Herco

You should really send this in for service. Esp. if it is still under warranty. Loose aperture rings happened to me on two of my XF lenses, but never on a GF lens. I'd hoped for better quality assurance for GF(X) gear.

In the past Fujifilm rep's have stated that XF lenses were designed for up to 32MP which at that time (the 24MP was just introduced) seemed like an abundant margin. It's not that all newer lenses are able to resolve higher resolutions. The 16-80 for instance is a fine lens when you look at the center, but only average in corners and near the edge. Esp. at longer focal lengths. Primes like the 35/2 and the 80/2.8 are probably better equipped to resolve a 40MP sensor. However, it's clear that Fujifilm has a lot of MkII lenses to go... However, whether a lens is able to resolve the megapixels of the sensor doesn't tell the whole story. Many Fujifilm fans rave about the 35/1.4 where, in all honesty, the character of the lens is partly because of some optical flaws. In fact, some Leica shooters are paying top dollar for vintage lenses that aren't very sharp at all. It's the particular look they're after. So, if you love a lens, don't worry whether it can resolve all 40MPs. You'll hardly notice the difference between 32 and 40MP anyway.

should you prefer reading: Recommended Fuji X-T4 Settings (photographylife.com)

Great. I'm sure you don't plan to read the manual, but on YouTube there are some video tutorials to cover the basis settings. Just type in "setup fujifilm xt4" in the search box.

Couple of most likely settings. Re. sharpness/blurriness: set the AF mode to AF-S (front of camera) and in the AF menu the AF mode to single point. Now take a photo with one object in the center covered by the green focus box. That object should be tack sharp in the photo unless your shutter speed is really low (below 1/30th). In the IQ menu set the image size to L 3:2 and the image quality to F or F+RAW. Re. washed-out colors: press the Q button - set the film simulation to STD (Provia) and make sure that color is set to 0. S-Tone and H-Tone should be no more than -1 or +1 and switch Grain off. Make sure that you set White Balance to Auto, the aperture and shutter speed ring to A and switch on Auto ISO. With these settings you should at least get 'normal' images. You have to check these on your computer. The LCD on the camera is not very accurate. If you did check the images on the LCD make sure that in the Set Up menu under Screen Set Up, the LCD brightness and color are set to 0.

As long as it is a screw-in filter, yes it will protect against weather. However, this is never waterproof (just like the Fuji filter) so don't leave it lens up in the rain and let a puddle arise in the filter. It might slowly trickle down or at least create a damp between lens and filter. If it is a system filter, it is obviously not protecting. You also might want to be careful with screw-in filters that have separate rings like POL or Variable ND filters.

It depends on where you live. Under EU law the warranty must be transferable to a second owner. I can't comment on other jurisdictions. In itself, Fujifilm states that the warranty is not transferable unless mandated by local legislation.

The 50mm/f1.0 is even $1,500… First, I advise you to move this thread to General Discussion in the news forum. It is less about photos and more generic Fuji. I fully agree that the newer Fuji cameras and lenses become increasingly expensive. That is a general trend in the market. A Sony A1 of $6,500 was unthinkable 5 years ago… Next to all sorts of resource issues (chip shortage, transport issues, rare earth metals…) we see price increases, due to declining markets. The camera market (compact + interchangeable lens) declined by 90% between 2010 and 2020. So R&D and manufacturing costs need to be spread over a smaller number of cameras and lenses. However, we also see full-frame cameras going down-market. Priced right into aps-c territory. The costs of the image sensor make up less of the overall costs compared to 5y ago. Only the very new, high-res BSI sensors remain pricey, but the basic 24mp full-frame sensor is more or less the same priced compared to a 24/26mp aps-c sensor. You can argue whether a Sony A7C or a Nikon Z5 is as good overall as an X-T4, but if you value the benefits of full-frame, now is the time to move. For me, the Fujifilm sweetspot is the compact lines (X-S10, X-T30, X-E4…) and the smaller lenses (f2 primes and budget zooms). The fast primes, red badge zooms, X-T4 and later on X-H2 are indeed in full-frame territory and esp. interesting for those who are very Fuji-minded.

