Alas dear Fuji, I knew you well.

It's been a while since I posted on nzdigital (about three months), but I haven't been quiet during that time - anything but. I've been posting, instead, on my 'other' blog; The Fuji X-Files. It made sense, since I had invested heavily into the Fuji mirrorless system with the X-E2, and had a Fuji-centric blog waiting and ready to go.

And I enjoyed the Fujifilm X-E2, I really did. Well, at least I thought I did - until recently. Let me explain...

Lake Kaniere. Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm. f11 @ 1/80th, ISO 200.

A few weeks ago I decided to film a video for my Youtube channel, comparing images taken with a full frame, APS-C and micro four thirds camera. I just happened to have all three sensor sizes together at one time, and thought it might make for an interesting video? And it certainly was interesting, and enlightening, but not quite in the way I had envisaged it would be. 

I went into the 'experiment' with a fairly clear idea of what I thought the outcome would be (not very scientific, I know), since I've shot on all three sensors over the years and know that they can all perform fantastically. All can produce clean, clear and sharp (more on that soon) images - at least at the sizes I need to print or display my work at. I took all the images at the same focal length, with the same effective aperture, and all in RAW so I could get the very best out of each sensor.

The three cameras I tested were the 24MP full frame Sony a99, my 16MP Fujifilm APS-C X-E2, and my son's Olympus OM-D E-M5 16MP micro four thirds. Above is the edited RAW images, with a 100% crop from the extreme left edge of the frame, from each camera. The full frame 24MP image has the edge in sharpness and clarity - of course it does. But having said that, the Olympus E-M5 micro four thirds image gives an impressive performance - with the very cheap 14-45mm kit lens no less - and isn't that far behind. But what shocked, surprised, and upset me, was how poor the Fujifilm X-E2 result was! It might not be quite as obvious from the images here on the web, but compared to the Sony and Olympus, the X-E2's 100% crop from the left edge is horrible! Soft, mushy and just plain horrible! Bugger 😞

On closer inspection, it looks as if the Fujinon XC16-50mm kit lens that I've been using has a slightly de-focused left side of the image, since the right side edge was indeed sharper. So chalk that up to a lens issue and move on. Whew!

Things will surely get better if we look at the central portion of the image - all shot at an f11 effective aperture, all on a tripod. Well, hang on there Bucky. Not so fast. Once again, it might be hard to tell from these web images, but - once again, the Sony and Olympus look very sharp, while the Fujifilm X-E2... not so much.

This time the result is not so much blurry, as just every so slightly 'mushy'? Detail just isn't as distinct and 'crisp' on the Fuji as in the Sony and Olympus images. On-screen, they all look fine. Sharp and clear enough. But pixel-peep at 100% and the Fujifilm X-trans sensor is definitely more 'mushy' in rendering detail. If I was being kind (hey, I'm trying), I'd say it produces a more 'painterly' image - maybe more filmic, than the other two? Great if that's the look you're going for.

Now normally I'm not a pixel-peeper. Really, I'm not. And I'm also not someone who has to have the 'cleanest' image possible with zero noise/grain present. In fact, with the Fujifilm cameras, I'm actually purposefully going the other way and introducing grain into the image. I like the fact that they can produce very film-looking images straight out of camera - when I want that look. But I'm also not the first to have noticed a general 'softness' with Fuji RAW files that aren't there with other systems.

This image softness has mostly been attributed to Adobe Lightroom's handling of the Fujifilm RAF files (yes, I'm using Lightroom). It's a common, and oft discussed issue, with a couple of work-arounds.

First, third-party plug-ins can take over the RAW development engine inside of Lightroom to process the RAF files. This is the 'fix' preferred by those who wish to stay within the Adobe ecosystem.

Second, ditch Lightroom all together and move to Capture One for processing RAF files in the future. Capture One has worked closely with Fujifilm, and are known to have a much superior RAW processing engine for RAF files than Lightroom. People have reported much sharper images processing in Capture One than Lightroom. So fortunately, there is a fix.

Having said all that, I'm not laying the blame only at the foot of Adobe. I have to at least consider that the lens has something (a lot) to do with IQ and sharpness. I've been shooting the X-E2 mostly in jpeg, and letting the camera process the image. If you do this, then a lot of the inherent lens issues will be 'minimised' by the processing software. So that what you get out of camera should be fairly sharp, corrected images. Not so with RAW. The RAF's are unadulterated data - warts and all - and it seems that maybe the XC16-50mm has quite a few warts?

So, having established this, I made two decisions immediately. One - get a new lens, and two - start processing RAF files in Capture One.

And that's exactly what I did. I purchased the 23mm f2 prime (35mm equivalent fov) and downloaded Capture One Pro for Fujifilm (which just happened to be on special). Problem solved - right?

Well actually, no. On the lens front, I'm sure that I am getting sharper results with the 23mm prime than I was with the XC16-5mm kit lens. No doubt. It's a lovely little lens, and a joy to use.

But, when I went back and re-processed the RAF file in Capture One, I got the exact same result as I had when I used Lightroom. The Fuji file still looked 'painterly' rather than crisp and sharp. Bugger (again) 😢

After that, it was a bit like one of those inkblot tests. Once I had seen it, I couldn't 'un' see it. I started going through my back catalog of images and looking at photos at 100% (I really am NOT a pixel peeper!). If I clicked on an image at random, then I could almost always tell if it had come from the Fuji because of the painterly pixel structure. If I clicked on an image, enlarged it, and thought "great, that looks better" then it was invariably from another camera sensor (usually a Nikon). And once I started playing the 'spot the Fuji fuzziness" game, then that was really the beginning of the end for me and Fuji.

Motukiekie Beach. Fujifilm X-E2 with Fujinon XC16-50mm

I've had a lot of fun using the Fujifilm X-E2, and made a lot of amazing images with it. It's been another piece of my mirrorless journey puzzle, and shown me that I can get along with smaller cameras. But it's also been a bit of a struggle, I'm not gonna lie. The X-Trans sensor is a unique beast, and many struggle to tame it satisfactorily. It's especially difficult if you're an otherwise satisfied Lightroom user. 

