My Fujifilm JPEG Journey

Hidden Church – North Salt Lake, UT – Fujifilm X-T200

I didn’t always shoot JPEGs. I used to shoot RAW. Now with Fujifilm cameras I am a JPEG guy, and I’m inspiring many others to shoot JPEGs, too.

This is my journey.

I learned photography in the film era just before digital photography became a big thing. I didn’t like digital photography in those early days—I could spot a digital picture pretty easily. I resisted buying a digital camera for about 10 years. Technology changes quickly, and digital camera technology advanced to a point that it made sense for me to jump in. I’ve been primarily shooting digital for a little over 10 years now; I still shoot film, although since using Fujifilm cameras I’ve shot a lot less of it.

When I started in digital photography, I took the advice that is often given to newcomers: shoot RAW. JPEGs are terrible, so if you’re serious, shoot RAW. I didn’t initially heed this advice as the learning curve for RAW editing software is steep, but I quickly learned a tough lesson. I was in Sedona, Arizona, at Red Rock Crossing at sunset with a clearing storm, photographing the iconic Cathedral Rock with the Oak Creek in the foreground. It was incredible! I shot it with the camera set to JPEG. Later, when I reviewed the pictures on my computer, I discovered that the JPEGs were simply awful! I tried to “fix” them in software, but it was simply a missed opportunity. That’s why you shoot RAW.

One of the problems with RAW is that it can take a lot of time to edit, or really develop, the images. Some pictures can be quick, but some can take hours. I once had a particular brand of camera with a unique three-layer sensor, and it would often take 30 minutes to an hour or more to get a finished picture from a RAW file. It was painfully slow! I spent a lot of time sitting at the computer editing pictures. I tried to find shortcuts to speed up the process, but editing still took up a significant chunk of my time.

Blue Mountain Lake – Flathead Lake, MT – Fujifilm X-T30

My first Fujifilm camera was an X-E1 that I purchased used. I immediately loved it, but I did not understand how great the JPEGs were. I was still a RAW shooter. I did some RAW+JPEG with that camera, and I was impressed that the JPEGs actually looked pretty good. Several months later I purchased a Fujifilm X100F. While shooting RAW+JPEG on the X100F, I began to notice that the straight-out-of-camera JPEGs looked an awful lot like the RAW images that I had spent time post-processing. It was a lightbulb moment.

I began to experiment with the different JPEG settings and I realized that I could achieve in-camera different looks that I liked. I’m not 100% sure where the term “recipe” came from—if it was something that I invented or if someone else came up with it first—but I began to create film simulation recipes (sets of JPEG settings) for my X100F. The very first recipe was simply called “Acros” and I published it on August 27, 2017. It was the fifth post on this blog. My “Classic Chrome” film simulation recipe was published later that same day. I stopped shooting RAW and relied entirely on camera-made JPEGs.

I thought it truly amazing that high-quality pictures that looked like post-processed RAW images could come straight-out-of-camera. It felt good to not spend hours and hours sitting in front of a computer editing pictures. What was most meaningful to me is the time that shooting JPEGs saved me. Suddenly I had a lot more free time, which I spent on two things: my family and photography. My family life improved while my photography simultaneously became significantly more productive. It may seem like hyperbole to state that it changed my life, but it really did!

Time went on and my film simulation recipes were noticed by others. They spread by word of mouth, and more and more photographers began to use them. The more that I experimented, the more creative I got with the settings. I began to get requests to create different film looks. I collaborated with others on some settings. People began to create their own recipes, sharing them on social media. Film simulation recipes are now more than just JPEG presets, they bring people together, the foundation of community.

The way that the world is being captured today is in part through the filter of the film simulation recipes on this website. People across the globe, from new-to-photography to experienced-pro, are using these settings. I’m honored and humbled to influence photography in this way. I cannot tell you how many times people have told me that these recipes have had an impact on their photography, either rejuvenating their passion or saving them time (or both).

Forsaken – North Salt Lake, UT – Fujifilm X100V

When I was in Photography 101 in college, my pictures weren’t as good as some of my classmates, and I wondered if I’d ever amount to anything as a photographer. Through various photographic failures that I’ve endured over the years, I wondered if I should keep pressing forward. When I began this blog three years ago, I wondered if anyone would even read it. There’s no need to wonder anymore, except perhaps to where all this might lead.

