Fujifilm X-T5 with XF 33mm f/1.4 R LM WR Lens
After shooting with full-frame dSLRs, many people are looking for smaller, and, above all, lighter equipment. A full-frame sensor measures 36 x 24mmm, about the same as one frame of a 35mm film. In recent years, smaller sensors have improved dramatically; for instance, APS-C sensors that measure 24 x 16mm now rival the quality of full-frame sensors despite having a surface area that is less than half that of the larger sensors. Of course, the contrast in weight between a full-frame sensor and an APS-C sensor is negligible; the difference is mainly that the larger sensors must use lenses that spread light over a wider area, and this means that they must use more glass; they are thus larger and heavier. To give an example, my Nikon ƒ/4 full-frame 16-35mm wide-angle zoom lens weighed 680 grams; my Fujifilm ƒ/4 APS-C 10-24mm lens (15-35mm equivalent in full-frame parlance), a nearly identical lens in terms of viewing angle, weighs 385 grams, just a little over half the weight of the full-frame lens. Both are autofocus and stabilized lenses; other APS-C lenses offer similar savings in size and weight. In addition, most of the newer APS-C cameras are mirrorless, and this permits smaller and lighter camera bodies that contribute to the savings in weight.
APS-C is by no means the only format that is smaller than full frame; Micro Four Thirds, developed jointly by Olympus and Panasonic, has a sensor size of 17.3 x 13 mm), and 1-inch, with a sensor size of 13.2 x 8.8 mm are two other well-known formats. Then there are many far smaller sensors used, for instance, for cell phone camera. APS-C is probably the most popular of the sensors that are smaller than full frame; not only is it the largest of the smaller sensors, but it also has the same 3:2 aspect ratio as 35mm film (and therefore full-frame sensors). As the name implies, Micro Four Thirds has an aspect ratio of 4:3, and while 1-inch sensors also use a 3:2 format, their area is less than a third of an APS-C sensor, and this translates in a substantial difference in quality.
It turns tout that Fujifilm has been very successful in making APS-C cameras, starting with the X-100, released in March of 2011. One year later, Fujifilm released the X-Pro1, the first camera that used their proprietary X-Trans sensor. It features a different color filter array as the Bayer sensors used in almost all other digital cameras; its purpose is to get by without a low-pass filter, thereby increasing resolution while controlling moiré. Today, all Fujifilm APS-C cameras use X-Trans sensors. Currently, the company only produces APS-C and mid-format cameras; they do not have to compete in the full-frame market and, unlike companies like Nikon and Canon, can concentrate on APS-C. New Fujifilm X-Series cameras and lenses are incredibly popular, and for certain models, there are waiting lists of many months. Why, then, are these cameras in such demand? Let's look at what I believe the main reasons are (in no particular order):
Fujifilm cameras work like the analog SLRs used to: the aperture is set on the lens, the shutter speed on a dial located on the top plate of the camera just the way my old Minolta SR-T 303 used to work (I got this camera for my 20th birthday back in 1974, and incredibly, I still use it occasionally now, over fifty years later. You can read how it felt to shoot film again after years in the digital world by looking at this page). Here is a photo of my Fujifilm X-T5:
|
|
Fujifilm X-T5 with XF 33mm f/1.4 R LM WR Lens |
The shutter speed dial is clearly visible, as is the aperture ring on the lens (not all Fujifilm lenses feature aperture rings; on some, the aperture has to be set with either the front or the back dial). The dial on the left is where one sets the ISO, something not possible with film-based cameras as one set the appropriate ISO when one loaded the film. The dial on the right is where one sets exposure compensation, and naturally, the effects of doing so are immediately visible in the viewfinder or on the rear screen before releasing the shutter. The cameras has a huge series of buttons that can be assigned a variety of functions or reprogrammed to suit one's needs. Up to fourteen different configurations can be stored, seven each for still photography and for videos. It's almost like a construction set to make exactly the camera one wants with the features one needs, accessible where one wants them. It's an amazingly customizable camera.
You may notice that there is no mode dial to select aperture priority, shutter speed priority, or full program mode. This is an interesting example of how Fujifilm does things a little differently. The lens can be switched from manual to automatic, and on the shutter speed dial you can set the desired speed or automatic. When you set a shutter speed and the lens is set to automatic, you are in shutter speed mode. If you set an aperture and leave the shutter speed on automatic, you are in aperture priority mode. When you set both aperture and shutter speed to automatic, you are in full program mode, and if you set an aperture and a shutters peed you are in manual mode. What could be simpler?
