Fuji Manager Toshihisa Iida confirmed at dpreview that Fujifilm will launch a higher MP sensor camera. And it seems he confirms also rumors saying that it will keep the X-Trans CFA in order to maximize resolution:
“We think that our 16MP X-Trans sensor delivers a higher effective resolution than conventional Bayer 16MP sensors so if we do go to higher pixel counts we expect the same thing. […] our lenses are currently waiting for higher resolution sensors and processors.
[…]
And of course focusing is a challenge – we need a faster focusing system. And also movie quality. This is one of the criticisms of the X-series and we need to solve this issue. […] High-speed readout is the key [to avoid moiree in video].”
Toshihisa Iida also expects CSC cameras to catch up with the advantages of DSLRs (focus speed/lens lineup/overall responsiveness) within 2 or 3 years. He also says that
“[…] mirrorless cameras are finally taking off in the west. This is great news for the industry. Last year we saw more than 40% growth in this product segment in terms of value and that’s good for the whole industry.”
It’s a very interesting read… make sure to check it out at dpreview.
The first comment comes via Twitter 😉
92 Responses
I pretty much agree with everything he said. The X-Trans sensor (even if many cry because it’s ~3-4 years old tech) is still very good. Higher MP count? Why not!
The focus on faster (more accurate [phase DAF]) is really important (maybe if they ask nicely Panasonic will tell them how to do it ;))
One more thing I’d like to see/hear: think different! Try new concepts. We still are trapped within the exposure triangle which was working for film. But digital is different – why not be the first manufacturer to really use the difference?!
We already have auto-iso or so called iso-less sensor which is a major difference from film. Otherwise I agree
I am sure they “think [their] 16MP X-Trans sensor delivers a higher effective resolution than conventional Bayer 16MP sensors” because it doesn’t have an AA filter. However, at 24mp and higher, it seems an AA filter is not necessary for Bayer sensors either.
Either way, an X-Series camera with higher resolution and greater dynamic range should be very nice. Until cameras have dynamic range like our eyes, there will always be room for improvement.
A while back, someone said that greater dynamic range is only useful for heavy processing or HDR, which is not entirely true – higher dynamic range reduces the need for HDR. Personally, I prefer black card technique over HDR. However, if the dynamic range was expanded to closer to that of our eyesight, I perhaps would not need to use black-card technique when shooting long exposures.
While Steve Huff claims Fuji’s over expose to easily, I haven’t found that to be the case. However, for some scenes, they do clip in the shadows. Higher dynamic range would prevent this, which would mean less need for shadow recovery. This, less processing.
That is the main reason why I am hoping for the organic sensor – higher dynamic range than the D810 in an APS-C sized sensor, and apparently better colour resolution, would render the benefit of current full frame sensors even smaller (just perspective and depth of field control).
DR closer to our eyesight … only because the eye self-adapts in real time when you look at different part of a scene. Otherwise the “native” dr of the eye is pretty poor. That might be a way to go, something like an electronic black card.
I love my x100s and am not ready to go back to bulky cameras that soon, but I see it exactly like Steve Huff. Highlights get easily burned in my opinion.
That is too bad. For some reason, I have never had a problem with blowing highlights with my X-Pro 1. I actually thought the issues Steve was having was due to his inability to expose shots properly ~ perhaps my assumption is wrong.
It would be an honor to be as unable as Steve… 🙂 No, seriously, tried a lot of tuning, but it’s inconsistent although happens regularly. I saw it first when I tried to find “my setting” for b/w. As soon as I push something to get more contrast it gets obvious. Then I got “sensitive” for that and now it jumps to my eyes in many situations. But that said, the results are still extremely satisfying. There’s a lot of progression I have to achieve with my skills before Fuji alone could make me better by technical advance alone…
BINGO! Thought I saw him working at Glamor Shots in the mall ha ha ha ha. Not impressed with Huff. My two cents.
Haha ~ yes, he seems to be biased…
Everyone needs to make money, and he seems to have leaned towards that…but, who knows. Have a great weekend.
For those that don’t already know, Huff apparently had a falling out with Fuji a few years ago. Don’t expect him to endorse Fuji until they patch things up, which may or may not ever happen.
X Trans isn’t necessary for 16 MP either. See Ricoh and Pentax for proof that this is true. X Trans is NOTHING but a marketing gimmick.
