Camera ideas | FUJI X WEEKLY

How Fujifilm Could Easily Make an XPan Camera

*Canal at Sunset* – Copenhagen, Denmark – Fujifilm GFX100RF – Copenhagen Negative – XPan

Over the weekend, PetaPixel published an article encouraging Fujifilm to make a digital XPan camera. Their idea was to make an X100VI-like camera with two 40mp sensors side-by-side, for 80mp 65:24 (XPan) aspect ratio pictures. If Fujifilm ever did that, I would buy it no questions asked. Within the first minute of the preorder opening, I’d purchase it. That would be a dream camera. But this isn’t Fujifilm’s only—or maybe even best—option, should they desire to pursue a digital XPan camera.

For those who don’t know, XPan was a collaborative project by Hasselblad and Fujifilm beginning back in the late 1990’s. The cameras used two frames of 35mm film to make a panoramic picture. While only moderately successful at the time, the cameras are now much beloved with a cult-like following. A digital version would certainly be niche, but it would also become iconic very quickly.

*Clearing Clouds* – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – CineStill 400D v1 – XPan crop

First, Fujifilm doesn’t necessarily need to make a dedicated XPan camera. The GFX cameras already have the XPan aspect ratio, and you could use the GFX100RF as an XPan-like camera, producing 50mp panoramic pictures. This is probably the closest you can get right now with Fujifilm, and it really is close-enough. Someone let me use their GFX100RF, and I loved using it for XPan pictures. Fujifilm could (and should!) add the XPan ratio to all of their 40mp cameras, which would produce 22mp panoramic pictures. There’s no good reason why I can’t make in-camera XPan pictures with my X100VI, X-T5, or X-E5, and I would if I could (unfortunately, it has to be cropped after-the-fact using software).

The Hasselblad and Fujifilm XPan cameras were interchangeable-lens models, so for a truly accurate XPan experience you need an interchangeable-lens camera. I would be surprised if Fujifilm ever made an interchangeable-lens XPan camera, but if they did, one option would be to use GF lenses. Perhaps make a version of the next X-Pro with a wide sensor and GF mount. More likely, in order to do a wide sensor (or two sensors side-by-side), Fujifilm would use a fixed-lens body, which was PetaPixel’s idea. If the WCL and TCL lenses also work with an X100-like XPan camera, I could see this as being a good compromise (I would be mildly surprised if the conversion lenses actually work for it, though).

*Yucca in the Sand* – White Sands NP, NM – Fujifilm GFX100S II – Velvia Film – XPan

There is another option. It’s not perfect, but it would certainly simplify everything. This could be pretty easy for Fujifilm to do. It’s not as exciting, but it would work. Fujifilm could simply do anamorphic de-squeeze in-camera. For example, Fujifilm could make an XPan (1.8x) anamorphic lens that screws onto the future X100VII (like the WCL or TCL does), and the camera would then de-squeeze it, and show the wide image in the LCD or EVF. This would produce a 40mp XPan image. If Fujifilm wanted to do this for the interchangeable-lens models, they would need to make 1.8x anamorphic lenses (no such lens exists for X-mount). This, of course, comes with some negative side effects, namely a reduction in sharpness and “stretched” bokeh.

There isn’t a perfect solution. For those wanting a digital XPan camera right now, the GFX100RF is your best bet. If Fujifilm were to ever make a digital XPan camera, it would likely be a fixed-lens model; however, they could use GF lenses on an interchangeable-lens camera. An anamorphic lens with built-in de-squeeze is another option that would be easier to implement, but has downsides. What Fujifilm could and should do more than anything else is simply add the XPan aspect ratio to the 40mp models via a firmware update, and also include it on all sixth-generation cameras. With that said, if Fujifilm ever did make a dedicated digital XPan camera, I would be right at the front of the line to buy it.

Fujifilm Should Do THIS With The X100-Series

Posted on June 4 by Ritchie Roesch

If Fujifilm wanted to, they could do something really cool, that would be a massive sales success. The perfect time for them to do this is now, or really beginning two or three years ago and continuing at least a little while into the future; however, the ideal opportunity won’t last forever. Trends change, paradigms shift. Right now, though, is really good. What is this thing that Fujifilm should do? Alternative focal-length versions of the X100-series camera.

