gyoung143 wrote:
Beats me why people want to wallow in the problems of the past. I spent decades regretting the idiosyncratic colour rendering of films. Good riddance to all that, forget the limitations, take the raw out of camera and create your own look to your photos, you have control in post processing we could only dream of in film days
Gerry
For serious photography, one needs a certain level of consistency in appearance, including the color palette. Can't imagine a published series in the magazine or a portfolio of work published or online consisting of 4 of "Summer of 1976 recipe," 5 of "Riviera Azure," 3 of "Reala Moon," etc. It ruins the consistency in look and will look so unprofessional. Recipes and customization are fun, but one needs to settle on one or very few of them. There is no need for a dedicated dial to constantly switch among 12 of them. The film sims were a novelty to me when I first played with them, but then the consistency problem became clear. I also want my images to be future proof -- what if I detest the once trendy "Riviera Azure" look 10 years down the road? I don't want to re-process everything for a different trendy look. So I stick with Fuji's standard profile where the colors also look very nice to me.
foto16 wrote:
For serious photography, one needs a certain level of consistency in appearance, including the color palette. Can't imagine a published series in the magazine or a portfolio of work published or online consisting of 4 of "Summer of 1976 recipe," 5 of "Riviera Azure," 3 of "Reala Moon," etc. It ruins the consistency in look and will look so unprofessional. Recipes and customization are fun, but one needs to settle on one or very few of them. There is no need for a dedicated dial to constantly switch among 12 of them. The film sims were a novelty to me when I first played with them, but then the consistency problem became clear. I also want my images to be future proof -- what if I detest the once trendy "Riviera Azure" look 10 years down the road? I don't want to re-process everything for a different trendy look. So I stick with Fuji's standard profile where the colors also look very nice to me....Show more →
So we are talking about magazine publications now? Please, tell me how many magazines you read last month
Maybe thats the issue- Fuji is trying to tap into a younger market which is actually shooting film and loves Film Sims. I saw multiple college age people out at bars and events, all with Point and Shoot film cameras.
The magazine reader isn't the target market anymore for some of these cameras and its showing in this forum. Also most "serious" photographers probably aren't snagging the Xt50. They are targeting a different market obviously.
It is clear though its a polarizing topic- Whats crazy to me though is the no one wants it crowd-
RustyRus wrote:
So we are talking about magazine publications now? Please, tell me how many magazines you read last month
Maybe thats the issue- Fuji is trying to tap into a younger market which is actually shooting film and loves Film Sims. I saw multiple college age people out at bars and events, all with Point and Shoot film cameras.
The magazine reader isn't the target market anymore for some of these cameras and its showing in this forum. Also most "serious" photographers probably aren't snagging the Xt50. They are targeting a different market obviously.
It is clear though its a polarizing topic- Whats crazy to me though is the no one wants it crowd-
Even for people's Instagram and Flickr, I find having inconsistent colors from different recipes distracting and unprofessional.
I recognize there might be a segment of the market that likes the film sim dial. However, the number of "serious" photographers who wanted to snag the Xt50 may be more than you think. The X-Tx0 had always been a mini X-Tx. I have the X-T5, but I have always had a smaller and lighter camera, from the X-E1 to the X-T30. It is untrue that "serious" photographers don't need small cameras. Judging by the reactions all over the forums, I'm not alone on this. The X-T30 and earlier models actually served both the "playful" and "serious" groups well. What has annoyed people s that on the X-T50 Fuji has replaced a core function dial with a dial that is only useful for a limited subset of the users (only for the stock film sim switchers, not even very useful for recipe users) and thereby alienated the "serious" group. So a muti function camera has become a more narrowly focused camera. It's a downgrade and not sure consistent with Fuji's initial intention of expanding the market.
As many have argued, there are clearly better ways to implement film sim selections, and some are already there in Fuji cameras. For advertisement, Fuji can print stickers of film sims, t-shirts... but it's mad to print ad on a dial. The dial would have been fine for an X-A or X-T200, but the price tag of X-T50 is not entry level and Fuji certainly want to sell a lot of these to "serious" photographers.
foto16 wrote:
Even for people's Instagram and Flickr, I find having inconsistent colors from different recipes distracting and unprofessional.
I recognize there might be a segment of the market that likes the film sim dial. However, the number of "serious" photographers who wanted to snag the Xt50 may be more than you think. The X-Tx0 had always been a mini X-Tx. I have the X-T5, but I have always had a smaller and lighter camera, from the X-E1 to the X-T30. It is untrue that "serious" photographers don't need small cameras. Judging by the reactions all over the forums, I'm not alone on this. The X-T30 and earlier models actually served both the "playful" and "serious" groups well. What has annoyed people s that on the X-T50 Fuji has replaced a core function dial with a dial that is only useful for a limited subset of the users (only for the stock film sim switchers, not even very useful for recipe users) and thereby alienated the "serious" group. So a muti function camera has become a more narrowly focused camera. It's a downgrade and not sure consistent with Fuji's initial intention of expanding the market.