Perhaps that is true. If there were an X-Pro 2 with a Bayer sensor option and no AA filter, perhaps I would choose that instead. At least Fuji is trying to be innovative and is designing some very nice cameras and lenses.
Fuji has USED it for marketing, but it is, in fact, more than a marketing gimmick.
Good interview. It should put to rest the idea that there will be a MF digital Fuji anytime soon.
Ha. You’re not trying hard enough. If you take the ascii representation of every other 24th and 36th character, string them together, take the resulting binary string as a photo, convert it to black and white, then reparse the resulting binary into 8 bit bytes, convert back you get the statement “full frame is fuji’s future”. It’s obvious that Fuji’s secretly working on a FF sensor, since nothing else is professional.
Excellent! ROFL, if I may.
No need to get that complicated. I’m sure the “our lenses are currently waiting for higher resolution sensors and processors” quote run through a few people of the telephone game will produce proof that the current lenses can resolve full-frame. So a full-frame camera is coming.
Very positive, I know he’s from Fuji but it does show they are not ignoring the X-camera areas of weaknesses. Good to know my investment in Fuji lenses will last the distance for quality as well.
Yes, if they could improve the sensors to the potential of Fuji’s high-quality lenses, the X-Series system would be exceptional. While they are already very good, I welcome higher true resolving power (not necessarily higher MP – the 15MP Merrill sensors out resolve the 36mp Bayer sensor in the D810/A7r) and greater dynamic range.
If they can improve the AF to the speed of the A6000 this year, it would be great for wildlife and sports photographers, just in time for the XF120-400mm.
Those Merrill sensors are great but they don’t out resolve the D800. By most measures it is equivalent to a ~26mp Bayer. The dynamic range is great but at base ISO I would call it a horse race. Beyond ISO 200 the D800 is the clear winner. Not to mention better ergonomic design and more flexibility.
Don’t get me wrong, I liked my DPM1 Merrill and on some shots it was amazing but I had so much more fun and better overall images from my old D800. And when I had the D750 I found it was better on pretty much all the scenes I shoot than the Merrill.
I would welcome a better sensor but I really don’t want more megapixels. I would rather fuji create two “lines” that are equal with the exception of megapixels. That way that 5% of people who truly need more can get it and the rest of us aren’t subsidizing the cost.
I would add dont forget the non existing flash system, lack of native powerful flashes is for me the biggest drawback even more than the af speed, accuracy, native iso 100, a second sd card slot, increase flash sync 1/180 to 1/320= 16 bit tiff in, better exposure/braketing, easier way to select focus points “one touch” or via touchscreen etc. and one of the biggest mistakes of fuji which he didnt mentioned was to make every prime lens weather sealed (WR) from the scratch on….and fuji come out with a small pancake or 2.0 series of small,cheap, acceptable iq primes as nikon did with the 1.8g primes for traveling….
Lack of powerful native flashes? Using the small one (EF-X20) and it’s so powerful that I prefer it to my big (and yes, powerful) Yongnuo strobe most of the time. Hardly have to use it at full power, btw, except I’m out in bright daylight.
I imagine the “big” Fujifilm flash to be even more powerful, but never tried that one.
So very true! I laugh long and hard about how the fan boys keep saying, “Fuji listens” when in fact, people have been asking since DAY ONE for a real flash system. WHERE IS IT??
Laugh. Out. Loud.
wow, that is a lot of lens on that little camera…
400mm, that’s nothing !!
Lol, don’t think he/she was talking about focal length.
You can’t argue with the man: “our lenses are currently waiting for higher resolution sensors and processors.”
Them and us both!
Yes!!!! Autofocus is what is heaps away from serious DSLR performance, so it should be the nº1 one priority by far… maybe for marketing and for crowds delivering a 48 Megapixel camera will create more noise and hype, but to be serious (as Fuji usually is) and aiming towards photographers, image quality and performance, and not gimmicks; AF is clearly the worst thing of Fuji X system. And for all people that will tell me that AF works great for them, or to prefocus as Ansel Adams or Cartier-Bresson, or are landscape photographers, or do statue portraiture… I’m happy it works for you, but AF it’s objectively the Achilles heal of Fuji X system right now (maybe of all DSLM)
Did you try different lenses and Fuji bodies? There is quite some difference in AF performance.