I don’t consider myself an influential photographer, but there’s no doubt that I’m influencing photography. The stigma attached to the camera-made JPEG is changing (in part) because of me. The aesthetic of today’s pictures is (in part) the recipes from this website. My reach on this website is worldwide and the audience much larger than I could have ever dreamed.

I still primarily shoot JPEGs, but I discovered along the way that film simulation recipes are much easier to create when you can reprocess RAW files, either in-camera or with X RAW Studio. Instead of strictly being a JPEG-only photographer, I use RAW+JPEG, but I still only use camera-made JPEGs. That’s what works for me.

Really, it’s about finding what works for you and your photography. RAW might work best for one person, RAW+JPEG for another, and JPEG-only for another. There’s no right or wrong way to do things. There’s advantages and disadvantages to each. Nobody should say that everyone should do things one way, or put people down for doing it different than them.

For myself and a growing group of photographers, using film simulation recipes on Fujifilm cameras is the preferred method. I’m a JPEG guy, or, really, RAW+JPEG. I get the pictures that I want straight-out-of-camera without the need for editing, except for minor cropping and occasional small adjustments, which I do on my phone. You won’t find me sitting at a computer fiddling with files. There’s no need to. That’s why I love Fujifilm JPEGs.

All About Aspect Ratios

49714398296_c9a3772c01_c

48059190098_44091e79ba_c

49816250307_1a3a937e42_c

Your Fujifilm X camera has three aspect ratio options: 3:2, 16:9 and 1:1. You can see an example of each of those above. Have you ever wondered which one to use? Why these three? Why not others? Should you crop to a different aspect ratio? What do the numbers mean? I hope to answer these questions and more in this article!

Before moving on, I want to quickly discuss the aspect ratio numbers and what they mean. For instance, what does 3:2 stand for? It’s math, and it means that one side of the picture is 3 parts long (whatever the measure), and the other is two. It’s the shape of the image, and the shape matters when you print. A 3:2 image can be printed 4″ x 6″ without cropping, as well as 8″ x 12″, 12″ x 18″, 16″ x 24″ and 20″ x 30″. If you want to print at those sizes and don’t want to crop, the 3:2 aspect ratio is the right shape for you. The shape also matters for composition. What might look great with one aspect ratio might not with another. You will likely compose your pictures differently depending on the shape.

Let’s take a look at each of the three aspect ratios that Fujifilm gives you, plus some other common aspect ratios not found on your camera.

3:2

49786663218_cfd529d9e5_c

The 3:2 aspect ratio is the native ratio on your Fujifilm X camera, and that’s because it’s the shape of the sensor. It’s the common aspect ratio of full-frame and APS-C sensor cameras, and it’s also the aspect ratio of 35mm film. The 3:2 aspect ratio is one of the most used, if not the most used, aspect ratios in digital photography. It’s a very familiar shape that most of us use every day, and it conveniently matches a number of different print sizes.

While the 3:2 aspect ratio is a very common shape, for some it’s too wide, and for others not wide enough. There are other shapes that might suite your photography better.

49786689953_4d63f113e7_c

49786588323_11907bb817_c

49787376927_ae63d21d3c_c

16:9

49786667323_4043f80f6e_c

The 16:9 aspect ratio might seem cinematic, and that’s because it’s the shape of wide-screen televisions. When you watch your favorite TV show or movie at home, you likely view it in this aspect ratio. This is a common shape for video.

While mainly intended for video, the 16:9 aspect ratio can be used for still photography. The long, thin proportions are almost panoramic, and can be especially great for landscape photography. In order to create this shape, your camera crops a little off the top and bottom of the image and doesn’t use the whole sensor.

49787232826_b4539721b5_c

49787454107_436c3bbb04_c

49786523463_efefa9bcb1_c

1:1

49787221801_03a0fd27a7_c

The 1:1 aspect ratio is square, but that doesn’t mean it’s lame. In fact, it’s the original shape of Instagram. The square picture has been around nearly as long as photography itself. There have been numerous cameras over the years that capture square images, including many 120 and 126 film cameras.

Magazine and newspaper editors used to prefer square pictures because they could crop them tall or wide, whatever would best fit the available space. On your Fujifilm X camera, some of the picture is cropped off the ends to make it square, so it doesn’t use the whole sensor.