As many have argued, there are clearly better ways to implement film sim selections, and some are already there in Fuji cameras. For advertisement, Fuji can print stickers of film sims, t-shirts... but it's mad to print ad on a dial. The dial would have been fine for an X-A or X-T200, but the price tag of X-T50 is not entry level and Fuji certainly want to sell a lot of these to "serious" photographers.
foto16 wrote:
Even for people's Instagram and Flickr, I find having inconsistent colors from different recipes distracting and unprofessional.
I recognize there might be a segment of the market that likes the film sim dial. However, the number of "serious" photographers who wanted to snag the Xt50 may be more than you think. The X-Tx0 had always been a mini X-Tx. I have the X-T5, but I have always had a smaller and lighter camera, from the X-E1 to the X-T30. It is untrue that "serious" photographers don't need small cameras. Judging by the reactions all over the forums, I'm not alone on this. The X-T30 and earlier models actually served both the "playful" and "serious" groups well. What has annoyed people s that on the X-T50 Fuji has replaced a core function dial with a dial that is only useful for a limited subset of the users (only for the stock film sim switchers, not even very useful for recipe users) and thereby alienated the "serious" group. So a muti function camera has become a more narrowly focused camera. It's a downgrade and not sure consistent with Fuji's initial intention of expanding the market.
As many have argued, there are clearly better ways to implement film sim selections, and some are already there in Fuji cameras. For advertisement, Fuji can print stickers of film sims, t-shirts... but it's mad to print ad on a dial. The dial would have been fine for an X-A or X-T200, but the price tag of X-T50 is not entry level and Fuji certainly want to sell a lot of these to "serious" photographers.
•40.2 megapixel X-Trans CMOS 5 HR sensor with X-Processor 5
•2.36 Million-dot OLED viewfinder and 3-inch 1.62 Million-dot 2-way tilt touch LCD
•8fps mechanical shutter and up to 20fps in electronic shutter mode
•Up to 7.0-stops in-body stabilisation
•Face/Eye AF subject detection
•Physical film simulation dial
•20 film simulation modes including Reala-Ace
•1x UHS-II SD memory card slot
•390 shots battery life with NP-W126S Li-ion battery
•6.2K/30p, 4K/60p, 1080/240p 4:2:2 10-bit with F-Log2, ProRes and BlackMagic RAW
•3.5mm mic and USB-C headphone jacks, USB-C PD, Micro HDMI, USB-C adapter
included
•Bluetooth, WiFi with built-in frame.io connectivity and UVC webcam 4K/60p
•Available in black and Silver X-T50 body
foto16 wrote:
For serious photography, one needs a certain level of consistency in appearance, including the color palette. Can't imagine a published series in the magazine or a portfolio of work published or online consisting of 4 of "Summer of 1976 recipe," 5 of "Riviera Azure," 3 of "Reala Moon," etc. It ruins the consistency in look and will look so unprofessional.
I've been to a few of the major photography museums and galleries here in NYC, and I've looked through many anthologies and photo books from famous and noteworthy photographers. Unless we're talking about a specific photographer in a specific period of time, rarely has consistency of color been a running theme in their work. Indeed, in the days of film color consistency would be mostly based on the type of film used, and even then it was common for well-known photographers to experiment with different film stocks (Fuji's film simulations were modeled on their film stocks), different color treatments and different ways of lighting, composition, and subject matter.
Moreover, I follow a number of well-known photographers today and, with the exception of landscape photographers, rarely does their work have a consistent color treatment. It varies entirely with the subject matter, the setting, the lighting conditions, and the story the photographer is trying to tell.
I agree with you that for some people, a consistent color palette may be a preference to develop a "style" of their work, (it's a preference for me, actually), but it's far from necessary to be a "serious" photographer (I'm not even sure what that means). Actually all the folks that I know, have read about or watched would (and have) said that experimentation is important to this craft.
OLED Colour Electronic Viewfinder with 2.36 million dots, and 0.62x magnification.
This is a bit underwhelming. Compared to the good old X-S10, the only difference in specs is 40MP vs. 26MP, and that costs 400 USD? I would have been interested if it were 40MP+IBIS+larger EVF, despite the film sim dial.