100% right. But that is also true with a lot of DSLR-lenses. Some have better motorization than others, are having historically different technologies are just belong to other price/quality categories. But for the Fujinons XFs these differences surprise a bit in a range that was developed from scratch.
Yes, tried several and own the fujinon 56mm and 35mm primes with the x-t1 since I’m a portrait photographer. In Fuji world X-t1 and 56mm are top performrs according to what I have read, and for my work won’t use a wide angle nor a zoom. The 35 was supposed to be rather slow, the 56 was supposed to be much faster. Both are extremely slow compared to DSLR, not being able to focus to deliver a majority of in focus pictures of a randomly moving pet or kid as my Nikon can, no matter what setting and in optimal conditions of light. With my Nikon I get 9/10 in focus, with Fuji, with luck, 1/10. Yes, if I tie the kid to a chair I can get 10/10. I stopped using back button focus because no phase bla bla on older firmware, set performance to high, continuous, single, big focusing area, etc… hoped new firmware was going to deliver better… the same thing. With latest firmware possible of camera and lenses. Tested it extensively with nephews on vacation, and several pets friends. Remember one paid shoot where I took the X-T1 along with my Nikon full frame, only could take some with Fuji when the kid was sitting or in her parents arms, while was moving in the garden (sunny day) when fuji acquired focus (couple of seconds) the kid was already out of frame, or behind me… while with my Nikon does focus instantly in the same setting and can track perfectly and keep it’s focus with random and fast moves, and can obtained around 10 perfectly in focus pictures in the same couple of seconds fuji takes to lock focus for the first time (with equivalent focal distance and DOF: 56 f/1.2 on X-T1 vs 85 f/1.8 on FF)
Quote: ” At the moment we’re focusing on APS-C because we’re heavily committed to the lens roadmap, and there a lot of things we need to do, such as develop higher-resolution APS-C sensors and more powerful processors, and that’s a major project.”
Hopefully that puts to bed rumors of full frame using the existing lens lineup or coming anytime soon.
“Hopefully that puts to bed rumors of full frame […]”
Oh boy, the times I’ve read that sentence even on Fujirumors alone. Maybe we should put to bed the idea that people are ever going to shut up about it instead. 😉
Dear Fuji, save some R&D time and just drop video, at least for your digital rangefinders. We’re still image shooters that want small lenses. Even if you improve video and produce a set of cine lenses, this is not your audience. Personally I’ve never used video on any of my Fujis. I’ll reach for my phone or rent a dedicated video rig if a job requires it.
Speak for yourself. I would personally love it if Fuji prioritized video going forward and became the leader in it over time. The X trans sensor could produce beautiful results if lived to its fullest potential. I think a lot of Fuji fans would agree with me as well.
No I don’t. I’ve been in video-work for almost 10 years – filming with a still camera feels for me after all this time still like trying to ride a bike with one leg and one arm. In particular with a concept like the X-concept that was NEVER made for this. The X-series are a photography-project.
+1
+2
As a 10 years video-worker, I guess you have dedicated video gear. What about people who can’t afford or just don’t want to carry both systems ?
X-T1 without awful moire/aliasing, and decent focus-tracking could be enough for most people. (and video-worker can still use different tools).
I’m not saying remove video across the board, just in the rangefinder designs. If Fuji wants to get serious for video then fine, the successor to the XT-1 line could have robust video capture and Fuji could take a cue from the Panasonic GH4 and make a grip with a breakout box like the Lumix DMW-YAGH Interface Unit.
Is there another camera can offer an OVF with video? And at the same time you can have a small patch that shows you focus and exposure (X100T)… pretty unique in my book.
Screw video.
I’m with you Don! I’m a photographer not a cinematographer
Same here please don’t start with the whole video nonsense.
Both are basically the same thing and video IS getting more important. Not something to dismiss if you are serious about increasing the market share.
Let me throw in an idea here: Video lenses is a much bigger business for Fujifilm than photography. Why not put something made by Fuji behind it?
Sure, do it. But do it with a dedicated video camera for video professionals. Don’t try to cram in everything into a small pocketable still cam… it will never work.
Absolutely, but a decent video implementation for the x-series cameras could be a start or an easy byproduct.
