I’ve never been a staunch advocate of In Body Image Stabilization (IBIS). For the 25+ years that I’ve been creating photographs, only in the last four or five years have I even owned a camera with IBIS, and it has had only a minimal effect on my photography. So I’ve had a take it or leave it attitude towards it—nice to have sometimes, but far from essential. Nowadays, most of my cameras have built-in stabilization, including my X-E5, X-T5, X100VI, GFX100S II, X-T4 ES, Ricoh GR IV, and more. I still have many without IBIS, including an X-E4, X-T30, X100V, and some others. Yes, I own way too many cameras.
For the most part, the inclusion or exclusion of stabilization hasn’t had any significant impact on my photography. I’m not much of a videographer; if I were, I’d want IBIS—in fact, my wife is a videographer, and IBIS is essential for her. With that said, I know of several people who have done amazing video work on non-stabilized cameras. If I used long telephoto lenses, I’d want IBIS. I used to own the Fujinon 100-400mm, but I rarely used it, so I sold it—for that lens, IBIS can be helpful. The longer the lens, the more camera shake is exaggerated, and the more important IBIS is for handheld photography; the wider the lens, the less you need the camera to be stabilized.
Fujifilm X100V at 1/3 second exposure handheld
The picture above is nothing special, but, at 1/3 second, I do believe it is the longest I’ve successfully handheld a non-IBIS camera. The leaf shutter in the X100V certainly helped, but mostly I just utilized good techniques, including bracing myself and slowly exhaling as I lightly pressed the shutter release button, which was set on a two-second self-timer. It took several tries to get one sharp result. It was more work than that particular picture was worth, but it does demonstrate that the lack of IBIS isn’t necessarily a major deal.
Aside from that, I could always carry a tripod with me. Even a monopod will potentially offer the stabilization necessary for slow shutter speeds, but a tripod ensures the camera is perfectly still and I’ll get a sharp picture. Before I had cameras with IBIS, I would usually use a tripod for any shutter speed as long as or longer than half the reciprocal focal length of the lens. For example, with a 50mm lens, I can, with good techniques, get a sharp photo as slow as 1/30; anything slower than that needs a tripod. Even in that example, using 1/30th shutter speed with the 50mm lens is definitely pushing the envelope of what I can do, and it might depend on how much coffee I’ve had that day. If the lens is wider, the shutter speed can be slower. For a 12mm lens, 1/8 might not need a tripod, but 1/6 probably does.
I hate carrying tripods. Especially when traveling, or if I have to hike somewhere, the last thing I want is a tripod. When I was younger, carrying a tripod was less of a big deal (and I’m sure they were heavier back then, too), but now that I’m in my mid-40’s, it’s annoying, and I’d rather avoid it. That’s where IBIS comes in handy. I can go slower and not think twice about it. I don’t have to utilize crazy techniques. I can leave the tripod at home, and just enjoy photography—the camera will take care of my shakiness.
So even though I’m not a big IBIS advocate, and it’s still a feature that 99% of the time I see as nonessential for me, it can certainly be quite handy. It was definitely nice to have on my recent trip to The Great Smoky Mountains National Park, where I utilized it a number of times for flowing streams and waterfall pictures. I don’t think that every camera needs to have IBIS; however, when I’m packing my camera bag for an adventure, if I think I might be shooting in low-light situations or want a slow shutter speed for effect, you better believe that at least one of my bodies will be stabilized. Having at least one camera with IBIS is good to have.
There’s been a lot of discussions about the rumored upcoming Fujifilm GFX100RF, which might get announced next month. Supposedly, it will be a compact 100mp medium-format fixed-lens camera similar to the X100-series and about the size of an X-Pro3. It won’t have IBIS, and the lens will be 35mm f/4, which are major points of contention for some. I figured that this might be a good opportunity to explore if those two design choices will be crippling for the camera, or if it is much ado about nothing.
I don’t have any inside information on the upcoming camera. Fujifilm hasn’t shared anything about it with me, not even if there is a camera forthcoming. I only know as much as the next person, and what I do know I read on Fujirumors. Patrick has a pretty solid track record, so there’s a good chance that everything he has shared about the camera is correct, but until it is announced by Fujifilm, nothing can be known with 100% certainty. In other words, anytime that we’re discussing rumors, it should be taken with a grain of salt.