This is most likely 'the card write' issue that is quite common to Fujifilm cameras. For some strange reason Fuji is quite susceptible to card write issues. Try different configurations (back-up - sequential - raw/jpeg) for the card slot settings in case your camera has two slots. Also only use Fuji recommended SD cards and always format them in camera before use and never pull out the cards (and back in) with the camera powered on. However, above recommendations are no guarantee. On top of several other issues, this for me was the reason to no longer use Fuji cameras for my professional work. In 36 years I haven't lost a roll of film or a single image on card, but in my 6 years with the Fuji X-system it happened to me about a dozen times. Esp. the X-H1 (otherwise their best X so far) was notorious, according the specialist at my camera (repair) store. If you have a Fujifilm camera that behaves like this and still have warranty on it, have it checked and possibly repaired. I've heard of cases that were solved after a service. Not in my experience, but perhaps you're luckier...

There's quite a big difference in terms of the EVF between the X-T3 and the X-S10. The latter not only uses an older design OLED as EVF with less pixels (2.36m dots versus 3.69m dots in the X-T3) but also has a much smaller magnification factor (0.62x versus 0.75x for the X-T3). Finally the eye-point of the X-S10 is 17.5mm versus 23mm for the X-T3. The result is that the X-T3 has a much larger, brighter and detailed viewfinder that is easier for users who wear glasses. The higher the magnification and eyepoint values, the better for those who wear glasses.

I guess you use an X100 and probably the F or V (as you're unpacking what's likely a new camera). Both have an optical viewfinder (OVF) as well as an electronic viewfinder (EVF) setting. Have you been looking through the OVF? If so, there's indeed a very small distortion due to the optics and the magnification factor of the viewfinder. There's also the parallax effect due to the nature of the OVF. The EVF shows the image as recorded by the sensor and should be free of distortion, although you have of course some perspective distortion when the camera is not exactly horizontal.

I agree with @itchy shutter finger to make your own assessment of what you need, but some words of advice re. pixel peeping. I'm a professional fashion and make-up portrait photographer based in Switzerland. I frequently give workshops for enthusiasts and it strikes me that many of them are obsessed with "what is the best...?". The true answer is of course "it depends...". There's a lot debate about 'sharpness' of lenses and admittedly, when you look at 100% or even 200% on a monitor you'll likely see differences between lenses. Not so much in the center, but mostly towards the edges and corners. However, when you look at the whole image in print or on screen, differences are either minute or even invisible. Raise your hands when you frequently print 20x30 inch or bigger... Very few do. The most striking example I had last year when somebody told me he sold his XF 18mm/f2 although with huge regrets. He loved the lens, he shot some of his best images with that lens, but many people (incl. Youtubers) told him it was the worst lens in the XF ecosystem. I advised him to buy back that lens and enjoy it rather than pixel peep it. In fact, one of the most beloved Fujinons is the XF35/f1.4. Many rave about this lens because it produces this 'magic' quality. In fact, this 'magic' is the result of some optical flaws. On the test bench the XF35/f2 is much better, but it lacks that 'magic'. I personally prefer primes over zooms. Simply because a prime forces you to think twice about the framing and therefore composition. With a zoom most people just zoom in/out until they have covered the scene and then press the shutter. A prime may force you to take a step forward, backward or even change your view angle completely. That usually results in better images. I recognize that zooms are more flexible in situations where you can't change your standpoint. Back in the days when I was shooting with Fuji a lot, I loved the Zeiss Touit 12mm for landscape. It had that same 'quality of magic' that the 35mm/f1.4 has. Two other Fujinon primes come to mind as superb: the 16/1.4 and the 90/2. They are really above the rest of the range. The 16-55 is a very good general purpose lens, but for specialist portrait work I would always prefer the 56 (and of course the 90). Even when you only want two or three lenses, don't think that you need to cover all focal lengths by getting zoom lenses. It depends on your style of shooting and your ability to improvise. A few years ago I went on a personal trip to Colombia with only my X-Pro2 and the 23 and 50 f2 primes. Some of my most precious images where from that trip. Even though the 23/f2 is not a particular sharp and contrast-rich lens. But when you decide on the trinity of zooms (8-16, 16-55 and 50-140) there's nothing wrong with that either. It's just a heavy kit to carry around and a lot of money that gets close to full-frame territory. But that opens up a whole different debate...