Shooting jpegs and using images SOOC (straight out of camera) is a serious option to consider with Fujifilm - their film profiles are really that good. And boy, have I had a lot of fun (and wasted a lot of time) with custom film profiles. The combinations are almost endless. Which again, unfortunately, presents something of a problem. I've programmed, changed, and reprogrammed the custom film settings on the X-E2 dozens of times - tweaking, reshooting, tweaking and reshooting again - only to end up changing them all later anyway. They are fun, but for me they've also been time-wasters, and something else for me to obsess about with my photography (me, obsessive? never!?).

So I've decided - for better or worse - to move on from Fujifilm (what a shock). I've used it for about a year now, which is fairly good going for me and a camera system historically 😕 I haven't really been a one-camera-one-system guy for years now. Variety is, as they say, the spice of life.

There is, however, one love that I have returned to time after time. And I think she is calling me again... 

I'm pretty sure I was using a Nikon before I switched to Olympus, and I know I was using a Nikon D300 before switching to the Fujifilm X-E2. My first digital 'love' was the Nikon D70, tearing me away from my 20 year affair with Canon. Nikon has been the stable home in my system-swapping career, and I hear her calling me again... 

I've also thoroughly documented my struggle (love and hate relationship) with 'going' mirrorless, since I'm still convinced (as are many) that mirorrless is the future of photography. But... having grown up using SLR style cameras, the DSLR has a strong emotional, and physical, attachment to me. As soon as I pick up a solid, hefty, magnesium alloy DLSR body, it feels like coming home. They just feel so 'right'. So wonderfully good in the hand. And try as I might - and I have tried - mirrorless cameras, with all their bells and whistles, just do not feel as good to hold and use. This is a hugely underrated part of enjoying photography. How does the camera 'feel' in you hands. Does it make you want to pick it up and use it for long periods of time? For me, Nikon's just do.

Of course all of this would be moot if money was no object. It would, of course, present a whole new raft of problems - but if money was no object, then I would definitely be buying a mirrorless camera. But not a tiny wee thing like a Fujifilm XT30 or Olympus E-M10III - something solid like an Olympus EM1x or Fujifilm XT4 with grip attached. Actually, what I think I would do is wait for the new Nikon Z9. I think that's going to be a stellar camera for Nikon. But alas, I haven't won lotto (that I'm aware of anyway), so budget is, as always, a major factor.

I'm going to Christchurch this weekend (as I write this). I've sold my Fuji gear already, have a few other bits and pieces to sell, and with the money I am going to buy another camera and lens(s). I don't know exactly what I will get, but at the moment I'm thinking it will be a Nikon DLSR. Something like the D7000 pictured above. Or maybe, if my budget can stretch and I can be convinced that its sensor is clean, a full-frame Nikon D600? It will all depend on what the store has in its secondhand department at the time.

Then again, there's a very nice black and silver Olympus OM-D E-M1 for sale as well. And, as we all know, the future is mirrorless! 

Using Fujifilm's PC AutoSave function

There's not a lot I don't like about my Fujifilm X-E2. The size, weight, form factor, ergonomics and IQ are all fantastic, and I adore the range-finderesque style of shooting (which is a complete surprise to me).

There are, however, a couple of features (or lack of in one case) that I am not all that crazy about. First, which I wrote about last post, is the X-E2's inability to set individual white balance shifts for each custom film setting. To be fair, this isn't just an X-E2 issue, and was only recently fixed with the X-Pro 3 and X100V. Still, I wish the X-E2 had this ability.

Second, due to its X-Trans II sensor, the X-E2 doesn't have the Acros film simulation, and nor does it have any Grain setting for the film recipes. If I am going to stick to shooting in Jpeg-only going forwards (which remains to be seen), these are two settings I would dearly love to have. As much as I adore the X-E2 in most other respects, these omissions have me seriously considering upgrading to the X-E3.

And third, I'm not a huge fan of the positioning of the SD card underneath the camera right next to the battery. For a couple of reasons. Primarily, it's fiddly to get the card out with the battery in place, and even worse if the extra grip is attached. Fuji's own accessory grip for the X-E2 covers the battery compartment completely and so needs to be removed every time you need to change battery or SD card. I also have a third party grip which is better, in that it does have a cut-out so the door can be opened without complete removal of the grip. However, it makes the hole quite a bit deeper and therefore even more difficult to get you fingers in to eject the card. Sigh...

While not much can be done to fix my first two gripes (other than an upgrade to the X-E3 or X-Pro 3... yes please), my final issue does actually have a work-around - especially if you're shooting jpeg-only. It's a brilliant solution called PC AutoSave, and basically uses your home wi-fi connection to transfer all the images from the card to your computer wirelessly.

I recall a couple of years ago investigating whether this could be done on my Olympus OM-D EM5 MkII. I think that I had seen on some promotional material at the time that this feature was available on the Fuji's - so I presumed that since the E-M5 MkII had wi-fi connectivity, that it could do it as well. But alas, it couldn't. I actually wrote about my frustration with this at the time here.

In the ensuing couple of years, I'd obviously forgotten about this feature on the Fuji system (I'm getting old), and haven't been utilising it at all. Something (don't ask me what) jogged my memory the other day when I had returned from a quick shoot with the X-E2 at the Cobden Lagoon (see last post). As I was preparing to fight yet again with the camera to give up its SD card I suddenly thought "Hang on a minute. Can't you download these images over wi-fi?" And the answer is 'yes', you can.

