Photokina 2014: Fujifilm interview - 'Over the past few months I’ve been getting more confident': Digital Photography Review

Article

Toshihisa Iida, Senior Manager of Sales & Marketing in Fujifilm's Optical Device & Electronic Imaging products division. Pictured at Photokina 2014.

DPReview attended the Photokina trade show last week in Cologne Germany, and as well as stand reports and hands-on looks at the major new products we also sat down with executives from several of the major camera manufacturers.

In this interview, we speak to Toshihisa Iida, Senior Manager of Sales & Marketing in Fujifilm's Optical Device & Electronic Imaging products division.

Last time we spoke you had just released the X-T1. How have people reacted to it?

Very well, not only in Japan but also in the rest of Asia and all over the world. Demand was twice as high as we expected, so we’re very pleased. A lot of people have told me that they consider the product to be a game-changer.

You had to increase manufacturing capacity - is that correct?

Yes. Our colleagues in Germany especially were asking us to increase capacity, but we’re catching up now, which is why we’ve introduced the new graphite silver edition of the X-T1 at Photokina. In terms of hardware, the main difference is the coating of the body material, which is in three layers. The finished product has a premium look, and the finish and all the dials have been carefully designed to match the body.

Mechanically, the 'graphite silver' edition X-T1 is the same as the conventional black version but it is coated differently for added durability (and of course a different, silver finish).

At the same time we’re releasing new firmware including electronic shutter, the new ‘natural view’ mode and classic chrome film emulation. And that firmware will also be available for the existing X-T1 from December. We’re also adding several other improvements, including manual exposure in video mode, customization of the ‘Q’ button and direct autofocus area selection and so on.

What is your strategy for developing the X-series?

In the X30 and X100T products which we announced for this show our main focus is improvements to the viewfinder and to usability. We didn’t change the lens or sensor of either camera but we did make changes to usability including additional custom options, dial refinements and so on.

Is the AF system in the X100T changed compared to the X100S?

It’s basically the same, but the algorithms have been a little changed.

Do you get much feedback from X100 customers that they want different focal lengths?

Yes, and that’s why we introduced the wide-angle and teleconverter lenses. There is some demand but there’s always a balance between quality and size. I think at the moment we’re doing the right thing by keeping the same lens but offering the converters.

Were the new features in the X30 and X100T based on customer feedback?

Yes. We’re not playing for numbers anymore. Real usability is very important - it’s a key focus. In terms of battery life, we’ve changed the battery in the X30, almost doubling the number of shots. Plus we’ve introduced USB charging. With the X100T, although the battery is unchanged and the battery life is the same, the indicator is more consistent, and should show a more accurate indication of charge level.

In terms of mirrorless, our focus is on high-end. We want to lead the market for high-end mirrorless and in order to do that, a key factor is the lens lineup. We’re constantly doing our best to deliver and develop best-in-class lenses.

Your roadmap for lenses through to the end of 2015 - does this represent lenses that your X-series customers have been asking for?

Yes. We’ve had some consistent feedback from many customers, especially professionals. Globally we now have more than 300 of what we call ‘X Photographers’ who have been invested in the X-series from the beginning and advise us constantly. For example the 90mm F2 was not in our previous roadmap but we got a lot of requests. So we listened and we added it based on that feedback.

Among the lenses on Fujifilm's roadmap for 2015 is a weatherproof 16-55mm F2.8 standard zoom, which should make a good companion to the company's X-T1.

Was that also the case for the 56mm F1.2 APD?

The APD was actually suggested by our technical R&D team, who had this 'magical' filter, so we added it.

You’ve talked about the X30 and X100T, and how you haven’t changed the sensors. What comes next for X-Trans? 16MP has been a constant now for several years.

Of course we are committed to the APS-C format, and we’re still investing it. In terms of resolution, our lenses are so sharp, there’s scope for higher resolution to maximize the capabilities of the lenses. We could also improve sensitivity, which is already good, but there’s some room for improvement. Also speed - we can definitely look at this.

One thing we’ve found with X-Trans sensors is that while they’re very capable for stills, they’re not good for video.

Yes, sure, we recognize that. Our customers have pointed it out.

Is video getting more important for Fujifilm?

Yes, for everybody. Of course the still image is still of primary importance but we can’t ignore video, which is getting more and more important.

How important is it to you to have a Fujifilm X-Trans sensor inside your cameras?