Try this: The Fn (Function) Buttons (fujifilm-dsc.com)

Rode has some nice shotgun mics (and way better than the original Fuji mic), but if that's too pricey look at Boya. Many mics have a 3.5mm jack, but ideally you want a 2.5mm jack that goes to the X100V without adapter.

There's always a lot of debate about the value of weather sealing. First of all, weather-resistance is not absolute. In fact, Fujifilm doesn't provide any information as to the quality or WR or the tests that cameras and lenses need to pass. That means that we have no clue to what extend the WR-badge 'protects'. To my knowledge only Leica provides you with an IP-rating which indicates what standardized tests the camera and/or lens is able to pass. Fuji's -10 C claim is a quite generic one. The past 35 years I haven't had cameras unable to operate at -10 C. Regardless of brand or the WR-status. The weakest point of an ILC is obviously the lens mount. You should avoid changing lenses under challenging conditions unless you can provide protection against direct impact. That means that lenses with rubber gaskets also protect the weakest point of a non-WR camera. In my experience (I meet a lot of enthusiasts in workshops) most amateurs are quite meticulous about their camera and lenses. Just some generic TLC will go a long way, also for non-WR cameras. Submerging your camera or leaving it unprotected in a downpour or snowstorm, can lead to immediate failure. If not, then you were lucky. WR only protects a little against that but not entirely (not at all to submerging by the way). The real issue is the long-term threat. Dust and moisture gradually builds-up inside the camera and starts corroding the contacts and print boards, resulting in strange and erratic failures until complete shutdown. WR helps a little bit in this area. But when your camera survives the rain, it doesn't mean that you're in the clear. Always wipe dry your camera. Esp. around the dials and buttons. Also when your camera is WR. If the elements are really severe (monsoon season or arctic winters) I would always use a rain cover. Regardless of WR or not. Sometimes people claim that WR doesn't make a difference at all and that most cameras in repair are actually WR. That's a bit misleading imo. Cameras in repair are usually the more expensive cameras, where repair is worthwhile. These more expensive cameras are mostly WR, so that messes-up the statistics. Next to that, these are also the cameras mostly used under severe conditions, so eligible to more potential damage. Esp. when their owners have complete faith in the WR-badge. So, in short, if you like the X-S10 and you apply a little TLC it shouldn't be a problem. Just avoid the severest of conditions and if not possible, use one of these cheap plastic rain covers.

Take a look here:

These days I use Fujifilm only for personal work and I use the X-Pro2 because I like that camera best. So for me the 35/2 is the better option as it blocks less of the optical view finder. Moreover, I personally love the small form factor of the 35/2 and I don't shoot portraits with it that require shallow DOF and very smooth bokeh. I use it mostly for (urban) landscape, so the better sharpness is well-suited. I would only opt for the 35/1.4 if I really needed the extra stop of light and/or would do specifically portraits with the lens. PS. I also use it for street photography (X-Pro2 + 35/2) and because of its much faster and more accurate AF, I tend to loose fewer candid shots with the f2 compared to the f1.4 version.