It's pretty strtaight-forward as well (thanks Fujifilm). Just download the Fujifilm PC AutoSave App on your PC or laptop, open the software on the computer, and follow the prompts. You will first have to set your camera up to 'Save to PC' in its wi-fi settings, and then connect the camera to your home wi-fi network. But once you've achieved these simple tasks (the software walks you through the process) the rest is plain sailing. Point the software to the folder you want to use as the 'download' folder, hit enter when the camera asks you if you want to transfer the files to your PC, and bingo - away it goes. Brilliant!

Honestly, this is the answer to all my prayers (in-so-far as the SD card issues are concerned). With wireless transfer of images to my computer, I need never take the 64GB SD card out of the camera ever again! And you only have to go through the (relatively painless) rigmarole of setting it up once. Next time you come back from shooting, set the camera to 'Image Preview' mode, press the wi-fi button, and the camera should pair up to the computer automatically.

It's a great system for someone shooting Jpeg-only, with 'relatively' small file sizes. I'd imagine that if you were shooting RAW + Jpeg and came back from a wedding with a full 64GB card (or two), then it might take quite some time to transfer them all over wi-fi. In that scnario, perhaps the old-fashion card reader might still be the better option? But for one or two hundred Jpegs transferred over wi-fi, the wait time isn't too horrendous.

Fortunately, after file transfer is complete, the camera disables the wi-fi connection automatically. You should, however, make sure that you have a reasonably full battery in the camera during image downloading, since the camera - not surprisingly - needs to be 'on' during the process.

This all may be old-hat to many of you who have been using Fuji cameras fro a while. But for me, it's been almost revolutionary! I've never been able to do this with any other camera that I've owned - although I wanted to with the Olympus's and couldn't understand why they didn't.

If, like me, you've been fiddling about getting the SD cards out of the slot next to the battery chamber, then fiddle no more! Download Fujifilm's PC AutoSave app and enjoy the liberating experience of wireless image transfer! What a relief.

WB settings for film simulations in my Fujifilm X-E2

In my last post I discussed 'going 100% Jpeg'. This may sound scary to some photographers for who shooting Raw is almost a religion (and yes, that was me too). It's really only been made possible - for me at least - by shooting with the Fuji custom film simulations (or recipes).

Fujifilm expects you to play around with film simulations and create your own - that's what their X-Raw Studio software is all about. Unfortunately, my X-E2 is not compatible with X-Raw Studio (I presume it only works for X-Trans III sensors and above?). Fortunately, others have done the hard work for me already, and there are a plethora of film simulations on-line to choose from (check out the amazing Fuji X Weekly blog).

All sorts of parameters can be tweaked to create a 'look' you're after; from highlight and shadow tone, to sharpness and colour - and even grain and clarity on the latest Fuji camera models (alas, again, not my X-E2!) To get the very best out of these film simulations, you also need to tweak the white balance R & B (red and blue) channels to truly dial-in the colour shifts that some 'films' give. It's well known among film shooters that Kodak has warmer tones than Fuji, whose films are generally slightly cooler (bluer). To achieve these colour variables, the R and B channels can be changed to mimic these tonal variances. So far so good.

Unfortunately, on most of the Fuji cameras, these changes to white balance in the R & B channels are a 'global' change. So, for example, if you have Auto WB set, with a +3R and -2B colour shift, all film recipes that use Auto WB will have the same shift applied. Annoyingly! This has, fortunately, been fixed with the X-Pro 3 (and X100F I think?) - but I don't have an X-Pro 3, do I...😞

Fear not, fellow Fuji user - for there is a work-around for this... kind of. Since the white balance shift is global, what you need to do is set different white balances for each film simulation, applying the correct red and blue channel shift to each white balance. You can also, of course, choose film simulations that use the same r&b channel colour shifts. I've set my X-E2 up with a combination of the two. Let me explain...

The seven film recipes I have currently programmed into my Fujifilm X-E2

Currently, in the seven allowable custom setting slots on the X-E2, I have Ektachrome 100SW, Acros mono, Kodachrome II, Kodak Tri-X, Fujichrome Sensia 100, Kodak Ektar 100 and Kodak Portra 400 film 'simulations' programmed in. Of those, five use the same Auto white balance shift (Auto +3R, -4B) while two have different WB settings applied with their own R&B channel shifts.

Remember how I said earlier that Kodak is known for being a 'warmer' toned film. Look at the list above. Five of them happen to be Kodak film recipes - four of which (Ektachrome, Kodachrome, Ektar and Portra) use the same Auto WB as mentioned above. The fifth is actually the black and white Fuji 'Acros' simulation. Since mono is less crucial with colour shifts (obviously), having my Acros film simulation share the Kodak films WB setting isn't an issue.

Having said that, of the two film recipes that have other WB settings applied, one of those just happens to be a Kodak mono film - Kodak Tri-X. This recipe actually uses a Daylight WB, with +9R and -9B. The final, odd one out is, not surprisingly, the Fujichrome Sensia recipe. The slightly 'blue' cast associated with many Fuji films is actually achieved by using the Fluorescent 2 WB with a -1R and -3B channel shift. As can be seen in the thumbnails above, it certainly gives it a blue tone over the other Kodak film recipes. 

It's early days using these film recipes, and the above images were taken on a very overcast and gloomy day - not my normal shooting conditions. Initial indications, however, are good, with the film simulations rendering the Jpegs as expected. Ektachrome and Ektar are exhibiting the punchier colours, while Kodachrome has a more vintage look. Sensia, as mentioned, has the cooler Fujifilm tones, whereas Portra colours are more subtle and muted (ideal for portraits). The Acros and Tri-X mono recipes are fairly similar in overcast conditions. I expect more variance will become apparent in brighter light?

I won't go into each individual recipe in this post - it's far too long already 😆 Look for future blog posts where I will discuss each individual recipe I'm using in greater detail. If anything I've written in this post doesn't quite make sense, or you want further clarification, don't hesitate to comment down below and ask me questions. I'm just feeling my way through using channel shifts as well, so maybe we can work all this out together?