WE’re still image manual focus shooters that want small lenses.
Then “Personally”. I don’t need Fuji to make an A7S or NX1 competitor, but I’m pretty sure we can expect the same level of video / focus than A6000 without Fuji spend billions of dollars…
Well we can like that Fuji is a bit like Leica, not just changing the strategies and development because the blogs, magazines and a lot of other brand oriented fanboys out there are full of bright ideas. If it was up to them, Fuji would likely become a kind of soulless Sony clone. In the Leica world, the M9’s CCD has been surviving in a credible range of models for almost 5-6 years now. Still a lot of people prefer it over the M.240 CMOS – there is a very solid reason for that – and it so contrasting with all those pixel peeping reviews in which the Kodak CCD was never a bright performer due to its noise performance and ISO-limitations. Well, well, also Fujifilm sticks now to their X-trans concept. It has generated a lot of controversial feelings in the market over the last 3 years, but only this proofs the don’t want to become not just ‘another Sony-clone’, also easily jumping over the FF hurdle out there with a few statements. Who wants to go with Fuji, doesn’t go for the easiest choice & workflow path out there, will detest those weird RAFs during sleepless nights but will gradually also start to feel there are advantages of this particular concept. It’s still one of the best APS/C implementations we’ve seen and Fuji has done with colors something special in particular when you start printing. Something that has been their core competence for a very long time. And though – as I expressed a few times – I’m not getting too wild about those Film imitation presets (having a fair bit of contrast and saturation pronunciation) in my proper Lr color management & presets, I start liking again what this sensor does looking back at a few of my recent projects.
Fuji Manager Toshihisa Iida
Here is the list of things Fuji needs to develop.
1) FF Fuji R-M 28 to 36 mp organic Leica rangefinder knockoff in the $2500 to $3000 range. Leica’s fit and finish is superb, but their sensor is second rate and their cams are sickly overpriced for the fondler crowd.
2) Increase the current X crop sensor to 28 mp organic.
3) A Fuji M43 with shutter speed dial – 24mp organic.
4) A FF 6mp 6 x 6 back for the old film Hasselblad’s in the $2500 range.
5) Fuji needs to stop dummying down their gear removing manual controls on their lenses.
Don’t screw up the Leica knockoff Manager Toshihisa Iida. Your camera fondling engineers will ruin it no doubt. Just copy it closely and let someone like me give you a 2nd opinion.
How many of your engineers have their doc photos in nearly 100 museum collections Manager Toshihisa Iida? I wont charge you a penny either for consulting.
The fanboys here are useless for help…
You need to start listening to great doc photogs and not the camera fondlers if you ever expect to make great doc cams. Trying to perfect AF is not going to do it. The only way I get the shots I do is to shoot my Fuji’s like a Leica. Fondlers worry about perfect AF…photogs worry about fighting their dummed down gear. The only way I can get a Fuji to work is to second guess it. Whomever invented your ‘focus by wire’…fire em Manager Toshihisa Iida.
The problem IS the engineers that design this crap are NOT great doc photogs themselves…they are camera fondlers.
The 2 worst inventions that came down the pike from the camera fondling engineers were the program dial that replaced the shutter speed dial and Fuji’s terrible ‘focus by wire.’
They keep dummying down the lenses, removing controls like distance scales for zone focus work and aperture controls and turning gear into useless garbage when it comes to serious doc work.
Leica perfected what is needed in a great doc cam eons ago. All the Japanese had to do was copy it and make it affordable Manager Toshihisa Iida. Was that too much to ask of the camera fondling engineers?
Do you want to know what a camera fondler is Manager Toshihisa Iida?
http://www.fujix-forum.com/index.php/topic/25463-which-soft-release-button/?p=269961
That guy spends more time changing buttons than pressing them. (They kicked me out of that forum. They didn’t like me calling them camera fondlers.)
What else am I going to call them? All you read about is “What did you buy?”…”What are you planning to buy?”
Why not ‘What did you shoot’…’What are you planning to shoot?’
Camera fondlers are the problem. When I tried to school the Fuji Rumors crew on zone focus they didn’t know what I was talking about. Everything is going to hell with the camera fondlers. Only good thing about them is they keep the cam companies in biz with their continual spending.
