autofocus | FUJI X WEEKLY

Why New Cameras Might Seem Boring

PetaPixel published an article entitled If You Think ‘Cameras Have Gotten Boring’ You’re Looking at Photography All Wrong, and I’m not so much interested in talking about that article in particular as I am of the idea of why new cameras might seem boring. There are probably a thousand different ways to look at it, and they’re likely all legitimate—I’m not suggesting that my explanation is better, it’s simply my thoughts and opinions. You might agree or disagree, and that’s perfectly ok. So, why do new cameras seem boring to some people?

I read a book last year, entitled David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits, and the Art of Battling Giants by Malcolm Gladwell, that was quite fascinating. I’m not a mathematician by any stretch, and I’m certainly not a statistician. For those who haven’t read the book, Malcolm talks a lot about the inverted-U curve (that is to say, an upside-down U). There’s a common pattern found everywhere (that’s often ignored) where something goes up a little, then up steeply before it begins to flattens out as it nears the peak, followed by a slow decline, then a steep decline. Can you picture the upside-down U?

Above: A short excerpt from Malcolm Gladwell’s David and Goliath from Amazon’s website. Seriously, read the book if you haven’t yet done so.

Let’s take a topic like autofocus, which a lot of people talk about in the Fujifilm world, but much less so outside of that. Photographers who use Sony cameras, for example, don’t discuss AF, except to occasionally remind everyone else just how good it is. In the PetaPixel article, the author states, “Sony managed to… improve processing for better autofocus….” Do Sony photographers care? If their AF is already super-duper awesome amazing, does it matter that it just got a hair better? I’m sure that 99%+ of Sony users wouldn’t be able to distinguish a difference, and only a tiny fraction of a percent of users would note that it makes a real, practical difference to their photography. While the improved processing for better autofocus may have been a substantial technical feat, for most people who use the gear, it’s inclusion or exclusion doesn’t matter in the least.

The reason why it doesn’t matter is that autofocus on Sony cameras (and some other brands) is near the peak of the inverted-U curve. Each improvement has less-and-less-and-less of a practical benefit to the users, who already find it more than good enough for each and every situation. In some circumstances, AF was prioritized to the detriment of image quality. If autofocus is already amazingly incredible beyond what you even need, any improvements will seem boring. They’re more gee-whiz than anything else. It’s like the famous line from The Incredibles, spoken by the villain: “And when everyone’s super, no one will be.”

With Fujifilm, there is some room for improvement. Fujifilm’s AF isn’t trash like some have hyperbolically said, but it isn’t peak like Sony’s. Fujifilm’s AF is more than good enough for most photographers; however, it is occasionally less than ideal for some situations. If Fujifilm “managed to improve processing for better autofocus” just like Sony did, it would not be perceived as boring because Fujifilm is not at the peak of the inverted-U. The improvements would make a real, practical difference to a larger percentage of the users. But, with each improvement, they inch closer to the peak, and eventually they’ll reach it (a bet some will still complain, though).

I think digital photography technology is near the peak of inverted-U curves in most categories. This means it’s an amazing time to be a photographer. We should have a deep appreciation for just how fortunate we are to have access to the gear we have. At the same time, camera advancements are easy to take for granted. An improvement that a team of experts worked tirelessly on for years might seem ho-hum, because the usefulness of it is minor for a small percentage of people, and is otherwise unnoticeable. That’s just the way it is at the peak.

New cameras aren’t boring because they’re boring; they’re boring because they’re so good they do everything we need them to and more. They’re so good that our expectations have become incredibly high, making it more difficult to wow us. And, when you’re at the peak of an inverted-U, it’s easy to step a little beyond it. Take a step forward, and you take a step down. For instance, Sony’s new Dual Gain Output technology increases the dynamic range at low ISO when using the mechanical shutter, but can give a lower dynamic range when using the electronic shutter than cameras without this technology—a step forward, but also a small step down.

I’m not picking on Sony, they were just the primary subject of the PetaPixel article. Actually, I’m pointing out that they’ve managed to get to the peak of inverted-U curves almost across the board, which is an amazing feat. It puts them in a tough position where advancements seem boring to their customers. Some areas where they’re not at or near the peak of the curve are JPEG output, color science, and stylish camera body design. If they make improvements in those areas, they’re less likely to be perceived as boring. For Fujifilm, they’re near the peak in those areas, but not in some others. In my opinion, camera manufacturers should self-identify where they are on various inverted-U curves, and put more efforts where they’re not at or near the peak, and less effort where they’ve already achieved greatness.

Autofocus and an Upside-Down U

Posted on July 26 by Ritchie Roesch

*Captured with a Fujifilm X-M1 camera & Fujinon 90mm f/2 lens*

Fujifilm’s autofocus will never be as good as Canon, Sony, or Nikon’s, and that’s ok. I’ve explained this before a couple of times, so forgive me for repeating myself. There are some highly unrealistic expectations that need to be put to rest, which I hope this article accomplishes.

There are a lot of comments floating around the internet along the lines of, “Fujifilm’s autofocus sucks.” And, “Fujifilm needs class leading autofocus like Sony and Canon.” And, “If Fujifilm doesn’t address AF on the next generation, I’m leaving.” And many other similar sentiments. But these comments are out of touch with reality. Let me explain why Fujifilm’s autofocus will never be as good as the Canikony brands, and why it doesn’t matter.