49787257601_561fdff7a7_c

49786590598_f641518dcd_c

49787416727_935152917f_c

5:4

49786671178_c5e01f481c_c

The 5:4 aspect ratio is not found on your Fujifilm X camera. In fact, none of the rest are, only the first three. In order to get this shape, which is almost square, you’ll need to crop your picture using software.

This aspect ratio is from large format film, which commonly come in 4″ x 5″ or 8″ x 10″ sheets. You might note that this is the shape of 8″ x 10″ and 16″ x 20″ prints, which are common sizes. While it’s not unusual to print in this aspect ratio, it is a bit unusual to find a camera that captures it.

49787236446_e6f290d015_c

49786596473_3dea0b86c3_c

49787070321_218d83491e_c

4:3

49787537057_549c689fbe_c

The 4:3 aspect ratio, which has its origins in medium format film, is very common. Most digital cameras with sensors larger than full frame or smaller than APS-C use this aspect ratio, including Fujifilm GFX. It’s not as wide as 3:2, but wider than 5:4. I wish that Fujifilm offered this as an option on their X-Trans models. Since they don’t, if you want to use the 4:3 aspect ratio you’ll have to crop using software. If you print poster-sized, you might make a 30″ x 40″ print; otherwise, the 4:3 aspect ratio will require some cropping to print common sizes.

49786708158_2169c58678_c

49787462562_b40573514d_c

49787084191_aebdcd24c0_c

7:5

49787534782_d9b6155988_c

The 7:5 aspect ratio is very uncommon. It’s a not-especially-popular large format film size. You can make 5″ x 7″ prints, too. Outside of that, this is a pretty much forgotten aspect ratio. With that said, it’s a nice in-between to the 3:2 and 4:3 ratios, which might make it a good option if you’re looking for something different.

49786703923_4bfe3a7220_c

49787139231_855a94bfe1_c

49787078261_8a6aa80ce7_c

Your Fujifilm X camera has 3:2 as its standard aspect ratio, which is good because it won’t require cropping for many common print sizes. You also have the option of 16:9 if you want a wide picture, or 1:1 if you want a square picture, although the camera won’t use the whole sensor. Any other aspect ratio will require you to crop using software. You can make a picture any shape you want, but the more uncommon the aspect ratio, the more difficult it might be to print. Still, that shouldn’t stop you if that’s what you want to do. It can be tricky to discover what aspect ratio works best for your photography, so if you aren’t sure, I invite you to try different shapes until you find what you like best. You might find that you appreciate different shapes for different subjects or situations. There’s no one-size-fits-all aspect ratio, but the 3:2 aspect ratio is one-size-fits-most, which makes it ideal to have as the shape of your sensor.

Digital Holga – Turning My Fujifilm X-T30 Into a Toy Camera, Part 2

49746239568_d970e2bd11_c

49747112057_62fce60c39_c

Part 1

“…the Fujifilm X-T30 isn’t an especially good or practical way of achieving an out-of-camera Holga look. Can you? Sure, to an extent. The use of a couple of apps improves the results. Even so, there are only a few of these pictures that I really like. I think next time I’ll just load a roll of film into my Holga 120N.”

That statement above is how I concluded Part 1. Put more simply, the Fujifilm X-T30 isn’t a good option for digitally recreating an in-camera Holga aesthetic. Or is it? I’m not one to easily give up. Many of my different film simulation recipes took much trial-and-error to achieve. I failed over and over, but I didn’t give up. I kept trying! Yes, the Toy Camera effect isn’t a good option, but there has to be another way. And there is!

What I ended up doing was punching a hole in some black cardstock, and taping it to the front of the Industar 69 lens. This provided the vignetting that Holga cameras are known for. I added some tape to the edges of the hole to increase the blur at the frame edges. The aperture of the lens had to be preset (I chose f/4) because the cardstock and tape blocked it. I set the aspect ratio on the X-T30 to 1:1 for a square picture.

With this setup I could use any film simulation recipe that I wanted, and I could even do in-camera double exposures. This was a much better way to get an in-camera Holga look! This is a significantly better option than using the Toy Camera effect. It didn’t take very much work to add cardstock with a hole to the front of the lens. While better, this still isn’t the same as shooting film in an actual Holga camera, but it isn’t a bad facsimile, either. This was an interesting experiment that was worth doing, but I probably won’t be doing it again anytime soon.

