Видео

I can’t afford “boutique”, I certainly hope not. I spent 40 years with Canon and defected to Fuji after leaving the photojournalism field in 2017. The idea of returning to Canon is not all that appealing. Despite all of Fuji’s issues and flaws, especially over the last year or so, I love these cameras.

I don't know Edward, as nice as the Acros sim is, I can't really see how a monochrome sensor makes sense. It does sound intriguing, but the whole scarcity business model has pushed me into the Nikon Zf. Believe me, I looked for an XT5 for weeks, with no luck. So Nikon got my money. Will I like it? Time will tell. I do still enjoy my XT3, and if an XT5 came available, I might be hard pressed to not get it. This next Fall season will be interesting...

I predict either a Leica Q ff competitor or a apsc monochrome sensor.

I agree that the production of new lenses would be a big problem trying to create a full frame camera. But, I had someone in another video tell me it would be a full frame camera with an L mount. Whatever it turns out to be, it's going to be fun hearing all of the guessing until it's announced!

I would not be surprised if they pull a Sony and just tack on FF bodies to ease the transition. They have enough room inside the lens mount. Also, if they ship the 1st body with a 61mpx FF sensor, it'll have the same resolution in crop mode as the X-T4, X-H1, etc. It's the same reason Pentax will use a 61mpx - that way current K3iii users can move to FF without a resolution drop for existing glass. Fuji won't release a monochrome. What they will do is release a fixed-lens FF body to pull in the folks lusting after a Leica Q3 that don't have the cash for a Leica. Sony had that market with the RX1 but they never followed up, and Fuji has superior ergonomics too.

I think its going to be a full frame rangefinder style camera.

Fuji has said they have ramped up production of the X100VI and I think if you are going to produce a monochrome camera they would put it in a X-Pro camera not a 100 series or the X-T series...either way I'm putting aside some money as I would love a monochrome camera from Fuji...then wait until 2028 for a X-Pan (I hope) from them

Sony announced a 250 mp medium format sensor. They have no camera to support MF. Fuji makes medium format camera. Easiest, cheapest way for Fuji is to put Sony sensor into current MF body.

I can't see why Fuji would go FF. It would require a new set of lenses and maybe mount. It would also take sales from both APSC and GFX lines.

Bayer sensor instead of X-Trans? Or Foveon-like made in house? Fuji after all is capable of making sensors and I think they build new semiconductor plant in Vietnam?

X Pro 4 Monochrome

GFX monochrome ? 🤔

Fuji have made a decision to reduce their production as they make more money per unit that way. Also as you mentioned there is no fuji frame lens support so that's 100% out.

i don't see them going full frame , just because it doesn't fix the line up. I could seem them coming out with B/W.

Is this the 2028 rumor release ?

I really wanted to switch to fuji, but I really needed better autofocus and they couldn't deliver. The production "issues" (not only with cameras but everything else) was my signal to get out of dodge.

my guess, is a full frame x-100 vi.

I just use a 4x5 because the photos are really nice and I feel like I am participating in the process since every aspect is decided by me.. Anyway I am not Ansel Adams but photography has always been a great hobby. Tomorrow we are heading south to Cambria Calif and I am going to photograph the San Miguel Mission and the San Luis Obispo Mission and also take photos in Cambria Calif.

Looking for a difference on a print of this size is a little better than looking for a difference on an iPad screen. The question of technical quality is meaningless, practically non-existent, separately from the size and scale at which we look at the photo. Large and even medium format on fine-grained material has enormous potential. But prints of this size are quite within the capabilities of an APS-C camera. 26 megapixels, especially these non-Bayer ones, are quite enough to fill our eyes at this size. With a large margin. Size is the very limitation that equalizes everything. And this is almost a hard threshold - an even smaller print and pictures with micro 4/3 will become indistinguishable, and if you take one more step, then you will not be able to distinguish a 1" Sony compact camera from anything that is larger and "better". But with an increase in print size, weaker cameras gradually begin to give in and leave the race. And at some point (we'll need big walls for this) 8"x10" will leave even the latest 150 megapixel Phase One back behind.

