I wasn’t wrong about everything, actually. The Zfc is indeed surprisingly large and heavy—since it’s large and heavy it should have a grip, but it doesn’t. The camera feels too plasticky. It has an unnecessary PASM switch. The Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 lens that it came with is pretty pedestrian—plus it doesn’t have an aperture ring (none of Nikon’s Z lenses do, unfortunately). The Zfc is a little overpriced. It’s a camera that is easy to be disappointed with, and I believe a missed opportunity for Nikon. I was right about all of that.
Where did I get the Zfc wrong? How I was using it. This is a camera that begs to be used with a manual third-party (or vintage) lens, and with the PASM switch set to M. Forget that crummy Nikkor lens! Buy a cheap “nifty fifity” from China instead. Then use the Zfc as an all-manual camera. Viola! It suddenly makes sense!
Nikon Zfc + TTArtisan 35mm f/1.4
I purchased a TTArtisans 35mm f/1.4 for about $85 (stay tuned for a full review), and I’m much happier with it than the 28mm f/2.8. It has nothing to do with the focal length of the Nikkor lens or its maximum aperture. My favorite Fujinon lens is the 27mm f/2.8—that Fujifilm pancake is great! The Nikon version is not. The TTArtisans lens is much better than the Nikon lens that came with Zfc—it’s both optically superior and has more character. More importantly, though, it has an aperture ring.
Using the Zfc in full-manual without an aperture ring just doesn’t make sense. Using the Zfc in Aperture-Priority without an aperture ring doesn’t make sense, either. Using an aperture-ring-lens on a PASM camera isn’t particularly natural in my opinion, unless you set it to M and treat it like an old-school film camera—that’s what I did with my Zfc! It works on this camera only because it has shutter and ISO knobs—I control the exposure triangle with physical controls.
Nikon Zfc + TTArtisan 35mm f/1.4
This! This is how to use the Nikon Zfc—the right way—all manual. No auto anything. The Zfc is unique in that, even though it has PASM, it also has physical controls that are activated by being in the correct mode (in this case, manual mode). When you do this, the shooting experience is similar to manually shooting with a Fujifilm X camera—this is the closest to the traditional Fujifilm experience that I have found outside of using a Fujifilm camera. If you don’t mind attaching a non-Nikkor lens and shooting full-manual, the Zfc is actually an alright camera. Yes, it’s still short of what it could have and should have been, but at least I found how I can enjoy using it.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
After the announcement of the Fujifilm X-H2S, which has a PASM dial instead of the traditional dials of the X-H1, many people asked, “Is Fujifilm losing its soul?” I’ve had a number of Fujifilm photographers tell me that they believe so, and some have inquired if I believe so, too. What’s my opinion? Is Fujifilm indeed losing its soul?
Fujifilm has already lost its soul. It’s done gone. Elvis left the building awhile ago. The design decisions during development of the X-H2S are simply the manifestation of that lost soul.
What was this “soul” that Fujifilm lost? How can a company even have a soul?
A whole book could be written on this topic, but to summarize in a short sentence, Fujifilm’s philosophy for their X-series cameras was analog-inspired innovations with a focus on the photographer’s experience (both while using the camera for photography, and as customers of the brand). This was their soul. That philosophy, which seemed to be clearly understood, is what drove the camera department of the company (remember, Fujifilm’s main business is not photography nowadays). From the design decisions to the Kaizen firmware updates and everything in-between, this philosophy oozed out—it was both obvious and attractive, and is why Fujifilm was suddenly successful, quickly overtaking other brands, including iconic Nikon.
Fujifilm didn’t need to have a photography department at all, but they decided that, even if it was a bust, they’d still fund it and keep it going, because photography had been such an important part of their company’s heritage, and had been an important aspect of Japanese culture. They were merely the caretakers of this thing that was bigger than themselves. That’s how they looked at it, anyway, and it was noticeable and refreshing.
Somewhere along the line, however, Fujifilm began to view this differently. The photography division needed to be built bigger. It must grow. It must become more profitable. It must gain more marketshare. It must become as big as—or bigger than—Canon and Sony. I think there are actually two competing sides within Fujifilm (and maybe this battle has been taking place for awhile now): one is profit-first driven, and the other is nurture-first driven. The side I would like to see win is the latter, but the side that seems to be winning is the former.
Where this lost-soul has most obviously manifested itself is Kaizen, or the lack of it. This is a word that I hadn’t heard of until I owned a Fujifilm camera. It’s something that attracted a lot of people to the brand. It means continuous improvement—making something better over time, even though it was already purchased. Why? Part of it is duty (what you are supposed to do), and another part of it is that it creates loyalty, because it shows the customer that you care about them, and not just their money. That care will cause the customer to overlook shortcomings, because the caring is more important to them in the whole scheme of things. And long-term loyalty is more valuable to the company than short-term gains. I don’t know the exact timeline of when Fujifilm stopped caring (or, more accurately, began caring less about their customers in favor of caring more about profits), but it seems to be during the development of X-Trans IV. That’s when the profit-first people seemed to first get an upper hand on the nurture-first people. I don’t know for sure, though. What I am confident in is that, as X-Trans V rolls out, the profit-first philosophy is the current mantra of Fujifilm’s photography division—it’s Fujifilm’s current soul, unfortunately.
Am I overreacting? After all, the X-H2S is just one camera, right? There are two points that I’d like to make. First, Fujifilm removed the traditional dials on the X-H line in favor of PASM. For Fujifilm, PASM cameras are intended to attract new customers who are not interested in or are otherwise intimated by the traditional controls of their other X models. They don’t put PASM on cameras that they intend to market to their current customer base. The X-H2S is their top-of-the-line “flagship” model, the first X-Trans V… and it’s not for you. It was never intended for you. Screw you! It’s for them. Those guys with their Sonys and Canons, that’s who it’s for. We give our best to them. Our current customers who have been so loyal over the years will have to be happy with the crumbs that fall from the table. Second, X-Trans V is rolling out, while the X-T3 (their all-time top-selling model) and X-T30 are still on an island, and the X-Pro3 and X100V (premium models) don’t have as good of JPEG features as the X-S10, X-E4, and X-T30 II (mid or lower tier models). That’s shameful, in my opinion. Take care of your current customers first before working so hard to bring in new customers. Fujifilm is making their customer base less loyal, which will only hurt them in the long run. Nurture first.