There are three reasons why Fujifilm’s AF isn’t as good as the three big brands. First, those companies have been making autofocus systems for much longer. Sony (through Konica and Minolta) have been making AF since the 1970’s—they were the first (via Konica), and the first to have what was considered a “good” AF system (via Minolta). Canon and Nikon have been developing AF since the 1980’s. Since they had such a big head start, it is only logical that they’re further along. Second, the Canikony brands have more R&D funds to commit to autofocus development and improvements. They have larger teams with larger budgets, and it’s probably easier for them to attract the most experienced talent. Last but not least—and this was pointed out by PetaPixel—the big three have put most of their effort over the last handful of years into AF, and have largely ignored image quality improvements; in some cases, autofocus was prioritized to the detriment of image quality. That is a path I would highly discourage Fujifilm from pursuing, personally.

*Fujifilm X-T30 & Fujinon 90mm f/2* *— Fujichrome Sensia 100*

While Canon, Sony, and Nikon have put a lot of their eggs in the AF basket, we’ve long surpassed the point of diminishing returns—the Inverted U Curve, for those who have read Malcolm Gladwell’s David & Goliath (a book I definitely recommend). How good does AF really need to be? At what point is it good enough for almost everyone? I think we passed that point years ago. For almost the entire history of photography and videography, there was no autofocus. It was manual focus only. Yet today’s photos and videos aren’t necessarily better than they were then (in some ways, they might be subjectively worse). If we compare Minolta’s first “good” AF to the AF of any camera made in the last 25 years, it’s clearly not as good as even the worst examples you could find. In other words, we’re really spoiled today with incredible gear. Fujifilm’s so-called “sucky” AF is better than the best AF from 15 years ago, maybe even 10. Were we incapable of creating good photos and videos then? Are photos and videos captured today using the latest Canikony cameras better than anything previously? Of course not! Some people seem to think that photography has only been around for a few years.

It was never about the gear, it has always been about the one using the gear. Yes, some tools make it a bit easier to achieve your desired results, but if you really want a certain result, you can do it no matter your camera. You might have to try a little harder, you might have to learn a new skill, or you might have to practice a skill you’ve gotten rusty at, but you can still do it. My guess, though, is that for 98% of people, Fujifilm’s AF is more than good enough just as it is, as was Canikony’s five or ten or even 15 years ago. So does it actually matter that Fujifilm’s autofocus isn’t as good as the three big brands? It might matter to some, but it shouldn’t matter to the vast majority. If you can’t get the job done with the gear you have, the problem isn’t the gear; however, that’s a bitter pill that people don’t want to swallow. Nobody wants to hear that they’re the problem, but without introspection there’s no opportunity for growth.

With all of that said, Fujifilm has done an amazing job creating and improving the autofocus on their cameras, all things considered (aside from that infamous firmware bug last year). With a smaller budget and smaller team (and with a lot less time), they’re not terribly far behind Nikon. I’m sure they will continue to make strides, and—who knows—with AI they might have some breakthroughs that would be difficult otherwise, and which might level the playing field a bit. For most people, these improvements will have little-to-no practical benefit because the AF is already more than sufficient—we’re near the top of the upside-down U. Seriously, how good does it need to be? It’s been more than good enough for me since X-Trans III, and even the older models are decent in daylight situations. Only in extreme cases do the Canikony brands have a clear advantage, yet even those situations aren’t insurmountable if the one behind the camera doesn’t allow them to be. While I’m sure Fujifilm’s autofocus will continue to improve, the difference it will make for most people is very small. Yes, we’re rooting for Fujifilm to be at the head-of-the-pack in every aspect of camera-making, but it’s important to keep expectations realistic, or else we’ll inevitable be disappointed, which will lead to unnecessary resentment—something that’s easy to spot all over the internet.

Fujifilm Autofocus — An Uncomfortable Conversation We Need to Have

Posted on September 25, 2024 by Ritchie Roesch

*Skates & Hoop* – Tempe, AZ – Fujifilm X-E4 – Astia Azure Recipe

In this article we’re going to discuss Fujifilm’s X-series Autofocus, which is a hot topic right now. A lot of things are being said about it on YouTube and social media and especially in the comments section of photography websites. I’m a little afraid to give my two cents, because I know it will not be well received by some of you reading this. I think most regular visitors of this website will not have any qualms about it, but no doubt this will be shared on Reddit or DPReview or a Facebook group or someplace like that, and I will receive some aggressive disagreements by some of those folks.

I cannot tell you how many times I’ve seen people online call Fujifilm’s Autofocus “garbage” or “bad” or some other negative term. Every once in awhile a person will comment on Fuji X Weekly with a similar sentiment; however, it’s vocalized a lot less here than elsewhere, it seems. This is a controversy that I’ve tried to steer clear of—people have strong opinions about this topic, and my opinions are different than many. I did write about it two months ago, but I think it needs to be addressed again.

As I’ve pondered this topic, I think there are a number of issues that are often lumped together, but need to be discussed individually. They are related in that it affects Autofocus, but otherwise they are unrelated, and lumping them together doesn’t help bring about any solutions. We’ll get to it all, but it will take some time to navigate through it. Be patient, as this will be a journey.

First and foremost, I believe that much of the negativity is a type of hysteria. Someone points out a “problem” and now everyone (it seems) is experiencing it. Echo chambers and groupthink on the internet can make people especially susceptible to this. I’m not a psychologist and offer no professional medical advice, but I did listen to a podcast recently on a flight that made me consider this as a strong possibility.

