Paul Crespel

Hi Maurice, thanks for your suggestions, but I need tools that do the job, and I cannot afford the luxury of work-arounds. I need total efficiency, and the T simply doesn't do it. I am now back on the S, a new one to replace the one that broke a week ago, and happy. The T is consigned to the obsolete bin, and I am a happy Fuji user again... but the T was an unpleasant experience, not just for me, but for many thousands of others in the Internet who are complaining about the same issue. Workarounds are ok when a manufacturer is pioneering new fields and still in the learning phase. In this case, Fuji took away something that worked very well in the X-Pro1, the X100 and the X100S and they replaced it with something that didn't work. That's not nice. All the improvements they made were completely ruined by one inexplicable decision to break something that worked great for five years. The X100S is wonderful, and I'm producing photos again

Maurice, I have read it, thank you for the suggestion.... but I don't want to use eye sensor mode. It takes too long to wake up - up to 2 seconds.... I don't have two seconds to waste when I'm out looking for photos, and it also causes a massive drain on the battery. I just want the X100T to work the same as my X100S, my X100, my X-Pro1, my Canon EOS cameras, my Nikon cameras, and all my other cameras. Fuji have changed the T and it no longer does what all other cameras do. Strangely enough, this issue is being taken very seriously by other Fuji forums, but nobody seems to understand it here.

Begi Nabara, I guess English is not your native language... but please read all the posts above carefully, it's all very clear :-) With the X100S I don't need to use eye sensor to get the menu on the LCD. The viewfinder only option works fine, and causes the menu to appear on the LCD. Canon, Nikon, Leica, Olympus, Pentax etc., all do the same. Fuji have changed something that had worked fine for 5 years on the X100 and X100S, and now it no longer works. Please read all the comments above. It seems from many replies here that people are commenting without reading everything that has already been written, and their comments are either irrelevant, or just repeating other comments others have already made. Maybe your native language is not English, and maybe you have problems understanding, but it is all set out very clearly, and if you don't understand, just ask Fuji have changed something that worked fine, that complied with accepted convention across all makes of cameras, and they have changed it to something that no longer complies with accepted convention. It worked well.... now it doesn't My replacement X100S just arrived from Amazon, and I'm happy again. The T has been retired. It may be ok for the average photographer, but it doesn't work well for those who need to work fast and under pressure, but the S is super.

owncavestudios, I only ever use viewfinder only mode. I am not interested in any of the others. Viewfinder is for taking photos, LCD is for viewing the menu. I have to move very fast to get the photos I manage to capture, and this "bug" is sufficient to prevent me from doing my work effectively. Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Leica, Olympus and all Fuji cameras with viewfinders until the X100S show menu on the LCD when in viewfinder only mode. The X100T has broken not just Fuji convention, but also the convention adopted by all camera makers in this respect. The X100S is wonderful, but the T, for me, was a waste of money, but will be consigned to my camera museum where all my obsolte cameras go

Begi, I don't want to see the menu in the viewfinder, I want to use the viewfinder as a viewfinder, and see the menu on the LCD, as happens with the X100S, the X100, the XT1 etc. With the X100T the menu is inside the viewfinder.

I have abandoned the X100T for the serious fault mentioned above. I have ordered another X100S. For me, the problem of the main menu appearing by default in the viewfinder instead of on the LCD makes the X100T unusable in situations where speed is critical. Anybody for whom normal camera menu convention, or speed of operation is critical should seriously consider the X100S instead of the X100T. Until the problem is addressed the camera remains problematic, not just for me, but for many thousands who are complaining of this issue in various forums and discussion boards in the Internet. I have been using Fuji almost exclusively now for 5 years, and this is the first time I have been seriously disappointed with an X series camera. If this change of convention continues I will reconsider my brand loyalty. This problem may be insignificant for many here, but in other forums it is regarded as extremly frustrating by a huge number of users, and it is certainly a problem for photographers who work in demanding and challenging conditions. I am sorry I wasted my money on the X100T. In the demanding conditions in which I work the X100T, for me, is not fit for purpose