If you build it, they will come. Fujifilm built it and they came; however, not enough for the profit-first people. They want more, but they’re barking up the wrong tree. Instead of becoming Sony in order to attract current Sony users who are unhappy with their gear (how does this makes sense to anyone?), Fujifilm should double-down on what makes them unique. What’s special about Fujifilm? Analog-inspired innovation and the photographer’s experience—that’s what’s special, or at least it used to be. There’s one other thing that’s unique, and that’s community. Fujifilm didn’t build it—instead it was built around them; however, they have not done nearly enough to embrace it and engage it. In fact, at times they’ve been standoffish to it. That needs to end, because community is Fujifilm’s greatest asset, yet they seem unsure of how to engage it, so they do so halfheartedly and from a “safe” distance.
I didn’t mean to write a negative article. When I sat down at the computer, I had no intention of typing out this post; however, it’s something that has been circling inside my mind for a few weeks now, so I suppose that it was inevitable. I really hope that it doesn’t make you feel angry towards Fujifilm. This article’s aim is to, on the off chance that this is actually read by Fujifilm, inspire reflection and perhaps even change, and secondarily put into words something that maybe you have felt but weren’t sure how to express. Perhaps this is somehow therapeutic. For me it feels good to say, even though it is negative, and I hope that getting it out in the open will somehow produce something positive.
Fujifilm just discounted the X-T3 WW, which is an X-T3 without a battery charger (USB charging only). The X-T3 used to be Fujifilm’s flagship model until the X-T4 was released two years ago, but they still offer it brand-new because it is a best-selling model, even outselling the superior X-T4. The X-T3 WW is one of the absolute best bargains available today, but now (through June 5th, apparently) the X-T3 WW is an even better bargain! If you’ve thought about buying one, it’s a really good time to do so.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
The Fujifilm X-T3 WW body-only is $100 off, now only $999.95! AmazonB&H The Fujifilm X-T3 WW + 18-55mm kit is $200 off, now only $1,299.95! AmazonB&H
A few months back I published an article, Best Fujifilm Cameras Under $1,000, and the X-T3 WW was listed as “Best Value Just Above $1,000,” but now that it’s on sale it would be my best value recommendation for $1,000 or less. The X-T3 also made it to number three on my 10 Most Important Fujifilm X-Trans Cameraslist.
Since I have three apps now—Fuji X Weekly, Ricoh Recipes, and RitchieCam—I’ve been asked by several people for advice on app development. I’ve also been meaning to discuss some of the things I’ve learned, because it’s interesting, and maybe it’s useful information to a few of you. I’ve hesitated to write this as it might seem like a boring topic—perhaps even controversial or offensive at times—and unrelated to Fujifilm, but I truly hope that by the end there’ll be something for you. I write from real-world experience, but I’ve also researched this fairly extensively over the last year-and-a-half (including reading several books on the topics), so I’m not making this stuff up.
I have received a lot of criticism over the pricing structure of my apps. There are three options: free, freemium (the app is free, but there’s a fee for some features), and premium (not free). Within freemium and premium are three options: one-time fee (to unlock everything), à la carte fees (pay individually for this or that), and subscriptions (reoccurring monthly or annually).
One-time fees used to be the most common, but are much less so now. Why? Apps used to be popular for a season, then the next trend would make them irrelevant, so the life cycle of apps was typically pretty short, usually two years or less. Nowadays apps have a much longer lifespan—often a decade or even indefinitely—so the one-time fee model makes no sense. You wouldn’t buy a vacuum cleaner and expect it to be up-kept and improved upon by the manufacturer for years to come—not without additional fees, anyway—but people expect that from apps and software. Apps that use this model are abandoned as soon as new customers become less frequent. There are numerous apps in the Google Play Store and Apple App Store right now that succumbed to this fate. In my research I came across countless apps that hadn’t been updated in years, where the most recent review was two years old, and it was begging the developer to update the out-of-date app. This model is good for short-term projects, but is not good if you want an app to be around for years and years to come, because as soon as the financial motivation dries up, the app is neglected and abandoned.
The apps that use à la carte fees are often gaming and dating apps. You pay to unlock something, such as a level redo, puzzle hint, or something like that. This can be affective, but you have to be careful because if not done tastefully it can come across as scammy. People don’t like paying “hidden” fees around every corner.
So that leaves us with the subscription model, which is a win-win, and allows the app to continuously improve into something greater over time. This is best-case for the developer because it ensures continuous resources, and best-case for the customer because it ensures the app will improve regularly over time and not be left abandoned. More and more apps are going this route, and it is now the most common model. It’s all rainbows and roses except for one thing: many people don’t like subscriptions in general, and some people passionately oppose it with all their heart, as if it were some great evil.
Premium apps are good if you can get the word out. It can be tough to gain traction, because most people don’t want to pay for things, so they won’t buy it. That’s why freemium is often preferred. Here’s the thing, though: 95% of people will use the app for free, and only 5% will subscribe—it’s actually more like 8% on Apple and 2% on Android (yes, this is true!). Apple users are much more likely to spend money on apps than Android, but either way we’re still talking about small percentages. That also means that 95% of people will pass on premium apps. With freemium, for 95 people who are using it for free, they’ll tell others, which will lead to 20 new users, and one of those will subscribe. That’s why a lot of developers choose freemium over premium—it’s a little easier to gain the traction you need to be successful.
Now let’s talk about free apps, or even the “free” aspect of most freemium apps. There are two sayings: there’s no such thing as a free lunch, and if you aren’t the customer than you are the product. Both are true. In addition to all of the time I put into creating, maintaining, and improving apps, there’s a real cost that I pay out of pocket. In fact, each time one of my apps is opened on your phone, I am charged an extraordinarily small fee, which does add up. Just because you are not paying, doesn’t mean someone else isn’t paying on your behalf. That lunch might be free to you, but it isn’t free.
If you aren’t willing to be the customer, app developers turn you into the product. They sell you ads or—much worse—sell your data. Ads are annoying, but a lot of people are willing to put up with them in exchange for something being free. For app developers, unless you have millions of users, ad revenue doesn’t add up into anything more than pocket change. The real money is in data harvesting. Companies want to serve personalized ads that are highly affective, and they need to know everything about you in order to do this. It’s a multi-billion dollar industry because it works, and, because of this, you unknowingly spend much more than the cost of an app subscription. That’s the cost of being the product.
Here’s the creepy part. If I were to harvest data with, say, the RitchieCam app, I could know so much about you. If I have access to your GPS, I could know where you live, and, comparing that with Zillow, I could know more-or-less how affluent you are. I could track where you work, and, referencing Google maps, could know what industry you are in. I could know where you shop. I could know where you eat out at. I could know where your kids go to school. Since I have access to your camera and library, I could deduce the size of your family, your family’s genders, who your friends are, if you have pets, I could read the text on your screenshots. I could do all of this and so much more. Rest assured that I do not collect or sell any data whatsoever, which isn’t particularly common, because I’m leaving money on the table. Most free and freemium apps are indeed collecting and selling your data, because there’s no free lunch, so they’ve turned you into the product for profit.
