I just got my Fuji X-E1, and it is a beautiful piece of gear that produces beautiful images. Having owned an E-M5 I am sure this camera produces superior files at any ISO. However, the implementation of auto ISO REALLY bothers me, and since I know this is something Fuji could fix with a major firmware update, I want to start a topic here and hopefully gather enough support for Fuji to take notice (I know they do) and implement the would-be useful function properly. The two problems related to auto ISO implemetation on the X series which need to be remedied are this:

1) When in aperture priority mode and auto ISO on, the old 1/focal length rule is used to determine shutter speed.

What if I'm shooting shots of my kids playing in the living room with the 18mm? I need shutter speeds at least 10 times that. I want to use aperture priority mode because I want the fastest/widest aperture possible at all times, and I want auto ISO on because there is a patch of direct sun across the room which alters shutter speeds dramatically when they run into that area. The movement is too fast to change ISO via a menu, so I want to rely on auto ISO to make that change as the scene changes.

Other camera manufacturers have options in the auto ISO parameters that let you set things like minimum shutter speeds, faster/slower shutter speed parameters etc, making the auto ISO function usable.... So why dont I just use manual mode you ask? Because, oddly...


2) In Manual mode, Auto ISO should be tied to exposure compensation! I want to be able to define my aperture for maximum depth of field control, and I want to define a minimum shutter speed for motion freezing. But I rarely want my scene measured in the middle. Who shoots 18% grey average scenes 100% of the time? Simply tie exposure compensation to auto ISO like other manufacturers do to make the auto ISO feature usable in real world conditions.

Thank you Fuji, and thank you FM members for your support on this issue.

You make good points, but it doesn't bother me, as I prefer to set the ISO myself.

jcolwell wrote:
You make good points, but it doesn't bother me, as I prefer to set the ISO myself.

Setting the ISO yourself is fine for static environments. But as a professional photographer I have come to greatly utilize the Auto ISO tool on my Nikon for fluid lighting situations, such as rock concerts, indoor/outdoor weddings etc. It is a remarkable tool once utilized properly in a certain type of environment. FYI I also shoot Pentax professionally and they have taken it an amazingly simple yet highly effective step further with SAv mode (shutter and aperture priority mode). It simply treats ISO as the third exposure value (which it should be, being digital).

The funny thing is that the X100 allows you to set the minimum shutter speed for autoISO. I'm not sure why they removed that feature in the newer X cameras.

ChrisDM wrote:
jcolwell wrote:
You make good points, but it doesn't bother me, as I prefer to set the ISO myself.

Setting the ISO yourself is fine for static environments. ...

I also shoot professionally in "fluid lighting situations", with both Canon 1DX/1DIV and Fujifilm X-Pro1/X100. I try not to assume that my personal perferences are right for everybody. YMMV.

douglasf13 wrote:
The funny thing is that the X100 allows you to set the minimum shutter speed for autoISO. I'm not sure why they removed that feature in the newer X cameras.


What!? Why on earth would they cripple the more advanced models? Well I guess this is good news, as it demonstrates Fuji is knowledgeale and capable of implementing such a feature.

I was under the impression that the E-M5 may have better quality at closer to base ISO?

jcolwell wrote:
ChrisDM wrote:
jcolwell wrote:
You make good points, but it doesn't bother me, as I prefer to set the ISO myself.

Setting the ISO yourself is fine for static environments. ...

I also shoot professionally in "fluid lighting situations", with both Canon 1DX/1DIV and Fujifilm X-Pro1/X100. I try not to assume that my personal perferences are right for everybody. YMMV.

