new Film Simulation for this.

If Fujifilm does indeed develop a new Film Simulation, it’s unlikely that they’ll add it to the X100F. They could add it via a firmware update, and in the past they’ve done just that with a few cameras (when Classic Chrome came out). I really hope that they do.

Most likely it will only be included on cameras with the X-Trans IV sensor, whenever that happens, because each new Film Simulation has coincided with a sensor update. So the X100V (or whatever they call the next generation X100) most likely will have it, and those who really want it will have to spend a bunch of money to upgrade.

Fujifilm X100F vs. Sigma DP2 Merrill

Posted on August 30, 2017 by Ritchie Roesch

My current camera is a Fujifilm X100F and I used to own a Sigma DP2 Merrill. Both of these are fixed-focal-length digital cameras that can fit into a large pocket. I thought it might be worthwhile to briefly compare the two. Perhaps someone right now is trying to decide which one to buy.

The Sigma DP2 Merrill was introduced in 2012. It has Sigma’s unique three-layer APS-C Foveon sensor with a whopping 46 megapixels (15.3 megapixels on each layer). It has a 30mm (45mm equivalent) f/2.8 lens permanently attached to the front.

The Fujifilm X100F was introduced in 2017. It has Fujifilm’s unique APS-C X-Trans sensor with 24 megapixels. It has a 23mm (35mm equivalent) f/2 lens permanently attached to the front.

Both the DP2 Merrill and the X100F have excellent image quality. They both have great lenses that have a few minor flaws. There are a lot of similarities.

Let’s take a look at a few example photographs from both cameras:

Red Field, Green Field – Tehachapi, CA – Sigma DP2 Merrill

Red Bicycle – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100F

From The Past – Mojave, CA – Sigma DP2 Merrill

Have A Seat In The Filth – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100F

The Desert Cross – Mojave, CA – Sigma DP2 Merrill

Building Storm Over Ridge – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Cheese – Big Bear, CA – Sigma DP2 Merrill

Look What I Drew – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Rangefinder & Film – Stallion Springs, CA – Sigma DP2 Merrill

Ilford Harman Technology – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

There’s a lot to love about both of these unique cameras, but which one is better? Which one should you buy? I’ll share with you my opinions based on my experience of using both.

Where the Sigma DP2 Merrill is better:

Hall Loves You – Newberry Springs, CA – Sigma DP2 Merrill

The DP2 Merrill has a slightly sharper lens than the X100F. Even though the Sigma camera has almost 90% more megapixels, the actual resolution difference isn’t nearly so big, with the DP2 Merrill just winning out with perhaps a 10% advantage. The DP2 Merrill has a little bit larger dynamic range, particularly in the highlights.

At base ISO, the Sigma DP2 Merrill produces superior image quality to the Fujifilm X100F, but not by a large margin. Honestly, the DP2 Merrill at base ISO has the best image quality of any camera that I’ve ever used. But the X100F isn’t very far behind.

Where the Fujifilm X100F is better:

Haugen – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100F

The X100F has a five stop high-ISO advantage over the DP2 Merrill. The X100F creates far superior JPEGs. The X100F is much, much quicker. Everything “auto” on the camera is superior. The X100F has way better battery life (which is an understatement). It’s significantly better designed and better looking.

Basically, the Fujifilm X100F is a better camera in every aspect outside of lens sharpness, resolution and dynamic range, where the DP2 Merrill wins by a small margin.

Conclusions

Which one is better is for you to decide. I can’t choose for you which one you’ll like more. I will say this: some of my all-time favorite photographs were captured with a Sigma DP2 Merrill, but I love my Fujifilm X100F. The DP2 Merrill has enough negative aspects about it to make it a frustrating experience, but boy did it make nice-looking pictures! The X100F makes nice-looking pictures, too, without hardly any bad points.

One of the big differences for me, and the reason that I prefer the X100F, is time. My time. The time it takes to get a finished photograph. You have to shoot RAW with the Sigma camera, and you have to use their painfully slow software (maybe it’s better now) to process the RAW files. I would have to dedicate 15 to 20 minutes (and sometimes more) per exposure to edit the Sigma pictures.