It’s very important to maximize quality, especially in still images. I think we do need X-Trans. There’s no low-pass filter and moire is minimized.

Fujfilm's new X100T features the same 16MP sensor as its predecessor but in a redesigned body and with an improved hybrid viewfinder.

A lot of our readers would love a full-frame X100-type camera with any sensor inside it, X-Trans or not. Could this ever be a possibility?

Bayer or X-Trans, the format is very important and at the moment I think that APS-C is the best format in terms of size, speed, quality and price. A full-frame camera would be bigger, more expensive and maybe slower too.

Fujifilm is evidently focused on the high end of the market, but how do you attract new photographers to the X system?

We don’t ignore anyone. Our cameras aren’t just for high-end users, and we keep trying to find the best way to communicate that.

Is it still difficult to sell mirrorless cameras in the USA?

The X-T1 is selling well, even in the USA which is very encouraging. There are customers who have been using big Canon and Nikon DSLRs with lots of lenses and they’ve been looking for something small and light without compromising quality.

Small, entry-level mirrorless cameras are hard to sell in the US, but in terms of high-end mirrorless there are a lot of enthusiast photographers in the USA and all over the world. Those customers are waiting for something small and compact which doesn’t comprise on quality. To be honest we’re pretty clear about what we need to do, and I think we’re moving in the right direction.

Last time we spoke you expressed the opinion that if Canon and Nikon got into mirrorless more seriously it would help everybody - has that situation changed in the past 6 months?

A lot has happened over the past few months. If you look at CIPA statistics for the first seven months of this year, the mirrorless market increased by more than 40% by value. SLRs were down by around 20%. The biggest reason is that we introduced cameras like the X-E2 and X-T1, Sony introduced the Alpha 7 and Olympus introduced the E-M1. All high-end mirrorless. That changes the perception of mirrorless in the market. Of course if Canon and Nikon get more serious about mirrorless the market will benefit, but whether they do or not…

Over the past three or four months I’ve been getting more and more confident about the future of mirrorless. At a recent internal conference I made the point that 100 years have now passed since the first rangefinder and sixty years since the first SLR. So what is the next revolution? The evolution from DSLR to mirrorless is our main message at Photokina.

Click here for more interviews

Comments

Total comments: 215

3 things which Fujifilm need to fix

Flash support: work with 3rd party flash vendors to get some products out there to match what is available for Canon and Nikon SLRs. It is clear that flashes are not Fujifilm's area of specialty, so forget about "not invented here" and "can't share information", learn from market successes like the IBM PC and Linux: share information = grow your market

Autofocus: the X range of bodies and lenses might be the camera equivalent of the "best running shoes on the planet" but the awful and inconsistent autofocus is like a stone in the shoe. Eventually the runner will get tired of the pain and take off the shoes.

Lens design: include end users early in the design process. Continuing flaws in the lenses are aperture rings that are not firm enough & change by brushing them lightly), and zoom lenses with no capability to put a lens ring with tripod mount onto the lens. Some simple design changes could make a big difference. Another "stone in the shoe".

0 upvotes

Great to see Fuji getting the credit they deserve. Having worked there for over 18 years as a Pro Products guy, you have to understand their philosophy. They will not make full frame. Photographers THINK they need it, but size and cost go WAY up and quality...not. Medium format will not happen. Remember, Fuji MAKES the Hasselblad stuff. How many are sold? Profit? Not so much.
What Fuji needs to make, now that they have extension tubes coming, is a LONG macro focal length. Their samples were shot with a 35mm 1.4. No serious nature micro shooter would use that. I'm using extension tubes on the 55-200 and loving it, but a 200 micro lens would be the best. Shooting close up nature with anything shorter eliminates depth of field control, compression as an addition to DOF, and WORKING DISTANCE. All needed for field work.
It's all about color, contrast and sharpness, just like with film. Video? Buy a video camera. Anything that does everything does nothing well.

1 upvote

Forget about small format. I want a full frame mirrorless medium format with 645 size sensor camera. Fujifilm should make a medium format version of all the X series cameras. They will be game changers!

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

And sell like hotcakes.

0 upvotes

This interview was so much better than the Canon Exec. I would add that I think Pro Level wireless TTL flash would drive pro adoption. Canon and Nikon already have that in spades, but no mirrorless company has great options for this. Sony has some options. And I am not talking about the flash controlled optical TTL, thats crap for an outdoor wedding. I am talking pocket wizards, Quantums, or Radio Poppers. "Radio wireless, not optical"

How hard would it be for Fuji to partner with one of these companies to help them put something out for their X-series. Hard to shoot events with manual flash unless you have light meter built into your head. And who wants a 1970's phone cord stuck to their hot shoe?

