Herco

With most Fuji WR lenses there's a certain 'roughness' in the zoom and focus rings. I've been told -by a camera repair expert- this has to do with the way how Fuji seals the rings with slightly oversized plastic rings. That gives a feeling like it is insufficiently 'lubricated'. Some people describe it like there's fine-grained sand in the lens. It is suppose to get less over time with more use and there's a sample variation between lenses even of the same type. Having said that, I don't experience this with weather sealed lenses of the other brands I use (Nikon and Leica). The aforementioned repair man told me that this is due to the quality of the sealing ring. A replacement ring for a Nikkor S lens costs about 4x as much as that of a comparable Fuji WR lens... (for X-mount that is, not for G-mount).

I can confirm this. My X100V had the same as do some of my other XF WR lenses. The fact that some lenses do and others don't (same lens) leads me to believe that Fuji has quite wide production tolerances. Over the past 7 years I've had (partly still have) 13 different XF lenses. 4 of them needed replacement due to production failures (loose aperture or focus rings, crooked mount...). Though I really like Fuji cameras, to me that is a bit too often...

It's quite a difference. As a basis the Leica Q2 already has a very good 47Mp full-frame sensor paired with one of the best lenses ever made (a 28mm Summilux). By leaving out the color array filter on the sensor and optimizing the sensor lenses for monochrome images, you get an incredibly sharp and contrast rich monochrome image. Without the color array filter you also boost the low light performance and expand the dynamic range of the sensor by approx. 2 stops. In the meanwhile, I couldn't resist and purchased a Q2 Monochrome. I'm not disappointed. Though my X-Pro produces very nice Acros files, the Q2 Monochrome is a different league (also in price to be fair). I usually shoot monochrome for my personal work, but to be able to shoot at ISO25000 and have files as clean as an X-Pro at ISO1600 is amazing. At normal ISO levels, the level of detail and the tonality of the Q2 files is stunning. Both for the jpegs out-of-camera and the DNG raw files via Capture One.

When you shoot RAW+JPEG it doesn't make sense to edit the JPEG with tools like sharpening, noise reduction and enhance details in LR or C1 or any of those tools. In almost all cases it makes the JPEG quality worse. All these 'raw-processing actions' are done by the camera when processing the RAW file to a JPEG. You can control that process by the camera settings: http://fujifilm-dsc.com/en-int/manual/x100v/menu_shooting/image_quality_setting/index.html or create a custom setting in your camera to handle that. What you can do with the JPEG in LR or C1 are actions like cropping, culling and tagging. You can also make limited changes to white balance and overall exposure but even these I would preferably do on the RAW file rather than the JPEG. The issue is that the JPEG is a compressed file with severely reduced dynamic range and colors. Changes to these files generally have a much broader impact, than the pinpoint precision that you can apply to a RAW-file. Consider the RAW file to be the original Word document and the JPEG the PDF-file. It's much easier to invisibly change the text of a document in Word before making a PDF of it, than to try and change the text in the PDF viewer. It's like putting raisins into an already baked cake... 🙂 What you can do is use the Fuji film profiles/simulations that are available in LR or C1 and apply these on the RAW-files. Note that the profiles in C1 are much better and closer to the original Fuji film simulations than those of LR. An alternative is using Fuji X Raw Studio software. It uses the JPEG-engine in your camera to rerun the RAW to JPEG conversion, based on the settings that you apply in the software. So if you have a JPEG but you need slightly more sharpening, connect your camera to the software, find the original RAW-file, change the IQ settings and rerun the JPEG conversion.

We're long-time users of C1 in conjunction with Photo Mechanic (Plus). Upgraded to C1 v21 and no problems at all except for the deactivate/activate step (why was that needed at all?). Mostly using Sessions (and tethered) but for personal work also Catalogues. Last time I checked our combined 'database' was over 1.5 mio images. My personal catalogues are roughly 30k images each (usually 2 years per catalogue). No problems. We're working with macbooks and imacs in conjunction with Drobo NAS solutions and Enterprise Dropbox. C1 is the core of our workflow with roundtrips to Photo Mechanic and Affinity Photo or Photoshop when needed.

