The Perfect Dials for Future X-Tx Cameras? – Concept

Share

In response to my article The perfect dial is…?, FR-reader Luigi replied to me with an idea: what if Fujifilm would still use the dial, but instead of printed markings they would consist in ink-displays?

So how would it work?

Well, you can read more about below.

Guest Post by Luigi – LuicaPhoto Flickr

My Fujifilm history began 2012 with X-E1, 2, 3 and X-T1, 2, 5 and I belong to the group of enthusiast photographers. And I started already in the film era of the 70-90-ties. Therefore I like the Fujifilm vintage design with dedicated dials. But I am also aware of PASM design advantages.

Here I propose a dial design which could combine the advantages of both design worlds:

Dedicated rotating mechanical dials, same size and with central lock button as known from the X-T series. But instead of the small engraved numbers for shutter speed or ISO – which looks crowded and have poor readability – the dial top plate should become a circle shaped ink display. And each dial would always display two assigned settings (at 12 and 6 o’clock), but now in much larger figures.

Circle shaped displays can show their their settings when rotating the dial as we are used.

The dial itself consists therefore of an outside ring, rotating around the circle shaped display inside .The existing levers of the X-T could be transformed into push levers: when pressed, the upper or bottom halve of the display becomes the active section.

The Dials Explained

You can see the PDF below or download the PDF at my Dropbox here.

Before the PDF, I will share it also in JPEG format as gallery for you to quickly scroll through.

Share
** CLICK HERE to Read the Rest of the Article **

Fujifilm Japan is Aware of Autofocus Issues and is Working on a Fix

Share

Fujifilm Working on Fix?

Fellow Fujifilm X shooter Steven reached out to Fujifilm and asked them if they do plan to release a firmware fix for the autofocus issues that came up after the latest firmware updates.

Well, here is the reply he got (as I could verify from the screenshots he sent me, thanks!).

Thank you for your message and for taking the time to give us your feedback. We take all comments about our products very seriously. We are aware of several videos and posts on social media regarding AF performance.

Our R&D team in Japan is investigating a solution and we hope to have an update on this very soon.

Here on FujiRumors we did complain about the autofocus issues. And we also highlighted a quick solution: Fujifilm should just offer a “downgrade” to the initial firmware, which was really working well.

I don’t know what kind of solution Fujifilm is working on (a simple downgrade or major AF redesign). But what I know is that Fujifilm can’t mess it up this time.

Fujifilm Thoughts

Share
** CLICK HERE to Read the Rest of the Article **

Your Most Accurate Look Yet: Render of the Fujinon XF500mm f/5.6 R LM OIS WR

Share

When FR-reader Hiergeist made for us the size comparison of the Fujinon XF500mm f/5.6 R LM WR OIS with other X/GF lensers, he created a beautiful rendering of that lens.

However, right after we shared the comparison, a source reached out to FujiRumors suggesting some adjustments in order to make the lens as close as possible to the real deal.

I passed the sources’ feedback to Hiergeist, who then made the rendering based on that feedback (THANKS). You can see the result above.

The size is indeed similar to the one of the Fujinon GF500mm f/5.6 R LM OIS WR, but there are also some differences.

  • the tripod collar ring and the button panel are inverted compared to the GF500mmF5.6. In fact, it will the first of the “white XF lenses” to have that layout (first the buttons, then the tripod ring)
  • the XF version is white whereas the GF lens is black
  • the tripod mount slightly protrudes into the button panel, but there is a ever so slight gap between the tripod mount and the button panel, so that it does not interfere with it
  • on the XF500mm aperture goes up to f/22 instead of f/32 on the GF500mm.

Again: this is a rendering, so it is not the 100% final lens. But the render is based on input from our sources, so I’d expect the real lens to be extremely close to our rendering.

Thanks again Hiergeist!!! And thanks to our sources!

Share