The Fujifilm X100F files, on the other hand, are straight-out-of-camera JPEGs. No editing. Just shoot and upload. My time is limited and precious, and I literally save hours and hours and hours by not having to post-process my photographs.

If you have lots of free time to spend sitting at a computer, the Sigma camera is a very good option. If not, I’d look at the X100F.

Fujifilm X100F Digital Teleconverter

Posted on August 28, 2017 by Ritchie Roesch

35191776924_3a26d8eecc_k

Fujifilm has included an interesting feature on the X100F that I wanted to talk about. They call it a “Digital Teleconverter” which is a fancy name for zoom-by-cropping. It doesn’t sound all that useful, but it actually is.

As you are probably well aware, the Fujifilm X100F has a fixed 23mm (35mm equivalent) lens. That’s a great focal length for many types of photography; however, it’s not particularly versatile. Unlike an interchangeable-lens camera, you have just one focal-length to work with.

This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. You’d be surprised at the number of well-known and well-respected photographers who used just one camera and one lens for decades. Limiting oneself can be beneficial because it fosters creativity. Having only one focal length at your disposal is only a disadvantage if you make it so.

One great thing about the 24-megapixel X-Trans III sensor found inside the X100F is that it has a lot of resolution. Almost nobody prints at billboard size. Rarely do people print at poster size, and the X100F files are just fine for printing that big. Most people show their pictures on the internet and make 8″ x 10″ prints, and only occasionally print larger. Many find that this camera has a ton of headroom for cropping.

The Digital Teleconverter that Fujifilm programmed into the X100F isn’t just a way to crop pictures in-camera. It applies an upscale algorithm to the crop, and also applies some smart sharpening. It makes the crops look less, well, cropped. They don’t look so much like you used a “digital zoom” (which is what you used), but more like you had a couple other prime lenses at your disposal. Fujifilm really did an excellent job with how they designed this feature.

Sky Keepers – SLC, UT – Fujifilm X100F 75mm

You could do this all yourself with software. You could shoot RAW and do all the editing, cropping, upscaling, sharpening and so forth. Or you could let Fujifilm’s excellent JPEG engine do it automatically in-camera. This could save you some serious time!

The Digital Teleconverter has two options: 50mm (equivalent) focal length and 75mm (equivalent) focal length. This significantly increases the versatility of the fixed-focal-length X100F! It’s almost as if the camera has three different lenses built in.

The 50mm option uses 16 megapixels of resolution from the sensor, which is still plenty (the X100S and X100T had “only” 16 megapixels). 16″ x 24″ prints are no problem, and, if you have a good quality file, you can make nice looking 2′ x 3′ prints. Unless you are pixel-peeping or making poster-sized prints, you’ll have a hard time distinguishing the 50mm Digital Teleconverter images from full resolution files.

The 75mm option uses 12 megapixels of resolution from the sensor, which is still plenty for most people and most uses (the original X100 had “only” 12 megapixels). 12″ x 18″ prints are no problem, and, if you have a good quality file, you can make nice looking 16″ x 24″ prints. Unless you are pixel-peeping or making large prints, nobody will be able to tell that you cut out half of the picture.

In a sense, it’s like getting an X100 with a 75mm lens and an X100T with a 50mm lens packaged with your X100F. As good as that sounds, it’s actually even better because of the advancements and updates the new camera has that the old ones don’t.

Black Conduit – SLC, UT – Fujifilm X100F 50mm

Another advantage of the Digital Teleconverter is that it allows you to do macro photography with the X100F. The closest focus distance is about four inches, which isn’t quite close enough for macro at the 35mm (equivalent) focal length. But the 50mm and 75mm options allow you to achieve true macro, even if barely.

You can custom program many of the controls on the X100F. I have the Digital Teleconverter set to the manual focus ring, which I believe is the default setting. In auto-focus mode, turn the ring to the right and it zooms in and turn it left and it zooms out. It’s very convenient.