Personally, I’m really excited for the GFX100RF. I believe that an X100-like GFX camera is going to be a major success for Fujifilm. While I don’t anticipate it being as viral as the X100VI, I do think it will have strong demand. It’s also about time that Fujifilm offers a GFX camera with manual tactile controls (is not PASM). The only other one is the long-discontinued GFX50R. If the GFX100RF is a big success, I bet that Fujifilm will begin work on a long-hoped-for GFX50R successor. If sales of the GFX100RF turn out to be disappointing, I don’t anticipate a retro-styled GFX camera for a long time, if ever. In my opinion, this is a crucial release, a lot hinges on it.
Fujifilm GFX100S II & Fujinon GF 30mm f/3.5 at f/4 – PRO Negative 160C
The upcoming GFX100RF will essentially be the digital version of the Fujifilm GA645W, a fixed-lens 120 film camera from the 1990’s. The GA645W has a 45mm f/5.6 lens, which is 25mm full-frame-equivalent, and with a depth-of-field similar to f/3.2. The GFX100RF will have a 35mm f/4 lens, which is 28mm full-frame-equivalent, and with a depth-of-field similar to f/3.2. It’s not quite as wide as the GA645W, but pretty close. The Fujifilm X70, with its 18.5mm (28mm full-frame-equivalent) lens, might also be considered comparable.
Some people have said that f/4 is much too small for a maximum aperture on the upcoming GFX camera, since f/4 is not especially impressive. Unfortunately, a larger maximum aperture lens would require the camera to be bigger and heavier. Would an f/2.8 lens be nice? For sure, yes. But, at what cost? I’m sure Fujifilm was faced with a lot of difficult choices as they developed the prototype, and as they weighed the pros and cons, they made what they felt were the best decisions. So we have f/4, which is not uncommon for GFX. I count six GF lenses in the current lineup with a maximum aperture of f/4, plus two at f/3.5, and four with a maximum aperture smaller than f/4. Only five GF lenses have a maximum aperture larger than f/3.5. The decision to go with f/4 should not be all that surprising, and I doubt many—if any—in the GFX world were shocked by it.
Fujifilm GFX100S II at ISO 6400 & Fujinon GF 30mm f/3.5 at f/4 – Kodak Tri-X 400
GFX cameras are good for high-ISO photography. It’s kind of a paradox of digital medium-format: it’s good that it’s better at high-ISOs, because you’re going to need it, since the maximum apertures are typically not as large as smaller sensor formats. There are pros and cons to everything. Unsurprisingly, you’re going to find tradeoffs. It is what it is.
Not all Fujifilm cameras have in-body-image-stabilization (IBIS), but most of the GFX models do (only the original two don’t). There are a couple of situations where IBIS is especially helpful, plus a few where it can be nice to have. One is video. IBIS is not a requirement for video, but it is particularly convenient when handholding without a gimbal. Another is telephoto lenses. The longer the lens, the more useful IBIS is. Low-light situations without a tripod is an example of when it can be nice to have. For many circumstances, IBIS is not particularly necessary, especially for wide-angle lenses. Some who say that they need IBIS might discover that their photography wouldn’t suffer if it was turned off—they’re not giving themselves enough credit for how well they can hold still.
Fujifilm GFX100S II at 1/20 & Fujinon GF 30mm f/3.5 at f/16 – Kodak Tri-X 400
The rule of thumb is that, without IBIS, whatever the focal length of the lens is (or in the case of Fujifilm cameras, the full-frame-equivalent focal length), the minimum shutter speed should be a similar number. For example, if the X-series lens is 16mm, which is 24mm full-frame-equivalent, the slowest hand-held shutter speed is around 1/25. If the lens is 90mm, which has a full-frame-equivalent focal length of 135mm, the slowest hand-held shutter speed is around 1/125. With good techniques, you can often get a sharp picture with even slower shutter speeds. For the GFX100RF, with its 35mm lens (28mm full-frame-equivalent), the slowest hand-held shutter speed will be about 1/30.