*Thunderbird & Canopies* – Glendale, AZ – Fujifilm X100VI – PRO Negative 160C Recipe

The podcast was Cautionary Tales with Tim Harford and the episode was entitled Sonic Poison? The Genesis of Havana Syndrome. It explains how hysteria can have a real affect on people, such as causing nuns to meow, or children to experience sickness that they don’t really have, or millions of dollars of perfectly good Coca-Cola dumped down the drain for no good reason, or spies “poisoned” by loud cicadas in Cuba. While these things were in their heads, they manifested in real physical ways.

What clued me in to the potential that this phenomena might also be happening to those who own Fujifilm cameras is when someone told me that they were really upset at Fujifilm because their Autofocus was not working as it should be and that Fujifilm needed to fix the problem right now; this person admitted that they had never experienced the issue personally, but they knew it was a problem because they had seen it in a YouTube video. Later, another person stated to me something very similar: while the “problem” had had no affect on their photography, they were aware of its existence because they had seen it on the internet—and they were demanding that Fujifilm fix it ASAP or else they would quit the brand.

I’m not suggesting that Fujifilm’s Autofocus woes are “all in your head” and that it is just psychological, but I do believe it explains a good deal of it. I think if some certain YouTube videos had never been published (and it’s fine that they were, I’m not condemning them, I’m just observing), there would not be nearly so much discussion and outrage right now. A lot of people “became aware” of a problem that they likely would not have noticed on their own otherwise, and it wouldn’t have affected them in any real way (in other words, it wouldn’t have been an issue at all). When you spend a lot of money on something, and especially if your livelihood (or hopes of a future livelihood) depends on that thing, and you believe that it is not working right, it’s easy to understand why there would be some hysteria. Nuns meowing, Coke getting dumped, and Fujifilm’s “sucky” Autofocus are related, if you ask me, and it’s something that we can all be susceptible to. But, again, I’m not a psychologist and offer no professional advice on this.

While I believe a significant amount of the outrage can be attributed to that hysteria, there are real issues that should be discussed rationally. Something that I find interesting is that for the first five or six years of this blog, Fujifilm’s Autofocus was not a big issue whatsoever. It wasn’t a hot topic. What changed? I think it was Fujifilm’s enticement of Canikony brand photographers. I think many of the complaints are by people who used to shoot Canikony brand cameras—particularly Canon and Sony—and when they switched to Fujifilm over the last couple of years, they were disappointed by Fujifilm’s Autofocus system. It’s not as good as those found on Canikony models, especially Canon and Sony.

*Hit* – South Weber, UT – Fujifilm X-T30 – Fujichrome Sensia 100 Recipe

There are three reasons why Canikony cameras have better Autofocus than Fujifilm. First, they’ve been doing it for much longer. Sony (through Konica and Minolta) have been making Autofocus cameras since the 1970’s, and had what was considered the first “good” AF system (not good compared to what we have today, but good for back then) with the Minolta Maxxum in the mid-1980’s; Canon and Nikon both introduced their first Autofocus cameras in the 1980’s. Second, Canikony brands have had significantly more R&D money to invest in their Autofocus systems. Finally, as PetaPixel pointed out, the Canikony brands over the last handful of years have spent very little effort on image quality improvements, while placing much of their efforts on Autofocus improvements, and in some specific cases, actually to the detriment of image quality (a path that I do not want Fujifilm to pursue, personally). Most of the Canikony cameras that Fujifilm models are often compared to are also significantly more expensive, and usually larger and heavier.

Anyone who expects Fujifilm’s Autofocus to be at the same level as the Canikony brands have not put much thought into it. Still, it’s surprising to me, considering the disadvantages that Fujifilm has faced, that they’re not very far behind, either. Fujifilm’s Autofocus is by far more than good enough for most people and situations, including for the many professional photographers who use these cameras each day even under difficult circumstances. In preparation for this article, I reached out to five highly talented and successful photographers/videographers who use Fujifilm—people I met in person this year while traveling across America—and asked if they find Fujifilm’s Autofocus “lacking” or “detrimental” to their work. All five answered no; one added a caveat that for a specific use-case this person prefers their Sony model—they could do it with their Fujifilm, but it’s a little easier on their Sony, so for that particular situation this person doesn’t use Fujifilm.

Photography has been around for a very long time. It didn’t begin two, five, or ten years ago. People have been capturing amazing photographs for well over 100 years. If you were to grab a Fujifilm X-T5, jump into a DeLorean, and travel back in time just 20 years, you’d blow away the photographers of that era with what would seem like to them impossible camera technology. Yet the photographs captured today are no more impressive than than they were then. Camera gear has advanced tremendously over the last two decades, but the great photographs from today are no more great than they were 30, 40, 50, etc., etc., years ago. I love finding vintage photography magazines and admiring the incredible photographs captured on significantly inferior gear than what we have readily available today—we’re so spoiled!

In other words, if they could do it on their lesser gear, you can do it on your greater gear. No excuses. Fujifilm’s Autofocus is really good, especially compared to what existed over the last handful of decades. No, not quite as good as the Canikony brands are right now, but really good nonetheless. The negativity just never made sense to me. It’s like complaining that a Corvette isn’t a Maserati, and calling the Corvette garbage because it isn’t more like a Maserati. If you want a Maserati, buy a Maserati! Otherwise, appreciate that you have a Corvette.