Some have complained that the Digital Teleconverter is a JPEG-only function. If you shoot RAW and you want to do a similar zoom-by-cropping, you’ll have to use a couple different software programs and spend awhile in front of a computer. Thankfully Fujifilm has included some excellent Film Simulation settings for camera-made JPEGs on the X100F. My favorites are Acros and Classic Chrome.

Here are some 50mm examples, all straight-out-of-camera JPEGs:

Drops On A Bud – Layton, UT – Fujifilm X100F 50mm

Rose At Ogden Depot – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F 50mm

Cilantro – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F 50mm

Kodacolor – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F 50mm

K-Cup – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F 50mm

Here are some 75mm examples, all straight-out-of-camera JPEGs:

Building Storm Over Ridge – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F 75mm

Ball & Hoop – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F 75mm

Elite – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Coffee & WiFi – Orem, UT – Fujifilm X100F 75mm

Light Bulb Shadow – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F 75mm

My Fujifilm X100F Classic Chrome Film Simulation Recipe

Posted on August 27, 2017 by Ritchie Roesch

36048378846_28039b002c_k

Fujifilm takes a little different approach to their JPEG settings than other camera makers. They use what they call Film Simulations, which are designed to mimic (to an extent) the look of actual film. Fujifilm, after all, knows a thing or two about film.

My favorite color Film Simulation on the X100F is called Classic Chrome. Fuji has not said what exact film this Film Simulation is supposed to be simulating, but a lot of people have speculated Kodachrome. Fujifilm would never call it Kodachrome since that brand is owned by their longtime rival, so they chose the Classic Chrome name instead.

Classic Chrome does look Kodak-ish, but having shot a lot of Kodachrome, I’m not convinced that it’s supposed to look just like Kodachrome. I’m actually reminded more of Kodak’s Ektachrome 100SW, but that’s not an exact match either. I believe that Fuji was going for a look similar to what was found in the pages of National Geographic before digital (think Steve McCurry), and that means not copying a specific film but leaning heavily on a late-1970’s through 1990’s generic Kodak slide film look.

And that’s exactly what Classic Chrome looks like. It can be manipulated (by adjusting the settings) to look more like Kodachrome or one of several different variants of Ektachrome, but whatever the settings are, it always comes out looking distinctly Kodak.

Haugen – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100F

I really appreciate the look and it takes me back to the days when I shot a lot of Kodak 35mm color transparency film. It’s a look that for years I’ve tried to manipulate my digital images to resemble. But now I can do it in-camera, and not rely on post-processing software.

While I have one specific custom Classic Chrome recipe programmed, I’m not afraid to deviate from it when necessary. I might adjust the highlights and shadows to increase or decrease contrast. I might change the dynamic range setting. I might adjust the white balance to something warmer or cooler. I try to look at each picture as unique and dynamically adjust whatever I need for each situation.

Classic Chrome
Dynamic Range: DR200
Highlight: -1
Shadow: +1
Color: +2
Noise Reduction: -2
Sharpening: +2
Grain Effect: Weak
White Balance: Auto, +1 Red & -1 Blue
ISO: Auto up to 12800
Exposure Compensation: +2/3 (typically)

Example photos, all camera-made JPEGs captured using my Classic Chrome Film Simulation recipe:

Let’s Roll The Moon Across The Sun – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

The Joy of Fishing – Huntsville, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Stud & Stripes – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Stargazer Lily – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Fruity Pebbles – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Yashica Rangefinder & Fujicolor – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Bowling Shoes – Kaysville, UT – Fujifilm X100F

No Soda Here – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Closed Drive Thru Window – South Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

CF Trailer – SLC, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Pacific X-26 – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Bicycle Blue – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Sky Keepers – SLC, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Hair & Lips – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Lightning Strikes Antelope Island – Layton, UT – Fujifilm X100F

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!

$5.00

My Fujifilm X100F Acros Film Simulation Recipe

Posted on August 27, 2017 by Ritchie Roesch

35191782074_2699a7ac0c_c

Fujifilm offers “Film Simulations” on their cameras instead of traditional JPEG settings. One of the most popular, available only on X-Trans III cameras, such as the X100F, is Acros.