Comment edited 48 seconds after posting

3 upvotes

+1 once all the new lenses are out it seems like a powerful flash system will be the final frontier for Fuji to go fully pro. You hear a lot of "the IQ is so good I use natural light now" but really that just means "I like my Fuji so much I'll use it even though it's crippled". Of course, it all depends on the client whether they like the "film grain" look you get from a fuji shooting in the dark.

1 upvote

Apparently Fuji ARE working with Nissin to get their i40 flash to work with TTL metering, but making it work requires firmware changes for it to work and Fuji hasn't got that done yet.

http://www.fujirumors.com/delayed-nissin-i40-coming-to-mid-novemberlate-fall/

I agree about manual flash at events. It's fine for studio or creative work where people are willing to "model" for you, but I don't want to mess around with test flash pops while people are standing around trying to enjoy the ambiance.

1 upvote

Thanks Jeremy, I tend to find "I shoot natural light" usually (not always) means I dont know how to use flash in an easy workable way. No excuse for Canon and Nikon Shooters.

Does that Nissin flash work wirelessly? I am not sure I see the excitement around that flash.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

I keep forgetting the details. Part of it is just that people are so unhappy with the Fuji flashes even when mounted on the hotshoe and thus having TTL.

It has a video/modeling LED light which is really cool.

It claims to have wireless TTL, but the marketing text is confusing and I have no idea whether the Fuji support will include that feature (as you can see at the link below, they single out Fuji in terms of not promising anything):

http://www.nissindigital.com/i40.html

0 upvotes

And yeah I've been a "I shoot available light" person who just hated flash too, but at least on the "fujixseries" forum I've seen people who use flash with Canon (and know what's going on with that) but not with Fuji for exactly the reasons your saying. The question is just how many people actually do that versus just not using Fuji in flash-needing situations.

1 upvote

OK I see. I didnt realize their flashes in the hot shoe had issues too. I use third party Godox TT850 wireless that let you control the power from the hot shoe remote. They also have recharcheable battery packs. They are super awesome flashes for cheap but no TTL for anything but canon. So I manually adjust on the hot shoe and I am pretty good at gauging power requirements but I prefer to have the mathematically correct exposures. Neewer and Cheetah light make the same flash with different label.

http://www.amazon.com/NEEWER%C2%AE-BATTERY-Speedlite-Professional-Photography/dp/B00GJMD08M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1411776390&sr=8-1&keywords=neewer+tt650

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting

1 upvote

For me at least I don't find the lack of TTL flashes any kind of hardship. I shoot events and weddings professionally and I've been using purely manual control flashes for the last 2 years. My metz went down during a job and I had to finish using one of my Yongnuo manual slave flashes and to my absolute surprise I found the exposures more accurate and consistent than using TTL. You've got to do a bit more thinking on the move but once you've got your head round it's really not hard and doesn't slow me down at all. YMMV of course but for me it's really not a biggy.

2 upvotes

On the one hand he doesn't say much more than you'd expect for someone in his position.

On the other hand... I tend to believe him. That's nice.

4 upvotes

Fuji should make a special limited run of fixed lens (about 35 mm) FF cameras. It doesnt matter if they are a little on the big side. It could be a collectors item; it wouldnt hurt their sales of aps-c if they price it high enough. Half the price of a LEICA maybe . As long as it is fast and sharp.

0 upvotes

In other words, divert resources from their existing "map", go to the time and expense of developing a full frame sensor and lenses and strictly limit the number for sale.

3 upvotes

I wouldn't doubt that that's something Fuji could do in a few years. But right now, I think they're just trying to build their base in APS-C. One step at a time. Companies have limited resources.

1 upvote

Why should it be limited edition?

That makes no sense.....unless you're a collector.

1 upvote

Limited edition so you dont put a lot of resources into production. Maybe there is a lot more work to make such a camera than I imagine. Premium price for the effort; it would sell. And it would make fuji fans proud. And also test the grounds for the future.

0 upvotes

Epson, where are you? We need a full frame RD-1 style classic!

1 upvote

Then and Now:

Then - FUJI overstated some of camera's ISO at least reported by Dpreview.

Now - FUJI says: "We’re not playing for numbers anymore.".