There are portraits and there are portraits... Meaning to say there are a lot of different setups that may requires different lenses. The 16-80 is definitely capable of some fine portraits when used correctly. When you wish to keep the flexibility of a zoom lens, but require some more distinct bokeh and a shallower depth of field, consider exchanging it for the 16-55/2.8. It's the classic reporter zoom lens, but wide open at 55mm it doubles as a very capable portrait lens. Should you wish to hold on to the 16-80 you might want to look at the 50-140/2.8. Part of the trinity reporter lenses, but very well suited for all kinds of portraits. In the Fuji line-up there are a few specialist portrait lenses like the two versions of the 56/1.2, the 50/1.0 and the 90/2.0. Only when you do a lot of (paid and/or studio) portrait work it makes sense in buying these. Outdoors in regular lighting you usually have to stop down anyway... For occasional portrait work there are a few generic lenses that can be used for portraits, such as the 35 (both the 1.4 and the 2.0) for wider portraits and half-body shots and the 50/2.0 and the 60/2.4 for head shots. The 23 (1.4 and 2.0) works well for full body shots and environmental portraits where you wish to show some of the surroundings/context of the subject. Your 16-80/4.0 and the 18-55/2.8-4 also fit well into this category. Finally, unless you plan to work in very harsh conditions, WR doesn't mean a lot. When I was using Fuji professionally, I had a favourite 23/1.4 (non-WR) that outlived a few WR lenses. With some common sense, WR doesn't make any difference. Most amateurs I know are meticulous with their gear and don't get into situations where it could make a difference.

Provia is indeed the most standard film simulation of all. When you use that as a starting point and create a custom profile dialing down all highlight, shadow and color settings to -1 or -2 you get a very flat profile in jpegs. You can also set the screen to 'Natural Live View' in the Setup>Screen Setting menu (switch it to ON). That way it will not display film simulations on screen (just monochrome and sepia when selected). Note that when you select a film simulation (any) that information is also stored in the RAW file. Some RAW-convertors use that for display purposes when importing the RAW file. You can easily bypass that by selecting the required ICC profile and curve. In Capture One by default the RAW image will be displayed using the selected film simulation (camera specific ICC profile and curve on AUTO). When you want to see the pure RAW image in Capture One you should select LINEAR as a curve, You can default this in the import dialogue.

Stopped down to 5.6 or so, the 16/2.8 improves in sharpness, but never quite reaches the level of the 14/2.8. The 14 has that same 3D-like rendering effect that the 35/1.4 and the 23/1.4 also have. When you compare field-of-view, the 14 is quite a bit wider, allowing for more dramatic wide-angle shots. The 16 is more of a universal wide-angle. Here in Europe there are ample 14/2.8s second-hand for around €450. Esp. when the 16/1.4 came out, people sold their 14s. You might see the same effect whit the mkII of the 10-24/4. The 10-24/4 is a very good lens as long as you stay away from the long (24) end. It’s much bigger though and personally I prefer a prime lens.

I’ve tried the 16/2.8 but didn’t find it good enough to replace the 14/2.8. The 14 is a very underrated lens. In my view it comes very close to the 16/1.4 which is one of Fuji’s best lenses. The 16/2.8 is less sharp wide-open (corners) and lacks the beautiful micro-contrast of the 14. For general use and street shots that’s less of an issue as it has faster AF and is smaller (and WR for those who care). But for landscape and architecture I much prefer the IQ of the 14.

The Fuji App is a constant source of frustration. I've given up using it even though is was improved a while ago. The book that @Olaf W. recommended is the best chance of getting it to work.

No, there is in fact an XF10 from Fuji. It's a compact camera: https://fujifilm-x.com/global/products/cameras/xf10/

It's probably the built-in battery that needs replacement. Not the main one that you remove and charge, but the one built-in that powers the memory in the camera. Long periods of inactive storage with drained main batteries may affect the quality of this back-up battery. The retailer where you bought the camera should be able to replace it, or otherwise a camera repair shop.

No worries, C1 will definitely support the M1 chip set. It'd be 'suicide' for them not to. Due to Rosetta 2 the current version of C1 already works great on M1 macbooks (so I've seen on someone else's brand new one). I personally wait for the 16 inch M1(X). Forums are usually the place where people complain, so I wouldn't read too much into that. I've had to use customer support from C1 two or three times and I have no complaints. Very quick and professional. Even on the bug I reported, I got a follow-up request from their product dept. I've never had that with Adobe LR in all these years with them.