*Midair* – Los Angeles, CA – Fujifilm X100VI – Appalachian Negative Recipe

Many years ago I was given this advice: Either you are controlling your camera, or your camera is controlling you. I think that a lot of people allow their cameras to control them, which might typically work out fine because the current tech is so advanced, but, when it doesn’t work out, it’s an easy scapegoat to blame the gear instead of looking inward. Without self reflection, you are robbing yourself of the opportunity to learn and grow. Your gear is only a limitation if you allow it to be, and if you don’t allow it, then it’s no issue whatsoever. That might require learning some new skills or sharpening some skills that you already have but could be improved upon.

A lot of people don’t like that advice, but it is completely true. You have it within you to not allow any limitations on any gear get in the way of creating whatever it is that you want to create. The difference between those that are having a ton of success with their Fujifilm gear and those complaining about it saying they can’t is the person holding the camera, and not the camera itself. I get it: it’s much easier to blame the gear. But, if you blame the gear instead of yourself, your camera is controlling you, and you will not improve—that success will be elusive.

All that I just said is the most important part of this article. You might disagree, and that’s ok. Sometimes the truth hurts. It might be a bitter pill that you were not ready to swallow. I didn’t say anything that’s not true; perhaps it is deserving of a second read-through, and with an open mind. With all that said, there are some other things that are important to address.

I think a good deal of the negative attention regarding Fujifilm’s Autofocus issues came after Fujifilm released a firmware update earlier this year with an Autofocus bug. I didn’t experience the issue caused by that firmware personally because I always wait awhile to update the firmware. This is a good idea regardless of camera brand. Sometimes there are bugs, and sometimes the bugs are significant. If you wait a week or two, if there is some major bug, it should be well known by then—if so, just skip that firmware and wait for the next one. Fujifilm did fix that Autofocus bug; however, to a much smaller degree there is still some AF problem that seems to only affect certain use cases. It’s my understanding that Fujifilm is aware of it and working on a solution. It will get resolved, just give it a little time.

*Horses on Allen Street* – Tombstone, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – Nostalgic Americana Recipe

As Fujifilm has grown, I think one department that may not have upscaled enough is the one that is in charge of firmware. Perhaps Fujifilm needs to add a couple more to the team, or maybe they have already and are experiencing some growing pains as new folks are brought in (or combination of the two). From my perspective, it just seems that this team is stretched a little too thin and needs more resources to allow them to keep up. My advice to Fujifilm is simply to invest more in the team that is in charge of firmware, as I’m certain it will pay off in the long run. A lot of negative attention today could have been avoided had this team been given all of the necessary resources a couple years back.

The remaining Autofocus woes are related to hardware and settings. It could be that you are not using the best lenses, or don’t have your camera settings programmed optimally.

Fujifilm’s older lenses are slower. The newer options with a Linear Motor (designated with “LM” in the lens name) are often the fastest. The larger and heavier the glass elements, the slower the AF will likely be. In other words, there’s a pretty significant performance difference depending on the lens that you have on your camera. Use the right lenses and you’ll have more success; however, for most people and circumstances, all of the lenses are plenty good enough—this is more for those who demand peak performance for their situation. Also, ensure that the lens firmware is up-to-date, not just the camera—this might resolve it for you, so it is worth looking into.

Fujifilm cameras have a lot of customizable fine-tuning options for Autofocus (especially on the newer models); if those settings are optimized for your situation, you will have much success, but if not, you may have more “misses” than you’d like. There are resources online that can help you find the right AF settings for you—it’s a very individual type of thing, so what works for one person may not for another; I recommend that you look for advice from multiple sources, and experiment—try different settings and see what happens. Also, I have found that several complaints were resolved with one specific thing: Release/Focus Priority should be set to Focus and not Release. I have a feeling that this one setting is the root of many people’s AF woes.

*Political Skateboarder* – Nashville, TN – Fujifilm X-T50 – Kodak Film Recipes

In my opinion, Fujifilm’s Autofocus problems have been significantly overblown—Mount Everest has been made out of an ant hill. The internet has spread hysteria. Some people have unrealistic expectations. For others its user-error, and could be resolved with a little effort. Blaming the camera is easy to do, but it stifles your growth. Control your camera, don’t let it control you. Many people have the same exact gear as you do and they do not experience your issues. It’s not the camera—it has never been the camera, and it never will be the camera. Your gear is much more than capable. As Ansel Adams stated, “The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it.” You have it within you to not allow it to adversely affect you, but it might require some practice or learning new skills. That’s not a message that people usually want to hear, but it’s one that needs to be said. If you require optimized peak Autofocus performance, make sure that you are using the right lenses and have the best settings selected for your situation. For Fujifilm: provide more resources to the firmware team so that they can ensure they are not producing buggy updates (by the way, this is not an issue unique to Fujifilm by any stretch).

Please keep your comments civil. I know that chronic complainers, haters, and trolls will come out of the woodworks when an article like this is published. Unlike most websites, I don’t put up with that here. If you disagree, please be kind in your disagreement. I feel like this article needs to be published to counteract all the negativity that is much too prevalent across the internet. My hope is that—if you have experienced issues with Fujifilm’s Autofocus—you’ll be encouraged to create amazing content with the gear you own, because your camera is, in fact, more than capable just so long as the one using it is also capable (and you can be!). Excuses get in the way, but you don’t have to let them. That’s the message of this article.

Camera Makers are Trading Image Quality for Speed — Should Fujifilm join them?

