Aperture rings and other manual controls

Someone made a comment a bit ago that all lenses should have aperture rings, just like in the good old days.  That goes along with a buddy back around 2002 telling me how Nikon's G-series lenses were terrible because they didn't have aperture rings.

Seeing as how the FujiFilm X-T1 has really brought back manual control dials, I wondered if people would be enthusiastic to such controls on every camera body big enough to have them.

That first person was talking about the Panasonic lenses, as the Leica-branded micro Four-Thirds lenses have aperture rings but the others do not.  I thought back to the inspiration for the OM-D series--the OM-system.  They not only had aperture rings on the lenses, but just behind the lens, on the lens mount collar was a shutter speed ring, which made manual control very efficient.

Yes, the shutter speed only goes to 1/1000th

While the OM-series bodies were slippery with a heavy lens, they were the most efficient when it came to quickly changing settings.  You can also see the ASA-calibrated film speed dial, which required you to press and hold the small button next to it so you could turn the film speed dial.  As I recall, FujiFilm had a lift-and-turn mechanism to keep the film speed from being accidentally changed, as it shared the dial with the shutter speed.

Oh, here is something you might not expect.  The light meter was manually activated (you held down a switch in front, near the lens) on the Fujica SLRs to cut down on battery drain, and there was the On-Off switch on the Olympus OM-series SLRs just for the light meter.  If you were good with settings, you didn't have to worry if the battery was dead.

The ST801 certainly didn't have many controls

AZ-1 had Aperture Priority AE with minor compensation

Film speed setting occurs in the window, lift and turn

The X-T1 really is overloaded compared to the 1970s

I gave up all that when I moved to the Olympus E-1 dSLR in 2004.  The aperture ring was on one of the unmarked dials and the shutter speed was on the other.  That's all I needed to know.  It drove me bonkers the first week, and then, it was just fine.  Mostly, I just found settings that worked for the current situation and I photographed sports.  I didn't worry about film, full stop.  There was a PASM mode dial.  Of course, that dial wasn't possible or necessary in the 1970s because auto exposure was something new.  It caused Pentax to create a new mount and for FujiFilm to follow that mount, as they were both using a screw mount prior to that.

Olympus E-1, practically perfect for 2003

Having used the Four-Thirds mount Leica/Panasonic 25mm f/1.4 with aperture ring, there are times when I like the ability to control the aperture on the lens.  It is helpful when working at a slower pace, being creative.  (Photographing sports you have little time to be creative.)  The problem is that the aperture ring only works on my Panasonic GH3, through the Olympus MMF-3 adapter.  My Olympus E-1 and E-5 don't support the aperture ring in firmware, unfortunately, so I have to use the "A" setting on the ring.  I was a bit surprised to find that Panasonic supported it through the adapter.

I'm 99.9% sure that Olympus has no desire to completely relive the past.  They'd like to be quite popular again, as I'm sure FujiFilm, Pentax, and others would like also.  I remember having choices and with mirror-less camera bodies, it's become interesting again.

Update 2014.04.04: Do we need a huge number of manual controls now?  I don't.  I want to set an ISO sensitivity range and leave it.  I want a clearly-marked exposure compensation button that can be used with a general dial or alternatively, a dial just for exposure compensation.  The trouble with the specific dial is that it may not have a large enough range, and I'll still need to dip into the menus to set up the steps.

I like what FujiFilm has done with the X-T1, but I think it's more for the hobbyist than for the professional.  It's both totally wonderful and totally silly.  Once again, I'm not the casual photographer and when I try to be, I don't take minutes to set up a photo.  I check my mode, my aperture or shutter speed, my focal length, and focus and re-focus, and shoot.  That's pretty much what I do while photographing sports, with less time to think about settings.

I could wish for a FujiFilm/Olympus/Panasonic/Pentax company with design from the best of each, leaving out the various weirdness that hampers usage.  The combined company would likely wipe Sony out of the camera-making business while using their camera-component-making business much more effectively.  They'd also likely put the hurt on Nikon and Canon.  Consolidating the best players in the mirror-less market might not do too much harm, especially if they could convince buyers of their combined strength.

FujiFilm to release a 1970s style mirror-less camera X-T1, like the ST801 or ST901?

I saw this rumor today that Fuji will release a mirror-less model that resembles the 1970s Fujica ST-series SLRs.  More images here.

This hits home with me as much as Olympus with their OM-D line, as my first SLR was a Fujica ST-series body.  In the photo shown, it seems that they're using the ST801 as inspiration, my favorite.  There were others: ST601, ST605, ST901.  All used the Pentax screw mount for lenses.  With the AZ-1 (first Fujica with auto exposure), they switched to the Pentax K-mount that is still used in some fashion today.