The fondlers are on an endless search for the perfect cam that somehow is just beyond their reach and is the reason why they can’t produce anything worthwhile with their cams…all the while loaded with fancy push buttons, thumbs up, custom skins, hand made straps, leather half cases and ever other GD thing they can think of to put on a cam to bloat their ego and make their cam more useless.
More than a few guys on the Leica forum wanted to spend $20,000 for a Leica with no screen. They felt the screen was the root of their problems… SAD.
An excellent post. I agree completely that the fan boys are absolutely useless to help out Fujifilm.
i loathe focus by wire on my x100s.
Lol, you think that is bad? You should head over to dpreview.
It’s atrocious.
Wow. I agree with most of your points (though there are bigger problems than focus-by-wire for me). But your arrogance and dissing of others! Just wow.
I would probably have kicked you out of that forum as well…
“Welcome to Fantasy Island.” 🙂
Need to work on flash usability. Not just flash sync speed but also being able to use flash in continuous mode for the X-T1, would be great for studio work. Flash sync at all speeds in electronic shutter mode would be dreamy but senor type is the known limit here.
this is why they focused on image quality on the 16-55 2.8 rather than putting OIS in it. Once the higher resolution sensor is out the door, the difference between that and the 18-55 will be more pronounced. So it won’t feel as overpriced..though it’ll stay overpriced unless that MSRP drops to $1000.
It isn’t overpriced. Compare it with the competition. You may feel it’s overpriced but that doesn’t make it so.
Exactly, high-speed full readout if the sensor turns X-Trans CFA into a non-issue for video, that also increases the resolution and decreases rolling shutter – which makes better images with electronic shutter mode -, line-skipping and binning won’t turn into great video for Fuji with X-Trans, that’s a waste of time.
“higher effective resolution” …. really? I’m actually comparing the X100, X100T, X-A1/23 and X-T1/23 at the moment. I have done one controlled comparison shot so far, at ISO800. The two Bayer cameras seem to me to have higher default resolution (no NR applied) and also higher noise. So if not seeing separate eyelashes and also not seeing color splotches means “higher effective resolution” then I can buy the statement… but to me the chroma noise is not a resolution issue per se. If the Bayer camera can delineate a lash and the X-Trans one cannot, the Bayer is clearly the resolution champ… right? Even if he means “at equivalent noise levels” the X-Trans has “higher effective resolution”, the X-Trans loses flexibility points for not being able to give me a tack-sharp noisy image. My analysis has a long way to go but so far I’m not sure how “higher effective resolution” corresponds to reality.
What raw processor are you using? I have recently switched to Capture One 8 and the output is significantly better than Lightroom. The first time I ran the trial version of Capture One I had a “holy crap that’s sharp” moment looking at xf 35 files, and I had never seen that quality before from Lightroom. There is a noticeable difference between Lightroom and the better converters (Iridient, SilkyPix, Capture One etc.) So comparing Xtrans vs Bayer in Lightroom would be pretty unfair to the Xtrans sensor.
Lr Sharpening settings: sharpness: 35-40, radius: 1, detail 100, Masking 10, and eventually, in lens corrections, remove Chromatic abberation. A lot of the ‘better’ output from other convertors will be gone.
Sharpness isn’t the problem, that just enhances the weird rendering (yes the detail slider too). CO is better, especially at seeing colors in foliage for example that LR just can’t get to, but detail still doesn’t look very natural – even if you lower the sharpening which is almost always needed in CO imho. While at times it looks like a lot of detail, a lot of it would be false detail.
Not that it’s all terrible, this is just nitpicking on a otherwise fantastic system, but imho xtrans has a long way to go. Not surprising though as bayer has had a LOT more time to get to where it is now, and certainly wasn’t always like that either.
Starting from these settings, and a few other things more, I can get almost the same result as Iridient. What bothers me, is that it brings back the workflow to a kind of trial and error effort, be honest, a pain in larger series of pictures. Out of the box, we have to see the same in Lr as Iridient (the major reference, no other RAW convertor delivers the same result). And C1, I’ve tried it a dozen times now, just like Silkypix, I don’t get that ‘stunning’ kind of impression as some seem to get, really, a tweaked Lr can perform about the same, or even be slightly better. Again, I’m a Mac user, not so sure this has influence or not.