I do encourage you, if you're not already, to set some film 'recipes' up in your custom settings on your camera and start using them. They are a lot of fun, especially if you're an ex-film shooter who had some favourite film stocks back-in-the-day. Yes, I know it's still digital. But you can at least pretend you're shooting film - can't you?

Golden Bay Holiday - Wainui Falls

Greetings fellow photographers, and welcome to 2020!

Over the next few blog posts I'm going to be chronicling my recent holiday to the Golden Bay region at the top of the South Island.

My wife and I spent 9 nights (10 days) in mid January, with friends (Tim and Nicki) staying at a batch at Puponga - the northern most settlement in the South Island. Nestled at the base of Farewell Spit, Puponga is an idyllic spot to stay over the summer, and we were blessed with amazing weather (hot and sunny with no wind) for the whole 10 days!

Golden Bay is a beautiful region that incorporates Nelson's Kahurangi National Park, The Abel Tasman National Park, and some iconic landscape locations such as Cape Farewell and Wharariki Beach (more on them in future posts).

Cair Paravel - The batch at Puponga

Neither my wife Joanna or I had ever been to the Golden Bay region before, so we were very excited to be visiting for 10 days, and to have Tim and Nicki as our guides. They have holidayed at Golden Bay several times, and knew exactly how to get to all the beautiful locations. All my wife and I had to do was sit back and relax - and find out from Tim every morning what we would be doing and where we would be going for that day!

As well as posting these blogs, I am also putting together some 'vlogs' on my Youtube Channel. The first of these here: https://youtu.be/kcZ4POkUAFk is a 'What's in my Bag' video that shows all the photography gear I took on holiday. If you have read any of my previous blog posts (and of course you have 😉), then you will know that I changed all my photography gear over to Fuji towards the end of 2019.

What's cooking? Fuji X-E2 with 16-50mm XC lens

My Fuji cameras - the X-E1 and X-E2 - are ideal travel cameras. Small, mirrorless, lightweight, range-finder style bodies with superb image quality from the 16MP X-Trans sensor. I used the X-E2 as my 'main' camera, paired with the 16-50mm and 50-230mm XC 'kit' lenses, and the X-E1 with the 27mm f2.8 pancake lens for an even smaller and lighter combo. This worked very well, and I never felt that I lacked for anything on the holiday - even on the days when I was just carrying the 27mm pancake.

I  also took 6 (yes, six!) camera batteries with me so that I wouldn't run out of battery power during the day. Turns out that six is a bit overkill, even if you're shooting all day. With some pretty heavy use as we traveled around, I only ever needed two batteries to make it through a full day of shooting. And of course, staying at the batch meant that I could charge batteries every evening. So really, three or four batteries would have still been more than enough. Better safe than sorry with these mirrorless cameras though, I guess.

The first day of the holiday was a travel day. With stop-offs along the way (and plenty of them), it took us about 8 hours to get from Greymouth to the batch at Puponga. We did go out on the first night to recce a spot for sunrise the following day, but the light was fading and so no good photos were had on day one. Unfortunately, sunrise on day two didn't really happen either. See the vlog on my Youtube channel about that here: https://youtu.be/9wjQTTuDXWk

It wasn't until the afternoon of day two that the photography began in earnest, with a trip to Wainui Falls.

Wainui Falls is a waterfall (surprise, surprise) about 20km east of Takaka. It's quite a tourist destination and even has a cafe and family play area at the start of the track. You know a waterfall is a popular destination when it has its own cafe!

It's just a short walk through native bush to the waterfall - about half an hour there - and is a very well maintained and easy walk. Mostly flat and only rising gradually to the waterfall itself. I guess its easy accessibility is what makes it so popular. It was a lovely walk, although we were there at the hottest and brightest time of the day - not ideal for great waterfall images. And I also wouldn't call it the most impressive or photogenic waterfall I've ever seen? In my humble opinion, the Coal Creek Falls at Runanga on the West Coast is a much more impressive waterfall, just as easy to walk to - but would only get a fraction of the visitors. Just saying...

Wainui Falls, Abel Tasman National Park, Takaka. Fuji X-E2 with Fujinon 16-50mm. f/5.6 @ 1/500th, ISO 200

On a hot summer day, it's inevitable that you will also get people who want to go for a swim at the falls. This adds yet another possible obstacle for us landscape photographers looking for a good image of the falls. In this instance, however, I actually like the inclusion of the two figures in the bottom right of the image. They add some interest, indicate that it was a hot day, and give a clue to the scale of the falls themselves (which aren't massive). Given that most of the elements for a good image were conspiring against me on this occasion, I'm very happy with the photo I managed to capture. Shooting in RAW allowed me to pull extra detail out of the blown highlights and deep shadows you get mid afternoon in summer, and even though there were probably another 20 or so tourists milling about trying to take their own photos (mostly selfies), I was able to isolate just these two swimmers in one frame.

Wainui Falls Swingbridge Selfie.

And speaking of the dreaded selfie... yeah, ok. It had to be done. We were on holiday after all! This was taken on the swingbridge leading up to the falls. It's only about another five minutes from the bridge to the falls themselves, and is a natural place to stop and grab a quick selfie. I took this on my wife's iPhone 5s, since I was using my iPhone to vlog the falls for my Youtube Channel. The video isn't 'live' yet, but soon will be. Just follow the other links above to my channel and make sure you check out Vlog #15 when it becomes available...

I've been vlogging on Youtube for almost a year now, and I'm still not sure what I think about it? It's a lot - and I mean a LOT - more work to create coherent video as well as stills, and there were many time on this holiday where I just couldn't be bothered carrying around all the extra gear.

I've been a 'stills' photographer for over 30 years, and old habits die hard. I still don't really 'think' in terms of video, so it takes a lot of extra time, thought, and effort to shoot video for the channel. But, the flip side of this is that when I do take the time and effort, the resulting video can be a much stronger visual experience. Especially if I've taken the time to shoot a lot of B-roll (I don't always remember). Now that we are back from holiday, and I'm working through the photos and putting together the videos that I could be bothered to shoot, I find myself wishing that I'd actually shot more video than I did. Might have to reflect on that for the future?