Posted on August 7, 2024 by Ritchie Roesch

PetaPixel published an interesting article today entitled Camera Makers Are Increasingly Happy to Trade Image Quality for Other Benefits by Jaron Schneider. I found it fascinating, particularly in light of my Let’s talk Fujifilm AF article that I published a little over a week ago. When I typed that post, I hadn’t considered that there might be an actual cost to image quality in order to produce blazing fast cameras with extraordinarily exceptional autofocus.

In my article, I said, “Fujifilm’s autofocus is very good—fantastic, actually. However, Sony and Canon (and arguably Nikon) have a bit more fantastic autofocus system than Fujifilm (as you’d expect). I really don’t understand the complaints about Fujifilm’s autofocus. It is like complaining that a Corvette isn’t a Maserati, and calling the Corvette garbage because it isn’t more like a Maserati. If you want a Maserati, buy a Maserati! Otherwise, appreciate that you have a Corvette.”

*Corvette Abstract* – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-H1 – Mystery Chrome Recipe

PetaPixel’s article essential states that the big three camera makers—Canon, Nikon, and Sony (a.k.a. Canikony)—are chasing faster camera processing, improved autofocus, and increased video specs at the expense of pure image quality. It might be that they’re so focused (pun intended) on those things that improving image quality for still photographs just isn’t a priority, so it remains stagnate from one model to the next. Perhaps they simply feel that image quality has neared the ceiling for the current tech, so there’s no need to push things further. On the other hand, the tech they’re using in some cameras to achieve speed plus autofocus and video specs is actually detrimental to image quality, particularly for dynamic range and high-ISO noise.

I’ve never even been inside of a Maserati or Corvette, but perhaps the Corvette, while not as fast or agile as the Maserati, offers a more comfortable ride for significantly less money, while still delivering a thrill. No camera is perfect, and each has advantages and disadvantages—what I can say for certain is that I’d choose a “Corvette” camera over a “Maserati” any day of the week. And I’m glad that Fujifilm is not compromising still image quality in pursuit of speed and specs. Jaron wrote, “One company that is finding its products suddenly becoming more compelling because of this: Fujifilm.”

I hope that Fujifilm doesn’t cave in to the negativity by some who would prefer that they simply become a part of the Canikony brands (Canikonyfilm?). In my opinion, Fujifilm should continue to blaze their own trail, and not concern themselves too much with what the other brands are doing. They need to continue to produce compelling cameras—trendworthy and timeless products—and do more to communicate with potential customers why their unique approach is desirable and maybe even preferable.

I really don’t want Fujifilm to pursue a path that leads to reduced image quality. Those who appreciate image quality above technical specs and extreme performance will turn to—and have already been turning to—Fujifilm as the Canikony brands ignore them. Those who prefer speed and specs above all else have three brands to choose from—for certain those things sell cameras (or else they wouldn’t be doing it), but those who actually need it are a very small percentage of the total customers. Most of those who buy those cameras do so because of marketing or hype or FOMO; however, they don’t need a “Maserati” by any stretch, and would be quite happy with a “Corvette” instead.

What is your opinion? Should Fujifilm give up some image quality in order to make faster cameras like Canon, Nikon, and Sony have been doing? Or should Fujifilm work more towards improvements in image quality instead? Comment below with your opinions!

Let’s talk Fujifilm AF

Posted on July 29, 2024 by Ritchie Roesch

There have been a lot of vocal complaints recently about Fujifilm’s autofocus. I cannot tell you how many times I’ve seen people online call it “garbage” or “bad” or some other negative term. Every once in awhile a person will comment on Fuji X Weekly with a similar sentiment; however, it’s vocalized a lot less here than elsewhere, it seems. This is a controversy that I’ve tried to steer clear of—people have strong opinions about this topic, and I believe that my take is not going to be well received by those with the strong opinions. But I feel someone needs to say something, so I will.

First, let’s begin with this important perspective: no camera is perfect. Each and every model, no matter the manufacturer, has advantages and disadvantages. No Sony, Canon, Nikon, Fujifilm, etc., etc., will ever be perfect, because each and every person has different wants and needs. Someone will desire a camera that’s especially compact, while someone else will want one with a large grip. The first person would likely greatly dislike a Canon EOS R1, and the second person would likely greatly dislike a Nikon Zfc; however, the first person might like the Zfc and the second person might like the R1. The first person might like a Ricoh GR III significantly more than the Zfc, and the second person might like a Fujifilm GFX100 II a little more than the R1. For the first person, the GR III might be the most perfect camera currently available, while for the second person, the GFX100 II might be. Now realize that there are 10,000 or more various takes on what is or isn’t the “best” camera, and those opinions are likely fluid and evolving.

*Fujifilm X-T30* *— Fujichrome Sensia 100*

Second, let’s not forget that photography has been around for a very long time. It didn’t begin two, five, or ten years ago. People have been capturing amazing photographs for well over 100 years. If you were to grab a Fujifilm X-T5, jump into a DeLorean, and travel back in time just 20 years, you’d blow away the photographers of that time with what would seem like to them impossible camera technology. Yet the photographs captured today are no more impressive than than they were then. Camera gear has advanced tremendously over the last two decades, but the great photographs from today are no more great than they were 30, 40, 50, etc., etc., years ago.