Just show us the Xpro2 with that new 35mm on it. We’ll talk about the sensor later… And don’t forget the small lenses… the new crop of lenses is nice, but they’re getting bigger and bigger. While a high quality 23mm f1.4 is awesome, a 23mm f2.8 would sell like pancakes… Yes, I went there.
(The 27mm would have been much nicer with an aperture ring you know.)
The really amazing development I can see happening with digital si teh development and clever use of a global electronic shutter.
Want more dynamic range? Underexpose the brighter areas and overexpose the darker areas directly on the sensor. Makes sense to me.
Both are Fuji’s biggest weaknesses. Love to see the changes.
So we’re off playing the megapixel game again. What a pity.
Trouble is some many people complain about the “lack” of MP …. that it could start hurting their sales. Kudos to Fuji, they’ve tried as long as possible to resist.
Still playing the – real photographers don’t care about megapixels – game i see. Get over it, the new sensor will be 24MP and i wouldn’t want it to be anything less.
Higher resolutions than 16MP are merely an hype, it’s just a spec-race started by Sony. Unless for the heavy croppers, and the very large size printers, no-one really needs is. Most adopters higher res products have also no idea what it impact this has on the overall workflow if you want to exploit these higher MP (from shooting to the more elaborate & costly disk consequences). If I’d had to chose between 16MP@ a very high ISO-competence vs. 24MP at what we see now in the X-series, I’d go for the first one. The X-trans make the Fuji’s what they are… stubborn but excellent performs in noise & color. They don’t need to go away from this if they can manage the third-market RAW-support better than what we see now.
24MP is good move if Fuji wants to compete with Sony and others, but personally I would like to see one of the top Fuji cam with Bayer filter (X-Pro2 or X-E3). But there are also more very important (some even more important) features Fuji needs to put in next cams, I fully agree with this list:
• Weather sealed and dust proof
• bigger EVF with higher rate
• -3EV focusing (at least -2EV) for low light focusing (0EV is a shame)
• faster and more PDAF points + fast manual AF point selection
• useful AF-C + 8 fps at least
• big dedicated Back-AF button placed near thumb!!!
• better placed and bigger AE lock buton!!!
• improved DR
• not cheated ISO (clean 6400iso)
• all buttons customable
• 1/250s X-Sync
• +/- 1/3s braketing
• tilt LCD (for low/high level shooting)
• ND filters in body
• add NR setting to OFF
• allow stupid “Blur Warning” mark turn OFF
• add TIFF file saving from RAW in camera RAW converter (why only to poor 8-bit JPEG???)
And
• Bring smaller primes like 35/2 WR – so next 23/2 WR, 56/2WR, 85/2.8WR and 16/2 WR. Small primes will make your RF type mirrorless a perfect tool for dynamic, street and discreet shooting.
the thing is fuji built its kingdom upon x-trans. If it goes bayer, it loose its uniqueness
What’s wrong with Fuji reps? Without camera in hand they look high or drunk, and when they actually hold a camera they look like they have no idea what this funky gizmo is.
They need to work with Adobe and other imaging software companies so that their new models are supported with raw processing right from the start. Fuji can’t afford the gaffe they made last time, offering a new product that was unsupportable for years with the software people actually use.
Everyone complaining about more mp. Don’t get me wrong I don’t need any more, however until they produce their own sensors they can only buy what other companies (sony) are selling. If you want faster readout for better evf, fps, video etc then you need a more modern sensor and alas that will be one of Sony’s 24mp apsc sensors…
I feel the same. There is no ‘real’ need for 24mp for most people but as 24mp become standard and Fuji don’t produce sensors, 24mp sensor is the only way to benefit of newer tech’ (AF, read-out speed…)
They don’t “need” to improve video features. Even if they did get the cameras’ video modes up to par, nobody is going to be ditching their DSLRs for a Fuji system as far as video goes; people who are serious about video aren’t going to live with the lens selection offered by Fuji and other mirrorless advantages, such as size, don’t make a damn bit of a difference. Even DSLR video has gone out of fashion as actual video cameras have once again taken over all the advantages that DSLR offered; the only people still using even DSLR—let alone mirrorless—for video are photographers making videos about their still photography!