Wainui Falls Cafe. Fuji X-E2 with Fujinon 16-50mm XC.

Anyway, enough with the video talk - this is a photography blog after all. Having photographed the Falls, we headed back for a coffee (I actually had an ice cream) at the Cafe.

Since the video was only going to be about our trip to the Falls, I felt that I could now relax and get back to what I do best - take photos. The Cafe and family play area was the perfect place to relax, enjoy an ice cream, and people-watch for a while. We spent a very enjoyable afternoon sitting in the shade, watching the ever-present,  very tame Weka's (flightless native birds who always hunt out free food) pick through leftovers and drink coffee from tables! They are very used to people (obviously) and will come right up to you expecting to be fed whatever it is you're eating. Probably not recommended food for native birds, but the Weka's won't take no for an answer!

Help yourself! Fuji X-E2 with Fujinon 50-230mm XC. f/6.4 @ 1/60th, ISO 200

Your move. Fuji X-E2 with Fujinon 16-50mm XC

Tim and his son Tim Jnr. ended the day with a game of Garden Chess. I'm not going to say who came away victorious - except to say that the wiser (or should that be older?) head prevailed 😂

We picked up Tim Jnr. in Nelson and he joined us for the first few days of the holiday. It was great to catch up with him, since we've known him as a young lad, but haven't seen him since he moved to Nelson a few years ago.

The trip to Wainui Falls was a great way to start our Golden Bay adventure. I wouldn't say that the Falls themselves were anything spectacular, and the photos aren't anything above travel snaps, but in terms of relaxing, enjoying ourselves, and settling into 'holiday mode', it couldn't have started any better. There was going to be many more opportunities to take some 'serious' landscape photography on the trip. And trust me, the best was yet to come...

A Day in the Life of the Okarito Boat Shed

Every year, a group of men from my local anglican church in Cobden, go away to Okarito for a 'mens weekend'. This usually involves lots of fishing (for trout and whitebait), lots of walking (around the lagoon and up to the Okarito Trig Lookout) and lots of cards (500 seems to be the card game of choice).

I've only been once before, six years ago, so I thought it was high time I went away again. And of course, my focus (excuse the pun) was always going to be on one thing only - photography.

Okarito Boat Shed at pre Dawn. Fuji X-E2 with Fujinon XC 16-50mm. F/11 @ 6 secs, ISO 200.

To get away for a whole weekend, no other pressures or concerns, to concentrate 100% on photography is practically unheard of - for me at least. And an amazing luxury. So I was determined to make the most of the opportunity. Unfortunately, the long-range forecast one week out didn't look promising. There was, in fact, Civil Defence rain warnings in place, especially for the Friday that we were travelling to Okarito (a two hour trip from Greymouth). As we drew closer to the end of the week, the forecast for Saturday began to look a little more promising. But I wasn't all that hopeful, and had a good supply of books with me along with the camera gear.

Okarito Boat Shed at Dawn. Fuji X-E2 with Fujinon XC 16-50mm. F/11 @ 1/35th, ISO 200

Friday came, and there was indeed torrential rain all day! The drive down to Okarito was slower than usual, with heavy surface flooding in places, although fortunately never enough to close the roads. When we eventually got to the Okarito settlement, the rain was starting to ease (a little), although it was obvious that they had also had their fair share throughout the day. Yet as the evening turned to night, the rain continued to ease. And when we finally called it a night, I set my alarm for 5.30am with a sense of optimism for the following day.

Okarito Boat Shed at Sunrise. Fuji X-E2 with Fujinon XC 16-50mm, F/11 @ 1/35th, ISO 200

As you can see from the images in this post, that optimism was well founded! Saturday dawned with a beautiful, calm, clear and still morning. Not a breath of wind or rain in sight. Just glorious! I was so ecstatic, and was treated to one of the most beautiful mornings I've ever had the pleasure to experience - let alone photograph. Last time I was in Okarito (six years earlier), the morning light was wonderful. This time, it was spectacular. May prayers were answered in a truly special way and I felt very blessed.

From a technical perspective I am, and continue to be, impressed with the Fujifilm X series cameras. I used the X-E2 exclusively over the weekend, although I had the X-E1 and 27mm pancake lens with me as a back-up. Just prior to leaving for the weekend, I purchased a new camera bag - a Vanguard 'Sydney' messenger-style bag. It's a small bag with top-loading access through a zip, or conventional access through a flap, and fits the X-E2 with 16-50mm, the X-E1 with 27mm, as well as spare batteries and memory cards. Just brilliant to wander around with all day, and was the ideal travel camera bag for the X-E's.

Boat Shed in Early Morning Light. Fuji X-E2 with Fujinon 16-50mm. F/11 @ 1/60th, ISO 200

I arrived at the famous Okarito Lagoon Boat Shed pre-dawn, at around 5.30am. The sky was just beginning to brighten, even though sunrise wasn't for another hour. Since the boat shed looks east, the sun rises right behind it (as you stand at the waters edge), so most of the time the boat house will be in silhouette against the rising sun. All you can really do is expose for the sky and let the boat house go to dark shadow, especially as the sky brightens and the sun begins to climb.

Eventually, if it's a clear morning, the sun will be so bright that it's no longer feasible to shoot from behind the shed, and another vantage point will need to be found. Fortunately, it was also low tide, so access to other areas of the lagoon wasn't a problem. At high tide you can't really vary your viewpoint too much, as getting in front of the boathouse becomes difficult.