Hmmmmm......

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 1 minute after posting

1 upvote

What?

2 upvotes

I saw some review sites disclosure the relation with specific manufacture for specific article/product.

It may not be have to, but it is nice to know.

0 upvotes

I still have no idea what you just said.

3 upvotes

Until these cameras can autofocus quickly enough to be used in the field with reliable results - they will remain niche products for people with plenty of time to wait.

0 upvotes

they focus fast enough for "field use"... it just depends on the field :)

4 upvotes

So, you find X-T1 AF too slow in the field. I guess you are a sport photographer, a photojournalist, a wildlife photographer specialized in nocturnal animals, or some other niche audience that must use flagship FF to get your job done?

3 upvotes

Photographing farm harvest in varying light and a lot of dust.
The Canon 1 series nails it most of the time. The Fuji misses a lot - especially when dust is around the combines - where the Canon nails it most of the time.

Add in photos of people working in and around the farm equipment and such in twilight - where the Canon hits way more often than the Fuji.

Not to mention that in my hands the Canon fits while the fuji is just too small.

Overall, the images from the fuji are excellent but I have missed too many from AF not being quick enough.

2 upvotes

From what I have seen on other websites and asking friend photographers, are that there are some pros buying the XT1 and using it as a lighter weight second body in the field for recording pro work when speed is not critical, as the excellent image quality produces very usable pro results. For a lighter less bulky camera, great also for travel and personal use for image quality exceeding top m43 compact cameras and images comparable to bulkier body top APSC cameras from Nikon/Canon. Rapid speed is not always needed to get many types of shots however I agree with you that accurate AF is. I am considering Fuji again as an personal camera after having 2 in the past 10 years - S2Pro and S5Pro which are older DSLRs. Love the Fuji colours.

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

It seems for Fuji to do a Full Frame fixed 35mm lens rangefinder all they need is a body generally the size of a X-Pro1. Since Sony already makes a smaller RX1(smaller than x100), I think it is possible for Fuji to make a Full Frame 35mm x100 with a slightly bigger body the size of a x-Pro1. I think the only reason Fuji is not doing this is because such a camera will damage the hype/religion/sales of their other APS-C cameras. I don't think it is because they are worried the camera would get too big.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting

1 upvote

"I think the only reason Fuji is not doing this is because such a camera will damage the hype/religion/sales of their other APS-C cameras."

I think the main reason Fuji is not doing this is because, like the RX10, it wouldn't sell. And because APS-C is perfectly adequate for almost any photographic situation.

1 upvote

”The APD was actually suggested by our technical R&D team, who had this 'magical' filter, so we added it.“

correct me if I'm wrong, this filter was out in 2009 and the designer claimed Fuji never contacted him about using this design.
http://forum.xitek.com/thread-635957-1-1-1.html

0 upvotes

The concept has been around even longer... and there's nothing to say that Fuji is using his design.

0 upvotes

The Minolta STF 135mm, was introduced in 1999 (just an example i know, might also exist older lenses that use this type of filter).

1 upvote

thanks badi, so it's not something new

0 upvotes

The interesting part of that quote is how honest it is. No one was asking for that lens and everyone was mystified as to why it was even released when there are so many more pressing needs. The answer: It was burning a hole in the pockets of the engineers, and was easy to make use of so they did.

One of the few things Fuji has done that wasn't feedback-driven. Everyone with the 56mm praised it's bokeh, the idea that it needed improvement is just crazy. Oh well, it was easy and ready so they put it out :)

0 upvotes

Apodization filters give the best bokeh, watch how people rave about this lens. I've used the 135mm STF from Minolta and Sony and no bokeh compares to the output- period. Its simply amazing. This is a shorter focal length so the effect isn't likely to be as pronounced, but still should blow away other 50 something lenses.

Carl

3 upvotes

Sure, but it also seems like something you add after you have every other focal length covered. The most obvious point being that Fuji released the 56mm APD before even having their 135mm equivalent on the market. Minolta released theirs after having many different 135mm lenses available.

Also the light loss makes it a tough sell for a lot of people, who want the lens for it's actual f/1.2 light gathering (especially now that the electronic shutter will allow f/1.2 to be used in bright light).

Overall it's an incredibly specialist lens with a limited market, so it's understandable that people are frustrated/confused about it release, but I agree, in the right circumstances it will create masterpieces :)

0 upvotes

Sure they can get frustrated but Fuji are very aggressive with their lens releases, they are on fire. I therefore have little sympathy for those complaining. Fuji of all the mirrorless manufacturers right now are the most transparent and aggressive in building up their system. At some point, people just need to quit complaining.