If you disagree with the complaints, a common rebuttal that people will make regarding this topic is that “you must only photograph things that don’t move.” Interestingly, if you Google search photos of the Olympic games from the ’60’s or ’70’s, you can find some really amazing sports images captured well before autofocus was even invented. You can do the same with wildlife photography. They did this on equipment that was far less advanced and sophisticated than what exists today. If they could do it with the gear they had, why can’t you with the gear that you have? (Hint: it’s not the gear, and never has been).

Third, Fujifilm’s autofocus should not be expected to have the same level of performance as pretty much any other camera maker. Both Canon and Nikon’s first autofocus SLRs were released in 1986. Konica made the very first autofocus camera back in the 1970’s, and Minolta made the first “good” autofocus camera in 1985 (Sony cameras trace their heritage to both Konica and Minolta). Fujifilm has been making autofocus cameras for a much shorter time; Fujifilm also has had less R&D money to spend in-general than the Canikony brands. Anyone who expects that Fujifilm’s autofocus would be at the same level as those brands (who had a big head start and more money to spend) hasn’t put much thought into this. Even so, Fujifilm isn’t all that far behind Sony and Canon, and is arguably on par with Nikon. I have a Canon EOS 5DS R, Sony A7 IV, and Nikon Zfc (and have owned other cameras from those brands in the past), and I haven’t personally noticed any difference in autofocus performance between any of those cameras in my photography.

Fujifilm’s autofocus is very good—fantastic, actually. However, Sony and Canon (and arguably Nikon) have a bit more fantastic autofocus system than Fujifilm (as you’d expect). I really don’t understand the complaints about Fujifilm’s autofocus. It is like complaining that a Corvette isn’t a Maserati, and calling the Corvette garbage because it isn’t more like a Maserati. If you want a Maserati, buy a Maserati! Otherwise, appreciate that you have a Corvette.

The fact is that autofocus is a crutch, and I don’t mean that in a bad way. A lot of tech is a crutch, which can make things easier for you—they can oftentimes be quite helpful. I almost always use crutches of some sort in my photography, and I suspect that most other people do as well. But like any crutch, you don’t need it, or, at the least, you can learn how to make it work for you. Someone told me a long time ago that either you control your camera or your camera controls you. That has to be much more true today than when it was told to me. Whatever subject that you are photographing, people have been capturing amazing pictures in that genre for longer than you’ve been alive and with gear much less advanced and “capable” than yours. If they could do it, so can you. Your gear is only a liability if you allow it be—if it is a liability to you, you have the power to not allow it (control your camera vs it controlling you). The gear has never been the issue, but it’s a lot easier to blame the gear than to look inward. It’s important to remember that whatever you are photographing, there are people in that same genre using Fujifilm gear with much success. The gear isn’t a problem for them, so why is it for you?

Which brings us to your choice. If you own a Fujifilm camera and are dissatisfied with the autofocus, you have three options: 1) figure out how to make it work for you (you absolutely have the power to do this), 2) find a different camera that has better autofocus (a more sophisticated crutch), or 3) do neither, and just complain about it and be miserable. I can’t think of any other options, so those are your choices.

The complaints about Fujifilm’s autofocus have really only been over the last couple of years. Yes, there have been discussions about it since the original X100 back in 2011; however, I’ve seen a sharp increase in the complaints over just the last couple of years, and especially over the last year. I believe what accounts for this is people coming to Fujifilm from Canikony brands (especially Canon and Sony), and being dissatisfied with the autofocus of Fujifilm compared to the cameras that they previously had (my question is: why did they leave their previous brand if it was so good??). Fujifilm’s autofocus is not quite as advanced as Sony’s or Canon’s, but that should be expected (as was already outlined), and it doesn’t mean that Fujifilm’s is garbage or bad, only that the photographer needs to rely just a bit more on their own personal skills to compensate for the slightly diminished crutch.

It is true that I’m neither a sports nor wildlife photographer—I’ve dabbled in both at times, but those are not my main photographic interests by any stretch. I do have kids, and have captured a ton of successful pictures of them, as well as many other moving subjects. I don’t personally have any issues with Fujifilm’s autofocus—not even on the older models, which have far less sophisticated autofocus capabilities than the latest fifth-generation cameras. With that said, your photographic wants and needs might be different than mine, which brings us right back to the start: no camera is perfect, and each has advantages and disadvantages. If you don’t feel that a certain one is “right” for you, you have a lot of options. If you feel like the camera is controlling you (and not the other way around), I wholeheartedly believe that you have it within you to take control of your photography.

TTArtisan 35mm F/1.8 Autofocus for Fujifilm X-Mount

Posted on November 20, 2023 by Ritchie Roesch

Back in early-August, Pergear reached out to me and asked if I’d be interested in testing out an upcoming lens. I said sure, agreeing to provide feedback and keep quiet about the lens until it was announced sometime in the future. Two weeks later a box arrived at my door containing a TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 Autofocus lens. I eagerly attached it to my Fujifilm X-T5 and put it to use!

Before I go any further, I want to state a few important notes. To start, this is the first time that I’ve ever been given a chance to try out and provide feedback for a piece of unreleased camera gear. Heck, I’ve barely been offered gear that’s already been available! This was such a big honor, and I appreciate the opportunity given to me by Pergear. I hope it’s not the last time, or that it’s limited to just one manufacturer (Fujifilm: hint, hint). Second, my copy of the TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF was a preproduction model. They told me that the production version would have a slight tweak to the mount (which, for my copy, is X-mount, if that wasn’t obvious), but the optics and functionality would be identical; however, I have some notes (and an apology) about this in just a moment. Third, I wasn’t given any technical information until after I’d finished writing this review, so I had to edit that information in as best as I could.