Morning has broken, Okarito Boat Shed. Fuji X-E2 with Fujinon 16-50mm. F/8 @ 1/640th, ISO 200 

If you get a great day, then you can shoot at just about any time at the iconic boat shed wharf. It's such a fantastic structure, sitting out on its own in the lagoon. It looks great in almost any light - morning silhouette, daytime side-lighting or back-lit in the evening. I often used a 6 stop ND filter to slow down the water and give a stronger reflection, but using a faster shutter speed can also work to accentuate the ripples in the water.

Of course during the middle of the day the light is never the best for landscapes, so I went elsewhere. But I would often return to the lagoon, drawn to the boat shed, just to check up and see what the light was doing at any given time of the day. This is a luxury that only time can afford and as noted earlier, I was very lucky to have a day to spend just on photography.

Late evening long exposure, Okarito Boat Shed. Fuji X-E2 with Fujinon XC 16-50mm. F/11 @ 14 secs, ISO 200

As the day progressed to evening, and the sun began to set in the west, the boat shed was now lit up at the back. This low, soft light was ideal for some long exposures with the 6-stop ND filter. And since the light was also quite muted, the tones worked perfectly in black and white.

That's another reason I love shooting with the Fujifilm X series cameras - the custom film simulations are superb. The above image is a straight-out-of-camera jpeg, shot using my own Acros film simulation recipe. The range-finder style Fuji X-E's just cry out to be shot with film simulations and they are super easy to access with the 'Q' Quick selector screen. Just tap the 'Q' button and flick the scroll wheel next to it to access up to 7 user-defined film simulation recipes. My two favourites are my 'Classic chrome' and 'Acros' simulations, which I shoot in 90% of the time. And, since I have the camera set to capture RAW + Jpeg, I always get the best of both worlds if I'm shooting black and white jpegs.

It was late in the evening... Okarito Lagoon Boat Shed. Fuji X-E2 with Fujinon 16-50mm. F/11 @ 17 secs, ISO 200

It was a lot of fun, and a great visual exercise, capturing the Okarito Boat House throughout the course of one day. The light had its own unique qualities and feeling at each and every part of the day, and the one location yielded almost endless possibilities.

Okarito isn't a destination I can get to very often. The last time was six years ago. And there certainly aren't many locations that I have the luxury of being able to spend a whole day photographing. So I feel very lucky, and very blessed, to have had the opportunity to capture 'A day in the life of the Okarito Boat Shed'. I came away with a great portfolio of very different photos, and a richer understanding of light and its many facets. Not a bad way to spend a day if you ask me.

Beware of the Worms - sharpening Fuji files in Lightroom

Worms. Not a word I typically associate with photography. We have a dog though. And yes, worms is a topic of conversation that is often associated with her (every 6 months with the vet).

Yet since moving to the Fujifilm system, I have come across the term 'worms' being mentioned in relation to Fuji images on many occasions. Mainly in regards to the post-processing of files from the x-trans sensor, in Adobe's Lightroom.

Rock the Boat. Fuji X-E1 with Fujinon XF 27mm f2.8 pancake. f/5.6 @ 1/480th, ISO 200. C1: Classic Chrome recipe

Many people report to seeing 'worm-like' artifacts in Fuji files, specifically after image sharpening. Fuji files have become somewhat notorious for the dreaded 'worm' effect. Lots of reports on the interwebs discuss the issue, and refer to photos that look like watercolour paintings due to the worm-like pattern that pervades the entire image.

This kind of talk is, not surprisingly, cause for some concern. And also, for someone like me, requires a little more investigation. I don't want photos that look like watercolour paintings (unless that's the specific look I'm going for), and would certainly like to avoid 'worms' in my images if at all possible - thank you very much!

Rock the Boat detail - 100% crop of central portion

Which of course got me thinking - and looking - very hard, at all the images I've taken with the Fuji X cameras thus far. And I can't say that I have ever noticed, or been bothered by, worm-like artifacts in any of my Fuji images. The above 100% crop is as crisp and as clear as any other file, from any other camera system, that I've ever used. The 'mottling' you can see on the surface of the boat is actual paint - not wormy artifacts generated by the sensor! It's super crisp, super sharp, and not a worm in site!

But then again, it hasn't been sharpened at all in Lightroom. It is a jpeg direct from camera, which LR does not apply any sharpening to on import. I even have sharpening set to -1 in-camera for the above image, which was taken using my C1: Classic Chrome recipe. And it's plenty sharp enough (btw, Lightroom does have a default sharpening for RAW files upon import; Amount: 40, Radius: 1, Detail: 25). I have found the Fuji x-trans files to be super sharp straight out of camera, even the RAW files, and have honestly not felt the need to sharpen them later on in post. But what if I did need to?

Beach Sculpture with Worms? Fuji X-E1 with XF 27mm f2.8

Above is a Fuji RAW file (RAF), processed in Lightroom, with a heck of a lot of sharpening applied! Looks okay on the web at screen resolution, but what about zoomed in to 200%?

Worms galore!

And there it is folks! Worms! My Fuji has Worms! They are clearly visible at 200% (and 100% to be fair), and certainly give a very watercoloury effect to the details (or lack thereof) in the image.

But hang on a minute. This is, as I said, after a heck of a lot of sharpening has been applied. Sharpening that, as I've already stated with my Fujifilm files, I didn't need to apply. How much sharpening has been applied you ask? How about 140% (close to Lightroom's maximum) with a 0.5 radius and 60 detail. That's a serious amount of sharpening! How would other files hold up to this amount of pixel punishment? How about a Nikon or Canon RAW file?

Motukeikei Beach Low Tide. Nikon D300 with Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 lens. f/11 @ 1/13th, ISO 200

With the same amount of excessive sharpening applied in Lightroom, the Nikon NEF file above (converted to a jpeg for posting) also looks fairly decent at screen resolution for the web. But what happens if we zoom in a little closer?

Nikon NEF at 200% 'oversharpened' in Adobe Lightroom. Yep - it's got worms!