These are straight-out-of-camera JPEGs using this faux Holga technique:

49744627251_d345d3c961_c

49744090913_8586ca5e7b_c

49744122148_859a248fea_c

49744082373_417a96ee96_c

49744968207_68c16af1df_c

49744099728_ba34aa55cc_c

49744958837_1f1037007e_c

49744043708_f450573d34_c

49746783391_efc7de5eb9_c

49746241888_106fa12318_c

49744045793_de63d42795_c

49744941837_75e49e4595_c

Fujifilm X100V

Fujifilm X100V

Fujifilm just announced the much anticipated X100V, which replaces the much loved X100F. The X100 series hasn’t changed much externally since it began. This is one of the most beautifully designed cameras in the digital era, so why change it? There’s no reason, so Fujifilm doesn’t. The X100V looks nearly identical to the original X100. What’s different is internal.

Fujifilm redesigned the lens. It looks the same and has the same specs, but with improved sharpness, particularly corner sharpness wide-open. The rear screen now tilts and is a touch-screen. Unfortunately, and this is perhaps the biggest external change, the D-Pad is now gone, but this isn’t a huge deal, as you get used to the touch controls pretty quickly. The viewfinder has been given a small upgrade. The X100V is weather-resistant, which is not the same as weather-sealed; it’s designed to handle the elements a little better than previous versions.

The biggest upgrade for this camera is the X-Trans IV sensor and processor. This is the same sensor and processor found in the X-T3, X-T30 and X-Pro3, yet the X100V has the new features found in the X-Pro3 that aren’t (yet) found in the X-T3 and X-T30, including the Classic Negative film simulation. The X100V is faster, more feature-rich, and has better video capabilities than the X100F.

Fujifilm X100V

Is the X100V a camera that you should buy? Whenever a new camera is released, it’s easy to want it. It’s easy to get caught up in the hype. It’s easy to have camera envy. The X100V will be a fantastic camera, no doubt about it! The X100 series cameras are easy to love. But should you really drop everything and order your copy today?

My opinion is this: if you already own the X100F, keep it! The upgrade isn’t significant enough to justify buying the new model. The X100F and the X100V are very similar to each other. If you wear out your X100F, then buy the new model, but if it still works just fine, don’t change cameras. If you have an older model, such as the original X100, X100S or X100T and are considering upgrading, I say sure, why not? But if those cameras still work and bring you joy, why rush to get the new model? If you are trying to decide between the X100F and X100V and money is no issue, go with the X100V, which is a little better than its predecessor. But if you are like most people and have a tight budget, the X100F is nearly as good and can be found for a little cheaper.

The X100V will be released on February 27 with an MSRP of $1,400.

This post contains affiliate links. I will be compensated a small amount if you make a purchase after clicking my links.

Fujifilm X100V black:   B&H   Amazon
Fujifilm X100V silver:   B&H   Amazon
Fujifilm X100F black:   B&H   Amazon
Fujifilm X100F silver:   B&H   Amazon

An interesting side note: I predicted that this version of the X100 would be called the X100V way back in September of 2017. The “S” in X100S stands for second, the “T” in X100T stands for third, and the “F” in X100F stands for fourth, so nobody really knew what the next one would be called. Some predicted X200, or X110, or X110F, or X100N (“N” for new or next), or X100A (because A is the first letter of the alphabet), or X100Z (because Z is the last letter of the aphabet). I took a guess at “V” because it’s the Roman numeral for five, and this is the fifth iteration of the X100. I have no idea what the next one after the X100V might be called. Any guesses?

Fujifilm Monochrome, Part 2

Monochrome Wasatch Mountain

Dramatic Silver Mountain – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-T30

In my last post I suggested that Fujifilm should make a monochrome camera like the Leica M10 Monochrom. I wasn’t planning to say anymore about it, but the response I received from that article compelled me to type out this one. The majority of those who replied, either in a comment under that post, via Instagram, or through email, said that they would consider buying a black-and-white-only camera if Fujifilm made one. Some of you had great ideas for it. There’s a chance that someone at Fujifilm reads Fuji X Weekly, so I’m writing this with that in mind.