I'm not sure how the new Canons implement auto ISO, I switched to Nikon when the D800 came out. Have you tried auto ISO for fluid lighting situations? If the light is changing predictably it can be the difference in whether or not you get the shot. In rock concert photography, for example, when I used to shoot full manual, a burst of stage lighting or pyrotechnics could blow the frame out by 6 stops, rendering the frame unusable. But now shooting the same scene in manual mode with auto ISO on, if the same burst happens the meter drops ISO to compensate for the blast, and I get the shot. The same thing can happen at more dynamic wedding receptions, etc... I also like it for events where I am constantly traversing indoor to outdoor and back. In the past I would shoot this in manual mode and move the ISO every time I went through the door, which could be 100 times.. But now I just keep my same manual setting and wander in and out at will letting the camera change the ISO for me. This frees me to focus on the event and the subject without having to fiddle with settings every time I cross the threshold of light.

FlyPenFly wrote:
I was under the impression that the E-M5 may have better quality at closer to base ISO?

Well, perhaps I am under the spell of the "my new toy" syndrome, but I think the files look better than my E-M5. This may also be that I was shooting everything at 1.4 yesterday and am under the spell of the really wide aperture... In either case it is at least very very close at low ISO and as the ISO climbs the Fuji gets the nod.

You may be right though, the comments I read may only be in comparison to other apsc cameras. As I understand it, high ISO capability is the reasoning behind the Fuji sensor. Therefore it must be frustrating to have ISO work that way.

This is actually a real common complaint among most Fuji X-E1 and X-Pro 1 users. I'm pretty sure Fuji will add it in eventually though I'm surprised they haven't already.

I also have an X-E1 and it doesn't bother me. Maybe because I'm so used to setting the ISO myself on my 5DII.
However, I understand the frustration if you really want to use auto ISO. It's a very common firmware request on the forums.

From pure theoretical point of view, E-M5 should have bit more resolution (same mpix, smaller sensor). From practical, output from X-Pro 1 and X-E 1 is amazing. Only downside is near zero options for RAW processing. But JPEGs are probably one of best ever made..

Do you guys also have an issue with the slight lag in the EVF of the Fuji X-E1? I read somewhere there's a lag in the Fuji X-E1 while panning but it seems to go way if you half press down the shutter button.

Doing a little research on the subject I see the poor auto ISO implemetation is Nick Devlin's number one niggle as well in his Luminous Landscape review:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/fuji_x_e1_review.shtml

jonrock wrote:
Do you guys also have an issue with the slight lag in the EVF of the Fuji X-E1? I read somewhere there's a lag in the Fuji X-E1 while panning but it seems to go way if you half press down the shutter button.

It's there, but you get used to it really quickly.

jonrock wrote:
This is actually a real common complaint among most Fuji X-E1 and X-Pro 1 users. I'm pretty sure Fuji will add it in eventually though I'm surprised they haven't already.

Yeah, the fact that it hasn't been resolved in the various firmware updates is a concern. I would have thought that it would be in that last X-Pro1 firmware update from a couple of months ago.

Hey Canon was no better till the 5D3 and even then they cap it at a 1/250. Just what you need for sports or longer lenses ain't it. Why would they need to cripple it? They don't even keep the feature for the higher end cameras. Pentax were the first to implement a decent auto ISO and Nikon do it right too.

There is some lag in the Xpro1 EVF but truthfully I never needed to pan when looking through the EVF. If you need to I would assume you are shooting a moving subject and in that case the LCD view is much easier but then again, the whole process would be much easier on a different camera if trying to shoot moving objects. For static things, I think the Fuji is great and after looking at some of my older pics taken with the Xpro1, I think I may just have to get an XE1 as I never used the OVF, only EVF when I forced myself to...

Good rant
It doesnt bother me, but I support this "online petition" to fuji because I dont see a reason why this feature should be unavailable to people who want it

Having said that ChrisDM, I'm thinking you're maybe using the wrong tool for the job? If you want the max available aperture for moving subjects (especially close-by), even if you get your programmable auto iso there will be something else that will let you down, particularly the slow AF (for this type of work), lack of mutliple AF points and the sub-par AF tracking which is a common feature in all mirrorless. If you want this job done without annoyances and compromises I think you're entering SLR territory, and probably high-end SLR too.