What I have said might sound farfetched, but it isn’t. In fact, what I pointed out was really just the tip of the iceberg. You have apps on your phone right now—apps that you regularly use and trust—that go well beyond what I described in the previous paragraph. Have you ever talked about something out-loud and five minutes later see an ad for it? Ads are highly personalized and targeted because your apps know so much about you, and companies pay big bucks for that knowledge, because it means even bigger bucks—your bucks—become their profits.
Again, I want to make it clear that none of my apps collect or sell data. It’s to my own detriment that I do this, but I do it for you because you deserve it, and it’s the right thing to do, even if it is rare. On my apps, you are never, ever the product. I “pay for your lunch” for you if you are using the apps for free, and I happily do that.
You might be surprised to hear this, but I am told frequently that I do not give enough away for free. I am told that I am selfish and greedy because I have the audacity to charge “so much” for things. I am told that my approach is wrong. I am sorry if you feel that way, but I deserve something for my work, right? Trust me, I’m not rolling in the dough or becoming wealthy from this. I have enough to put food on the table, a roof over my head, and take trips sometimes (adventures are often more worthwhile investments than gear), but I couldn’t go out and purchase a GFX system right now. This is to say that the perception of my compensation is often exaggerated and misunderstood—I’m doing alright, but if I were indeed greedy and selfish I could be doing better. The accusations are hurtful because they’re untrue.
There’s a lot that can be debated on what exact paths are the best paths. I chose the freemium model after much research and advice from others with experience within the industry. Some might disagree with that decision. I chose not to turn those using the apps for free into products. Some would say that’s leaving money on the table, and everyone else is doing it anyway. I chose the subscription prices for a reason—I’ve received a lot of criticism from that, and many “Monday morning quarterbacks” tell me that I got it all wrong, although the books I’ve read and those I’ve spoken with within the industry tell me that I am where I should be (I “got it right” thanks to all the research that wen’t into the decisions to begin with, but there’s always different paths and varying philosophies). As Abraham Lincoln stated, “You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time.” In other words, nothing that I do will make everyone happy, but I hope that many people find my apps to be helpful and worthwhile tools. I hope that most of those who subscribe find it to be worth their money, and that they don’t feel ripped off or swindled—that they’re good values for what they deliver. Not all will feel that way, though, and that’s just the way it is.
For those wanting to create an app, you have to know that, no matter how much research you do, and no matter how much of your heart, soul, blood, sweat, and tears you pour into it, there are some who won’t like it and some who will criticize your decisions. Mean and hurtful things will be said about you. You can’t make everyone happy, and you have to know that and accept that, but if you do what you believe is right—especially if you’ve done extensive research—you’re going to make some people happy just for the fact that you did it. The tricky part is figuring out how to maximize happiness and minimize the dissatisfaction, while also being fair to yourself, because you deserve satisfaction and compensation for your time, money, and hard work that you poured into it. It’s definitely a difficult and precarious balancing act that has to be regularly analyzed and addressed, and perhaps adjusted if needed.
I know this lengthy article has nothing to do with the regular content of this website, but I hope it is helpful for a few of you, and that most of you got something out of it (even if it is simply awareness of what your apps are doing behind the scenes). I didn’t write this as any sort of complaint or “woe is me” statement, because I don’t mean it that way whatsoever. I am quite happy with what I’m doing, and I know that it is helpful to many of you—it is even having an impact on the photography continuum, something I never imagined would happen! I’m really honored and blessed to be a part of this. I’m extraordinarily flattered and humbled if I’ve impacted your photography in some small way. It really is my pleasure to do all that I do for the Fujifilm community. With all of that said, I think it is important to be authentic, which means being vulnerable, and sharing this information is one way to do that. Perhaps somehow this was a meaningful article for some of you, and maybe it was worth your time today to read, even if it wasn’t about Fujifilm cameras.
If you are searching for a good blue-hour and nighttime Film Simulation Recipe, this is one you should try! I used it recently in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, and Astoria, Oregon, and was impressed with the results. I invite you, if you will be photographing after dark anytime soon, to give this recipe a try—you’ll be glad that you did! I suspect that this will become a favorite recipe for some of you.
Night Statue – Jackson Hole, WY – Fujifilm X100V – “Serr’s 500T”
This recipe is compatible with the Fujifilm X-Pro3, X100V, X-T4, X-S10, X-E4, and X-T30 II cameras. For those with an X-T3 or X-T30, you can use this recipe but you’ll have to ignore Grain size and Color Chrome FX Blue—the results will be slightly different, but pretty close. Those with X-Trans III cameras will additionally have to ignore Color Chrome Effect. Because Clarity is set to 0 in this recipe, I used a 5% CineBloom filter on my X100V for these pictures—alternatively, you could set Clarity to -2 and get similar results.
Classic Chrome Dynamic Range: DR-Auto Highlight: -2 Shadow: -1 Color: -1 Noise Reduction: -2 Sharpness: -1 Clarity: 0 Grain Effect: Strong, Large Color Chrome Effect: Strong Color Chrome Effect Blue: Strong White Balance: 3200K, -1 Red & +4 Blue ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400 Exposure Compensation: -1/3 to +1/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs using “Serr’s 500T” Film Simulation Recipe on my Fujifilm X100V:
Dairy Maid – Warrenton, OR – Fujifilm X100V
Cold Nights – Jackson Hole, WY – Fujifilm X100V
Magic Fork – Astoria, OR – Fujifilm X100V
Salmon – Astoria, OR – Fujifilm X100V
Walking Tadziu – Jackson Hole, WY – Fujifilm X100V
I was asked to recreate the aesthetic from a frame of a classic movie. I don’t know which movie, but only that it was shot on “Eastmancolor” film, which is a brandname for many different motion picture films and processes going back to the 1950’s. In fact, Eastmancolor Negative, better known as ECN, is still the development process used for today’s motion picture film. It’s unknown which film was used for the frame I was shown, but I did my best to recreate it on a Fujifilm X-Pro3.
After using these settings for several days, I decided that it really reminds me of old Ektachrome color reversal film, perhaps from the 1970’s. Ektachrome was known for fading rather quickly, with some color shifts if not stored well. Aside from some faded slides from my grandparents, most of the Ektachrome I’ve seen from this era have been in classic photography magazines. I don’t know how faithfully this recipe mimics old Ektachrome film, but it definitely has the right “memory color” for me. I hope that you like it, too.