Neopan Acros is an ISO 100 film made by Fujifilm available in 35mm and 120 formats. I’ve used it before and it’s quite good. While Fuji recycled the Acros name for their black-and-white digital Film Simulation, it’s not an exact match to the film. But that’s OK.

The Acros Film Simulation is a wonderful option that has great contrast, beautiful tonality and lovely faux film grain. An interesting fact is that the amount of film grain applied increases as the ISO increases, like what you would find if you shot actual film. So an image shot at ISO 1600 has noticeably more grain than an image shot at ISO 200.

And it really does have a film look! You’d be hard pressed to tell apart an image shot on real black-and-white film and one shot using the Acros Film Simulation. Straight-out-of-camera JPEGs look like black-and-white prints made from 35mm film. Amazing!

Sitting Large – SLC, UT – Fujifilm X100F

There are four Acros options: Acros (no filter), Acros+R (red filter), Acros+Y (yellow filter) and Acros+G (green filter). Acros+R is more like using a real orange filter on actual film than a red filter. Acros+Y and Acros+G are a little more subtle than if you used real filters on actual film.

I use Acros+R for landscapes (which darkens blues and lightens reds), Acros+G for people pictures (which darkens reds and lightens greens) and standard Acros for everything else. If you know what each one does, you can choose what’s best for each situation. The rest of the settings are the same.

While I have my Acros recipe programmed (custom settings 3, 4 and 5), I’m not afraid to deviate when necessary. Sometimes a little more or less contrast is needed, so I increase or decrease the highlights and shadows. If I want more grain, I will turn the Film Grain to weak (which adds more faux grain to what’s already included in the Acros Film Simulation). I might add or decrease the Dynamic Range. Each situation is different, so I try to be dynamic when shooting.

Acros/Acros+R/Acros+G
Dynamic Range: DR200
Highlight: +2
Shadows: +2
Noise Reduction: -2
Sharpening: +2
Grain Effect: Off
ISO: Auto up to 12800
Exposure Compensation: +1 (typically)

Example photos, all camera-made JPEGs captured using my Acros Film Simulation recipe:

Ilford Harman Technology – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Train Watching – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Track 1 Platform – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Black Conduit – SLC, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Safety Features – SLC, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Diversity – SLC, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Industrial Spur – North Salt Lake, Utah – Fujifilm X100F

KeyBank Building – SLC, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Salt Lake Cityscape – SLC, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Building Through The Tree Leaves – SLC, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Light Bulb Shadow – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Building Storm Over Ridge – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Man In The Straw Hat – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Joy’s Joy – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Look What I Drew – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Help Fuji X Weekly

$5.00

Photographing The Great American Solar Eclipse With A Fujifilm X100F

Posted on August 23, 2017 by Ritchie Roesch

Let’s Roll The Moon Across The Sun – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Two days ago when The Great American Solar Eclipse of 2017 made its way from coast to coast, a whole lot of pictures were taken. In all likelihood, more pictures of the sun and moon were captured that day than any single day before. It was a big event!

I live in the Salt Lake City, Utah, metro area, which is not far from where the full eclipse could be seen. Unfortunately I had obligations (you know, a job) and couldn’t journey a few hours up the road to see that. From my home, however, I could view a 93% eclipsed sun.

We set up some chairs in the front yard and the kids rode their bikes. We had secured some solar glasses that allowed one to look directly at the sun without harming the eyes. We were amazed as the light around us changed. We saw the sun slowly disappear behind the moon. I used my Fujifilm X100F to capture it all.

Jon Wearing Solar Glasses – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

You might think that the X100F, with it’s fixed 35mm (equivalent) focal length lens, would be the wrong gear for capturing the eclipse. And you’d be both right and wrong. The best photographs that I’ve seen of the eclipse were captured with long telephoto lenses. A wide angle lens isn’t ideal for photographing something that’s about 240,000 miles away crossing in front of something that’s about 93,000,000 miles away.

But the X100F did better than I expected. Plus, a long telephoto lens isn’t the best choice for capturing the rest of the action: the people. Those watching the event were just as interesting as the event itself. The X100F, with its leaf shutter and excellent built-in fill-flash, was the perfect choice for people pictures.