As I've been saying, FujiFilm has been designing and bringing new and improved technology to market lately that is compelling to me.  As far as I'm concerned, and you're welcome to disagree, they belong at the top of the interesting heap, along with Panasonic and Olympus, because they've made interesting usable.

Their X-Trans sensor, whichever version, has quite a bit more to offer than those made by Sony, Canon, or Panasonic.  If they can bring down the cost of the sensor, they could inundate the market with something better.  I'd also like to see if Panasonic and FujiFilm can work together to bring similar sensors to micro Four-Thirds.

In any case, creating an SLR-like body is what I want and using the ST801 as a template is great, as it fit me well.  They need to offer more of a grip (the electrical contacts on the base are evidently there for a portrait grip) because, like anything from the 1970s, the ST-series was a bit slippery.  (They show a bit of a grip, but I don't think that's enough and charging US$150 for an enhanced grip is just evil.  They just did that for the X-Pro1 and X-E2.)

If the pricing is reasonable, I will likely stop using micro Four-Thirds before I really use it much (Do several hundred sports photos count as much?).  Other things must be handled, though, such as the ability to use raw files at any ISO sensitivity.  The current models only allow raw files to be used in the Normal range.

The company seems to be making excellent progress in bringing excellent equipment to the market but with a few quirks that hopefully, they'll eliminate.

Update 2014.01.24: The more I think about this, the more I'm interested.  We'll find out January 28th, if we're not all frozen here.

The 56mm f/1.2 (especially after seeing the price of Panasonic's Leica-designed lens, no matter how good) and 10-24mm f/4.0 lenses have made a switch compelling, and this body make complete that feeling.  I really, really want some lenses I can use for sports photography, and those aren't it.  As most people are more concerned about casual or artistic photography, they're talking about the 18-135mm that will also be introduced.  It has a good range and if it's weather-sealed, it's likely better than the Canon lens, but it's probably not for me.  I'm skeptical of image quality in lenses with more than 4x zoom.  I'm fairly sure than 18-135mm is longer range than 18-72mm.

The available long zooms have rather small (read consumer) maximum apertures, which won't give the performance I need.  They have a 70-200mm (50-140mm, weather-sealed) f/2.8 equivalent on the road map but that just means that my current Four-Thirds and micro Four-Thirds equipment will have to keep going.  Of course, this gives more time for FujiFilm to work out their firmware for raw files, and it gives developers of raw development software, namely the Phase One Capture One I use, more time to get the most from the images.

Update 2014.01.28: The X-T1 seems very reasonable, although hardly different than something in-between the X-E2 and X-Pro1.  Being weather-sealed is important to me, so I'm glad to see that it's there, like the Olympus E-M1.  It's also freeze-proof, like the E-M1, and the electronic viewfinder is apparently similar, but with a portrait orientation that thoughtfully rearranges the information for easy viewing.  The information display reminds me more of the ST901 than the ST801 which used LEDs to signal the light meter reading.  It also adds a sliding rear display.

The company is claiming a greater extended ISO sensitivity, up to 51,200--useful with JPEG images.  Yes, the raw file range is still limited from ISO 200- 6400.   I find this disagreeable.  Do I work past ISO 6400?  No.  Might I need to do that?  Maybe.  Prior to Phase One Capture One, the ability to process raw files was limited.  I  could use the free software that came with the camera (if I had all day, since it was slow), or hope that Adobe Camera Raw wasn't nearly as buggy as Photoshop, but neither was a good solution.  I suppose using a JPEG to get a low light photo wouldn't be the worst thing, if I really need the photo.  They have supposedly re-worked the circuitry around the sensor for less interference and therefore, a cleaner image.

There is a clip-on flash, and two grip accessories.  One is a portrait battery grip that allows the use of one extra battery.

The body is a bit small, comparable to the Olympus E-M1.  It remains to be seen if the XF-series (higher quality) lenses will be much of a burden.  Since my problem with the E-M1 is that it was meant to be used with the full sized lenses for Four-Thirds bodies, it isn't well-balanced most of the time.

Since the X-T1 won't be using similar lenses (FujiFilm doesn't have a K-mount adapter listed), there shouldn't be a huge imbalance.  The only official adapter was for Leica M-mount lenses.  I don't remember when the Fujica-series equipment went away, so I don't know if anyone would want to use their old K-mount (or for that matter, their Pentax screw mount) lenses with it, though Pentax makes a good range of weather-resistant K-mount lenses.

The lenses I would want are yet to be available, and all are in the XF-series and weather-sealed, so I have time to think about my direction.

FujiFilm's latest mirror-less cameras

A while back, I questioned the need/desire to design today's mirror-less cameras like those of 50 years ago.  Fuji and Olympus were high on my list.  These two have been my favorite camera companies since I was a teen.  They have done some really impressive work over the years.  I wasn't sure why they wanted to return to other decades for designs.