Abandoned Ferris Wheel – Salt Lake City, UT – Fujifilm X-Pro3 – “Old Ektachrome”
This “Old Ektachrome” film simulation recipe is compatible with the Fujifilm X-Pro3, X100V, X-T4, X-S10, X-E4, and X-T30 II cameras. This recipe isn’t compatible with the X-T3 or X-T30, but if you disregard Color Chrome FX Blue, disregard Grain size, and use a diffusion filter in lieu of Clarity, you’ll get similar results.
Classic Chrome Dynamic Range: DR400 Highlight: +2 Shadow: +1 Color: +3 Noise Reduction: -4 Sharpness: 0 Clarity: -4 Grain Effect: Strong, Large Color Chrome Effect: Strong Color Chrome Effect Blue: Weak White Balance: Daylight, +3 Red & +2 Blue ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400 Exposure Compensation: 0 to +2/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs using this “Old Ektachrome” film simulation recipe on a Fujifilm X-Pro3:
Blue Roof – Salt Lake City, UT – Fujifilm X-Pro3
Old Carnaval Ride – Salt Lake City, UT – Fujifilm X-Pro3
Too Late To Ride – Salt Lake City, UT – Fujifilm X-Pro3
Early Blossoms – Salt Lake City, UT – Fujifilm X-Pro3
Potted Plant – Salt Lake City, UT – Fujifilm X-Pro3
Desert Snow – Canyonlands NP, UT – Fujifilm X-Pro3
Rock & Half Arch – Arches NP, UT – Fujifilm X-Pro3
Cave & Juniper – Arches NP, UT – Fujifilm X-Pro3
Snow in the Desert – Arches NP, UT – Fujifilm X-Pro3
Sign Stickers – Canyonlands NP, UT – Fujifilm X-Pro3
Red Rock Tree – Canyonlands NP, UT – Fujifilm X-Pro3
View Through Mesa Arch – Canyonlands NP, UT – Fujifilm X-Pro3
Yesterday I published an article about the three Fujifilm X-Mount lenses that Sigma announced. These were already existing lenses within Sigma’s lineup, and they simply converted them for use on Fujifilm cameras. I stated that Sigma should have modified the lenses by adding aperture rings, because that is an important part of the Fujifilm experience. I also hinted (without downright stating) that Sigma should have filled holes in the Fujinon lineup, instead of going head-to-head with already existing lenses (hoping the cheaper price point is enough to entice potential customers). Yes, selling discount knockoffs (I don’t mean that to sound so harsh, because Sigma makes quality products) is one strategy, but I think offering something unique would be better.
With that in mind, I thought it would be a fun exercise to explore which Sigma lenses (that already exist) would fill holes in the Fujinon lineup. These are the lenses that Sigma should have released for Fujifilm X-mount, or maybe the lenses they should release next.
Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 Art
A high-quality mid-range zoom covering some very useful focal-lengths? A lens that is great for street, portrait, and travel? Heck, yeah! While Fujifilm offers a number of zooms covering all sorts of focal-lengths, they don’t have one quite like this.
Sigma 85mm f/1.4 Art
Fujifilm has a 90mm f/2, and an 80mm f/2.8, but they don’t have an 85mm lens or a telephoto lens longer than 56mm that has a maximum aperture larger than f/2. Seems like a winner to me.
Sigma 105mm f/2.8 Art
Fujifilm jumps from 90mm all the way to 200mm, and skips everything in-between. This would fill that gaping hole quite nicely.
Sigma 105mm f/1.4 Art
Or go crazy with the “bokeh master.” This is a full-frame lens, but it might pair well with the upcoming X-H2….
Sigma 45mm f/2.8 Contemporary
Fujifilm doesn’t offer a 45mm lens. 35mm? Yes. 50mm? Yes. But nothing in-between. Could be a nice “compromise” if you want both a 35mm and 50mm but can’t afford both.
Sigma 65mm f/2.8 Contemporary
Fujifilm has a 60mm lens, but if you want something just a bit longer, you have to jump to 80mm, which might be too long. Both the 60mm and 80mm lenses are macro, which can be nice, but they also have their challenges (lots of focus to scroll through), so a non-macro lens might be a good option.
Sigma 70mm f/2.8 Macro Art
This might be a good in-between lens if you can’t decide on the 60mm and 80mm macros.
In my opinion, this list is what Sigma should have used when deciding on which lenses to bring to Fujifilm. These make a lot more sense to me. What do you think? Do you prefer the three lenses Sigma announced, or would you prefer some of these instead? Which lenses should Sigma release on Fujifilm next?
Whatever Sigma does, I hope that they don’t just change the mount, but modify the lenses to fit the full Fujifilm experience. As it stands now, I have zero interest in any of these lenses, mainly because of the lack of aperture rings. What do you think? Should Sigma include an aperture ring, even if they have to raise the price a little to do so?
Sigma just announced three autofocus lenses for Fujifilm X-mount: 16mm f/1.4, 30mm f/1.4, and 56mm f/1.4. This is a big deal because 1) Sigma lenses are pretty darn good yet typically “affordable” and 2) it’s good to have options, which has been a little missing for Fujifilm photographers. These lenses can be pre-ordered and will ship in April.
I’m sitting here sipping my first cup of coffee, and already there has been plenty of press and early reviews published on these three lenses. What can I add that hasn’t already been said?
I’m glad that Sigma announced these lenses. I think it’s good. But I’m going to give you three quick reasons why you should not buy them. I’ll briefly explain why the similar Fujinon offerings are superior, and you should go with those instead.
First, there are no aperture rings on these Sigma lenses. Sigma literally took three already existing lenses for other mounts and made them compatible with X-mount. These lenses aren’t designed for the Fujifilm experience—they’re designed for Sony, in which you use a command wheel to adjust the aperture (yuck!). It is true that some Fujinon lenses work this same way, but most don’t. Most have an aperture ring, and that’s an important aspect of shooting Fujifilm. Sigma should have redesigned their lenses to include an aperture ring, but they didn’t, and I predict their X-mount lenses won’t sell as well because of this.
Second, behind the scenes, your Fujifilm camera is secretly fixing little flaws in the Fujinon glass. Fujifilm programmed their cameras to do this automatically, so you don’t know that there’s actually a little vignetting or chromatic aberrations or whatever else that doesn’t show in the pictures but is actually there if the camera wasn’t making this adjustment. Your camera won’t do this for third-party lenses. For the greatest optimization, stick with native glass.
Third, these three Sigma lenses are rather plain-looking. They don’t really match the retro-vibes of most Fujifilm X cameras because they look like modern lenses. Not all Fujinon lenses were modeled after vintage designs, but many of them were, and they match the stylings of the body much better than these Sigma offerings.
With all that said, there’s definitely a market for third-party autofocus lenses; however, they must offer something that Fujifilm doesn’t. It could be a focal-length and/or aperture. It could be quality. It could be speed. It could be size and/or weight. It could be price. What do these Sigma lenses offer that Fujifilm doesn’t? Let’s take a look.