0 upvotes

#agreed They can save up for the much-demanded and super-expensive new f/2.8 constants while they're busy not complaining :)

0 upvotes

Fujifilm...what a contrast from Kodak! Night and day difference. Let this be a lesson: no company is too big to fail, no matter what kind of success or dominance they once had.

8 upvotes

*Cheer*

2 upvotes

God right from the start. Anyone remember the early Kodak digital cameras? They were basically portable webcams, such a baffling dissapointment.

Early Fuji's on the other hand had wonderful IQ and color rendering, even if they had "quirks" like new Fuji's compared to the more reliable but less inspiring early Canon compacts.

2 upvotes

Fuji would be wise to make an X100 full frame with a fixed 35mm lens. I'm sure there is a market for it amongst enthusiasts considering the success of the X100 already.

For their interchangeable lens bodies, they're better committing to the APS size, improving AF and video quality, and expanding their lens lineup. They are right to worry about the cost and size of such a FF system and stretching themselves too thin.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting

2 upvotes

There are rumours about an MF version. Would actually make more sense then FF.

1 upvote

MF... something the size of a Plaubel Makina. That'd be nice.

0 upvotes

Fuji has a long tradition of putting out fixed-lens medium format cameras for film, so it would make perfect sense.

It would also actually be worth it, compared to a "full frame" 35mm sensor, which is by comparison basically the same size as APSC.

1 upvote

Now if they put out a manual focus range finder style FF with a huge OVF, that would be a home run.

Comment edited 45 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Great questions!
Unfortunently not so great answers, especially the one about not bringing out a full frame x100. That, in a word- SUCKS. That completley sucks.

Sony flopped on the RX1 by leaving off the viewfinder(evf or ovf).
If fuji brought out a full frame x100 it would sell through the roof.
I honestly dont know what they're thinking.

Not happy about the answer reguarding different focal lengths either.
The adapters dont cut it.

I like that they are improving usabillity. But this camera is getting long in thw tooth and the little tweaks to the x100t are no where near enough to warrant an upgrade from x100s. I wouldnt even upgrade from the first gen x100.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

"If fuji brought out a full frame x100 it would sell through the roof.
I honestly dont know what they're thinking."

There's certainly no guarantee that a FF X100 would "sell through the roof."

One reason why the RX1 flopped might have been the fact that it costs $2800. A full frame Fuji X100 with a viewfinder would probably be similarly priced. No fixed, single focal length camera is going to sell "through the roof" at that price. I think you're being a bit overly optimistic in your sales predictions.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting

12 upvotes

+1 to what T3 said. It would be impressive and everyone would get excited and wish they owned it, but who would actually buy it when they could get so much more for the same price in APSC format or FF from other systems?

1 upvote

+1 from me too. This fetish people have for "full frame" is completely unnecessary. APS-C is more than adequate for everything that used to be done on 35mm film, including all editorial work and even some advertising and fashion.

IMHO, APS-C is the new 35mm and hi-res full frame (e.g. the Sony A7s and Nikon D800s) can reliably take the place of medium format in terms of image quality. Pretty much the only situations in which this doesn't hold true are where the particular look-and-feel of a long-focal-length lens is needed to simulate the look of a 6x6 or 5x4 shot, where the end use is a large, close-quarters billboard or where the pics will undergo heavy post-production.

You lug your full-frame bricks around and look like a dinosaur if you like; I'll carry my light, high-quality APSs and get the shot whle you're still changing lenses.

1 upvote

Fujifilm on a roll.... a refreshing interview compared to some of the other company interviews especially ;).

6 upvotes

Fujifilm should have stayed on a roll of velvia *boom-tish*

1 upvote

*crickets chirping in the distance

3 upvotes

But I would love to have a full frame from Fuji.
Love their design but APS-C is not enough for me.

3 upvotes

Don't ever try a medium format Phase One or you'll have to sell your house just to satisfy your cravings for perfect quality ;)

1 upvote

Quite a revelation that mirrorless camera market does not need Canon and Nikon to generate more interest.

If Canon and Nikon still don't take this market seriously, then they will eventually pay a price.

13 upvotes

Not sure it's a "revelation" but a shift in how Fuji thinks about it.