I had suggested that, if Fujifilm did make a monochrome camera, it should either be in an X-Pro3 or X100V body, and they should call it “X-Pro3 Acros” or “X100V Acros” after their film and film simulation of the same name. It was pointed out to me that it doesn’t have to be in those bodies. It could be in a cheaper body, such as the X-T200, and since it doesn’t require any special sensor, just one without a color filter array, and would have a stripped down menu, the camera could potentially be made affordable. The less expensive the camera is, the more copies it will sell. Of all the body suggestions that I received, the X-E3 was the most popular choice for a monochrome camera by Fuji X Weekly readers.

Someone had an interesting idea for a feature on a monochrome camera: color filters. The X100F has a built-in neutral-density filter, so why couldn’t a monochrome camera have built-in yellow, red and green filters (and perhaps blue)? Click a button and the filter of choice is applied. That made me wonder: is it possible to have a color filter array that can be turned on and off? With the click of a button, perhaps the X-Pro4 can become a monochrome camera, and with another click it’s back to normal. That would be cool! It might be completely impossible, but I’m sure someone smarter than I can figure it out.

49452013198_fa08a72936_c

Bountiful Peak – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-T30

The second largest response that I got from my last post, not far behind the “I want that” replies, is, “would a monochrome camera even produce better results than what I can already get with the Acros film simulation?” My initial response was, heck yes! You get a big bump in resolution. But then I was shown two different YouTube videos that do blind tests between the Leica M10 Monochrom and the Fujifilm X-T3 (here and here), and it changed my mind. I did the blind test in both videos, and I was surprised by the results. In the first blind test, which compares the Leica with the Fujifilm and a Sony A7 III, the author uses the Monochrome film simulation, and not Acros, on the X-T3. Even so, the camera that I blindly picked as I looked at the pictures was the Fujifilm. I watched the blind test part twice before making up my mind and viewing the reveal. In the second video, which compares the Leica against another Leica monochrome camera and the Fujifilm and actual film, the author uses both the Monochrome and Acros film simulations. There were five pictures to choose from, and a few looked very close so it was more difficult to pick a favorite. I was surprised that the one I picked was the X-T3 with the Monochrome film simulation. Again, I watched the blind test part twice before deciding and viewing the reveal.

I’m not sure how much stock one can put into YouTube videos, where it’s difficult to really appreciate the pictures. Even so, I made two conclusions: Fujifilm cameras are especially great for black-and-white photography and I need to shoot more with the Monochrome film simulation. I use Acros on my X-T30, but it’s about time that I create a recipe using the Monochrome film simulation, which is apparently better than I gave it credit for.

Would a Fujifilm monochrome camera be awesome? Yes, it would! Would it be better at black-and-white than your current Fujifilm camera? Probably, but not by a big margin, that’s for sure. Perhaps if you print very large, that’s when the monochrome camera would be advantageous. I would still buy one if Fujifilm made one, but it’s good to reaffirm that Fujifilm is already superb at black-and-white photography, and I’m not missing much by not owning a monochrome-only camera.

In closing, I’m very curious what your results are with the blind tests. If you watched the videos, please let me know in the comments what your results were. Which camera made the best black-and-white pictures in your opinion? Thanks!

Announced: Fujifilm X-T200

Fujifilm X-T200

Fujifilm just announced the upcoming X-T200, which is the successor to the X-T100. While the X-T200 looks a lot like the camera that it’s replacing, and some of the specs might seem identical, this is definitely an improved model. Essentially, it’s a Fujifilm X-A7 that looks like an X-T100, but with some brand new features. The camera will ship on February 27, but you can pre-order now.

The main upgrades on the X-T200 are auto-focus, video, and the rear screen. For still pictures, there’s not much to distinguish this camera over the previous model. Auto-focus got a very nice boost, with the same capabilities as the X-A7. This camera also now has the same rear screen as the X-A7. Video is a night-and-day difference. The X-T100 has disappointing video capabilities, while the X-T200 overflows in this department.

One of the interesting new features is called “digital gimbal” which essentially crops the image slightly to make a smooth video without image stabilization. It’s similar to what GoPro has on their new models. It’s a great addition for those who plan to use the camera for video.

Who is it for? The X-T200 would make an excellent first interchangeable-lens camera for someone new to photography. It could be a great second body for someone who already has another Fujifilm X camera. Those who vlog or make YouTube videos might especially appreciate this model.