Fujifilm offers a 16mm f/1.4 lens already—a high-quality, quick lens that’s smaller than the Sigma offering. The Sigma is less than half the price.
Fujifilm offers a 33mm f/1.4—a high-quality, quick lens that’s a similar size (and focal-length) to the Sigma offering. The Sigma is less than half the price.
Fujifilm offers a 56mm f/1.2—a high-quality, quick lens that’s a similar size to the Sigma offering (but larger maximum aperture). The Sigma is less than half the price.
Now you see why one would choose a Sigma lens over the Fujinon: to save some cash. They’re priced significantly cheaper while offering something similar. If you can afford it, the Fujinon lenses are better, but if not, this is a solid alternative that’s friendlier on the wallet. There are also lesser-expensive Fujinon options worth considering, which maybe don’t have the tech-sheet wow factor, but are otherwise fantastic lenses that you’re sure to be happy with.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Clearing Clouds Over Winter Ridge – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-Pro3 – “Standard Provia”
A couple days ago I published a new Film Simulation Recipe: Standard Provia. This recipe is the first in a new series, in which I attempt to customize each film simulation to optimize the aesthetic that Fujifilm intended—in other words, make a nice-looking recipe that is similar to yet better than the stock look of a film simulation. Provia is Fujifilm’s standard film simulation (that’s why they call it “Provia/Standard” and even abbreviate it “STD”), but it’s one of my least favorite. Sometimes, because I don’t get excited over it, I force myself to use Provia, hoping that it will improve my feelings about it.
The Provia film simulation doesn’t look like Provia film. In fact, it’s probably closer to Astia film, although it’s definitely not an exact match for that, either. There’s something that is “not right” about it to me, but I think it’s just my personal tastes. There are a lot of people who love the Provia film simulation and use it all of the time.
After I published my Standard Provia Film Simulation Recipe, I received feedback from several of you that I should have included a comparison with default Provia/Standard. So here it is! The Provia/Standard images have all of the parameters set to 0 or Off except for Noise Reduction, which is -4. Dynamic Range is DR200 and White Balance is Auto 0R & 0B. It’s basically factory Provia. These were all captured on a Fujifilm X-Pro3. Let’s take a look:
Move the bar left to reveal the default Provia/Standard image, and move it right to reveal the “Standard Provia” recipe image.
Move the bar left to reveal the default Provia/Standard image, and move it right to reveal the “Standard Provia” recipe image.
Move the bar left to reveal the default Provia/Standard image, and move it right to reveal the “Standard Provia” recipe image.
The most notable difference you might notice is that my recipe has less red, with a cooler/greener color cast that is more like typical of Fujicolor film. My recipe also has more contrast and saturation, and, in my opinion, looks better, as I find the default settings to be too flat. If you are looking for a “standard” recipe that utilizes Provia, I believe that my Standard Provia recipe is a good option.
What do you think? Do you like the default Provia/Standard settings better, or do you prefer my “Standard Provia” recipe? Let me know in the comments!
Fujifilm X-Trans is 10-years-old, and I thought it would be fun to list the 10 most important X-Trans models of all-time. The first X-series camera was the X100, but it had an EXR sensor, and not X-Trans. The first with the X-Trans sensor was the X-Pro1, which came out in 2012. I already wrote an article explaining the history of that camera, which you can read here. For this post, I’ll simply give my opinion on which X-Trans models were the most important.
Here we go!
10. Fujifilm X-E1
The Sexy One—I mean, X-E1—was the second X-Trans camera introduced by Fujifilm, and offered retro rangefinder styling in an affordable package. It had its problems (many that were fixed or improved by firmware updates), which hindered its commercial success, yet it is still a beloved camera 10 years later. Without the X-E1, there would be no X-E2, X-E2s, X-E3, or X-E4. While the X-E lineup isn’t usually a top-seller for Fujifilm, it is much loved by those who do own them. The Fujifilm X-E1 was my introduction into the X-series, so without it there would be no Fuji X Weekly.
9. Fujifilm X-Pro2
The X-Pro2 was not only the first X-Trans III camera, it was the first with a dual memory-card slot. For some, this was the first X-Trans camera that could be taken seriously—clearly aimed at professional photographers. It not only looked good, but had the specs and features to convince serious photographers to take a close look, and maybe even sell their full-frame gear in favor of Fujifilm.
8. Fujifilm X-T4
The X-T4 is the full-frame killer. Maybe that’s an exaggeration, but the it is an amazing tool for both professional photographers and videographers. To date, the X-T4 is the most “premium” X-series model made by Fujifilm, and is the camera that’s convinced countless people to choose Fujifilm over other brands.
7. Fujifilm X100V
The X100V is a solid update to the X100F, and is my “desert island” camera—if I could only have one, it would be this. For a lot of people who are unsure if they want to jump into the deep end of the Fujifilm pool, the X100-series allows them to get their feet wet without having to invest in the whole system. Once people do dip their toes, they discover that the water is fine. Although all of the five X100-series cameras are great, including the original X100, the X100V is definitely the best.
6. Fujifilm X-Pro3
The X-Pro3 is a controversial camera due to its unusual backwards-mounted rear screen. People seem to love or hate it. While it might be Fujifilm’s most polarizing camera, it has been a solid success, and a sought-after body since its introduction. Also, this was the first camera with Classic Negative, Clarity, and Color Chrome FX Blue, among other things.
5. Fujifilm X-H1
While it was initially considered a flop, the X-H1 now has a cult-like following. The X-H1 was even more top-of-the-line than the X-T2. It was the first X-Trans camera with the Eterna film simulation and IBIS, and had the best video specs when it was released. In a lot of ways, it was the X-T4 of the X-Trans III generation models (although in a body more reminiscent of the GFX50S), and was supposed to convince full-frame shooters to consider Fujifilm instead. Due to its high MSRP, sales were super sluggish, and Fujifilm had to steeply slash the price tag to get people to buy it. Those who did buy it were rewarded with an amazing camera! It’s a workhorse for many professional photographers, even if they own newer models, they often choose the X-H1 to do the heavy lifting.
4. Fujifilm X100F
The Fujifilm X100F is the camera that I first started making Film Simulation Recipes with. Fuji X Weekly was originally a long-term review (or journal, really) of this camera. The impact the X100F has had on the Fujifilm community and even the photography continuum cannot be quantified, but know that’s it’s massive. For me, the X100F changed my life, and that’s not hyperbole—it took a lot of self-control to not put it at the number one spot on this list.