I’ve had this exact conversation with a BBC producer and cameraman just a couple of weeks ago. Serious video—and I mean serious video—is not going anywhere. People who do a lot of video already have the best version of what they need. Mirrorless video will categorically not achieve anything.
Now, a higher MP count at the same IQ, that is something which can actually make a difference. More crop options, effectively lower noise at higher ISO after resizing, larger print options, there is no downside to upping the resolution. (Assuming the quality can be maintained at the larger size.) Faster AF? Of course that’s handy for everyone.
Personally, I’d like to see them work on battery life, then resolution—I’m frequently asked to deliver 20mp+ files, which means Fuji is completely out of the question for a lot of my work and I’m stuck still using DSLR when I’d rather not—then AF. Then let’s have weather sealing as standard across the entire range, work on making the EVFs even bigger and smoother, get me dual SD card slots… then, once you’ve got all that, then I guess you can give me a slightly better video mode, if you really insist on it. I’d still rather it wasn’t there and we could use the buttons for something else, but hey, that’s my personal use. I get that there are some people out there who do use video occasional and wouldn’t want to see it go entirely. To make it any kind of priority, though, as if any serious directors, producers, videographers and cameramen out there are begging for mirrorless video, is an absolute joke.
If sensor/processor technology make video improvement easy, why don’t use it ? And sensor/processor improvements are useful for still too. Read-out speed improvement increase usability of electronic shutter and EVF framerate too.
Mirrorless/EVF has other advantages than size for video, why don’t use it ?
Many people use GH4, A7S and NX1 to make video. Maybe you don’t consider them as serious video, not ABC-class, but in my opinion, the results are pleasing.
Lens selection : with adapters or third-party lenses, this is not a problem…
I agree with your list of improvement, but I’m sure (and others companies demonstrate it) that Fuji can do both.
Those cameras you mentioned are for low budget studios. Which is not serious enough for broadcasting and such.
And I want Fuji to follow the same track : great camera + low budget studios video ability.
There are plenty of interesting short-films or documentaries shot with 5DmkIII and the new wave of mirrorless camera is promising. I want Fuji to be one of them.
Well, as far as I concern current x-trans variants will disappoint you. Go for the GH4 to be honest.
Fuhi raw files are 20mb haha…
x-t1’s raw file is somewhere around 32mb
Oh yes. I was meaning my x100 20mb files so the larger mp camera fujis will easily be 20+
I like lossless files as well. But I don’t like the size. It stresses the SD card.
For RAW-Shooter give us X-TI with “normal” bayer-sensor with 24MP! And X-Sensor for JPEG-Shooter! That would be great and help all RAW-Shooter for after shooting image developing!
Or Fuji comes out with developing software, as Canon (DPP) or Nikon (NK)!
He mentions that current fuji lenses await higher resolution sensors. Is this higher resolution (presumably from a higher MP) noticeable in a small print, or does this really apply only to professionals and large prints?
Just one tought, the best Nikon Camera, the D4 have “only” 16 MP, and professional work are made with that camera, how come!?
D4 is for photojournalist and sports shooters, its main advantage is ruggedness, high frame rate, and exceptional autofocus. People shooting portraits, macro or landscape aren’t using the D4
As of 2015, raw processing software handles x-trans raw files very well. Darktable does well, it seems that Lightroom too. In a perfect world, Camera companies will share their demoisicing algorhytm with open-source software programmers… I think that the main reason to choose a Fuji X right now for a photographer over another camera, is the image quality compared to the compactness and lightweight of the system. Right now, image quality of X-series cameras is the best amongst APS-C sensors, even the Nikons (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-t1/18) . It also compares very well with full-frame cameras for about half the cost and bulk.
For me (I’m a still photographer), the image quality of a camera is defined by the quantity of detail I can pull from the shadows without adding noise. It is also defined by the cleanness at high iso. Shadow detail and high iso cleanness are almost the same thing, it corresponds to the capacity of the sensor to generate a clean signal that can be amplified without distortion (noise). High Megapixel-count diminishes the size of the pixels, hence their light gathering capacity, the signal is weak and distorted when amplified. High Mega-pixel diminishes image quality (in some way). 16 MP is enough for people that don’t print billboards every day. 20 or 24 MP could give some cropping capacity, but, if the image quality decreases, there will be no reason to choose a Fuji X over another camera.