DAM stands for Digital Asset Management and is indeed the Library/Catalogue function in LR and C1. LR has indeed some advantages here for users who seek very detailed filter and keyword features. However, C1 comes pretty close for most users. You can migrate your LR catalogues to C1 and it retains all keyword and album functions. For the very large catalogues and advanced filter options Photo Mechanic is a very good addition. When you work in projects (like most professionals do) C1 has another option which is called Sessions. I suggest to view the online C1 tutorial Catalogues vs. Sessions first before setting up C1. That should give you an idea which one to go for. You can also use both depending your workflow. For my personal work I use Catalogues (coming from LR). My paid work is in Sessions (incl. mostly tethered shooting).

As for laptop performance I only have experience with macOS. On my macbook C1 seems to be a bit faster than LR and it is certainly coded with more efficiency in mind. Most Adobe products are very memory intense and make less use of multicore processor capabilities on the macOS platform. I also have ON1 Photo Raw 2020 installed and however that doesn't work with a catalogue, it seems much slower and processor intensive than C1. I'd recommend you download C1 and start a trial subscription first. As for tutorials, C1 has an excellent support section with lots of good videos. Very practical are the 'edit with...' videos. If you're familiar with LR, you'd quickly understand the logic of C1 too. Next to pal2tech, I can also recommend the channels of Scott Detweiler and Thomas Fitzgerald. Thomas also has nice Styles (C1 language for Presets) available for download and sells an excellent guide on how to handle Fuji RAW files in C1.

It's a very good deal actually. The X-Pro2 is my personal favourite Fuji camera. I've used the X-Pro3 for a couple of days but decided not to switch for a few reasons. First, there's no visible improvement in image quality. The new sensor/processor are mainly an improvement in continuous AF whereas I mostly use single AF for my personal work with the X-Pro2. Secondly, the OVF is a bit brighter and larger on the X-Pro3, but it lacks the dual magnification of the X-Pro2. Therefore, you can't actually use the OVF with lenses shorter than 23mm or longer than 50mm. The EVF of the X-Pro3 is better though with its 3.69mp vs. the 2.36mp of the X-Pro2. However, one of the reasons to use an X-Pro is the OVF capabilities. Finally, the LCD is only nice for waist level shooting, but otherwise a pain in the a*s. To use the menu you either have to flip down the LCD or use the EVF/OVF in combination with the joystick. When wearing glasses and left-eye dominant (like me) this is useless as you're constantly make stains on your own glasses. I'd rather have an X-Pro with the articulating LCD of the X100V. The sub screen on the back is just a gimmick. Because it lacks backlighting, it becomes useless in less than perfect light. When you're really set to 'Classic Neg' film simulation on an X-Pro2, try this: https://fujixweekly.com/2019/11/07/my-fujifilm-classic-negative-film-simulation-recipe-for-x-trans-iii/.

Only if you frequently shoot in inclining weather or plan a trip into the Sahara desert, WR makes some sense. Usually with a little bit of care you can perfectly use a non-WR lens in rainy weather too. My most used lens is the 23/f1.4 (also non-WR) and it's been in downpours in India and didn't give up.

Capture One indeed doesn't support the X100-range for tethered shooting. In Fuji X Acquire you need to switch to PC Shoot or USB mode in the connection menu of the camera, as you apparently do. Note that Fuji X Acquire doesn't support MacOS Big Sur yet. You can also try the wifi connection mode instead of the USB mode.

Unless the WB is ‘overwritten’ by a WB set in the preset in LR, LR can use the stored WB in the RAW-conversion. It will be applied to the displayed image when importing, unless replaced by a WB set in a LR preset. To my knowledge LR behaves similar to Capture One in that aspect. To use the WB set by the camera, select WB As Shot in the import profile.

The D7500 is quite a recent model and certainly one of the best APS-C DSLRs on the market. In terms of image quality for stills it can match any Fuji X-camera (given good Nikkor lenses). Next to the reduced battery life and the EVF (which is an ‘older’ 2.36 million dots model in the X-S10) you will probably notice a slower AF-C performance, as the D7500 is blazing fast esp. in very low light. Only when you plan to shoot video, the X-S10 would make a lot of sense. The IBIS is of course nice to have, but the VR in most Nikkor lenses is also quite good.