The X-T100 was clearly a step-down from the X-T20, both in price and features, while the X-T200 keeps up with the X-T30 quite well, and is a little cheaper, but not by a huge amount. It is a Bayer sensor camera and not X-Trans, and because of that it’s missing some of the options that the X-T30 has, yet the X-T200 has some features that the X-Trans model doesn’t. I would recommend the X-T30, but if you want to save a little money, the X-T200 is a surprisingly solid alternative. The X-A7 doesn’t have the “digital gimbal” feature found on the X-T200, but it’s also a little cheaper, so if you don’t need it, you might as well buy the X-A7 instead, because it’s essentially the same camera, just in a different shape. For still photography, the X-T100 is basically just as good as the X-T200, and you can pick it up for much less, but if video is important to you, the X-T200 is the camera to buy.

This post contains affiliate links. I will be compensated a small amount if you make a purchase after clicking my links.

Fujifilm X-T200 (Body Only) $700   B&H   Amazon
Fujifilm X-T200 w/15-45mm lens $800   B&H   Amazon

When Weather Sealed Cameras Matter

49373852362_a93e1fea25_c

Cold Cargo – Salt Lake City, UT – Fujifilm X-T1

I’ve always felt that, for me, a weather sealed camera isn’t essential. It’s certainly a nice feature, but not something I just have to have. Cameras that aren’t weather sealed can handle the elements to an extent, and oftentimes there are easy steps to mitigate the weather conditions (such as an umbrella), so I haven’t found it to be a limiting factor to my photography. Yet, there have been times that having a weather sealed camera has allowed me to “get the shot” when I might not have otherwise.

Fujifilm has a few cameras with weather sealing. The X-T0, X-Pro, and X-H series are all weather sealed, while the X-T00, X-T000, X-A, X-M, XF, X-E, X100, and X00 series (am I missing any?) are not. I’ve owned a few of these non-weather-sealed cameras, and I’ve used them with success in conditions that might warrant weather sealing. Take a look at the pictures below:

29741037803_8a3d1260d3_c

Monte Cristo Mountain Snow – Monte Cristo Mountains, UT – Fujifilm X-E1

49125526887_fc86e72150_c

Out In The Cold – Cedar City, UT – Fujifilm X-T30

38607571001_7aecf9983c_c

Umbrella Overpass – Edmonds, WA – Fujifilm X100F

33953518211_14ea2f6fcf_c

Dust In The Wind – Bonneville Salt Flats, UT – Fujifilm X-E1

The photographs above were all captured in conditions where a weather sealed camera would have been nice, but I got along just fine without it. The X-E1, X100F and X-T30, which are the cameras that I used for those pictures, are not weather sealed; despite that, I was able to get the picture that I wanted. I didn’t allow it limit my photography.

A weather sealed camera allows you to photograph with confidence in more extreme conditions, such as cold, rain, snow and dust. While non-weather-sealed cameras might get the job done, a weather sealed camera definitely will. Each time that I pushed the envelope on what my camera was designed to handle, it worked fine, but I worried about it. I hoped that I wasn’t ruining an expensive photographic tool.

There was one situation where I know that if I hadn’t used a weather sealed camera, I would have ruined the camera, or at least would have had to have it serviced. More likely, I wouldn’t have photographed at all, knowing that the camera couldn’t handle it, and I would have missed some great pictures. But I did have a weather sealed camera, and I have the shots that I wanted. Those pictures, which were captured on a windy day at Great Sand Dunes National Park in Colorado using an X-Pro2, are below:

42769948535_3b2036238a_c

From Dust To Dust – Great Sand Dunes NP, CO – Fujifilm X-Pro2

42769948315_f38cd740c5_c

Sandal – Great Sand Dunes NP, CO – Fujifilm X-Pro2

41864550960_b88010e004_c

Passerby – Great Sand Dunes NP, CO – Fujifilm X-Pro2

The conclusion is this: you don’t need a weather sealed camera until you do. Almost always your non-weather-sealed camera will suffice, especially if you take action to mitigate the conditions, but occasionally you might run into a situation where you really do need weather sealed gear. In those circumstances, you’ll either get the shot because of your camera, you’ll get the shot in spite of your camera (and you might find yourself in the market for a new one), or you won’t get the shot because of your camera. I do think those situations are rare for most people, and whether or not you have weather sealed gear is unimportant for most, but it’s sure nice to have it when you need it.