I think many people will choose to wait for the X-E5, now that it has been confirmed by rumor. In the meantime, I will get by with my X-T5 and X100VI.
foto16 wrote:
OLED Colour Electronic Viewfinder with 2.36 million dots, and 0.62x magnification.
This is a bit underwhelming. Compared to the good old X-S10, the only difference in specs is 40MP vs. 26MP, and that costs 400 USD? I would have been interested if it were 40MP+IBIS+larger EVF, despite the film sim dial.
I think many people will choose to wait for the X-E5, now that it has been confirmed by rumor. In the meantime, I will get by with my X-T5 and X100VI.
The XS10 is discontinued, so the only options are the used market and most people don't want a used camera.
The XT50 is intended to be a lower end version of an XT5. If you already have an XT5, this camera is not for you. If you don't have any Fuji cameras (as most people don't have), then it could be a good option for people who want most of the manual dials of the XT5 without the bells and whistles and the $1700 price tag and the relatively low stock at most retailers.
foto16 wrote:
For serious photography, one needs a certain level of consistency in appearance, including the color palette. Can't imagine a published series in the magazine or a portfolio of work published or online consisting of 4 of "Summer of 1976 recipe," 5 of "Riviera Azure," 3 of "Reala Moon," etc. It ruins the consistency in look and will look so unprofessional. Recipes and customization are fun, but one needs to settle on one or very few of them. There is no need for a dedicated dial to constantly switch among 12 of them. The film sims were a novelty to me when I first played with them, but then the consistency problem became clear. I also want my images to be future proof -- what if I detest the once trendy "Riviera Azure" look 10 years down the road? I don't want to re-process everything for a different trendy look. So I stick with Fuji's standard profile where the colors also look very nice to me....Show more →
I consider myself a serious hobbyist, but I choose film sims the way I would choose film stocks. Plenty of the sims on Fuji X weekly are novelties and I think you are right that mixing some Velvia recipes alongside Summer of 74, and Across wouldn't make sense in a portfolio, but that's not the way I shoot. I reserve a version of Velvia for landscape shots when the lighting conditions suit it, and for other things use a version of Kodachrome 64 or Reggies Portra, which both have a Kodak look. I also keep a version of 800T for night shooting, and Superia 800 for city shots. The trick I find is to match the recipe to the subject and shooting conditions in the same way one might pick different film stocks for subject and shooting conditions. And if you are wanting to exhibit photos just exhibit those with a consistent theme/genre. I also shoot RAW when I want maximum flexibility but am increasingly finding the film sims giving me most of what I want, with only needing to make occasional minor adjustments. And I suppose having started with film I am the type that prefers to get shots right or near right in the field, rather than doing a lot of post processing.
Sure there may be people on Insta showing an eclectic and distracting mix of photographic experiments, but I don't think Fuji is the problem here. Rather all the youtubers flogging Lightroom preset packs, and amateurs who want to display their latest experiment who probably aren't that serious about photography anyway. But who is to stop them?
That said, I think the film sim dial mixing C modes and film sims is a bit of a mashup and would have preferred it to remain a drive dial, or C mode dial only.
They priced this way too close to a Nikon Z6II. Like I'm sure it's on sale currently, but B&H has it listed at $1496 and I know what I would choose if I had to choose one.
Geoff D F wrote:
I consider myself a serious hobbyist, but I choose film sims the way I would choose film stocks. Plenty of the sims on Fuji X weekly are novelties and I think you are right that mixing some Velvia recipes alongside Summer of 74, and Across wouldn't make sense in a portfolio, but that's not the way I shoot. I reserve a version of Velvia for landscape shots when the lighting conditions suit it, and for other things use a version of Kodachrome 64 or Reggies Portra, which both have a Kodak look. I also keep a version of 800T for night shooting, and Superia 800 for city shots. The trick I find is to match the recipe to the subject and shooting conditions in the same way one might pick different film stocks for subject and shooting conditions. And if you are wanting to exhibit photos just exhibit those with a consistent theme/genre. I also shoot RAW when I want maximum flexibility but am increasingly finding the film sims giving me most of what I want, with only needing to make occasional minor adjustments. And I suppose having started with film I am the type that prefers to get shots right or near right in the field, rather than doing a lot of post processing.
Sure there may be people on Insta showing an eclectic and distracting mix of photographic experiments, but I don't think Fuji is the problem here. Rather all the youtubers flogging Lightroom preset packs, and amateurs who want to display their latest experiment who probably aren't that serious about photography anyway. But who is to stop them?