While I could have grabbed a bigger camera and attached a longer lens, I’m glad that I didn’t. I was able to get some good shots that will become cherished memories. And I didn’t have anything big to lug around or get in the way. I was able to enjoy myself and the company that I was with.

Looking At The Sun – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Joshua Watching The Eclipse – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Girl & Her Solar Glasses – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Pointing At The Eclipse – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

I captured the solar eclipse using the camera’s built-in neutral-density filter (you can see the eclipse in the lens flare):

The Sun Partially Obscured Is Still Bright – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

I also captured the eclipse shooting through the solar glasses:

Eclipsed – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Understanding X-Trans

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Ritchie Roesch

35989807856_f0ec53affe_c

Hidden inside the retro-designed body, the Fujifilm X100F has Fuji’s latest X-Trans III sensor. The first generation X-Trans sensor was introduced on the X-Pro1 camera in 2012. But what exactly is this unique sensor and what does it mean for your photographs?

Sony is who manufactures Fujifilm’s APS-C X-Trans sensors. They are actually ordinary sensors found in a number of different cameras by Sony, Nikon and Pentax. What’s different is the color filter array placed on top. Instead of using the traditional Bayer color filter array found on almost every digital camera since its invention, X-Trans uses a completely different pattern.

The Bayer mosaic uses a 2×2 pattern with 50% green, 25% blue and 25% red light sensitive sensor elements. It was developed in 1976 by Bryce Bayer who was working for Kodak. The advantage of Bayer is its simplicity, while the disadvantage is that it is subject to aliasing.

The X-Trans mosaic uses a 6×6 pattern (made up of four different 3×3 patterns) with 55% green, 22.5% blue and 22.5% red light sensitive sensor elements. The advantage of X-Trans is that it’s not subject to aliasing, while the disadvantage is that it’s much more complex to process.

Ilford Harman Technology – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

The original reason Fuji developed X-Trans was to eliminate the need for a low-pass filter, which blurs the image slightly to prevent aliasing. However, it was discovered that as resolution increased the need for a low-pass filter decreased, so many modern Bayer cameras don’t have one.

Digital cameras use the green sensor elements for luminosity information, while blue and red are for color information. Because the X-Trans has more green sensor elements (55% vs. 50%), it has a larger dynamic range (in the shadows) and better high-ISO performance than the same sensor with a Bayer color filter array.

Because X-Trans is much more complex and has to be handled differently, Fuji went back to the drawing board and rethought camera processing. A few things came out of this.

First, they adjusted how digital noise is handled, making it less saturated and more random, which produces a film-grain-like result. Comparing really high ISOs, there is a distinct difference between X-Trans and Bayer–not necessarily the amount of digital noise, but the look of the noise.

ISO 200 – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X100F

Second, to maximize dynamic range and prevent clipped highlights, they programmed the software to underexpose while boosting midtones and shadows to the correct exposure. This is why ISO 200 is the base ISO. The camera is actually at a lower ISO, but increasing everything except the highlights to an equivalent of ISO 200. This is also why the extended ISO 100 setting has a smaller dynamic range. Some have called this cheating, but I call it smart programming.

Third, they took camera-made JPEGs seriously, and decided that they shouldn’t look like crap. Fuji studied their films, and they also studied what photographers typically want their pictures to look like, and made JPEG settings that could actually produce out-of-camera results that photographers would actually appreciate. The X-Trans III cameras can even add fake (yet convincing) film grain.

The disadvantage of X-Trans is that it’s significantly more complex. It requires more processing power. It’s not quite as fast. A big obstacle for Fuji has been heat. There’s a little more guesswork within the algorithms, and it doesn’t always get things right. Adobe has struggled with how to appropriately handle the RAW files.

For me, the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. Fujifilm has smartly designed their cameras to deliver results more in line with bigger and more expensive gear. That’s why there is a passionate cult-like following from their users, including myself.

So Why The Fujifilm X100F?

Posted on August 21, 2017 by Ritchie Roesch

36048378846_28039b002c_k

My Fujifilm journey began a little over one year ago when I purchased a four-year-old Fujifilm X-E1. I was getting into astrophotography and wanted something that had good high-ISO capabilities.

