You must log in or register to comment.
deleted by creator
I don’t really understand what’s so great about Fuji cameras. Sony did everything better with the RX1 a decade ago.
It’s the jpeg with film simulations… :( I got into Fuji a few years back. I work in IT and spend all day on the computer, I game quite a bit…on the computer. I did not want another hobby that required more hours on the computer! So, with film sims, I can “pre-process” my shots. I think about all the colors in the location I will be and choose a tone that I like before I go on the shoot. I’ve been pretty impressed with what I have been able to capture just with jpegs. There are times when the film sim is a complete bust for a shoot, so I do record RAW along with JPEG and probably end up editing 15% of what I take. It works for me! That’s all I’m saying.
But eg. RawTherapee has film simulations built-in, and you can save profiles and then apply them in bulk. It’s only a bit more work than jpegs but a lot more flexibility.
I get it. I shoot in RAW+JPEG and sometimes the filter I prethought up isn’t working and I’ll batch edit the RAWs. But I’ve learned enough and enjoy shooting in the moment. I am happy with my JPEGs 90% of the time. Some examples: www.niedermier.org
I think a big part of why people seem to really like the film simulations in the Fuji cameras is because you can create or copy other people settings, “recipes”, and you get a nice live preview right on the LCD screen as you are shooting. It gives you a much closer visualization of your desired final product right on the back of the camera as you are shooting.
RawTherapee has film simulations built-in
Have you used them? If so, how do you like them?
I have no experience with RawTherapee but I’m someone that doesn’t like spending a ton of time editing photos.
Yes, I’ve used them a lot. You have to download them separately, but it’s just a zip file that you extract and then tell rawtherapee where it is. It has many films; I really liked Portra 400 for portraits.
I think you can also get the Fuji film LUTs, so if you shoot raw you can later pick whichever film simulation you like.
For live preview I usually set minimum contrast and saturation, to get wider dynamic range (on the preview)
I ordered the X100V as soon as it was announced and have shot many thousands of images with it. It’s easily at the top of my most used and loved cameras ever. It’s coat-pocketable, has a fantastic lens, feels good in the hand / is ergonomically pleasing, it’s visually pleasing, and offers built in film simulations that can be modified to your taste. I take it with me almost everywhere I go. I don’t use my phone’s camera. Fuji’s “X App” is great for transferring high quality JPGs to your phone for sharing on social media / with friends.
As for the internet hype around the camera though, I have no idea what the big deal is. I keep seeing these videos on YT about it and they seem to blame “influencers” on TikTok. Maybe there’s still a market for a snapshot camera (a la Canon Elph) for those who want something more than a phone but less than a full frame ICL camera.
My first digital camera was the Fuji X-T10. Finally, a camera that met my expectations coming from film photography. That’s always been the charm with Fuji - they’ve bridged a gap between old and new and, with their rangefinder-style cameras, offered a poor-man’s Leica (albeit using a cropped sensor). in my opinion, they’ve completely lost their way in recent years though as they’ve been competing more with Canon and Sony.
Edit: I just looked a the Sony RX-1. It doesn’t even have a view finder. The X100V has a hybrid EVF / OVF which in and of itself may be enough for some people to enjoy it.
The RX1 has an optional optical viewfinder you put in the hotshoe. The RX1 mark 2 adds a pop-up EVF.
Have to say though that I prefer to use the screen rather than a viewfinder because it gives you more freedom around camera positioning.
From what I can piece together it’s the retro look and the built in fuji film emulations for jpeg. Don’t know if it’s a lens thing too, but if there is any interest in RAW format the popularity is non consequential- unless you’re deep into the Fuji universe and suddenly everything is super expensive.
The insanity of paying $1000+ for a camera and then shooting jpeg.
I’ve payed more than that for my Canon and while I do save all the RAWs I barely ever use them.
Why go through the hassle of developing the RAWs when the Jpegs look good already?