3. Fujifilm X-T3
Have you ever wondered why Fujifilm hasn’t discontinued the X-T3 even though the X-T4 has been out for almost two years? It’s because the X-T3 is the top-selling X-series camera of all time, and continues to sell really well even today. Yes, it’s about three-and-a-half years old, but as long as people continue to buy it in droves, it will continue to be manufactured by Fujifilm. I wouldn’t be surprised if the X-T4 is discontinued before the X-T3. This is the only camera on this list that I haven’t personally used, but I know for certain that it’s a great model.
2. Fujifilm X-T1
A lot of people might be surprised that the X-T1 made it so high on this list, not because the camera isn’t great (because it is great), but because the reason might not seem obvious. What was so special about this model to make it all the way to number two? The X-T1 was Fujifilm’s first real commercially successful camera. Yes, the X-Trans models that came before this—X-Pro1, X-E1, X-E2, X-M1, X20, XQ1, and X100S—did well enough (more or less, depending on the camera), but the X-T1 sold significantly better than them all. It really brought Fujifilm into the forefront, and made a lot of people take notice. For a large number of photographers, the X-T1 was the first model that made them seriously consider buying X-Trans.
1. Fujifilm X-Pro1
The Fujifilm X-Pro1 was where X-Trans began. All of the current Fujifilm cameras are here today because the X-Pro1 made a big splash with its retro rangefinder design and hybrid viewfinder 10 years ago. If it had not sold well, the X-series might have ended there, or not long after. But it did sell well, and is even in-demand to this day. That’s why the X-Pro1 is the number one most important Fujifilm X-Trans camera of all time.
Conclusion
What about the other cameras that deserve to be on this list? The original X100 is not here because it is not X-Trans (a requirement for this list), but I could have included the X100S, which the first X100-series model with an X-Trans sensor. The X100T was the first camera with Classic Chrome—except that a lot of people forget that one month earlier the X30 was released with Classic Chrome, and the X100T was actually a close second. The X-T10 was Fujifilm’s first real successful mid-range model—the X-T20 and X-T30 were pretty darn successful, too, and the X-T30 II is off to a solid start. The X-S10 has also done well, and is the cheapest model with IBIS. I think there are a number of cameras that could have made this list. What do you think? Do you agree with my Top 10? Would you replace any? I’d love to hear your thoughts on this!
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Fujifilm sent me an X-Pro3 camera and 33mm f/1.4 lens to borrow for a few weeks. I get to use them, but I don’t get to keep them. In fact, if you’ve ever read a review of this camera or lens, there’s a good chance that this exact copy is what was reviewed. I don’t have any obligation to write a review, but of course I will, after I’ve had a chance to put the camera and lens to the test.
My initial impressions of the X-Pro3?
I currently own an X-Pro1, and I’ve extensively used an X-Pro2; the X-Pro3 is a very similar camera. The headline difference is the backwards-mounted rear screen, which I think people will love, hate, or both love-and-hate simultaneously. It’s way too early to know for sure, but I think I’m going to be in that love-hate category. Maybe once I use it more I will feel differently about it. I wonder, though, why the rear screen doesn’t swing to the side instead of down? I find it less than ideal when I need to use it, but I do like that the camera is designed to encourage you to not use the screen, because, when you don’t need it, the experience is better when it is hidden. I love the little “box top” screen that’s in its place. Inside, the X-Pro3 is a lot like other X-Trans IV cameras, such as the X100V. The ability to save in 16-bit TIFFs could be reason enough to buy this camera, although I haven’t examined this closely yet. So far, the X-Pro3 seems to be a workhorse body that one could happily use for many years. Be on the lookout for a full-review in a few weeks.
My initial impressions of the Fujinon 33mm f1.4?
Amazing lens! Do I need to say more? It’s definitely bigger and heavier than my Fujinon 35mm f/2, but also perhaps optically superior and with great character, which says a lot, because the 35mm f/2 is a great lens. The Fujinon 33mm f/1.4 is for the X system what the Fujinon 63mm f/2.8 is for the GFX system, but maybe better. There will be a full-review of this lens in the future, but I can tell you right away that you won’t be disappointed if you should buy it—it really is a fast 50mm-equivalent prime lens that’s top-notch.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
I’ve been asked a few times recently what adapter and filters I use on my Fujifilm X100V. I will state right off the bat that my choices aren’t necessarily the “best” ones, it’s just what I’ve done. There are likely better options, and perhaps different choices that would be better for you, so keep that in mind. With that said, let me get right into the adapter and filters that I use on my Fujifilm X100V.
The X100V doesn’t initially appear to be able to accept filters. There are no screw-in threads visible. But there’s a “secret” ring around the lens that unscrews to reveal threads, but these threads cannot accept filters. You need to buy an adapter to screw into those threads that has its own threads that filters can screw into. Make sense?
The top reason why you want to do this is because the X100V is almost weather-sealed. The one unsealed point is the lens, but Fujifilm says that if you put a filter in front of it, that should give you protection from the elements. To complete the weather-sealing process, you need to buy an adapter and filter.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Fujifilm offers their own adapter, but it’s not cheap. I’m a cheapskate, so I went with the $10 Haoge adapter instead, and saved about $40. I think the only disadvantage is that the lens cap fits a little loosely over the adapter, but probably fits snugly on the Fujifilm option (just guessing). There are lots of other choices, including some that have a lens hood included. I don’t think which adapter you choose is all that important, but obviously it’s got to work for you.
I have tons of filters, some going back to the film days. Many of them are not 49mm (the correct filter size for the X100V), but some are, and I don’t use all of them. The number one most used filter is the Fotasy 49mm Ultra Slim UV, which is less than $10. For under $20, it’s possible to add that layer of weather protection to give you some peace of mind. I also own a Hoya UV filter (that predates my X100V), but it’s black and I prefer silver, so I don’t usually use it (yet I have used it), and a Nicna UV filter, which I have no idea where it came from. The UV filter doesn’t do much for you photographically, but it does give a layer of protection, and 90% of the time this is how my X100V is configured.
About 10% of the time I use a diffusion filter instead of (or in conjunction with) the UV filter. The one that I use the most is the 5% CineBloom, which gives a very subtle effect. A 10% CineBloom and 1/4 Black Pro Mist are occasionally used, while a 20% CineBloom is almost never used because it is so strong. If I could only have one, it would be the 5% CineBloom, but I do use the 10% CineBloom and 1/4 Black Pro Mist sometimes, and even use them together, so it’s nice having them around. I have considered buying a 1/8 Black Pro Mist because I think I’d use it frequently, but I haven’t pulled the trigger on that one yet.