Most famously, both Leica and Ricoh have made a second focal-length versions of their fixed-lens camera. For Leica, it’s the Q3 43, a 43mm version of the Q3 (which normally has a 28mm lens). For Ricoh, it’s the GR IIIx, a 26mm (39mm full-frame equivalent) version of the GR III, which normally has an 18.3mm (28mm equivalent) lens. The Sigma DP series has had two, three, or even four focal-length variants, depending on the iteration. For instance, the DP Quattro series had a 14mm f/4 (21mm equivalent), 19mm f/2.8 (28.5mm equivalent), 30mm f/2.8 (45mm equivalent), and 50mm f/2.8 (75mm equivalent) versions, with everything identical except the lens. Fujifilm could and should do something similar.

Fujifilm’s solution has been the WCL-X100 and TCL-X100 conversion lenses. Simply screw a lens onto the end of the fixed-lens, and the camera becomes either 18mm (28mm equivalent) or a 32mm (48mm equivalent) respectively. That works well in a pinch, but if you want a nifty-fifty focal length all of the time, the extra weight and size of the TCL-X100 defeats the purpose of the camera. In other words, the wide and tele conversion lenses work well for a lightweight travel kit when used occasionally, but they are much less practical when needed frequently. I have walked around all day with the TCL-X100 attached to the camera many times, and it become a bit annoying after awhile.

Something that I’ve come to realize over the last couple of years is that my favorite focal length is the 40mm-60mm (full-frame equivalent) range. I like going wide sometimes, and I like going telephoto sometimes, but most often, I prefer a “standard” focal length. This is probably because when I first learned photography—and for nearly the first decade of my photography—I used a 50mm lens. It’s very natural to me, and I oftentimes find my compositions stronger and my appreciation for the images higher when I use a focal length in that 40mm-60mm range. I don’t want to strictly use nifty-fifty lenses. I think it’s good to stretch outside of my comfort zone—just within the last handful of months, I have gone as wide as 12mm and as long as 600mm. Having experience across a broad range of focal lengths is good. But if there was a 50mm (equivalent) X100-series camera, I would much prefer it over the 23mm (35mm equivalent) version that Fujifilm makes. For you, maybe it would be something wider than the current 23mm lens, or maybe the 23mm lens is perfect.

What I propose to Fujifilm (assuming that they read this—sometimes they do, and sometimes they don’t), is to make alternative focal-length versions of the X100. The X100VI is probably more than halfway through its lifecycle. I assume that the next version will arrive in about a year-and-a-half or so, maybe two years tops. That’s probably enough time that Fujifilm could do this with the X100VI near the end of its lifecycle. More likely, though, it would not be the X100VI, but the X100VII. When the next iteration comes, Fujifilm could make alternative focal-length versions of the camera.

What would make the most sense is 18mm (28mm equivalent) and 33mm (50mm equivalent) versions, in addition to the regular 23mm (35mm equivalent). Literally have three different X100VII cameras. Maybe call the 18mm version X100VII-Wide (X100VII-W), the regular version X100VII-Classic (X100VII), and the 33mm version X100VII-Standard (X100VII-S). People who have hesitated to buy the X100-series because the focal length isn’t ideal for them (it’s either too wide or not wide enough) would purchase the version that is more ideal. And you’d have people buy two of them, or maybe even all three (I knew someone who owned all four Sigma DP Quattro cameras). If Fujifilm were to do this, all three versions would be sales successes. I don’t think they’d have any trouble selling as many as they manufactured.

The great thing about this is that the WCL-X100 and TCL-X100 lenses would still work. If you purchased the X100VII-Wide camera, the WCL-X100 lens would gave it a 14.5mm (22mm equivalent) focal length. I know it would work because the wide conversion lens works well on the X70. The TCL-X100 would give the X100VII-Standard a 46mm (70mm equivalent) focal length. The conversion lenses would still serve a purpose, and won’t become any less relevant just because there are three versions of the camera.

For a lot of people, the X100-series is their gateway into the Fujifilm world. You can try out the X-series without investing into a whole system. Once they’ve decided that they really like it, a camera like the X-T5, X-T50, X-E5, etc., often follows, along with some lens purchases. Not everyone who owns an X100-series camera travels this same path. For me, the X-E1 was my gateway, and an X100F came later. I purchased an X100V when it was new, followed by the X100VI when it was released. I own a number of interchangeable-lens cameras, as well. The X100-series is great for travel, street, or everyday snapshots where it’s more about being in the moment than fumbling with lenses and accessories. For me, the most ideal X100-series camera would have a nifty-fifty focal length lens. A wide version would be nice, too, sometimes—I really like the GFX100RF and X70; however, the GFX is much larger and heavier (although super small and lightweight for medium-format), and the X70 is old and doesn’t have many of the Film Sims and JPEG options of the latest models (can’t do nearly as many Recipes). I would buy more than one version, but the X100VII-Standard would get the most use by far. It would be really cool if Fujifilm did this.