3 New Cameras Confirmed

Fujifilm Film Simulation Blog

In my last post I mentioned the rumor that Fujifilm will be releasing three new cameras this spring. The details were pretty limited at that time, but a lot more information has come out since then (thank you, Fujirumors), so I wanted to pass along a quick update to those who are interested.

One of the three cameras will be the X-T4, which will be the successor for both the X-T3 and X-H1. It will be nearly identical to the X-T3, but with a slightly larger body, and will feature in-body-image-stabilization (IBIS) and 6K video capabilities. I’m not sure if it will use the X-Trans IV sensor and X-Processor 4, or if X-Trans V is right around the corner. Clearly, it’s a merger of the X-T and X-H lines, and will be Fujifilm’s flagship APS-C camera. I’m sure it will be priced higher than the X-T3.

Another camera will be the X100V, which will indeed have a redesigned lens. The X100 series has had the same lens from the beginning, so this will be the first with different optics. What will be different about it is unknown. Details are pretty vague right now, but I’m sure in the coming weeks we’ll know much more.

The third camera will be the X-T200, the successor to the X-T100. It sounds like it will be essentially the same camera as the X-A7, but in the shape of the X-T100. In other words, the rear screen, auto-focus and video capabilities will be much improved, and everything else will be pretty much the same.

And, apparently, there will be no new GFX camera in 2020, but sometime in 2021 instead. They are working on one, that’s already been determined, but I guess aren’t ready to release it for awhile. That concludes your gear update for today.

3 New Fujifilm Cameras Coming Soon!

Fujifilm X100F Blog

There’s some exciting news that I want to pass along to you. I don’t want Fuji X Weekly to be completely centered on gear, but I also want to keep you in the know, and so I try to keep things balanced. Anyway, according to Fujirumors.com, there are three new Fujifilm cameras coming this spring. One is the X100V, which will replace the excellent X100F. Another, which might be called X-T3s or X-T5 (in Japan, the number four is bad luck), will replace the not-very-old X-T3. The third is a mystery, but I’m betting that it’s a medium-format GFX camera. Let’s briefly talk about each.

The X100V has been whispered and rumored across the internet for many months. There’s no surprise that it’s coming soon. What we don’t know is how much different it will be from the X100F. It will certainly have the 26-megapixel X-Trans IV sensor and processor, and probably all of the new JPEG tools of the X-Pro3, but beyond that nobody knows. There’s been speculation for some time that Fujifilm redesigned the lens, but I don’t know if that’s true or not. It could be a mild update to the X100F, which makes sense, because if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. Or it could be a moderate overhaul, similar to what Fujifilm did with the X-Pro3. We will know soon enough.

It’s very surprising to me that Fujifilm will be announcing a replacement to the X-T3 so soon. Why? Because the X-T3 will only be one-and-a-half years old when its successor is released. Digital technology advances quickly, but I’m not sure there’s enough to justify a whole new camera in that short amount of time. Is there a new sensor coming? New processor? If not, a simple firmware update would breathe a second wind into what’s already a successful camera model. If there’s nothing big to separate the upcoming model from the current one, I don’t think it will be a huge success because there’s no incentive to buy the new camera. Why pay more for something that’s essentially exactly the same? It will be interesting to see what Fujifilm has up its sleeve on this one.

The third camera is an unknown model, but fuzzy pictures have leaked out of Japan of a new GFX body. It could be a non-IBIS 100-megapixel camera. It could be a 50-megapixel body with IBIS. It could be the first GFX with an X-Trans sensor. Fujifilm has done well in the medium-format market, quickly setting themselves up as the leader, so it would be unsurprising if they added another camera to the GFX lineup.

What other cameras should Fujifilm release in 2020? I’d like to see an X70 but with an X-Trans IV sensor. How about an X-H2? While it was well-received by users, I don’t believe the X-H1 was especially commercially successful, but Fujifilm should have at least one APS-C camera with IBIS for those who want it, so an X-H2 makes sense. That is, unless the X-T3 successor has IBIS. The X-E line is due for an update. Keep the body the same, but put the X-Trans IV sensor inside, and you have an X-E5. Simple enough, right? It will be exciting to see whatever is forthcoming from Fujifilm, and I will do my best on the Fuji X Weekly blog to keep you updated, but hopefully without overwhelming you with gear posts.