What’s left? I own a Tiffen 49mm Circular Polarizer that I rarely use. I probably should use it more, because CPLs are great for reducing unwanted reflections. To some extent, it’s theoretically possible to mimic Color Chrome FX Blue with a CPL filter, I think, although I’ve never tried. I also have a Hoya Intensifier (a.k.a. Didymium filter or Starscape filter) that I’ve used a few times. I have some 49mm color filters for B&W film photography, but obviously those don’t work well on the X100V (I tried). I also have a Hoya 80A filter, which actually does work on the X100V, but I pretty much never use it.
I’m not sure which filters are right for you, but at the very least consider attaching an adapter and UV filter to give your Fujifilm X100V a little more weather protection. I like using diffusion filters sometimes, but not all of the time, and usually less is more when it comes to these. That’s what works for me, but you’ll have to figure out what works for you. Hopefully, this article is helpful to some of you. Let me know in the comments which filters you use on your X100-series camera, because I’d love to know.
People ask me all of the time for my recommendation on which Fujifilm camera to buy. Recently, I’ve received a number of requests for cameras under $1,000. Which one is the best? Which should you buy?
There aren’t currently very many low-budget offerings by Fujifilm. The Bayer models, like the X-A7 and X-T200, have been discontinued, and those are the most budget-friendly Fuji cameras, if you can find them—if being the key word. There are a few X-Trans options that aren’t too expensive, so let’s take a look at what’s available to purchase right now.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Best Value: Fujifilm X-E3
The Fujifilm X-E3 is a discontinued body, but you can still find it brand-new here and there for a good price. It’s X-Trans III (the current models are X-Trans IV, and X-Trans V is just around the corner), so perhaps it’s a little dated, but no doubt about it, the X-E3 is an excellent camera. There are even some who prefer it over the newer X-E4, because it has more buttons and such. While it doesn’t have quite as many JPEG options as the latest models (no Classic Negative, for example), there are still plenty of Film Simulation Recipes that are compatible with it, so you’re sure to still experience that Fuji-Fun. If you are trying to get into the Fujifilm system, or are upgrading from an older model, the X-E3 is your best value option.
The Fujifilm X-S10 serves two purposes: Fujifilm’s “budget” option for video, and Fujifilm’s entry-level camera for those migrating from other brands. It is the cheapest Fuji offering with In-Body-Image-Stabilization (yet the most expensive in this list), and is slightly more video-centric in specs and design than some other Fujifilm cameras. Instead of the classic Fujifilm knobs, the X-S10 has a typical “PASM” dial that most other brands use, so the learning curve might be a little less than with other Fuji models, although you’ll miss out on the true Fujifilm experience. If you do a lot of videography, or if you’re coming from another brand and want the shortest learning curve, the X-S10 is the camera that I recommend for you.
If you want the camera that offers the most for the least and gives you a true Fujifilm experience, look no further than the Fujifilm X-T30 II. This is the ultimate Fujifilm X camera that doesn’t break the bank. While it’s the very last X-Trans IV camera, it is certainly not the least, and the many JPEG options (including Classic Negative and Eterna Bleach Bypass) will allow you to use all of the Film Simulation Recipes that require those. Seriously, if you are upgrading to a new model or buying your first Fujifilm camera, the X-T30 II is one to strongly consider. The only downside is that you might have to wait to get your model, depending on availability, because it is brand-new. Also, be sure that you’re buying the X-T30 II and not the original X-T30 (which has been discontinued), unless you happen to find the original X-T30 for a good discount.
Fujifilm X-T30 II (Body Only) $899.95 AmazonB&H Fujifilm X-T30 II + 15-45mm $999.95 B&H
Best Minimalist Camera: Fujifilm X-E4
The Fujifilm X-E4 is much like the X-T30 II, except in a different (and smaller) shape and with a minimalistic design approach. This camera is for those who believe that less is more. If that’s you, you’ll love the X-E4, but if that’s not you, perhaps consider a different model instead. I personally own and love an X-E4, but I can say with certainty that it’s not for everyone. This is another model that can be hard to find right now, so if you want it, be sure to snag it if you see it.
There are, of course, a number of other offerings by Fujifilm that are currently available for purchase. The X-Pro3 (Amazon, B&H) is Fujifilm’s Leica, but well above the $1,000 top price point of this piece. The X-T4 (Amazon, B&H) is Fujifilm’s flagship camera, and it’s absolutely wonderful—my wife has one—but, again, it’s much too expensive to make this list. The Fujifilm X100V (Amazon, B&H) is my “desert island” camera, but it, too, sits above the $1,000 threshold.
Best Value Just Above $1,000: Fujifilm X-T3 WW
Then there’s the X-T3 WW, which is an X-T3 without a battery charger (USB charging only). The X-T3 used to be Fujifilm’s flagship model until the X-T4 was released. It’s a little above the budget for this article, but it’s worth considering nonetheless, especially if you need weather-sealing. It’s an excellent value, but if you don’t need weather-sealing, the X-T30 II is a wonderful alternative for a couple hundred dollars less.
It’s been a wild year—at least for me, and I imagine for many of you, too. As 2021 winds down and 2022 quickly approaches, I thought it would be fun to look back at the most-viewed articles of the year. Since it’s 2021, I decided to share the Top 21 articles. Below that, just for fun, you’ll find the most overlook (least viewed) articles of 2021.
You might notice that all but one of these Top 21 articles are Film Simulation Recipes, which is not a surprise to me. These recipes are why most people come to Fuji X Weekly, and what I’m best known for. You might also notice that recipes modeled after Kodak film stocks tend to be the most popular, which shouldn’t surprise anyone since Kodak was the top-dog in the film world for a century or so.
Many of these are old articles from several years ago, and a few are from this year. If you don’t recognize a title, consider clicking the link to perhaps see something you missed.
I want to take a quick moment in closing to thank everyone who has visited this website, shared articles, commented, downloaded the App, watched SOOC, and were otherwise a part of the Fuji X Weekly community in some way or another. You all are who make this whole project great! I truly hope you had a wonderful Christmas, and that 2022 will be a great year for you!
Pal2Tech posted a video today discussing the noise performance of various film simulations when using high-ISO photography on Fujifilm cameras. I like the videos from this channel, as they’re always entertaining and educational. I’ve learned several things myself, so I definitely recommend following him if you don’t already.
I wanted to mention this particular video (which you’ll find above) specifically because I think it misses the point on high-ISO photography. Or several points, really. I do still recommend watching it—I found it interesting, personally—and I appreciate the effort put into it. But I want to add my own commentary, so here we go!
The first point that’s missed is that Fujifilm’s digital noise doesn’t look like typical noise from digital cameras. Fujifilm’s programming makes it appear more organic, a little more film-grain-like, and much less hideous than that from other brands. So having some noise in an image isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Digital noise can actually be more than just “not bad” but can actually be a positive thing, and you might be missing out by avoiding it.