No, we don't. But I would be lying if I said that playing around with those lenses wasn't part of the fun. There is something soothing about getting out there at sunrise to shoot ferns with pearly dew on them with an F/1.4 lens

You don’t, but if you can afford them and don’t mind carrying them, rock on !

I don't carry all this gear anymore! One lens usually 35mm or 50mm on Leica M3,M6.. Slr is 50mm and slight tele 105mm or 28mm. Many of my lenses bought at camera shows or donations. I have good lenses bought price of coffee!

Fujifilm is STILL producing one of their earliest lenses, sharp, small and lightweight XF 14mm f2.8 (that's 21mm in FF term, right?), not weather sealed do, which you can get for €300 - 400 used, or there's the Samyang 12mm f2 AF for same kind of money, or WAY less if you go for mechanical version, if you REALLY wanna go that wide with Fuji. Just saying...

I used to do some portraits and wedding photography in the early 80s. Once I saved up, I bought a 500CM with a 80mm CF lens in a promotion. It was not that the camera was sophisticated or the lens super fast, quite the reverse actually as many amateur level cameras even in medium format were much more sophisticated and advanced, but the main reason was that the camera was reliable, produced decent images and Hasselblad then had a superb back up service. These were the reasons it was a Pro camera, and not because of its cost. These days when a camera is obsolete before the first credit card payment is paid, or each year two newer versions of the same lens are released, all bets are off. Photography has become a game of gimmicks, effects and clichés.

I have some fast lenses because they fulfill a specific purpose. But I don’t need all of my lenses to be fast, not at all. My street stuff is light, small and slow and I like it this way.

I agree with you. I think in most cases a good zooms from Tamron or Sigma or Rokinon in ranges 24-70 /70-200 with f2.8 aperture can fit and do the job for most of people. For day light landscapes that should be enough. For people portraits maybe a good choice is contemporary lenses from Sigma... IQ, build quality for dollar is outstanding. But for sport and astrophotography I think fast primes are must, but in case people have it as a job not as a hobby...

Fujifilm?

If one is not a pro with a specific need for a shot to earn one money, big, fast expensive lenses are little more than male jewellery. They are bought to give an image of status and wealth to the owner. In use they are indiscreet, awkward and heavy to carry around, may unbalance your camera and produce the same results as far cheaper and more convenient alternatives 99% of the time. People buy them for the same reason they buy sports cars they never go racing in or 4X4's which never go off road, choosing to favour image over practicality. The most odd thing is the RUclips videos saying how good the fastest and /or most expensive M mount glass is, even when it is abundantly clear these lenses intrude so far into the viewfinder frame you can't compose properly. I have been getting into RF film photography lately and I want all my lenses for that to be as small as possible. I did own the Pentax D FA* 50mm f1.4 WR for about a year not so long ago, as I could not resist the used bargain price it was going for (£450). It is optically wonderful at all apertures, and actually balanced very well on my K1 with a battery grip, but the set up was huge and heavy, so the thing stayed at home and I only used it for still life work - which I can do just as effectively with any 50mm - so I sold it for the same money I paid for it.

I got a Zeiss Ikon 50mm f/1.4 for $5 at a flea market

Edward, I agree. Few people need fast expensive glass. But hold on. Sony? Last I remember you tried Sony and liked it but decided it wasn’t worth the cost to upgrade. What did I miss?

What a great idea back-ending the lens mount caps! As far as price goes, compared to my Pentax lenses, those are super cheap 😅

1.8 is good enough, but my 50 1.2 blows me away every time use it. Completely unnecessary but totally worth it

I've had a Tamron lenses since 2005 a 75-300mm screw drive zoom lens and Sigma lenses since 2015 a 18- 250 and a 28- 75 zoom lenses

The Fujicron kit is hard to beat but the artistic nerd in me occasionally wishes one of those little lenses were a 1.4, killer tiny kit with the X-E4 for sure. I think the only 1.2 lens I've ever owned is the Pentax 50mm 1.2, (still have it). F/1.4 lenses are all I ever really need when I feel creative and want to play with a shallow DOF, even with crop sensor cameras. It's funny, most of the pro's with all those 1.2 lenses often show their best work with those lenses stopped down a little bit....