There’s a myth floating around that IBIS is more necessary with 100mp sensors than with lower-resolution sensors. That’s simply not true. More resolution does not equal a bigger need for IBIS in order to get sharp photographs. A 100mp sensor has no more or less of a need for IBIS than a 12mp sensor. A sharp photo is a sharp photo no matter the resolution, and a blurry image is blurry no matter the resolution. The myth is false, and not based on reality.
Fujifilm GFX100S II at 1/25 & Fujinon GF 30mm f/3.5 at f/9 – Superia Negative
Massive crop from the above photo
I put all of this to the test yesterday. Obviously, I don’t have access to a GFX100RF. I’m sure some people have it in their hands right now, but I don’t. I do own a GFX100S II and a Fujinon GF 30mm f/3.5 lens (which doesn’t have OIS). So I turned IBIS off. I kept the aperture at f/4 or smaller. I did my best to simulate the upcoming camera, although the GFX100S II is much larger and heavier, and with PASM. The 30mm lens is 24mm full-frame-equivalent (16mm on X-series), so a little wider than what the GFX100RF will have.
The f/4 maximum aperture wasn’t a major issue. Wide-angle photography is not known for shallow depths-of-field. While it is possible to achieve a shallow depth-of-field, I don’t anticipate this being a major selling point of the camera. I imagine that “f/8 and be there” will be a much more typical shooting philosophy. In low-light situations, I did have to increase the ISO higher than I would have had to if I had used my X-series gear, but thankfully the camera does well with high-ISO.
I tested handholding the camera at slow shutter speeds. Unsurprisingly, I consistently achieved sharp photographs at 1/25, with probably a 90% success rate. At 1/20, the success rate was closer to 60%. At 1/15, the success rate was probably 30%. I was able to get one sharp photo at 1/13. Because the lens on the GFX100RF will be a little less wide-angle, the shutter speed should be increased slightly. I suspect that it will be roughly a 90% rate at 1/30, 60% at 1/25, 30% at 1/20, and maybe 10% at 1/15. Obviously, results will vary from person-to-person, depending on your technique and ability to hold still.
Fujifilm GFX100S II at 1/13 & Fujinon GF 30mm f/3.5 at f/4 – Superia Negative
Massive crop from the above photo
While IBIS would have been a nice feature, I don’t think its exclusion is a major issue. I’m sure it was a compromise in order to keep the size, weight, and price down. This camera—like every other camera that’s ever been made—is not for everyone. It has advantages and disadvantages. It will be especially great for some situations and use-cases, and not so much for others. Personally, I plan to buy it; however, probably not on the announcement day. Like the GFX100S II, I’ll have to save up and probably sell some gear in order to afford it. I think it’s going to be a lot of fun, so I’m excited to try it someday when the opportunity comes.
I love to be creative, and to challenge myself to occasionally use curious techniques. While on the Central Coast of California tour earlier this month, one method I infrequently employed was a slow shutter speed handheld to purposefully achieve blurred images. When doing this, it’s possible to get an impressionist or abstract image that might be more interesting—or, at least, more unique—than if a quicker shutter or tripod had been used. I wouldn’t want to do this with every photograph, but when used sporadically (or maybe for a particular project), the results can be intriguing.
Neutral Density filters, more commonly called ND filters, are very useful. It’s worthwhile to have at least one ND filter available for your photography. Maybe you don’t know which one (or ones) to own and why you’d use it. I recently got some ND filters, and perhaps my story will be helpful to you.
In my How to get Filmic Photographs from your iPhone article I explained that my wife has a Sandmarc case for her iPhone 13 Pro. I thought she’d also appreciate some ND filters for her phone, since she uses it regularly for videography, so I got her three Sandmarc ND filters that can attach to her iPhone case. You see, ND filters are common in cinematography because you want a shutter speed close to the frames-per-second you’re recording in order to avoid jutter (a.k.a. stutter or choppy) when panning or whenever there is movement. Getting a slow enough shutter speed in bright conditions can be difficult without an ND filter. Unfortunately, the ND filters didn’t really work out with her iPhone workflow, so they initially went unused. Not wanting to let the filters go to waste, I reimagined how they could be utilized, and I figured out how to make them work for me. Now I see them as an essential tool for my photography!