Which brings me to point two: in the digital age we’re too often striving for “perfect” images with its squeaky-clean aesthetics. In my article No Edit Photography: 7 Tips To Get The Film Look From Your Digital Photos, I stated, “Perfect pictures can be perfectly boring.” And, “Creativity is rarely born out of perfectionism.” Avoiding digital noise is ok, I suppose, but never at the expense of things that are more important.
Point number three (for those keeping track) is that digital noise (from Fujifilm cameras) can actually make your digital pictures appear less digital and more film-like (that’s tip six in that article I linked to in the last paragraph). In fact, my Ilford HP5 Plus Push Process film simulation recipe purposefully uses a minimum ISO of 25600, and it looks shockingly good when printed! If you’re striving for “perfection” and you are pixel-peeping at 300% magnification, noise might bother you a little. Otherwise, the “imperfection” of it can be incorporated beautifully into your art.
The simple takeaway is this: don’t be afraid to get a little noisy. Don’t worry so much about squeaky-clean pictures, but embrace the messiness of photography, and worry about the things that actually matter (like storytelling). Don’t be afraid to shoot at high-ISOs. Certainly if you are limiting yourself to below ISO 3200 for Acros, Classic Negative, and Eterna Bleach Bypass, you are missing out on some lovely pictures (you’ll find an example of each below). It’s ok to pixel-peep, but just know that nobody outside of some photographers care what an image looks like when inspected so closely, and most people who view your pictures won’t be impressed or unimpressed by how an image looks at that magnification, because they only care if the picture as a whole speaks to them in some way.
I want to know what camera sensor generation is inside your Fujifilm camera. Why? Because I want to be more helpful to you, the Fuji X Weekly audience, when creating new film simulation recipes. I don’t currently have every sensor generation—right now, it’s GFX and Bayer that I don’t own (you never know when that changes), but, since I was gifted an X-H1, I now have every X-Trans option at my disposal. In the coming year I want to focus more on what is beneficial to you, and in order to do so I need to know what you own.
If you have a spare moment right now, help me out by taking the short survey below:
Thank you!
Let me know in the comments what your favorite Fujifilm model is that you own, and what Fujifilm model is the one you’d love to own someday but currently don’t. For me, the favorite model that I own is the X100V, and the one I’d love to own someday is the X-Pro3.
Pink Rose Blossom – Ogden, UT – Fujifilm X-T30 – “Ektachrome E100GX”
It’s now December, and the holiday season has officially begun! At least at my house it has. I thought it would be fun to look back at November, and see what the most viewed articles were. I have two categories: most viewed in November and most viewed that were published in November. It’s a subtle difference, but a difference nonetheless. I’ll finish up with a third category: pointing out some posts that seem to have been overlooked—maybe you missed them.
When I created the Fuji X Weekly website, I wanted it to be clean and simple. I took a minimalistic approach to its design. For awhile it was clean and simple, but as the website grew and things evolved over time, it became less and less so.
The Blog used to be the Homepage, but now they’re separate—while the Blog is still pretty minimalistic, the Homepage is fairly busy. The two screenshots below show the cluttered Homepage compared to the clean Blog. The original design philosophy still serves a purpose, but in many ways Fuji X Weekly has outgrown it. I will likely at some point revamp the design, which would be a lot of work, but for now it remains as it gets the job done.
Because the Homepage is so busy, it’s easy to overlook things on there. For example, you might have missed that the 10 most recent blog posts can be accessed from it. Or that if you keep scrolling down, there’s an option to “Follow by Email” or even search the website. Because the Blog is so clean, it’s easy to miss much of the available material. The point of this article is to shed some light on how to navigate this website so that you don’t miss anything. There’s much more content than many might realize.
Specifically, I want to talk about the Menus that some people might not even know exist. Before going into that, though, I want to mention that clicking on “Fuji X Weekly” over the camera (see the top picture in this article) will take you to the Homepage. No matter where you are, it’s easy to get back home. To the left and right of “Fuji X Weekly” at the top are what’s called Hamburger Menus. The top-left Hamburger Menu has three horizontal lines, and the top-right Hamburger Menu has four horizontal lines. The left menu will bring up a list of pages. The Homepage and the Blog are just two of 17 standalone pages on Fuji X Weekly. At the bottom is a search bar, which is helpful if you are searching for something specific. The right menu will bring up a list of recent blog posts, an archive of blog posts (you can browse through specific months, going all the way back to the beginning), and a search bar is on top. This is the easiest place to find specific articles, either by searching or browsing. The best way to think about it is: Pages are accessed via the left menu, Posts are accessed through the right menu.
Let’s talk briefly about those 17 standalone pages, accessed through the top-left menu.
The Homepage you already know. Next is About—there’s a short biography (and a link to an article that dives a little deeper into it), but most importantly there’s a “Contact Me” form, if you want to shoot me a message. Then there is the Blog, which, again, you already know. After that is the Creative Collective Corner, which is where you’ll find bonus articles for Creative Collective subscribers. Next is Development, which is simply a list of How-To and Photographic Advice type articles that I’ve published. The Film Simulation Recipes page is next. This is actually a redundant page that originally served a very different purpose. You see, for awhile all of the film simulation recipes were listed there, but then, as I made more-and-more, it just made more sense to separate them into different groups, and not all on one page. I didn’t want to delete the page because there were so many links to it. Now it serves as a launching platform (identical to what’s on the Homepage) to the different recipe groups. If you are not sure which sensor generation your camera has, there’s a list at the bottom of the page. After that is Film Simulation Reviews, which is a list of articles that demonstrate various recipes in different situations. Then there’s the Fuji X Weekly App page, which is everything you need to know about the App. The next six pages are where you’ll find all of the recipes: Bayer, GFX, X-Trans I, X-Trans II, X-Trans III, and X-Trans IV. After that is the Gear page, which is where you’ll find my camera and lens reviews. Next is SOOC Live, which is where you’ll find all of the SOOC episodes. Last but not least is the Video page, which is where you’ll find my YouTube videos.
All of that is accessed through that top-left menu!
The content in the top-right menu is more dynamic, and is always evolving as more articles are published. I want to mention one more time the search bar, which is such a great way to find things—especially if you are unsure where exactly it is located. If you can remember what the article was titled or about, the search feature can help you quickly find it.
Fuji X Weekly has been around for over four years, and I’ve published a lot of articles during that time. Most people come for the film simulation recipes, yet there’s lots of other great stuff to explore; however, it’s not always obvious what there is and where exactly it’s at on the website. The intention of this post is to help you find it. The top-left menu will take you to the various pages, the top-right menu will take you to various posts, and the “Fuji X Weekly” in-between will take you home.