*Fujifilm X-T5 + TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/9 + Kodak Portra 400 v2 Recipe*

The TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF competes directly with the Fujinon XC 35mm f/2 lens, which is the budget version of the XF 35mm f/2. Those two Fujinon lenses are, as far as I understand, optically identical, but the cheaper XC version lacks an aperture ring and weather-sealing. Going head-to-head with such a high-image-quality-yet-still-very-affordable lens seems a bit risky. Clearly, if money is no concern, one will opt for the $400 XF version (which is both smaller and better-looking); however, those on a tight budget now have two lenses to consider: the $200 Fujinon XC 35mm f/2 or the $149 TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF. At $280, the Viltrox 33mm f/1.4 AF could also be mentioned. Plus there are a number of manual focus options, including the TTArtisan 35mm f/1.4, TTArtisan 35mm f/0.95, and Meike 35mm f/1.7, which I compared side-by-side in Sedona earlier this year.

From a pure technical image-quality perspective, the Fujinon options are significantly superior. The TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF lens has some corner softness when wide-open, as well as vignetting. Across the entire frame, the TTArtisan is noticeably less crisp at f/1.8 than the Fujinon is at f/2. Once you stop down, things quickly improve, and the TTArtisan is quite excellent (and comparable to the Fujinon) from around f/5 or so and beyond, with nothing negative to report. There are 10 elements in 8 groups, with 9 aperture blades. The minimum focus distance is about two feet, which is so-so. The lens seems to be well built, with more metal than plastic. The filter thread size is 52mm. Of course, photography is art, and character in real-world use can be much more important than test charts and spec sheets, so we’ll move right along.

Thankfully, the TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF has excellent character, especially when a bright light source is just outside of the frame. I cannot tell you strongly enough how much I love how this lens flares! However, this is where I need to apologize. You see, I told Pergear that I really love the flare produced by this lens—especially the multiple rainbow flare—and showed them some examples of it, but their response was not what I expected: they didn’t think that most of their customers would appreciate it, so steps would be taken to reduce it. I reached out to them a few weeks later to inquire what was changed to reduce the flare, and they simply replied that TTArtisan reduced the flare, but did not change any of the optics or coatings. So I don’t know what’s different between my preproduction version and the final version that’s now for sale, but apparently there is a difference, and my copy is more prone to the absolutely wonderful flare, and yours less so to some extent, if at all. I pleaded with them not to make this change, but to no avail. I hope that whatever they did change has a minimal impact on flaring, but I have no idea. The lens comes with a square lens hood (mine did not), and maybe that was their solution; I’d definitely try the lens without the hood and see what you get.

The TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF doesn’t have an aperture ring. This might or might not be a big deal to you, but it is to me. In my opinion, all lenses for Fujifilm X cameras should have an aperture ring, because it’s such an integral part of the experience for the majority of Fujifilm models. However, I do understand that not everyone feels the same as I do, and that many third-party lenses are available for other systems where aperture rings are less common or essential. I told Pergear that if this lens was offered with an aperture ring, I’d definitely buy it. I hope that TTArtisan makes an aperture ring version at some point in the future. I don’t know how much that would cost, but I think $250 would be a fair price for such a lens. The minimum aperture is f/1.8 and the maximum is f/16, with 1/3 intermediate stops in-between the full stops (except for in-between f/11 and f/16, where it has only a single 1/3-stop before jumping 2/3-stop to f/16); however, you must use the command dial to adjust the aperture, which isn’t my preference. That makes the use of this lens more frustrating (and, in turn, less fun) than it should be.

*Fujifilm X-T5 + TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/2.5 + Reala Ace Recipe*

There’s one issue that I want to mention cautiously, and that you must take with a big grain of salt. While the autofocus was quiet, I experienced a lot of focus-hunting and misses with the TTArtisan lens, much more than any other glass I own. My guess is that this is due to it being a preproduction model (an early one at that), and I assume that the firmware on the production version has rectified this problem; however, I cannot verify one way or the other. It’s important for me to point this out just in case it is an issue, but I hope it’s not. Most likely it’s no issue. It’s common for preproduction versions of gear to have problems that are partially or fully resolved by the time they’re released. It’s probably only a problem on my copy, which was an early model, and those being sold today have fast and accurate autofocusing, but I cannot state that with certainty. A side note is that the firmware for this lens is updated via a USB connection in the rear lens cap, but apparently requires a Windows operating system.

Is the TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 lens worth buying? Despite no aperture ring and the autofocus woes of my preproduction copy, this has been my most-used lens since it arrived at my doorstep. I have used it on both my Fujifilm X-E4 and X-T5, but mostly on the X-T5. I love the character that this lens gives to my pictures. I have shared some of these images on Fuji X Weekly and on my Instagram page, and I’ve had a lot of people inquire about the lens I used (much more than usual), and I had to respond with “I can’t tell you yet” (because I agreed not to talk about it). The way this lens renders seems to pair especially well with Fujifilm’s excellent JPEG output and my Film Simulation Recipes. It’s highly desirable. In my opinion, this lens is well worth the small price-tag. With that said, I would much prefer an aperture ring, and I want the lens flare that my copy produces, which might be different than the one they’re currently selling. I hope that TTArtisan will someday offer such a version.