That said, I think the film sim dial mixing C modes and film sims is a bit of a mashup and would have preferred it to remain a drive dial, or C mode dial only....Show more →
One reviewer on YouTube confirmed that the FS1, FS2, and FS3 on the film sim dial CANNOT save recipes (jpeg settings) and can only be used to select base film sims (not already on the dial), which further limits its usefulness. If you want recipes, you still need to use C modes but then you can have the dial showing Velvia but your C setting shows Classic Chrome, for example.
This is just one example for not thinking through the implementation by Fuji. On the X-S10/20, the front wheel is set to change the aperture, but if you use the ring on the lens to change the aperture, there is no way to re-program the front wheel to perform other functions. So that wheel is basically wasted as almost all Fuji lenses have aperture rings. Another example: Fuji has this nice A1, A2, A3 settings for auto ISO, not seen in other brands. However, the ISO dial only has an A position. You still have to go into the menu (or program a button) to select A1, A2, or A3. Why not just put A1, A2, or A3 on the ISO dial directly? It will make the ISO dial more useful.
But anyway, the X-T50 is already out and looks sexy and I wish Fuji sell loads of them to the target market segment.
Camera aside, I'm hearing the new kit lens is only F2.8 from 16-17mm, which seems like an egregious bait and switch by Fuji to label it as 2.8 aperture for 1mm of focal range..
foto16 wrote:
One reviewer on YouTube confirmed that the FS1, FS2, and FS3 on the film sim dial CANNOT save recipes (jpeg settings) and can only be used to select base film sims (not already on the dial), which further limits its usefulness.
I didn't think that was a big surprise seeing as FS means film simulation, whereas "recipes" are created using custom functions (C1 to C7).
mdude85 wrote:
I didn't think that was a big surprise seeing as FS means film simulation, whereas "recipes" are created using custom functions (C1 to C7).
It's not a big surprise, but a big downside, as it further limit the usefulness of the dial. There was a hope, from all the forums, that the FS positions on the dial could be used to select recipes. The way it is, the dial is only useful to those who need to constantly switch among the stock film sims without using recipes. It's not usable to recipe users.
foto16 wrote:
It's not a big surprise, but a big downside, as it further limit the usefulness of the dial. There was a hope, from all the forums, that the FS positions on the dial could be used to select recipes. The way it is, the dial is only useful to those who need to constantly switch among the stock film sims without using recipes. It's not usable to recipe users.
Yes, I'm not sure why they were hoping for that as it was clear, to me at least, that FS did not mean custom function.
BPsmith511 wrote:
Camera aside, I'm hearing the new kit lens is only F2.8 from 16-17mm, which seems like an egregious bait and switch by Fuji to label it as 2.8 aperture for 1mm of focal range..
Yeah they made it slow to maintain a compact size that doesn't extend while zooming. Not for low lights. From the couple of tests I saw, the lens is always sharp in the center, but the edges/corners need to stop down to f5.6-8 to become sharp. It's only 240g and has a fixed lens profile, so I'm thinking it can be a useful street photography lens outdoors, where you typically stop down or don't care about corner sharpness anyway. Then add a fast prime for indoors. Zooming between 24mm equiv. to 75mm without your intention being noticed in the street sounds pretty cool. But I wouldn't buy it at standalone price.
BPsmith511 wrote:
Camera aside, I'm hearing the new kit lens is only F2.8 from 16-17mm, which seems like an egregious bait and switch by Fuji to label it as 2.8 aperture for 1mm of focal range..
Not sure I'd call it a bait and switch. It does exactly what Fuji claims and there's no generally accepted "range" at which a variable aperture lens is expected to operate wide open at. It sucks, but it's a kit lens. Spend real money, get a real lens.
foto16 wrote:
One reviewer on YouTube confirmed that the FS1, FS2, and FS3 on the film sim dial CANNOT save recipes (jpeg settings) and can only be used to select base film sims (not already on the dial), which further limits its usefulness. If you want recipes, you still need to use C modes but then you can have the dial showing Velvia but your C setting shows Classic Chrome, for example.
This is just one example for not thinking through the implementation by Fuji. On the X-S10/20, the front wheel is set to change the aperture, but if you use the ring on the lens to change the aperture, there is no way to re-program the front wheel to perform other functions. So that wheel is basically wasted as almost all Fuji lenses have aperture rings. Another example: Fuji has this nice A1, A2, A3 settings for auto ISO, not seen in other brands. However, the ISO dial only has an A position. You still have to go into the menu (or program a button) to select A1, A2, or A3. Why not just put A1, A2, or A3 on the ISO dial directly? It will make the ISO dial more useful.
But anyway, the X-T50 is already out and looks sexy and I wish Fuji sell loads of them to the target market segment. ...Show more →
I was in the camp that I liked the dial- If you can't save recipes in the dial, its a waste of time. What a bummer-