What I needed was a full-frame camera, but, you know, those are expensive. Like a lot of people, I’m not made of money and my photography budget is limited. My best alternative was a used Fuji X camera. Besides, I’d wanted to try the X-Trans sensor ever since it came out, but never had the chance.

When the X-E1 arrived I was blown away. Not only was it capable of good-looking high-ISO images, but it had excellent dynamic range and even made nice JPEGs (which would save me time from fiddling with RAW files). It was also designed extraordinarily well and the experience of using the camera reminded me of the best film cameras I shot with.

Stars & Salt – Bonneville Salt Flats, UT – Fujifilm X-E1 & Rokinon 12mm

The X-E1 became the first digital camera that I could say I loved. It was an instant favorite!

Fujifilm introduced the new X-Trans III cameras beginning with the X-Pro2 last year. It was highly raved, and one thing in particular caught my attention: the straight-out-of-camera JPEGs looked wonderful. I wanted it, but I couldn’t afford it. I couldn’t justify buying it.

You might be asking yourself right now what the big deal is about good-looking camera-made JPEGs. That’s for amateurs, right? Pros use RAW, right? I’ll have a whole article on this in the coming weeks, but I’ll illustrate the importance of camera-made JPEGs by stating my rule of thumb when it comes to post-processing times.

Lightning Strikes Antelope Island – Layton, UT – Fujifilm X100F

If I shoot RAW, I can expect that for every one hour of shooting I’ll spend two or three hours in front of a computer post-processing the files (and that’s if I’m quick). With the X-E1 shooting JPEGs, I’ll occasionally get a perfect straight-out-of-camera JPEG that requires no editing, but most exposures need some post-processing. The ration is about 1:1, meaning that I can expect for every hour spent shooting I’ll spend an hour sitting in front of a computer editing. That’s a big difference in time!

From what I had seen with the X-Trans III cameras, people were getting excellent camera-made JPEGs that consistently required no editing. The idea of significantly cutting my time staring at a computer screen manipulating pictures was very appealing. I mean, let’s face it, the main reason people shoot RAW is because their cameras make crummy JPEGs. But that doesn’t have to be the case.

I’ve taken a few road trips recently. One frustrating part of that is lugging around a camera bag and changing lenses. This is especially cumbersome when you are also responsible for a rambunctious toddler. I thought that a pocket-sized fixed-lens camera would be much more ideal than having a camera around my neck plus a bag of extra gear in my hand.

Hair & Lips – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X100F

I didn’t want to replace the X-E1, I only wanted to supplement it. If I purchased an interchangeable lens camera, I wouldn’t use the X-E1 anymore. The X-Trans III camera model that I wanted to buy became obvious, and it was the X100F.

The opportunity to purchase a Fujifilm X100F came one month ago. I found a slightly used one with about 500 exposures on the shutter and in near perfect condition for $1,125. That was a lot for me to spend on one camera, but I felt it would be worth it in the long run.

I couldn’t be happier with the decision to buy the Fujifilm X100F. I’ll talk much more about this in the coming weeks, months and years. Stay tuned and be sure to check back often!

Welcome To Fuji X Weekly

Posted on August 21, 2017 by Ritchie Roesch

35191782074_2699a7ac0c_c

My name is Ritchie Roesch, and welcome to Fuji X Weekly, my Fujifilm X100F journal! Thanks for stopping by, I hope that you find this site interesting. Feel free to bookmark it so that you can check back often.

I thought for the first post that I would share with you how this blog came to be, and what my intentions are for its future.

This isn’t my first blog. I ran the Roesch Photography Blog for over six years. It was a “general photography” site and covered every topic under the photographic umbrella that I cared to write about. I had some successes with it (one post had over 40,000 views), but a few weeks ago I pulled the plug and deleted the whole thing.

First, it was taking up too much of my time, and I felt like I wasn’t getting what I wanted in return. I was earning some money through Google Adsense (which, by the way, is a complete ripoff), but not much. I’m reminded of the movie Napoleon Dynamite when Napoleon does some day labor at a chicken farm. After working hard all day and getting paid in coins, he adds up what he’s earned and exclaims, “That’s like a dollar an hour!” I was earning that only on a good day.