There are indeed rumors about a new version of the GFX50. Both R as well as S. The R hasn’t been as successful as Fujifilm had hoped for, hence the early price reductions. Bear in mind that the GFX was intended to capture part of the full-frame market. After initial praise and good sales, the numbers dropped quickly. Depending on the market, the price of the R has been reduced in steps by $1500-$2000 since introduction. Professional photographers mostly prefer the S model with the ability to mount a tilting viewfinder. and a grip. Hence the prices of the S remained high for a longer period. The 51MP sensor from Sony is a previous generation sensor compared to the 102MP Sony sensor in the GFX100. The newer sensor has phase- and contrast detection AF whereas the 51MP sensor only has contrast detection. The result is a slower AF, that’s less decisive and doesn’t perform as well in low light conditions. Another feature that is expected in the sucessor of the R and the S models, is IBIS. That works so well in the GFX100. I guess both features are regarded essential in bringing over more full-frame users to the GFX platform. However, when you like the GFX50 this is the time for a good deal. Next to the rebates on the R and the free grip for the S, there’s still the trade-in premium for a full-frame camera. I know people who bought a beat-up 5D mark I, just to collect the extra premium. In case you haven’t used a GFX50R before, I recommend you rent one for a day or two first to see if it really fits your workflow.

Capturing these colors is difficult because our eyes are more susceptible to the longer waves of red light whereas a camera sensor is equally sensitive to all wave lengths within the visible array. Next to that a camera sensor cannot cope with the same dynamic range (dark-bright contrast) that our eyes can handle. Sunset colors are therefore often a bit washed-out or faded on regular shot images. First of all make sure you don’t overexpose the image. It’s easier to brighten the shadows than correct blown-out highlights. When you shoot jpeg and don’t want to adjust the image in post processing, make sure that highlights is set to -1 or -2. You can also experiment with setting Dynamic Range to 200 or even 400%. Fuji cameras are fairly good detecting the correct white balance, so leaving that on auto is usually fine. When selecting the film simulation I would recommend Velvia for the most vivid colors. To reduce the experimentation time, you can use the Auto Bracketing method. Setup with different exposures, different Dynamic Range settings or even different film simulations. That way you can quicly judge the closest settings. However, the best is still to shoot raw files and adjust exposure and colors in post processing. Capture One in my view has the best editing capabilities for Fuji raw files.

Correct. WB only affects the jpeg, but the setting is also stored in the metadata of the raw file. Software like Lightroom and Capture One use this setting as a starting point for their raw conversion (WB as shot). The WB is also used for the small thumbnail that is inside of every raw file for display purposes.

I would be surprised if Fuji would launch a monochrome version of their GFX-line. Like Leica, Fuji doesn’t have their own facility to manufacture image sensors and to my knowledge there are no cropped medium format monochrome out on the market. Of course they could have something custom-made at one of the manufacturers, but that would be very expensive given the small market. APS-C sized monochrome sensors however are available (esp. for astrophotography), so a monochrome X-camera might be more likely. Of course you can always go to maxmax.com and have your GFX converted. That however only involves stripping the color array filter. Optimizing the sensor lenses (as Leica does a/o) isn’t possible in a retrofit. Last September I was in Wetzlar at the Leica factory and I had the opportunity to take an M10-R and an M10 Monochrome for a two hour spin around the block and in their studio. The results I took home were amazing in terms of IQ. Both cameras are stellar performers but no matter how I edited the M10-R files in Capture One to monochrome, I couldn’t reach the M10 Monochrome IQ in terms of tonality and cleanness. Amazing... but it comes at a price too. And to be honest, you have to pixelpeep to really see the difference.

To my knowledge you can’t. I don’t use a GFX100, but do have a GFX50S. I guess from a connectivity point of view it is very similar. With Fujifilm cameras you need a host application on a computer to receive the tethered files. That is one of the things Fuji really need to improve for professional use. Many other brands have the ability to tether to an FTP-server (wired or even wireless). Nevertheless, tethered shooting to Capture One works perfectly and is for many photographers sufficient.