Before I get to the filters, I want to briefly talk about one other Sandmarc item I have: iPhone Tripod, Compact Edition. This was also for my wife, but she doesn’t use it often—only occasionally—so I borrow it regularly, except that I use it with my Fujifilm cameras and not my phone. I need a small tripod for my desk when I do the SOOC Live broadcasts, but the one I’ve owned for years kind of sucks and just barely works; however, with Season 3, I began using the Sandmarc tripod, and it is so much better—perfect for the job! I also discovered that it’s great for travel because it folds up very small and doesn’t take up much space (about 8.5 inches). The tripod only expands to a little taller than two feet, but it is sturdy enough to hold my X-T5 with a lens as large as the Fujinon 90mm, so for occasional casual use—which is all I ever use tripods for in my photography—it is just fine. Since getting it, the Sandmarc tripod has become my most-used. I don’t think that it’s intended for “real” cameras like the Fujifilm X-T5, but that’s what I use it for, and it works great. I bring this up because tripods are closely associate with ND filters.
Neutral Density filters block the amount of light entering the lens, which allows for slower shutter speeds. Why would you want to do this? I already mentioned that in cinematography, slowing the shutter can reduce juttering. In still photography, slowing down the shutter allows you to show motion by way of blurring moving things, and it allows for high-ISO photography in bright conditions.
Sandmarc’s iPhone ND filters come in a pack of three: ND16, ND32, and ND64. The ND16 reduces light by four stops, the ND32 reduces by five stops, and the ND64 reduces by six stops. I most commonly use the ND16, but for longer exposures, the other two certainly come in handy. Did I mention that Sandmarc’s ND filters are also polarized? They are! Polarizers reduce glare and haze, which can be particularly useful when photographing water. Pretty cool, eh?
So if these ND filters are made for iPhones, how am I using them on my Fujifilm cameras? Technically, I’m not using them on my camera, I’m attaching them to my Fujinon 27mm f/2.8 lens. The ND filters have 40.5mm threads, and the 27mm lens accepts 39mm threads, so I purchased a cheap Rise 39mm-40.5mm step-up ring, which allows me to use the Sandmarc ND filters on my Fujinon lens. It works like a charm!
There are three ways in which I’ve integrated ND filters into my photography: slow shutter with a tripod, slow shutter without a tripod, and high-ISO in daylight. I’ll briefly explain each below.
The classic way ND filters are used for still photography is with a tripod. By utilizing a slow shutter speed, things within the frame that are moving will become a blur. Waterfalls are probably the most common subject for this technique, where water appears to be a streak of blur or even a mist if the exposure is long enough. Typically, a maximum shutter speed of 1/15 is required for blurring the subject, but there are a few factors—lens focal length, speed and distance of the subject, desired blur—that could affect the necessary shutter speed, either faster or slower. The longer the shutter is open, the more blur you will get. Because you want everything that’s not moving to be sharp, a tripod is required for this technique.
Who says that pictures have to be sharp? Maybe you want everything in the frame to be blurry! For this, you simply remove the tripod and use a slow shutter while the camera is handheld. Panning is one example of this. Using a slow shutter speed without a tripod is probably the most difficult ND filter technique, but there is a lot of opportunity for creativity, which means there is potential for dramatic or interesting photographs. The longer the exposure the more difficult this technique is—unless you’re really going for abstract art—so be careful not to set the shutter too slow.
ISO 25600, f/2.8, 1/350 — Ilford HP5 Plus 400 Push ProcessRecipe
You might think that purposefully setting a high-ISO in bright daylight is a weird thing to do. The general advice given since the beginning of photography is to use the lowest ISO that you can get away with. If you can use ISO 200, use ISO 200. If you need to bump it up to ISO 400 because the light is dimmer, use ISO 400. Only use ISO 800 if you have to. And ISO 1600 should be used with extreme caution. ISOs higher than that are for emergency purposes only. But is that still good advice? In my opinion, Fujifilm cameras are excellent at high-ISO because—thanks to the X-Trans sensor and processor—they better control the aesthetic of digital noise, rendering it more like film grain. In other words, purposefully using high-ISOs can produce a more analog-like result. Some of my Film Simulation Recipes actually require ultra-high ISOs, and using them in bright daylight can be difficult; however, ND filters make it much more practical. My X100V has a built-in ND filter, but my other Fujifilm cameras do not; ND filters have opened up the opportunity to use these high-ISO Recipes in situations that would be much more difficult otherwise—this is how I’m most often using my Sandmarc ND filters.