Midnight Train - Italy - Guard looking out the window as the train leaves the station Capotreno by Paul Crespel, on Flickr

Italy - VIDEO CALL while driving in town Video Call by Paul Crespel, on Flickr

It's a big change, Maurice, and very strange. Nobody ever navigates the full menu in the viewfinder. All viewfinder cameras, including Canon, Nikon, Leica, Sony, Minolta and Fuji (until now) show the menu by default on the LCD. Most give the option to view in the viewfinder, if you want to, but by default the menu is shown on the LCD. With the X100T in viewfinder mode, the main menu defaults to the viewfinder. If you want to see the menu on the LCD you have to press the view mode button once. However, if you then put the camera back to your eye to take another shot, the viewfinder no longer works. You then have to press the view mode button another 3 times to bring the viewfinder back to life and switch off the LCD. It's not an ideal situation. Why have Fuji bucked convention (including their own convention) and introduced a serious flaw?

Maurice, I think we must both have failed I will clarify my question: When I have chosen "viewfinder only" on my X100T, why does the menu appear only in the viewfinder instead of on the LCD like all other Fuji cameras with viewfinders?

Hi Maurice, I don't understand your reply. I know what happens on the X100 and on the X100S, but as I pointed out the X100T is completely different to the older versions. I would like to know if Fuji are planning on fixing the issue, or if somebody here has found a hidden menu item that would bring the T in line with the older 100 models, and indeed with all other Fuji cameras with viewfinders.

After 9 months and 23,900 shutter operations, my X100s died.... the lens fell off - but 9 months for a camera is normal for me It was my second X100s, and I originally had an X100. My replacement arrived today, an X100T. It has a firmware design fault. On the X100 and X100s you could use viewfinder only for taking the photos, and LCD for viewing the photos and the menu. This was done with a single setting. It's logical, as the main menu is a lot easier to view on the LCD than in the viewfinder, and photos are much easier to view on the LCD. Nobody looks at their photos or main menu in the viewfinder. On the X100T you can either view menus and framing in the viewfinder, or you can view menus and framing on the LCD. There is no combination as exists in the X100s. You can also have everything on the LCD with the eye sensor, so that everything is viewable only on the LCD or only on the viewfinder if you are looking into it, but I really don't like that option, and don't want to use it. If I have the viewfinder set up to frame subjects, and I want to navigate the menu on the LCD, I have to press the view mode button to be able to do that, and then, when I am finished with the LCD, I have to then press the button 3 times again or the viewfinder won't work. This is not good. I have trawled the Internet for a work-around, but nobody has found any way of fixing this problem.... and given the thousands of people in various forums who are complaining, it is a problem. Fuji San, if you do, by some chance, read this post.... PLEASE can you fix this issue and let us have the excellent system that worked so well on the X100 and the X100s? Thank you

Peter, your arguments are good and valid, but we're getting away from the point being raised by Reuters, and by me. Reuters want unmodified files, like they wanted the negatives in the past. When I supply my images nowadays, I always supply the unmodified RAW file, as is expected of me, as if I were supplying the negative. Throughout my time as a news photographer (1975 - 1997), photographers, with just one exception that I know of, were never, ever allowed to edit their own images (talking about the British press here). That was a privilege awarded to just one, single photographer, whose reputation was based on trust and honesty. There were very good reasons for this. The newspapers and publications wanted to ensure that their good name was never damaged by a photographer's "creativity". They wanted the truth. Reuters, and I am now informed that others are about to follow, want to get back to being in control of their own reputation. The argument is not about what was done in the past, or in the present, with regard to dodging and burning, or removing fences, etc., it's about who does it. It's about journalism and the responsibilites and expectations of being a journalist, and about not crossing certain lines that were drawn in the sand probably around 90 or 100 years ago. Photoshop is not bad in itself, but it is VERY bad when the photographer uses it prior to subitting his or her version of the "truth". My duty as a photographer, for the 23 years that it was my trade, was to file undeveloped film. I was not allowed to even develop it myself, let alone edit it. That all came under the umbrella of the picture editor, whose job it was to uphold the credibility and reputation of his publication. Reuters are trying hard to right a bad situation, and with all the technology available today, they are going to have a difficult job. The big question one should ask is: why would any honest photographer criticise Reuters' attempt to bring some credibility and dignity back to the world of photography?