This is an area where Fujifilm just shines. Built into every Fujiflm X-Series camera are number of film simulations. These are mostly named for Fujifilm films, like Astia, Provia, Velvia, and so on. Contrary to what certain people believe, these are not merely basic tweaks; rather, they are painstakingly created by Fujifilm, down to the grain pattern of the particular films. Some of these simulations requires so much processing power that they are only available on more modern cameras. These simulations allow to produce excellent quality out-of-the-camera JPG images, either instead or in addition to raw images. On the web, many people are producing "recipes"; custom variations of simulations suitable for a variety of purposes. Such customized simulations, whether obtained on the web self-made, are easy to store in camera and select when needed. Check out this page to learn more about film simulations or look at this one for examples of out-of-camera images made with a custom profile. Naturally, other camera manufacturers allow modifying their out-of-camera JPGs, but in my opinion, no other company goes further and achieves better results in this area than Fujifilm. Many professional photographers are shooting most of their work in JPG and revert to raw only in exceptional circumstances; the results are that good. On this page, I wrote about how indispensable post-processing is when shooting with a digital camera, but producing JPEGs with film simulations may just be a great way to avoid it.
Fujifilm has a large assortment of lenses, starting with their budget XC line going up to the pricier and more professional XF lenses. Some of these lenses are spectacular, and even the XF 18-55mm (27-83mm in full frame equivalent) lens that came with my X-T30 as a kit lens is fantastic. In fact, it is the lens I use more often with my X-T5 today, and it works beautifully with the X-T5's 40 megapixels sensor. The XF ƒ/1.4 33mm (which corresponds to a 50mm standard full frame lens) is one of the best lenses of any brand I have ever used. It is interesting and an indication that Fujifilm is gaining some traction in the photography world that third-party manufacturers are beginning to build lenses for Fujifilm's X-mount cameras. A few that manufacture X-mount autofocus lenses, are Carl Zeiss, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, TTArtisan, and Viltrox. In addition, there are adapters available that permit using lenses made for Leica, Canon, Nikon, and other manufacturers. Finding the right lens, no matter how outlandish the project, should therefor never be an issue.
Turning Fujifilm raw sensor data into viewable images places an additional burden on companies that specialize in photo editing software because demosaicing X-Trans sensor data is different from demosaicing data from Bayer sensors. It is therefore encouraging to see that just about all editors of photo editing software are able to perform raw conversions from X-Trans sensors. This includes Adobe, Capture One, ON1, Skylum, DxO, and others. The DxO case is worth mentioning because their most sophisticated raw conversion, DeepPRIME XD2s, does not yet handle X-Trans sensors even though this capability was announced as "coming soon" in March of 2014. Fortunately, the program's DeepPRIME XD conversion works just fine and is more than adequate in the vast majority of cases. Still, DxO's reluctance to provide any updates on their progress—or lack thereof—has left many customers, myself included, disappointed as evidenced by many posts in the DxO user forums. Still, the feature will hopefully arrive soon. It is remarkable what kind of support Fujifilm's X-Trans sensor has received, and it is a testimony to the industry's perception of Fujifilm's importance.
The above points essentially mean that I don't miss out on picture taking capabilities by having gone from a full-frame to amn APS-C sensor, nor do I feel I sacrificed any image quality in the process. The only thing I have lost is some gear weight, but that was, after all, the purpose of the exercise. My move to the smaller sensor size is described on this page. I have never regretted the switch; in May of 2023 I sold my X-T30 and bought the wonderful X-T5, and thought this is my maini camera today, I still love to use my X100s, especially when I want to travel very light. And this, I guess, is the most important reason why I use Fujifilm: the company's cameras are wonderful and a pleasure to use.
Home | Site Info | Family | The Area | Trips | France | Work | Rants | Photography | Odds & Ends
This page was last modified on February 1, 2025
Send feedback about this page to feedback@kiechle.com
https://www.kiechle.com/photography/whyfuji/index.htm
(optimized for Retina display)
All contents © 1999-2025 The Kiechles