Note: the top four pictures were captured with a Fujifilm X-E4 & Fujinon 35mm f/2; images 1, 2 & 4 are Pacific Blues and image 3 is Kodak Portra 400 v2. The other pictures were captured using my Fujifilm X-T5 & Fujinon 27mm f/2.8 with a Sandmarc ND filter attached.
Nature in Motion – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
The rule-of-thumb that I was taught in photography school is that the minimum shutter speed should be the closest number to the focal-length of lens for sharp handheld photographs. This, of course, is assuming good techniques (such as how you stand, how you hold the camera, and how you breathe while capturing a picture). Fujifilm X cameras are crop sensor, so we have to take that into account. For example, the 23mm lens on my Fujifilm X100V is 34.5mm full-frame equivalent, so the minimum shutter speed for hand-held (not on tripod) pictures should be 1/40, perhaps 1/30 if you’re good. If you go less than that you are in real danger of “camera-shake” blur—fuzzy pictures from your movement. Even above that, if you aren’t careful, you could get it, so I personally try not to go slower than 1/60 handheld on my X100V if I can help it. If you aren’t using good techniques at all, you might even have to use 1/125 or faster to ensure sharp pictures.
But what happens when you purposefully go slower? What happens when you deliberately shake your camera during exposure for creative effect? Let’s find out!
Note: this was a Creative Collective article, but now it’s available to everyone.
Path Insecure – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
So why did I do this? For fun. To spark creativity. Because I like doing unconventional things just to see what happens. Maybe this will help spark some creativity in you, too.
I set the shutter speed on my X100V to 1/8, which is much too slow for handheld photography. Typically, the camera would be on a tripod with such a slow shutter speed. The exact shutter speed you will need depends on the focal-length of the lens. I feel that 1/8 worked well for this camera, but if you were using a more wide-angle lens you might need to go even slower, and if you are using a more telephoto lens you might need to be a little faster.
I utilized the camera’s built-in Neutral Density filter because the shutter was going to let in a lot of light. If your camera doesn’t have a built-in ND filter, you could screw an ND filter onto the end of the lens. If that isn’t an option, simply try this technique indoors, or just before the sun rises or right after it sets, or on darker days.
I set the Flash to On. Why? My theory was that the flash would make whatever it bounced off of “sharp” for a moment, so that there would be a little sharpness in the otherwise blurry picture. I think if you are close enough to the subject this does work, and can create a ghostly effect, but was unnecessary for most of my images.
The other settings? Both Aperture and ISO were in Auto (basically, I was operating in Shutter Priority). I used the Negative Print film simulation recipe.
When I opened the shutter, I moved the camera around. Sometimes just a little. Sometimes a lot. I moved it up or down or left or right. I even tried a swirly motion a couple of times. I also tried pushing the camera forward and pulling it back. Whichever direction you move the camera and how much you move the camera during the 1/8 exposure will greatly affect the outcome, so try different ideas.
When you do this, there are a few various looks that you get. One is an abstract impressionist image, such as in Nature in Motion at the top and Three Trees at the bottom. Another is a ghostly almost-double-exposure-like picture, such as in Ghostly Chair below. A third is simply a soft dream-like fuzziness, like in Hidden Trash below. Path Insecure (above) and Fading Memories (below) are a little bit of impressionism and dream-like fuzziness mixed together.
Ghostly Chair – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Hidden Trash – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Fading Memories – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
Three Trees – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X100V
This isn’t a technique for everyone, and certainly not for every photo. I could see it being a project. Maybe use this technique for a specific topic. Perhaps you’ll find that you like it more than you thought you would. If you are looking for something different to try, this might be just what you need.
