gdanmitchell wrote:
Let me preface what I'm about to post by writing that the X100v looks like an excellent camera, with improvements that seem like they would be welcomed. I have not used it, though I have used the X100f, and I liked the form factor and design of that camera a lot — and I was impressed with both its usability and the image quality it produced.
...
Imagine that each new iteration was actually, say, twice as good as the previous one. A bit of basic math is cause for suspicion.
...
A valid point. Notably, it can be applied however, to practically every camera line by every camera manufacture. The Sony A7rii was the cat's meow until the A7riii made the A7rii unusuable, until the A7riv improved on the ergonomics ... etc. Nature of the beast I guess!
rbf_ wrote:
The ISO dial and EVF upgrade are nice but I learned to live with those just fine on the XP2.
That observation illustrates and under-appreciated principle about camera interfaces. Often things that seem odd or awkward at first turn out to be just fine once we learn the interface.
For example, I use the XPro2 ISO dial all the time while shooting, and I no longer find it to be awkward at all. (Unless I"m shooting in the dark, when I cannot see the settings!) The action fo pulling up and rotating seems second-nature to me at this point.
Often it isn't so much that an interface is "bad" as it is that it is "not wha we are used to."
On the other hand, don't get me started on the problems with the EC dial, which is way too easy to turn and located in a place where accidentally turning it is all too likely...
Kit Laughlin wrote:
Makten: what were you hoping for, format-wise?
Mainly 4:3, and as a user of the GFX 50R with a ton of aspect ratios, I can't understand why on earth almost all manufacturers just ignore the possibility to let the photographer decide. And why Fuji, only on some cameras?
It must be extremely easy to make a bunch of additional aspect ratios when you already have 1:1, 3:2 and 16:9. Probably a few lines of code. But no, just don't... Idiots!
Makten wrote:
Mainly 4:3, and as a user of the GFX 50R with a ton of aspect ratios, I can't understand why on earth almost all manufacturers just ignore the possibility to let the photographer decide. And why Fuji, only on some cameras?
It must be extremely easy to make a bunch of additional aspect ratios when you already have 1:1, 3:2 and 16:9. Probably a few lines of code. But no, just don't... Idiots!
Speaking as a big fan of the 4:3 ratio, which I use for the great majority of my photographs produced on Fujifilm and other gear...
... I wouldn't mind at all if they would at least add some optional frame lines to indicate the boundaries of a few other formats. Doesn't seem like it would be too hard, and it would look like a plus to at least some of us.
On the other hand, your "Idiots!" comment is, well, over the top...
Makten: yes, 4:3 is good, and I do use this all the time in my µ4/3rds cameras. Fuji does have an excellent record of implementing additional useful features via firmware updates, so we hope they are reading here. Does anyone know of a dedicated Fuji feedback/features we'd like to see link?
To a previous TLDR and DWTQ (don’t want to quote) post in this thread:
The lens improvement over the X100F is indeed substantial. No need to quantify what substantial means if 1.) you watched the Fujifilm presentation where they compare corner performance between the F and V, and 2.) if you’ve seen Jonas Rask’s review where he demonstrates the improvement wide open at close distance by taking identical shots with the F and V. I can’t quantify “substantial” to anyone else, but for my uses this takes the lens IQ at f2/MFD from a Lensbaby-look to something more like the Leica Q.
This from the guy who prattled incessantly about the horrid X-Pro3 tilting screen without ever laying his hands on one.
gdanmitchell wrote:
That observation illustrates and under-appreciated principle about camera interfaces. Often things that seem odd or awkward at first turn out to be just fine once we learn the interface.
...
Often it isn't so much that an interface is "bad" as it is that it is "not wha we are used to."
Went to Fuji House in London today and played with the X100V for an hour. Silver finish was the best yet in the series but I still feel like it looks cheaper than the black.
New EVF was about the same size, contrast was better though and seemed a bit smoother refresh rate wise.
Love the refined ergonomics, Q button in a nice place, viewfinder switch felt firmer, slight slant to the rear top band felt great. I wish they would invest in a better joystick though (over the entire range)
AF was snappy but not as quite as the XT3 with 23/2, i tried them side by side. Nitpicking here though.
Touch screen was no where near as responsive as my D850, still happy to have it though.
Overall, great cam and I'll pick up a black one at some point.
gdanmitchell wrote:
That observation illustrates and under-appreciated principle about camera interfaces. Often things that seem odd or awkward at first turn out to be just fine once we learn the interface.
For example, I use the XPro2 ISO dial all the time while shooting, and I no longer find it to be awkward at all. (Unless I"m shooting in the dark, when I cannot see the settings!) The action fo pulling up and rotating seems second-nature to me at this point.
Often it isn't so much that an interface is "bad" as it is that it is "not wha we are used to."