FujiFilm was big in the news industry, although most photographers wouldn't even know that.  They still make some business-purposed cameras.  Most people now wouldn't even realize that their 135 format SLRs were fairly popular in the 1970s with the ST 601/605, 801, and 901 models, plus the AZ-1, their first auto exposure model that also signaled their move from Pentax screw mount to Pentax K-mount.  I knew a lot about them because I used to sell them, along with Nikon, Olympus, Minolta, and Canon.  I started with an ST605 as my first SLR.


Today, they're a very different company, especially since film is almost gone.

They looked back to some rangefinder/viewfinder cameras and did something the other companies weren't doing with mirror-less--hybrid optical/electronic viewfinders.

The trouble I remember with rangefinder/viewfinder cameras was getting the focus right.  Since you didn't look through the lens, you couldn't confirm focus at all.  Some of the cheaper cameras didn't even help you any scale in the viewfinder to guide you as to what would be in the photo.  Experimenting was expensive, but once you got the hang of it, you could remember what distance actually worked.

Today's Fuji X-series of interchangeable lens mirror-less rangefinders are much more helpful.  The rear display can give you a good view of your photo ahead of time.  The X-Trans sensors, for those bodies which have them, are quite adept at great image quality, surpassing other sensors of the same size.

What remains is the size and shape of the body and that polarizes most people.  It's the warm and fuzzy situation.  You're happy with the familiar and you don't want substitutes.  I want a good grip and a size that I can hold easily while using longer lenses.  Many people want something small that they can carry easily, especially when they can accessorize with a smooth leather case.  You'd think that I was talking about women, but the majority are men buying these cameras.

I guess my problem is that I'm just not a casual type behind the camera.  I take everything as a challenge!  That's probably why I'm better at sports than portraits or street photography.

However, I really admire what FujiFilm has done.  The latest X-E2's specifications look good, and the image quality will likely be slightly better than the X-E1.  Many of the models are impressive.  It doesn't surprise me that the company has gone their own way with the color filter.  For a while, they were putting their own sensors into Nikon bodies, similar to the way Kodak was working in the market.

Their auto focus has become faster and more reliable.  Their early problems with the sensors are gone.  They've added lenses, not that there are many, but they are sufficient for the kinds of cameras that they are.  I'm really thinking that they'll not be used for sports.  If they had an ultra wide angle lens, I'd probably buy one for that purpose alone.

I could see Ansel Adams using one, although I suspect that he could do wonders with a cardboard disposable camera.  He inspires me, and so does FujiFilm.

I saw the X-S1 in person the other day for the first time.   For a point-and-shoot, ultra-zoom camera, it's huge.  It was sitting between two Canon dSLRs and I didn't really notice it at first because it was a similar size.  Granted, the lens has much more reach because the sensor is so tiny, but the body size and the price were consistent with the others, also.  (Technically, it is mirror-less, but it's not a mirror-less system camera, so I just added it here.)

I just saw a rumor that Fuji make create a mirror-less dSLR-like camera body, probably grabbing the ST801 as a design reference.  If we wear the right clothes, start the 8-track tape deck, and use our fake 1970s cameras, it should feel as though the 1970s are back.

Update 2013.12.19: This new Fuji 10-24mm f/4.0 lens makes the system look even more valuable.   That, and an X-E2 or X-Pro1 would likely fill the rest of my needs for a few years.  Of course, they don't do anything for sport.

Update 2014.01.28: Given my previous bits about the 1970s, I think the X-T1 looks good, especially with the 70-200mm 135 format equivalent lens (50-140mm f/2.8) that is weather-sealed.  Maybe, they do sports after all.  It's not exactly  where I was thinking of going, but given the few alternatives, it might be the correct way to go.  If anything, FujiFilm really needs to find a way to provide a raw file with an ISO sensitivity outside 200-6400.  If images are usable past ISO 6400, a raw file would be preferable.

Update 2014.10.28: I tried the X-T1 in a store briefly and it was even more uncomfortable in my hands than the Olympus E-M1.  However, with extensive use, the E-M1 has become better, though the Panasonic GH3/GH4 is extremely comfortable.  FujiFilm has a grip accessory that fits on the front, as well as the battery grip.

FujiFilm continues to update their firmware and it's respectable.  Olympus actually updated the E-M1 firmware to version 2.0, which seemed unusual.  However, Olympus is selling quite a few bodies and FujiFilm is still working their way up.  It's sad that raw processing software has made it difficult to sell their bodies with an X-TRANS sensor.  It's getting better but hardly seems optimal.

In any case, FujiFilm seems to have created a Leica-like following of users.  They need a dedicated following, though not those who should be committed, if you get my meaning.  Their dedication to their users seems to have been met with dedication from the users.