Memento, yes, each article seems to have links to others, but they are all worth reading, and thinking about.

Sorry, it's fixed now

2016 WORLD PRESS AWARDS - CODE OF ETHICS After the very public disqualification of Giovanni Troilo in 2015, the World Press Awards has issued guidelines and a code of ethics for the 2016 edition: WPA has also issued a document titled "What counts as manipulation?" which, in my opinion, should also be applied to street photography.

Fuji cameras do not offer that possibility. You can set copyright onto the files with most photo file managers, such as Lightroom. You can set this to happen automatically on import.

Hi Clinton, I guess they could, but they get so many files sent, that by asking only for JPEGs they don't need as much bandwidth or storage, and they can then choose the ones they are really interested in, and then ask for those files. This is very much also about saving expensive bandwidth and storage.

Hi Tom, post 15, penultimate paragraph: I think you will find that Reuters will accept, and even welcome the RAW file of an exceptional image, but that means the original, virgin, untouched RAW file, not a frankenstein hatched from the RAW file. But first they would want to see it in JPEG to decide whether it's exceptional enough to want the RAW image. Reuters' email wasn't worded exceptionally well... maybe the original version was, but somebody photoshopped it prior to publication I think a news gathering agency could have done better.... maybe we should ask to see the RAW version of their email

Hi Tom, yes, the title is misleading.... but as a responsable photographer, I felt it would be wrong to photoshop what was, in my opinion, an error However, the quoted email, below, states "that were processed from RAW or CR2 files". Hi, I’d like to pass on a note of request to our freelance contributors due to a worldwide policy change.. In future, please don’t send photos to Reuters that were processed from RAW or CR2 files. If you want to shoot raw images that’s fine, just take JPEGs at the same time. Only send us the photos that were originally JPEGs, with minimal processing (cropping, correcting levels, etc). Cheers,

Tom H, The article clearly states that Reuters will no longer accept files created FROM raw files. It does not actually say they will not accept the untouched, unmodified RAW file. When I provide images for publication I am expected to send either the negative, or the untouched RAW file. I am happy with that, but it seems that the majority are not willing to do that.

Verona, Piazza San Nicolo' - Sunday football match - the church doors were the goal posts Verona Football by Paul Crespel, on Flickr

With the "old fashioned" method of negatives, i.e. until about 15 or 16 years ago, the photographer had to give the NEGATIVE to the publisher or agency. The negative could not be "photoshopped", but the publisher or agency knew the photo was what the camera photographed. Naturally, the photographer could have posed the shot, but at least one of the two variables was avoided. Now, if an agency insists on the untouched original RAW file, the photographer doesn't want to, or is too scared to provide it. Is that really progress? Cheating, lying and dishonesty has always existed in photography, but in the last 15 years it has become "normal". Reuters have started to try to minimise the possibilties for cheating. Others will follow. I sense that the people making the most noise against Reuters' move are the greatest users of Photoshop I repeat: Photography - Photo Graphy - means drawing with light. Photoshop means drawing with a computer. Photoshop is NOT photography. And yes, I'm one of the "older people" but I say things are MUCH better now with digital than they ever were with film. Read my postings above.... particularly post number 22

Digital images can't be trusted, says war photographer Don McCullinhttp://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/nov/27/don-mccullin-war-photographer-digital-images

signalz1123, when I use my X-Pro1 I ONLY use the 27mm lens now... the 35 and 28 have become redundant. It's extremely portable, and 42mm (FF equivalent) is pretty well exactly how the human eyes see things. For me, it is the ideal length for street photography.