• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Archie

  1. The focal plane isn't actually changing, so you could just keep shooting. The trouble in practice is that even wtih my other Fujis (X-Pro1s / X100s) when shooting manual focus at the hyperfocal distance, it's easy to accidentally knock the focus ring - but with the X100F playing up, you can't be sure whether you've done that, or the camera has changed the marker position while you weren't looking!
  2. I understand from Fuji Tech Support that Fuji knows about the issue and is working on a firmware update; but there's no release date yet. (Firmware 1.01 didn't fix it. If anything, I suspect it made the problem worse.)
  3. I haven't tested it thoroughly, but I don't think the plane of focus actually moves. I suspect it's just the indicator bar on the focus distance scale that's shifting - which is why I think it might be a firmware bug. But if others are not seeing this issue with the same settings as I describe, the firmware theory may not be right, and the problem may be with this particular camera.
  4. I just got an X100F, and set it up for the way I shoot street photographs: auto ISO; shutter 1/250s; aperture f/8; and manual focus distance set to hyperfocal distance - about 11feet (approx 3.4m). Using the OVF, the focus distance marker nudges upwards every time I press the shutter release (or even half press it), so that in about five presses it's nearly up to 15feet (about 4.5m) Remember, this is on MANUAL focus - so pressing the shutter release should not change the focus distance at all. This only happens with the OVF: the focus distance indicator on the EVF and LCD stays in the chosen position. Has anyone else seen this behaviour? (Grateful for any feedback about whether this is a firmware fault - I've upgraded to latest firmware.)
  5. Camera Price Buster provides a graph of price changes over time for the listed items: Click on a camera or lens to go to its page; the graph is on the right of the page.
  6. Bit of a shame it has an exposure meter, but I suppose you can't have a completely mechanical digital camera!
  7. 120 film ('medium format') isn't intrinsically more 'sensitive' because it's bigger. The main factor affecting its sensitivity or 'speed' is its ISO. So what film are you using, and what's its ISO?
  8. I ditched MS Windows for Ubuntu years ago. Never regretted the switch. Used GIMP to edit photos for a long time. However, I had to have Adobe Lightroom & CS5 for a course, so had to get an iMac to run them on. (Apple OS X is, like Ubuntu, a Unix-like operating system.) We have several computers and laptops in the house, all running Ubuntu. It's excellent - and costs nothing to download and use.
  9. The latest version of Lightroom has presets to process your RAW files just like the in-camera film-type processing uses to create its treated JPGs. There's one for Monochrome + Red Filter. (Adobe and Fuji worked together on the presets, so they're pretty good.)
  10. The viewfinder optical system is built with a value of -1 diopter. This is traditionally true of camera viewfinders (Leicas, for example, are set to -1 diopter, too). I've no idea why manufacturers chose this value. But I've had the value confirmed by Fuji in a phone call to one of their tech guys when I was researching to get a diopter adjustement lens for my X-Pro1. The supplied diopter lens is an optical flat - i.e. 0 diopter. When I sought help from my optician, we removed the supplied diopter lens from the camera, and he held his small adjustment lenses ( as used for eye tests) against the viewfinder opening while I looked through to check the sharpness, and chose the best adjustment. Hope this helps.
  11. If you like, use external colour filters with BW film, which only records luminance, and is therefore affected correctly by the changes in luminance that external filters create. (But see Owtafocus's comment.) Digital cameras don't work like that: they capture the image in full colour, and either store that as a RAW file for you to convert to BW, or convert it in camera to create a BW jpeg. If the camera jpegs arent't OK for you, you're better off shooting RAW and converting to black and white in post-processing, where you have more control. You can then simulate exactly the particular filter effects you want. (Arguably the best application for this is Silver Efex Pro 2). Leave the filters for shooting film. The exception is of course the Leica M Monochrom, which records only luminance information, and so behaves much like traditional black and white film. External colour filters on a Monochrom will behave just like they do with film.
  12. Just came across this trailer by Damian Lovegrove. Just watch from about 1m10s in how he's having to block the light to see the EVF. He doesn't wear glasses. Even pros have trouble in bright light!
  13. Surely this was really never in doubt: ALL Fujinon XF lenses are designed with an image circle for APS-C sensors. Anyone who gave the FF story a moment's serious thought realised it was nonsense, because Fuji wasn't going to produce an entire new range of lenses - just look how long it's going to take them to build the whole of the XF range of lenses for APS-C cameras. X-Pro2, when it eventually comes will clearly have to be APS-C. (And don't hold your breath about an X-Pro2: the decision to build the X-T1 was a strategic marketting decision, changing the direction of the X series to enable Fuji to break into the mainstream enthusiast market, where DSLRs still predominate with most buyers, and where the rangefinder format was making only peripheral gains. We therefore might well see an X-T2 before we get an X-Pro2.)
  14. Something that doesn't get mentioned much: the X-Pro1 has a longer tonal response in the shadow region (before it clips to black) than any other Fuji X camera (including the X-T1): enter X-Pro1 in the Cameras Compared - Dynamic Range Comparison widget, here: Just sayin'.
  15. This link seems to take me to a page about Fimware Version 1.2 Where's the Ver 2.0 page?