Yes, the 35/1.4 is often considered the 'best' Fujinon lens, but it is in fact due to some optical flaws that create an appealing character. It has much more vignetting and chromatic aberration than the 35/2 and it is less sharp in all areas. Furthermore it creates a warmer, less clinical image than the 35/2. Technically the 35/2 is much better (the 35/1.4 scored 91.9 in Fototest), but the 35/1.4 has a nice 'organic' look to its images. Finally, the 35/1.4 has poor AF speed and is noisy (both AF motors and aperture chatter). That makes it useless for video with on-camera sound. That of course only matters when you shoot video. However, when doing street photography or in theaters or museums, the 35/1.4 can also be irritably noisy for others.

It is definitely less comfortable to walk around with compared to the 18-55. It makes the cameras a lot more front-heavy. I used it on an X-H1 with a grip or L-plate and that is as bulky as a full-frame camera like the A7 or Z-series with their 24-70/2.8 lenses.

That is correct. The 18-55 is approx. as sharp as the 23/2. Fototest tested them both around 1600 linepairs in the centre and 1450 linepairs in corners. The 16-55 is a bit sharper in the centre (1750), but a bit less sharp in the corners (1370-1400 linepairs). The 35/2 is around 2000 linepairs centre and 1600 in corners. All at the equiv. focal lengths and 1 stop stopped down. Fototest also scores the lenses based on various categories (IQ, both measured and visual, build quality and features). The 18-55 had a score of 91.1 (out of max. 100). The 16-55 scored 90.3. The 23/2 scored just below 90 and the 35/2 scored 98.9.

Hi, I've owned all of these lenses (and quite a few more Fujinons) so here's my personal take on this. The 35/2 is a fantastic lens when it comes to image quality. The 16-55 will not reach that level. It's closer to the 23/2 and the 18-55. In fact, the German magazine Fototest has tested the 16-55 and the 18-55 and both are very close to each other in terms of sharpness. The 16-55 is a bit less sharp on the wide-angle side and the 18-55 is a bit softer on the tele end. The main advantage of the 16-55 over the 18-55 is better contrast due to better coatings. The images look a bit 'punchy-er'. You could get a similar result with the 18-55 in post by cranking up contrast, but the 16-55 has a better 'starting position' here. The 23/2 is a nice lens. The main advantage is size/weight, speed of AF and versatility of the 35mm equiv. IQ is good but nothing exceptional like the 35/2. With the 23/2 it's best to avoid f2 when you want good IQ, so effectively it becomes a f2.8 or f4 lens, just like the 18-55. So, it's easier to leave your 18-55 on camera and zoom to 23mm, instead of mounting the 23/2. The 16-55 is quite a bit larger and heavier than the 18-55. For travel and carry-around I would prefer the 18-55 as it is also image stabilized (the 16-55 is not). That allows you to shoot in available light situations like indoors. Esp. since the X-T3 doesn't have IBIS. The 16-55 is meant for more professional shooting conditions, with controlled light, shallower DOF, WR and front lens coating that repels water. I've used it for several assignments during when I was using Fuji for professional work. It's a work-horse lens, just like all 24-70/2.8 lenses from major manufacturers. The downside is that it is almost equally large and heavy, despite it's only for APS-C format. When you look for a great travel kit, you might consider to sell your 23/2 and buy a 14/2.8 next to the 18-55. Those two lenses are made for each other. Same filter size, lens hood, very portable and great IQ for relative low costs. You can always keep the 35/2 whenever you need more than f3.8 (which is approx. the aperture when you zoom the 18-55 to about 35mm). That way, you probably use the 18-55 more than 90% of the time. The rest would be the 14/2.8 or the 35/2. This however, depends on whether you need something wider than the 18-55.