Since they first made the statement Sony, Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji have together established that mirrorless has come far enough to compete.

At this point CaNikon getting serious about mirrorless (LOL@Canon interview) would just mean more competition that Fuji doesn't need! I'm sure they'd rather let Canon slowly hemorrhage users :)

1 upvote

"A full-frame camera would be bigger, more expensive and maybe slower too." - Fuji.
Didn't Fuji make a comment on Sony's RX1 full frame compact before? If it can be shown that such full frame can be made small, maybe Fuji can finish it off with a faster and less expensive model.

2 upvotes

...and please add a real shutter speed dial into that mix - not that 'children's' mode dial Sony put on the top of the RX1! The aperture ring and shutter speed dials of the X100 series bodies are just how it should be done. Very Leica, very nice, very professional!

3 upvotes

If there's a market for the RX1 then certainly Fuji could capture that same market and make a much more compelling product just emulating their existing designs. But IS there a market for RX1-type cameras?

Combining the DPReview "i own it" numbers for the RX1 and RX1R results in only 281 people. Compare that to 875 X100S owners and 590 X100 owners and it seems like Fuji is already on the correct path to user's hearts (especially considering that the X100/S are ALREADY considered extremely expensive cameras).

Of course that's a bit of an apples/oranges comparison because Sony has no APSC fixed-prime camera with a viewfinder. I still think the numbers are relevant, but agree that Sony screwed up by not putting an EVF in the RX1. It's such a dumb omission for a camera that expensive. The numbers would be different if they'd gotten that right.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Fuji make wonderful cameras that deliver great image quality and are a pleasure to use. But I'm not sure about their reliability. While the big manufacturers have issues now and again such as the D600 did, there seem to be all sorts of random issues with a number of Fuji products. I don't mind quirky controls but I do mind quirky engineering under the skin and I think that is one of Fuji's biggest issues for widespread pro acceptance.

0 upvotes

What issues are you referring to?

Lightleak problem was solved within two weeks after it was first noticed and those who've had it were serviced for free within a week after sending it in. For those people the D-Pad was also fixed for free.

I can't remember any other technical issues. Also their firmware updates are even carried out for non current models too. That is pretty unique for a manufacturer.

I think you must be mistaken in calling Fuji unreliable. Fuji has been good to their customers and responds very well to any issues since the introduction of the x-system.

Then again, many professionals already use a x-system as second or third camera.

Comment edited 5 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting

10 upvotes

I think they are very responsive. I agree they do firmware updates. I don't dislike them. I own two. Some research to shows a number of issues - often random.Yes they are fixed and corrected. On the X100/s, in no order, I have read of - sticky aperture blades, viewfinder dust, battery chargers that fail/insert falls out, OVF/EVF switch stops working, camera lugs that wear thru, battery compartment clips that break - little issues. I love Fuji but I'm not blinded either. When products are rushed to market that happens. Frequent software updates are wonderful, but can also mean that stuff was not thought through before the product is released. For eg, the original X100 was dead slow. The update made it nearly as good as the X100s. Great...but ask yourself why, when they were testing the original X100 did no one at Fuji say "Guys, we have been testing and it is too slow to focus. Get this sorted out before we release it." The users became the beta testers. Is this good or correct?

Comment edited 15 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

I have not really read about those issues on this forum in large numbers except for the AF issues you mention. If it was as bad for all the other things you mention like dust or battery chargers wouldn't it be more highlighted on DPR forums? Not saying these things do not happen btw.

However many DPR readers seems tech savy and are not ashamed of voicing any critical notes. It is easy to voice any criticism on a forum but one defect mentioned by one person does not make the whole batch of cameras bad or are directly related to the manufacturing process.

Technical issues like you mention do not seem to be any different then any other brand has, including Nikon and Canon.

I know of many users that had dust stuck under their ovf, had oil smears or have had problems with chargers or many errors related to faulty mirrorboxes or electronics.

Does that make manufacturers like Canon or Nikon bad as well or not geared towards professionals? I don't think so.

Anyway opinions may differ.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Let's not forget the tragedy of white orbs. That was to have been the end of Fuji. Somehow life went on, and after a very brief period of denying it was a problem, Fuji admitted it really was a problem and fixed it.

0 upvotes

Not super informative as an interview, but I still consider Fuji the second best mirrorless system out there. there seems to be a real commitment for the future.

0 upvotes

Second compared too.... m4/3?

Agree and not only a commitment, but transparency which exudes confidence and builds confidence.