Man In The Straw Hat – South Weber, UT – Fuji X100F

I kept telling myself that the time and effort I was putting into that blog was self-promotion, and one day it would pay off. It’s true that I did get some paid work from the blog, but most often I was hired by word of mouth, sometimes my own words from my own mouth. Only a couple of times did I get work as a result of the blog itself. It was very inefficient marketing, if marketing was my intent.

Then I discovered that my photographs–and even my words–were being stolen. I searched the web for myself and my pictures, and I found that I was routinely being ripped off. In some cases people were taking complete articles, including the photographs, and posting them on their own websites as if they wrote the content and took the pictures themselves. I was now spending time asking the thieves to remove the stolen content.

And those people are indeed thieves! They are lowlifes who can’t do it themselves, and instead of paying for content, they steal it. They’re cheaters. They profit off of other people’s hard work. They’re leeches, and probably worse.

I found that someone had cited me in their college paper. This was a poorly written essay that I imagine couldn’t have received a higher grade than a D. I wasn’t directly quoted, but a whole paragraph paraphrased my words. And it made me look as though I wanted young girls to have poor self-esteem. The words, or the paraphrasing I should say, was taken well out of context. The point of my article was that people were overreacting to Steve McCurry’s use of Photoshop. Somehow that turned into me saying that young girls should have a negative opinion about themselves.

Train Watching – Farmington, UT – Fuji X100F

All of this was much too much! I was wasting my time. I was being ripped off. I was being grossly misquoted. I wasn’t accomplishing what I was intending to accomplish. So I took it all down.

I took a few weeks off from blogging. I reassessed where I’m at and where I want to be. I looked inward. I took some time to reconsider everything.

I love to photograph and I love to write. Those are two things that I truly enjoy. So I decided to do just that, except without profit or self-promotion as a driving force. I’m not placing advertisements on this website. I’m not posting links on social media or other people’s sites trying to drive traffic here. If nobody ever reads this, I’m OK with that. I’m not looking for money or attention. I’m publishing this because that’s what I want to do.

I’ve called this blog Fuji X Weekly because I plan to publish one article per week. Sometimes I might write more than that, sometimes less. I’m limiting the amount of my personal time spent doing this to something that’s not burdensome. The topic of choice is Fujifilm X cameras, specifically my Fujifilm X100F that I purchased four weeks ago.

The Baggage We Carry – SLC, UT – Fuji X100F

I subtitled this bog My Fujifilm X100F Journal. That’s what this is. I’ll be talking about one camera. I’ll be writing about my personal experiences with this one camera. And that’s it! However, I purposely left the name of this site, Fuji X Weekly, a little more ambiguous in case that I decide in the future to expand to include other cameras. I didn’t want to make something that might become too limiting or obsolete in a few years.

I kind of hope that this blog remains mostly hidden with a small (but hopefully engaged) audience. I want this to be a treasure for those who find it and are truly interested in its content. But I don’t want it to be a treasure trove for those who are looking to easily steal and profit from my hard work.

That’s what this whole Fuji X Weekly thing is about. I’m glad you’ve found it and took some time to read it. I hope you’ll enjoy my posts and come back frequently.

Thanks for coming!

Ritchie Roesch

FUJI X WEEKLY

Author: Ritchie Roesch

Leaf Shutter & Flash & X100F – Oh, My!

Trip To The Treehouse – Visiting The Treehouse Museum With My Kids

Fujifilm X100F – The Best Aperture

Digital Film – Why I Shoot JPEGs With The Fujifilm X100F

What Film Simulation Should Fujifilm Create Next?

Fujifilm X100F vs. Sigma DP2 Merrill

Fujifilm X100F Digital Teleconverter

My Fujifilm X100F Classic Chrome Film Simulation Recipe

My Fujifilm X100F Acros Film Simulation Recipe

Photographing The Great American Solar Eclipse With A Fujifilm X100F

Understanding X-Trans

So Why The Fujifilm X100F?

Welcome To Fuji X Weekly