*Fujifilm X-T5 + TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/5 + Reala Ace Recipe*

Pergear asked that I not show some of the pictures in this article that have the rainbow lens flare, which might not be so pronounced (if produced at all) on the final version. Some of my absolute favorite photographs captured with the TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF lens have this flare. I have so many examples of it, I could have shown it in every picture. Instead, I only included a handful of those images, with the hopes that TTArtisan will realize that this unique characteristic is desirable. If you agree, please leave a comment below saying so.

This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.

TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF:  Amazon
Fujifilm X-T5 in black:  Amazon  B&H  Moment
Fujifilm X-T5 in silver:  Amazon  B&H  Moment

Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs captured using my preproduction version of the TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF lens on my Fujifilm X-T5:

*Fujifilm X-T5 & TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @f/11 + Vibrant Velvia Recipe*

*Fujifilm X-T5 & TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/13 +* *The Rockwell Recipe*

*Fujifilm X-T5 & TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/9 + The Rockwell Recipe*

*Fujifilm X-T5 & TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/8 + The Rockwell Recipe*

*Fujifilm X-T5 & TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/8 + Summer of 1960 Recipe*

*Fujifilm X-T5 & TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/5 + Kodak Gold 200 Recipe*

*Fujifilm X-T5 & TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/11 + Reala Ace Recipe*

*Fujifilm X-T5 & TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/7.1 + Fujicolor Reala 100 Recipe*

*Fujifilm X-T5 & TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/5.6 + Fujicolor Reala 100 Recipe*

*Fujifilm X-T5 & TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/1.8 + Fujicolor NPS 160 Pulled Recipe*

*Fujifilm X-T5 & TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/5 + Fujicolor Reala 100 Recipe*

*Fujifilm X-T5 & TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/1.8 + Reala Ace Recipe*

*Fujifilm X-T5 & TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/5 + Fujicolor Super HG v2 Recipe*

*Fujifilm X-T5 & TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/4 + Kodak Gold 200 Recipe*

*Fujifilm X-T5 & TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/2.8 + Reala Ace Recipe*

*Fujifilm X-T5 & TTArtisan 35mm f/1.8 AF @ f/4.5 + Emulsion ’86 Recipe*

Is Fujifilm’s Autofocus Any Good?

Posted on November 25, 2019 by Ritchie Roesch

Captured with a Fujifilm X-T30.

Fujifilm’s autofocus is inferior, apparently. There’s been a buzz on the web lately about autofocus. There have been several tests recently comparing the autofocus capabilities of different camera brands and models, and Fujifilm hasn’t come out on top, and sometimes they’ve come in last place. There’s been a lot of negativity towards Fujifilm in response to these articles, and I want to talk about that.

I have no problem whatsoever with these articles. There’s always something, no matter how hard one tries, that someone points out as unfair in these type of tests. It’s the nature of it, and it’s nearly impossible to be completely fair and unbiased. There’s always something that you didn’t consider, there’s always an apples-to-oranges situation, and somebody will undoubtably point it out. I think it’s important to understand this, as taking these types of articles with a small grain of salt will alleviate some of the frustration that comes with them. In other words, don’t take them as gospel, even though they mean well and might contain useful information.

When I started out in photography, autofocus existed, but many cameras (mine included) didn’t have it, and autofocus wasn’t very good on those cameras that did have it. The best autofocus systems of 20 years ago are embarrassing when compared to those found today. That’s not surprising as technology advances quickly. The best autofocus systems of 10 years ago aren’t as good as the “worst” found in any of those cameras that were recently tested. Sony, Canon, Nikon or Fujifilm, it doesn’t matter which one “wins” and which one is rated last, as they are all great! No one could imagine 20 years ago that autofocus would become as good as it is today, and the autofocus found on “pro” cameras 10 years ago aren’t as good as some “entry level” cameras today. Context is key.

Captured with a Fujifilm X100F.

It’s easy to get caught up in the results of autofocus tests, but the reality is that it doesn’t matter in practical use. Just because one camera did slightly better than another doesn’t mean that you’ll “get the shot” with one camera and not another. You’ll either get it with both or you’ll miss it with both, because the skill and vision of the photographer is far more important than the technical capabilities of the camera in hand, especially when the differences are so narrow. Cameras are tools, and one tool might work a little better for you than another, but they’ll all capable of getting the job done just so long as the photographer is also capable. One camera over another won’t make you a better photographer.

I don’t doubt that Sony’s autofocus is superior to Fujifilm’s. They’ve been working at it a heck of a lot longer, so they should be. What I argue is that it doesn’t matter, or if it does matter, it matters very, very little. Those saying that Fujifilm desperately needs to “catch up” or else are speaking hyperbole. A lot of the reactions I have seen have been overreactions. Instead of celebrating just how far autofocus has improved, people seem to be far more concerned about being ranked number one. Trust me on this: it doesn’t matter one bit. Fujifilm has made significant progress, and they’re continuing to do so. Autofocus on X-Trans II cameras is plenty quick and capable for most people and circumstances, yet it doesn’t compare to X-Trans IV. There comes a point where the improvements are more “gee whiz” than anything practical. It’s great for the marketing department, but is it something you’ll even notice? Will it really make a difference to your photography?

To answer the question in the title of this article, Fujifilm’s autofocus is indeed good. Very good, in fact! It’s more than capable, just as long as you are as well. So don’t worry so much where Fujifilm (or any brand) ranks compared to another in some test. It’s not important. Creating art is important, and you can use any camera to do that.