Comment edited 58 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Of course. It also goes without saying if Panny & Oly had different mounts, theirs would still be solid but weaker separately.

0 upvotes

True that.

0 upvotes

I'd even agree about that though I chose Fuji. Couldn't accept the DoF difference MFT forces on you and Fuji was the winner in my APSC analysis.

Of course now that I've started doing macro it's becoming obvious that the DoF difference isn't always good, and there are a LOT of contexts where an inherently deeper focus is useful while you are using fast apertures (as a large-format art photographer friend of mine said about DoF: You can never get enough :P). It's just that for people who's art pushes them toward shallow DoF MFT is an inherently flawed system that no amount of sensor magic can solve.

FWIW: A Fuji with IBIS is my dream.

0 upvotes

With such cool cameras and so many of them, it's amazing they aren't doing better than they are. And it's a shame, because unlike, say, Sony, Fuji has been in imaging for a very long time.

5 upvotes

Not a Sony fan, but really you are ignoring the swallowing up of Konica-Minolta by Sony which produced the early models of the "Sony" cameras. So they both have been in imaging a very long time.

14 upvotes

Sony has their own spin that isn't necessarily the Minolta tradition, though clearly Fuji hasn't had a steady course over the decades either.

Either way Sony itself has been consistently making ILC's since 2008, while Fuji really only got started in 2012 and had to build it's brand from scratch. An uphill battle for Fuji for sure, and not helped by the fact that the first generation were (lets be honest here) crippled in terms of AF performance and 3rd party support for RAW files, despite amazing IQ and surprising JPEG quality that made them appealing to many.

Now is the time when Fuji is really poised to start growing, with the X-T1 re-iterating the improvements from X-E2 and X100S and the lens lineup finally having all the major pieces.

They haven't made a profit so far (AFAIK) but that was to be expected, going forward we'll see if their investment is going to pay off or not.

0 upvotes

Seems like he's not actually answering the questions...

1 upvote

I think he's trying, and his answers aren't evasive as much as he just doesn't have anything to say. X-Trans if bad at video? We know, we are listening to customers. Higher res sensors? Sure, that would be great.

No mind-blowing info but no bull either.

7 upvotes

I always loved Fuji. This is a company not afraid of doing things differently and succeeding at it.

16 upvotes

Also not afraid to fail at something when they know it's good, then keep working 'till it's fixed, like X-Trans and the AF problems of the early cameras.

3 upvotes

Its says SLR DSLR was a transition statement. And yes SLRs are 60 years old.

0 upvotes

"It’s very important to maximize quality, especially in still images. I think we do need X-Trans. There’s no low-pass filter and moire is minimized."

Who cares about X-trans, nobody has AA filter with Bayer anymore.

Buy the 28mpix sensor and Samsung processor from the new NX1, and you will be golden, Fuji. Time to shop outside of Japan, the ancient 180nm factories wouldn't do anymore.

7 upvotes

X-trans is a buzzword and attracts followers. Overall, an excellent system, they just need to ditch the X-Trans and put Bayer sensors the way Apple went Intel and never looked back (after were are told so many times how their old CPUs were better).

9 upvotes

Meaby they have already done so.

They already said their lenses are good enough for higher resolution.

Which is an strategic answer to say that they will leave 16MP behind in future camera's.

Comment edited 51 seconds after posting

5 upvotes

Just a Photographer, 16MP and X-Trans are not connected in any way. You can put that suboptimal color filter array above any one-layer monochrome sensor.

2 upvotes

@Peevee1 Where did I say they are connected?

I reacted to this: "Buy the 28mpix sensor and Samsung processor from the new NX1, and you will be golden, Fuji. "

0 upvotes

I thought you are answering "Just another Canon shooter", sorry.

0 upvotes

Yeah, I dispute that X-trans is a necessity. It's not as dreadful as everyone makes it out to be, but there's no huge advantage over just not using a low-pass filter.

1 upvote

Dang it! You guys missed the most significant question: X-Trans RAW processing support by 3rd party software. JPEGs are nice, but until RAW processing (particularly in Lightroom) becomes completely hassle-free, it's hard to accept Fuji X-Trans for your only camera. Any chance for a follow-up?

4 upvotes

Here's his answer: "We've worked very hard with Adobe and others to get excellent output from our RAW files in Lighroom, and our customers have told us they are happy with the results".

A few rare circumstances where there are issues isn't going to make him admit defeat. What can they do but keep trying to improve?

