flysurfer

This has been reported and documented a few times. Sadly, Fuji didn't seem to care, because the bug persists in the very latest firmware revisions for the X-Pro2 and X100F. A simple workaround is to enable the ERF in MF mode.

Try to reset the camera. If that doesn't help, contact Fujifilm Service to have the camera repaired. Obviously, the T setting should work all the time on the X-T20. Of course, this only applies to manual mode, not the AUTO setting.

You mean except for the X-T2, the X-T20, the X100F, and the GFX 50S, of course.

It's a joke. It's too slow to use the live view on the computer, too slow to transmit RAW+FINE from the camera to the computer. It's even worse with the GFX, where compressed RAW files and JPEGs are larger. The live view works with a data rate of only 700 KB/s, and the maximum transmission rate for files from the camera to my computer is about 1.5 MB/s. WTF? Even my 4 years old iPad can easily manage data rates of 12 MB/s in the very same network with the very same router. And this in a brand new camera model that costs 7000 EUR naked.

I'm sure they would add it on a Fuji camera that doesn't feature any engraved switches, dials and rings. Like on the X-M1/A1/A2. They have a custom C mode that saves everything.

It will happen around 2020: Tokyo Summer Olympics feature the global shutter in mass market cameras --> end of DSLR technology as mass market technology. DSLR hybrid cameras will probably continue to exist in the high-price segment (Canon EOS 1X Mk3?).

From https://fuji-x-secrets.net/2016/10/26/fujifilm-x-pro2-using-firmware-2-00/ Turn SHUTTER AE OFF on the X-T2 and it will behave like the X-Pro2. Isn't SHUTTER AE a function that has been scheduled for the X-Pro2 May update?

Just hold the camera upright for horizontal lines.

GFXA1052 by Rico Pfirstinger, on Flickr GFXA1070 by Rico Pfirstinger, on Flickr GFXA1166 by Rico Pfirstinger, on Flickr

Was dark frame subtraction enabled? Color artifacts usually appear in Lightroom, I remember that the artifacts looked gray in SOOC JPEGs. Of course, I reported this phenomenon in late 2015 when I tested the X-Pro2 in Hawaii, so I was surprised to read about it from a few users with production models later in 2016. Since Fujifilm made changes in the dark frame subtraction of the X-T2 (processing now sometimes takes longer than taking the actual long exposure), I assumed that current X-Pro2 firmware should be okay, too. Especially since this topic rarely (if ever) pops up these days. As for the source of the problem, I tend to assume sensor (over)heating is the culprit. That said, if dark frame subtraction doesn't help, I'd have the camera serviced.

It could shoot 60 fps (ES, of course), but here's the thing: Pretty much nobody wants a 1" system. Folks prefer 1" compacts, but Nikon couldn't deliver. In the meantime, Sony kills it with the RX100 series.

They are still focused on DSLR technology that becomes more and more obsolete. Nikon 1 was a disaster. Nikon DL was starved by Sony. The new action cam stuff doesn't click, either. The Nikon booth at Photokina looked like a wasteland. So much empty space, so little so see. Compare that to the large crowds at the Fujifilm booth.

What we need is a mirrorless MF sensor with fast readout and PDAF areas. Everything else it pretty much already there.

No surprise if you ask me. I have a bunch of reservations about the GFX, but IQ isn't one of them. This beast is as ISOless as they come, dynamic range is through the roof. A 4 stop push in Lightroom from ISO 100 to 1600 virtually gives the same result as a native ISO 1600 shot of the same scene with the same shutter speed and aperture. You simply won't be able to spot any meaningful difference. I have made ISO samples from 50 to 102400 with 4 different RAW converters (Lightroom 6.9 beta, Silkypix Pro 8, Iridient 3 and the built-in camera processor), and it's certainly short of amazing what Fuji's own processing extracts from this sensor. I reckon the new sensor wiring is responsible for a really low read noise output (hence the ISOless capabilities and unmatched DR). My research also shows that pretty much all RAW converters that claim GFX support need recalibration when it comes to extended ISO numbers (Lightroom is beta, so I'm not holding this against Adobe, but Silkypix and Iridient already claim official support). My findings also show that RAWs can seemingly handle a healthy deal of overexposure compared to the in-camera JPEG, which means that you can extract even more DR if you manage to meet the sensor's actual saturation limit, which may well be 1 full stop above the JPEG highlight warning threshold in the camera's histogram and "blinkies" display. Of course, further tests are needed, but that's one reason why I'm flying to Malta Tuesday night. I am writing up a small article in German (Fuji X Secrets) and in English (X-Pert Corner) that should help illustrate my findings.

Not acceptable. Next firmware might mitigate the AF issues.

My main interest is finding out how the sensor performs IQ-wise, particularly in the light of Fujifilm's microlens and copper wiring mods. I expect a buch of people will be disappointed by several weak performance points that can all be traced back to rather slow sensor readout. This is no X-T2 with a large sensor, even though the processor is the same. OTOH, the sensor's ISOless performance appears to be impeccable (at least according to my preliminary testing based on ISO 1600 vs. a 4 stop push of ISO 100 to 1600 in Lightroom 6.9 beta). I expect very good dynamic range, and I suspect (also based on preliminary testing) that unlike other Sony-made sensors, this one will allow more overexposure than usual. Here are two samples with the same exposure (f/13, 1/50s), one was amplified with the camera's ISO dial to ISO 1600, the other one was shot at ISO100 and amplified in Lightroom CC:

GFX and X-T2 are very different beasts, and that won't change till probably 2018 or 2019, and even then, the APS-C cameras will always have a huge speed advantage. So the "pro" component in upcoming APS-C cameras is geared toward speed, agility, video, while the "pro" component of upcoming medium format stuff is geared toward resolution, IQ and (of course) better response/AF.

In this case, I'd be more concerned about building an adapter ring with a thickness of minus 9 mm.

Fuji said it isn't gonna happen, and I wonder how anybody could build an adapter with electronic contacts and power/current conversion (probably also a stronger power source to properly power the GF lenses) in a ring as thin as 9 mm.

I have already seen plenty of positive comments and nice sample images from users in the sister X forum. Some markets are usually earlier than others, so that's certainly a possibility.

It's basically what the standard LR tether plug-in does, just w/o Lightroom.

Yep. Don't buy vaporware. With Nikon, don't even buy based on stuff that has been officially announced, as the recent DL fiasco teaches us. The Fuji EF-X500 flash debacle is another fine example. Fuji is smartening up and becoming more vague, as you will see tomorrow morning.

I'm pretty sure that three native macro lenses will suffice. Two of them have been available for years, one was even part of the original lens trio five years ago. That would have been unwise, since every roadmap version stated that it can change anytime.

I think it's pretty obvious that a GFX version of my X-Pert Tips would end up being more expensive than previous books to offset the lower volume of the underlying product. Luckily, that shouldn't shock those folks who can afford a GFX with lenses.

So far, everything I have published (books, blogs/articles, forum stuff) was independent of Fuji and has not been commissioned or been subsidized by Fujifilm in any way. If there's a cooperation, it is marked as such (like my affiliation as an independent partner of FUJIFILMschool).