On the other hand, don't get me started on the problems with the EC dial, which is way too easy to turn and located in a place where accidentally turning it is all too likely...
Yes the EC dials are much tighter on the newer bodies I use! The old EC dials on the XP2 and XE1 were always getting moved around by mistake, very very annoying.
I for one like that they added a tilt screen, which I always found to be a huge omission.
I've always felt the manual focus on the X100 series to be it's weakest link.
I was hoping at some point they would've added a clutch mechanism, or at the very least snap focus mode, but alas.
Alaarx wrote:
Went to Fuji House in London today and played with the X100V for an hour. Silver finish was the best yet in the series but I still feel like it looks cheaper than the black.
New EVF was about the same size, contrast was better though and seemed a bit smoother refresh rate wise.
Love the refined ergonomics, Q button in a nice place, viewfinder switch felt firmer, slight slant to the rear top band felt great. I wish they would invest in a better joystick though (over the entire range)
AF was snappy but not as quite as the XT3 with 23/2, i tried them side by side. Nitpicking here though.
Touch screen was no where near as responsive as my D850, still happy to have it though.
Overall, great cam and I'll pick up a black one at some point....Show more →
rbf_ wrote:
Yes the EC dials are much tighter on the newer bodies I use! The old EC dials on the XP2 and XE1 were always getting moved around by mistake, very very annoying.
Good to hear. Have they moved the EC dial to a better position where it won't be rubbed by one's shutter finger?
The problem has been a combination of an easily moved dial and putting it in a position where it is inevitable that photographers will touch it accidentally.
In the current position, they are between the proverbial rock and a hard place — make it stiff enough to never move when that shutter finger inevitably hits it and it is harder to adjust than it should be. Give it the ideal amount of stiffness, and in the current position it won't resist the inevitable finger pressure from the side of the shutter finger.
If I were Fujifilm, knowing that this has been an ongoing issue with multiple bodies since they've been putting EC knobs in this position... I'd be looking for a better location for the EC knob, perhaps switching it with another control knob that could better tolerate a harder-to-move level of friction.
mmm55 wrote:
This from the guy who prattled incessantly about the horrid X-Pro3 tilting screen without ever laying his hands on one.
Since the first camera I used that had a flip out screen (in 2003), I have used a lot of them from different manufacturers with a range of different configurations.
I don't have to touch every one of them to understand the implications of their designs or compare them to other designs.
gdanmitchell wrote:
Good to hear. Have they moved the EC dial to a better position where it won't be rubbed by one's shutter finger?
The problem has been a combination of an easily moved dial and putting it in a position where it is inevitable that photographers will touch it accidentally.
In the current position, they are between the proverbial rock and a hard place — make it stiff enough to never move when that shutter finger inevitably hits it and it is harder to adjust than it should be. Give it the ideal amount of stiffness, and in the current position it won't resist the inevitable finger pressure from the side of the shutter finger.
If I were Fujifilm, knowing that this has been an ongoing issue with multiple bodies since they've been putting EC knobs in this position... I'd be looking for a better location for the EC knob, perhaps switching it with another control knob that could better tolerate a harder-to-move level of friction.
Still in roughly the same position but they have upped the tension significantly on the XT3 so that i rarely ever inadvertently change the dial position. I don't know if I can say never though on the XT3 but I don't remember and when using it takes some pressure to move. On the GFX 50R it's a bit less stiff but lower and recessed into the top of the body. I think I've accidentally moved it a couple of times but it's no where near as frequent as my earlier bodies.
I don’t why they’ve never put a lock on it like some of the other newer dials.
@rbf_: personally, I dislike locking dials, especially if their ergonomics mean a change in grip of hand position to adjust. With the two X100 series cameras I had, I got into the habit of glancing at the EC dial as I picked the camera up and never had a problem with either of them. I suppose a lock could be used the same way, though (if left unlocked). I should mention that looking at SS and ƒ-stop before putting the camera to the eye is just what is done if you have a film background.
gdanmitchell wrote:
Speaking as a big fan of the 4:3 ratio, which I use for the great majority of my photographs produced on Fujifilm and other gear...
... I wouldn't mind at all if they would at least add some optional frame lines to indicate the boundaries of a few other formats. Doesn't seem like it would be too hard, and it would look like a plus to at least some of us.
On the other hand, your "Idiots!" comment is, well, over the top...
I don't care about the optical viewfinder since I won't use it (I want accurate framing). But in the EVF, they already offer 1:1 and 16:9, so adding a few more options would cost ZERO. And yes, they are idiots for not doing that. Now they will lose a customer due to it, just as Sony did when I ditched them for the GFX 50R.
Shooting with your preferred aspect ratio is among the most important things that a camera can give you. But when even the manufacturers fail to understand such basics, there must be idiots involved.
Nature of the beast I guess! 