You may want to check out fujifilm_xpro1_manual_en.pdf (fujifilm-x.com) and esp. page 86 or CORRECTED AF FRAME (fujifilm-dsc.com) for the X-Pro2. The latter is the same, but better described. Though technically the X-Pro cameras are not rangefinders, the OVF has the same parallax issue as rangefinders have. That means that for shorter focus distances the frame (and therefor also the focus point) is different than for infinity, simply because you're not looking through the lens, but through the OVF which is slightly right and up from the lens. The deviation is larger for short focus distances and becomes insignificant for focus on infinity. When you switch on the Corrected AF Frame setting you get a dotted white focus box to the right and below the original focus box. The solid white focus frame is for infinity. The dotted white box is for 80cm focus distance (50cm in the X-Pro2). As soon as you half-press the shutter release (or press the AF-L button) while trying to focus on subjects closer than infinity two things happen: - the outer white frame line indicating the outlines of your image shifts to the parallax-corrected position: that will be the new outline of the final image; - a green focus box appears indicating the corrected focus area based on the parallax shift. It will be anywhere between the solid white and dotted white focus box depending how far your focus actually is. The camera focuses on the green focus box area. If that is not the area you intended, you need to slightly move the camera and re-focus. This requires some practice. Sometimes its best to switch to AF-C mode because the camera will re-focus wherever you point it. However, whenever focus is critical and distance is short (e.g. macro or portrait), you're better of using the EVF-mode of the viewfinder. An alternative is manual focus with focus peaking assistance. When you focus, the OVF switches to EVF to show the focus peaking and then goes back to OVF for composition.

Hi, this is a common X-mount issue. Fuji has addressed this in the X-H1 but hasn't seen it through in the next cameras (X-T3/T4/S10...). So it remains a 'weak spot'. It can be an issue with the camera mount (esp. the flanges) or the lens mount. Neither you can easily fix yourself unless it is a matter of loose mount screws. You might want to check that. If that doesn't help, the best thing to do is send the camera + lens in for service. Expect it to be at least $200 or so, but still cheaper than buying another camera or lens. By the way, try another lens (a similar heavy zoom) to make sure it's either the camera or lens. A good retailer could help you isolate the problem. PS. lens wiggle can also be a real issue in itself, as it can be the result of a crooked mount that causes misalignment of lens and sensor. That will result in reduced image quality.

If you look at Fuji's release schedule of the X100 so far, it shows that in general a model lasts for close to 3 years. That means that a next version can be expected around early 2023. I personally wouldn't wait for that. The current V is already a very good camera now that the lens issues of the earlier models was addressed. Of course this is a very personal decision and based on what you want the camera for. An argument for buying a X100V now and not wait for the successor, is that the X100 cameras keep good value in the second hand market. If you buy now and upgrade whenever a newer version comes out (should you wish to do so), you still get a decent amount for the X100V. Finally, sometimes Fuji makes decisions in newer versions that might not appeal to your needs. For instance, the X-Pro3 has some issues for me over the X-Pro2. I don't like the LCD-screen and the sub screen gimmick. I wish they had mounted an X100V-style LCD on the X-Pro3. Dropping the dual magnification in the OVF of the X-Pro3 was a real deal breaker for me. So I kept using the X-Pro2. If I would have waited 3 years for the X-Pro3 that would have been a waste of time and missing some great shooting experience. In general, I see a lot of enthusiasts amateurs (also in the workshops) who are obsessed with the latest and greatest gear. Of course the industry thrives on that by releasing new cameras every 1-2 years. Fuji was actually one of the worse companies to do so with their X-H1 > X-T3 debacle. However, I also see amateurs using about 10-15% of the capabilities of their cameras without taking the time to really learn and understand how their camera works under pressure of time and in new situations. So, buy that X100V and enjoy it for as long as you can/want. Know that even the original X100 back in 2010 is still a beautiful camera that can produce gorgeous images as long as you are capable of creating them.

This is a common error with the X-mount system. Does switching off and on actually help? This error occurs when the lens is not properly recognized by the camera. Some considerations: - never change lenses with the camera turned on - always switch it off first before de-mounting/mounting another lens - there could be bad contact between the lens and camera (connectors in the mount). This can be because of misalignment or even structural damage due to an earlier bump. The X-mount is quite susceptible for that, hence the strengthened mount in the X-H1, which was by the way never followed up in the X-T3 and T4. - the lens can be damaged internally - this is very likely when the error persists after switching off and on the camera.