Zoom in to 200% on the over-sharpened Nikon RAW file and you will also see the wormy artifacts all through the image. Perhaps maybe not quite as prominent as in the Fuji file, but they are definitely there nonetheless. So it would seem this whole worm thing isn't a Fujifilm issue per se, but an Adobe Lightroom oversharpening issue for all files? But let's not stop there...

Home Sweet Home. Canon 650D with Canon EF-S 18-135mm. f/8 @ 1/400th, ISO 200.

And then there was Canon. Once again, with the same excessive sharpening applied, the reduced image for the web is passable.

Wormy worms everywhere!

And once again, zoomed in to 200%, the resulting Canon file has the dreaded worms! They're everywhere! So it would seem that, pushed to the limit and over-sharpened, all image files from all camera manufacturers will produce the worm-like artifacts when processed in Adobe Lightroom. Not just Fujifilm files.

These examples are admittedly fairly extreme. What happens if we dial back on the aggressiveness? 

With all the images re-processed at a less aggressive sharpening in Lightroom (Amount 120%, Radius 0.5, Detail 20 and Masking of 80), the results are much better - all the worms have gone, from all the files. So it would appear that the worm issue is not a Fujifilm issue at all, but is in fact an Adobe Lightroom sharpening algorithm issue.

Want further proof? Sharpen your Fuji RAW files in Capture One's Fuji-specific RAW processing software (Capture One Express for Fujifilm is free). Ramp that sucker up to 1000% sharpening and there will be nary a worm in site! Not one. Of course it will look terrible for other reasons (never sharpen at 1000%), but it certainly won't have a 'worm' issue. The worm issue is Adobe's, not Fuji's.

So I'm moving my workflow to Capture One for my Fuji files then - right? Well, I have certainly downloaded Capture One Express 12 for Fujifilm (the free version), and if I was going to do a lot of sharpening of my Fuji files then I would most definitely be doing it in Capture One Express.

But (there's that 'but' again...), as I said somewhere near the beginning of this post, I have never noticed worm artifacts in my Fujifilm files - all of which have been processed in Lightroom, and none of which have, as yet, needed any sharpening. So my 'need' to switch to Capture One to avoid worm artifacts doesn't actually exist. As the saying goes, "If it ain't broke..."

I'm happy/thrilled/ecstatic with the final results I'm getting processing my Fuji files through Lightroom. Maybe I'm not all that picky? Maybe I don't know what the hell I'm on about (that's a possibility). Maybe I can't be bothered learning (and paying $240NZ or $20NZ per month) another software programme? 

Don't get me wrong, Capture One Pro looks like an amazing RAW processing engine. In many ways superior to Adobe's Lightroom. But I'm already paying for Lightroom, which in itself is superior to Capture One Express - the free version (not surprisingly). And who knows, maybe one day Adobe will fix their sharpening algorithm?

I appreciate this probably isn't the most scientific of studies. If you're not sure about my findings, go ahead and go through this process with your own files. Be my guest. I think you'll probably come to similar conclusions?

Finally, I want to end by restating my claim about this worm issue. This is not a Fuji file problem. It's an Adobe problem. I'm also really not quite sure why it's only being associated with Fuji? Why is there no 'Nikon worm issue' or 'Canon worm issue' pervading the internet? All of these manufacturer's files exhibit 'worms' in Lightroom when pushed. So forget Fuji. It's Adobe that has worms. Ewww!

In praise of the Fujinon XC 16-50mm f3.5-5.6 OIS

Maybe it's just me? But I think that Fuji's cheap, lightweight, plastic, consumer-based kit lens - the Fujinon XC16-50mm f3.5-5.6 OIS (to give it its full title) - is a damn fine lens! Damn fine.

Now to be fair, it also happens to be the only lens I've ever used in the Fujifilm lineup. So maybe I haven't got that much to compare it to? I do know, from reading and watching other reviewers, that Fuji's optical quality is spoken of in extremely high regard. Words like 'outstanding' and 'exceptional' are used on a very regular basis by anyone reviewing the XF primes or pro level zooms. And yet almost nothing is ever said about the XC range of lenses. And if they are mentioned at all, it's almost in embarrassment, and they quickly move on to more 'serious' optics.

I think this does the Fujinon 16-50mm XC lens a severe injustice. I really do. Because while I may not have any experience with other Fujinon lenses, I have a plethora (yes, I said a plethora) of experience with other lenses, over a more than thirty year photographic career. From consumer kit zooms to cheap plastic primes, mid-range third party offerings to expensive pro level glass - I've shot with (and owned) them all. And while the Fujinon XC 16-50mm lens might not be the best lens I've ever owned, it certainly is far from being the worst.

Lake Brunner Water Taxi. Fujifilm X-E1 with Fujinon 16-50mm XC lens. F/11 @ 1/125th, ISO 800. 23mm (35mm equiv)

 

100% crop of lower right corner. Click image to enlarge

That's not damning with faint praise either. Honestly. Because while I certainly can't claim that it's the best lens I've ever owned, I also believe that it's a truly fantastic lens, capable of remarkably good results - especially for the price that you will pay for this plastic 'kit' lens. Most reviewers completely disregard this lens, or ignore it completely as if it doesn't even exist. And I believe they do so to their own detriment.

Ok, so it's not made of metal. Yes, it is an all plastic construction - right down to the lens mount itself. But not - I repeat NOT - the optics. They are, of course, made of glass. Fujinon glass. 12 elements, in 10 groups, including three aspherical lens elements and one ED lens element. The good stuff. So whilst the body might be of consumer-grade construction, Fuji haven't skimped where it matters the most. With the optics.