3 upvotes

Thanks Jer. Did not see that in the interview. Mind me asking where it's from?

Either way, it's a bit disappointing as I have a high opinion of Fuji responsiveness based on prior experience. Denial is hardly what I was expecting.

0 upvotes

I think the most important thing if you use an X-Trans sensor is the selection of Raw processing software, and Lightroom shouldn't be on the list.
(SilkyPix Pro 6, Capture One and Iridient Developer should be, the first two from: http://chromasoft.blogspot.it/2013/03/lightroom-44rc-and-capture-one-versus-x.html which is the end of a long series of posts by a Raw software developer and the last one following some discussions I had with Thom Hogan.)

0 upvotes

That comparison used ACR 7.4 as the latest. It is up to version 8.6 now. Without a new comparison there is no conclusion that can be reached. No need to be mired in the past.

1 upvote

Woops, sorry I meant it to be obvious that I was inferring his answer: THAT IS NOT SOMETHING A FUJI REP SAID ANYWHERE.

I just think it's obvious that they would claim it's pretty much under control while admitting that it was a problem in the past. I know they have worked hard with Adobe to solve the problem (they've said that elsewhere) and it has definitely come a long way even if it isn't perfect.

I use Aperture where the RAW files work fine as far as I can tell, WAY better than the JPG files in all ways and a LOT better than the RAW files from Canon which always need work (the Fuji RAWs seem to have more contrast by default, while still having lots of DR to play with in shadows/highlights).

Maybe LR is actually still worse but no one who uses Fuji seems to complain about it any more. I think win39 is right about that review being old, find one from 2014 if you want to prove anything, it's already September 2014, it's been a long time since march 2013.

0 upvotes

Thanks Dr_Jon, but I am not about to increase my workload. Lightroom is what I use for everything else and I won't jump through hoops in order to own what is otherwise admittedly a very nice system.

Thanks for clarifying Jeremy. I admit that I have not looked too closely at more recent results so I'll check it out.

Every time my heart says you'll love the X system, my brain reminds me that my 70D is the more complete do-it-all camera. I just wish I had the luxury of investing in both systems.

1 upvote

They already asked about it in the past and as far as I know that's mostly up to Adobe to do it right. So it's not Fuji's fault that Adobe is doing a worse job than others. Fuji provided all the info and data needed to make a decent RAW processing, there are others 3rd parties doing a great job, so it's really up to Adobe to catch up. It seems that they already got better at it but anyway, you are barking at the wrong tree, blame Adobe then.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Adobe haven't updated the underlying X-Trans algorithms since 7.4, in fact they rarely make such basic changes, having a second go at X-Trans was very unusual, I can't think of another sensor they've done that for.

0 upvotes

Which may speak to how bad the original demosaicing must have been. That said, the X-Trans is such a departure from the standard bayer filter I'm not surprised it had some initial issues. Didn't expect these issues to linger so long though.

0 upvotes

> sixty years since the first DSLR

Welcome to 2055, my dear time traveller :)

12 upvotes

Article

Photokina 2014: Fujifilm interview - 'Over the past few months I’ve been getting more confident'

Last time we spoke you had just released the X-T1. How have people reacted to it?

You had to increase manufacturing capacity - is that correct?

What is your strategy for developing the X-series?

Is the AF system in the X100T changed compared to the X100S?

Do you get much feedback from X100 customers that they want different focal lengths?

Were the new features in the X30 and X100T based on customer feedback?

Your roadmap for lenses through to the end of 2015 - does this represent lenses that your X-series customers have been asking for?

Was that also the case for the 56mm F1.2 APD?

You’ve talked about the X30 and X100T, and how you haven’t changed the sensors. What comes next for X-Trans? 16MP has been a constant now for several years.

One thing we’ve found with X-Trans sensors is that while they’re very capable for stills, they’re not good for video.

Is video getting more important for Fujifilm?

How important is it to you to have a Fujifilm X-Trans sensor inside your cameras?

A lot of our readers would love a full-frame X100-type camera with any sensor inside it, X-Trans or not. Could this ever be a possibility?

Fujifilm is evidently focused on the high end of the market, but how do you attract new photographers to the X system?

Is it still difficult to sell mirrorless cameras in the USA?

Last time we spoke you expressed the opinion that if Canon and Nikon got into mirrorless more seriously it would help everybody - has that situation changed in the past 6 months?

Buying Options

Comments