I have that Tamron 20mm and the 24mm. I like the macro capabilities with these lenses.

Aren’t you using an A7R5 though? Curious if you feel an A74 with g master glass would be better (swap pricey body for pricey lens)

I too have Gitzo tripods for my 4x5 cameras but when I use my Nikon D500 with the 200-500 I use the wimberley system with a sirui monopod. It make is like to carry and easier than hauling a tripod. ruclips.net/video/Fgj8bMviZOw/видео.htmlfeature=shared

Nice work, In the end you kept the Pentax ;-)

one fix to the front standard issue, with lens selection and focussing, is to just use the back light and negative carrier, and mount it to a sinar {Norma/F2}, put on the mast, or a copy stand, that way, the whole standard clamp moves, no change in swing or shift, and for micro movements that is on a rack on the rail clamp (the standard one, Not the one for the tripod!); this is on both standards, giving 3cm or so each, total of 6cm of fine movement, also allowing for filters, the lens hood, and bag bellows, for using the 90/65mm lenses, if you need to. Another thing, if you don't have an enlarger timer, don't fret, you can also use the sinar DB shutter!, and time the 2 or so seconds that way, via that shutter timing gear.

Hi, new to your site. Considering getting into large format. Am I making a mistake starting out with 8x10, and skipping over 4x5. Have a chance to buy a used Chamonix Alpinist and already have a 8x10 Devere enlarger in my darkroom. Really enjoy your videos, down to earth and very informative. Thanks

I can recommend any L mount users to consider Sigma HSM (dslr lenses retrofitted with an L mount adapter internally) 28mm 1.4 and 40mm 1.4. These are exceptional quality options that were developed to show off their skills. The 40mm is a little big and heavy but the images are amongst the best for rendering and sharpness/oof detail. They are £550 new. As good as GM lenses imo. Autofocus works fine on lumix but don't expect super fast. Not too slow.

People love to over pay for gear. RRS is overkill for most. Pretty funny actually. (No offense) try a gimbal instead of a ball head. Ball head can wack your gear if you’re not careful.

How do you find that Tamron 70-300? I've heard some mixed reviews of it with some people saying it has field curvature at the wide end but that it only affects images at the closest focus distance. They also have a new 50-300 which seems like it may be better but it's out available for Sony at the moment.

I've always liked and used Sigma lenses, more so than Tamron. I've owned and used several over the years and still do. My most recently acquired Sigma lens is the new 10-18mm f2.8 lens for my XT-5 kit. It's better than the XF 10-24mm in many ways. Another great 3rd party lens company is Laowa. Seems many 3rd party companies have upped their game and are making great alternatives and great lenses, I think Sigma is leading the pack though..

So I bought the Sigma 100-400 with my new Panasonic S5iix. I have only had the camera for two days. Last night I grabbed the camera an lens and went out to take a picture of the moon. I was WOWED by how sharp my hand-held photos were. It seems like it will be a great lens. I also have the 16-28 and 28-70 f/2.8 Sigma lenses. I have not used them much but they seem sharp and are very light weight.

Thanks. Appreciate this

Most of my photography has always been b&w and I almost always take the shot assuming it will be b&w. On iconic/stereotypical shots, I have no problem with people taking those - I do it too and while it might be a boring copy, it is my boring copy and it would be odd to me if I didn’t have it just because lots of other people did! Of course, the aim is always to look beyond that.

Couldn’t agree more on B&W vs. Color. Color tells you want to see and feel. Black and white surprises you and forces you to participate in the experience.

Not expensive and you make nice content. I suppose I try.

That is very cheap! It could be interesting to see Ed Unfiltered. I hope it goes well for you.