Cross section of XC 16-50mm lens elements

Plastic it may be, but it's also a very good plastic (is there such a thing in this day and age?). The fit and finish is excellent, and the zoom ring turns smoothly and without any barrel wobble. I won't lie - a metal lens mount would have been nice, and wouldn't have added any discernible weight (or cost) to the lens. But for such an incredibly light lens (just 195 grams) for a zoom, I can see why Fuji have opted for the plastic lens mount. For its intended user base (this is a consumer grade lens by Fuji's own definition), they probably didn't see it getting very heavy use, and may even be the only lens that the average consumer ever owns? So I guess there might not be a lot of lens-changing going on anyway. And besides, we're long past the point where plastic lens barrels on consumer products are of concern. Canon and Nikon have been doing it since the introduction of consumer digital SLR's in 2003 (with the Canon D300).

Carters Beach, Westport. Fuji X-T1 with Fujinon 16-50mm XC. f5.6 @ 1/240th, ISO 200. 23mm (35mm equiv)

100% crop of central area. Click image to enlarge

So let's get over the all-plastic thing shall we? Let's concentrate instead on what it does have going for it. And there's plenty.

It's lightweight, well constructed, and has glass optics with some nice aspherical elements thrown in for good measure. It also has image stabilisation built in to the lens (up to 3.5 stops), seven rounded aperture blades, a quick and silent autofocusing motor, and focuses as close as 15cm's for 'macro' images. It's not weather-sealed (neither is the 18-55mm), but really, what do you expect at this price point?

Ultimately, what I'm most interested in with any lens, of course, is IQ (image quality). What do the photos that this lens takes actually look like? And in this regard I only need one word: fantastic! Honestly - fantastic. From the very first image I took with the Fujifilm X-E1 and 16-50mm XC combination I was blown away. Crisp, clean, clear, colourful, sharp - all of the above. And while a good deal of this is down to the x-trans sensor, it still needs the lens to translate all that x-trans goodness into a final image.

Truman Track, Punakaiki. Fuji X-T1 with Fujinon 16-50mm XC. f5.6 @ 1/550th, ISO 200. 16mm (24mm equiv)

100% crop of lower left corner. Click image to enlarge

I'm not going to lie to you, dear reader, and tell you that the Fujinon XC 16-50mm f3.5-5.6 OIS is the sharpest lens I've ever owned - because it's not. But it is plenty sharp enough. Just look at the 100% corner crops of the images in this post. They aren't bitingly sharp - but only the very best of the very best lenses actually are. You know, the ones you pay $1000+ for. For a 'kit' lens performance, these are excellent results, especially when you consider that all but the last image here (the one taken at Motukeikei Beach) were shot hand-held.

So while it might not be the sharpest tack in the box, I actually find this to be a positive. Sometimes I find bitingly sharp optics to have a very obvious 'digital' quality to them. Not so the Fujinon 16-50mm XC lens. It's sharp, without being 'digitally' sharp. It has, dare I say it (ok, I will) a more film-like quality to it. It's sharp (often very sharp) where it needs to be, yet also beautifully smooth in other areas. It's hard to define exactly, but I do find the images that I'm getting from the 16-50mm XC to be very beautiful. Drop dead beautiful, in fact.

Motukeikei Beach Sunset. Fuji X-E2 with 16-50mm XC. f11 @ 1/2sec, ISO 200

100% crop of lower right. Click to enlarge

Steady on! Am I gushing over this cheap little hunk of plastic a bit too much? Surely it's just a lens you 'put up with' until you can afford a 'real' lens? I take my landscape photography very seriously, so of course I'm going to 'upgrade' first chance I get - right?

Well, not so fast. Recently (as in this week), I had the chance to do just that. Buy a 'better' lens for the X-E2 (see my last post). I looked very closely at the Fujinon 18-55mm f2-4, and almost pulled the trigger on one. But then a few reviews I read suggested that the IQ of the 18-55mm wasn't really an upgrade. I'm thrilled with the IQ I'm getting from the 16-50 XC lens (can't you tell). Would I be more thrilled with the IQ from the 18-55mm? I'm not convinced I would.

Yes, the 18-55mm is 'better' built (more metal), and yet it still doesn't have weather-sealing. And yes, it's a 'faster' lens - but as primarily a landscape photographer working around f11, I don't necessarily need faster. And also, as a landscape photographer, I'm going to choose the 16-50mm over the 18-55mm because of its focal range. 16mm (24mm equivalent) is useful to me, and preferable over 18mm (27mm equivalent). Surprisingly, at wider focal lengths, that extra 2mm makes a huge difference  - especially on an APS-C sized sensor.

Realistically, my upgrade path is actually to go to the Fujinon 16-55mm f2.8 - which is weather-sealed, and which, I'm sure, is a superior lens. And I probably could have afforded one if I'd waited for a good secondhand deal. But the 16-55mm f2.8 would also come with its own set of problems. Weight being one of them. At 655 grams, it's over three times the weight of the 16-50mm XC lens - which would definitely be noticeable on my X-E2.

So in the end, after weighing up all the pros and cons, I decided that the Fujinon XC 16-50mm f3.5-5.6 OIS lens was, in fact, the perfect lens for me. So I've bought another one to go with my X-E2 (after having sold my original lens with my X-E1). My 'new' (secondhand) one is the version II model (slightly updated OIS apparently), in all-silver. Should pair up very nicely with my silver/black X-E2.

Lake Brunner Boats. Fuji X-E1 with Fujinon XC 16-50mm. f8 @1/125th, ISO 250. 23mm (35mm equiv)

Apologies if this post has gone on a bit long, and become a bit of a rant in places? But it does annoy me that so many 'serious' photographers and reviewers dismiss the XC lenses as 'inferior' rubbish. They are, as I have discovered much to my joy, nothing of the sort.

Since I'm not really a prime kinda guy, and since I've discounted getting both the 18-55mm and 16-55mm (at least for the foreseeable future), then I guess I'll keep using the XC 16-50mm plastic fantastic for my 'serious' landscape photography. And since my experience with this XC lens has been so positive, I'm considering getting the 50-230mm XC telephoto as well. If it's anything like its smaller sibling, then it just might be a real gem of a lens too? Can't wait to find out...