Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Yes, @veejaycee is right: firmware 1.02 fixes this issue, which is a great relief. Well done, Fuji, for fixing this problem with X100F and X-Pro2 cameras.
  2. I've just received the replacement X100F, which has firmware 1.01. You won't be surprised to hear that the new camera has exactly the same focus-distance creep when using manual focus with the OVF as the last one did. But I've discovered a temporary fix that works for now. If you turn on the OVF focus preview (the little 'EVF' rectangle at the bottom right of the OVF), the focus distance stays fixed where you put it when you press the shutter release. Let's hope the Fuji engineers build a firmware fix soon!
  3. Mmm... The Fuji wording looks to be a rather ambiguous translation from the Japanese. I wouldn't want to put money on the exact meaning of the statement either way. As for myself, I was noticing the phenomenon of the focus distance indicator in the OVF nudging upwards when I pressed or half-pressed the shutter release when the camera was in Manual Focus mode. But I noticed this when I was shooting at the hyperfocal distance and at f/8. It didn't seem to me that the focus in the images changed; but the depth of field under those settings is at its maximum, so I could be wrong about that. I have since seen reports of exctly the same phenomenon happening with X-Pro2 cameras when paired with some (but, apparently, not all) lenses, and some people discussing this say that the plane of focus does actually change. See, for example, this thread: http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/5086-xpro2-firmware-problem-af-is-happening-in-mf-mode/ My camera is with Fuji, so someone else may be able to test what actually happens to the plane of focus. But I've had conversations with Fuji tech support guys, and they say the Fuji engineers in Japan are working on a fix.
  4. No, sorry, I haven't. I call it 'Focus Distance creep', but I've no idea whether there's an official Fuji description.
  5. 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!
  6. 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.)
  7. 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.
  8. 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.)
  9. Archie

    X Camera Price Curve

    Camera Price Buster provides a graph of price changes over time for the listed items: http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/Fujifilm/Fujifilm-X-System Click on a camera or lens to go to its page; the graph is on the right of the page.
  10. Archie

    No more chimping

    Bit of a shame it has an exposure meter, but I suppose you can't have a completely mechanical digital camera!
  11. 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?
  12. Archie

    Linux/Ubuntu 14.4 Anyone???

    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.
  13. 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.)
  14. Archie

    Diopter correction lenses .... Agghhh!

    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.
  15. 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.