I lose lots of shots with the Fuji X00S...AF problems

I've shot Fuji for years, albeit the old out of date models. (12mp - 16mp) The AF is terrible on them all. I was shooting the X1000S today, lost a lot of shots due to slow / no AF. How I wish they made a Leica-like M43 rangefinder. Zone focus, either in focus or not, but the shutter fires. Yes, you can force fire some of the digital cams even if AF is not locked, but the 'focus by wire' is screwy on the Fuji plus no focus scale.

Save you time lecturing me how to do it. I'm no beginner, I know my stuff. You can't shoot AF while walking and moving around in low light well. Always a delay or fail. I'm a very fast shooter and the time needed for the AF lock and the shot is gone sometimes. Maybe the newer Fuji's are a little better. But you still can't swing any AF cam around and expect it to lock on what you are after. I still got some decent shots with the crappy Fuji, but missing shots is irritating.

As much as I hate the Fuji's, they are the cheapest thing to a Leica. And they produce very nice IQ photos. And from what I see on the forums, their AF is fine for the type of work people do. But for hi level candid work in poor light they are not too good a choice.

A fashionable boomer - NYC (Candid) (Sony)

The AF lag issue that you have is what irritates me the most about using every P&S that I've owned or used.

IMHO, that is totally useless for most types of action shots, especially the common expected ones.

Its simply a case of the wrong tool for the job for a given photographer. The Fuji X100 series has always been a bit of a "bait and switch" proposition: looks for all the world like the affordable compact "Digital Leica" of our dreams, but try shooting it like one and you'll likely be bitterly disappointed. Some do manage to make it work for them in your type of scenario, but it requires a certain degree of warping your instincts to follow the camera's lead instead of the other way around. Most would resent this requirement, as it runs against the grain and defeats the whole attraction of x100 in the first place.

It is what it is, but Fuji does at least try to improve it every three years or so. The X100S wasn't toe-curlingly better than the original X100, but the third-generation X100T is generally thought to finally have a reasonable approximation of usable AF. The latest X100F may be even better. If you otherwise love the concept, consider bringing your X100S to a Fuji dealer and comparing it to the newer T or F versions. They may be sufficiently AF-improved for your work to merit a trade-in. If not, you'll need to consider alternatives to the x100 series.

A possible drawback of the T and F versions is their change to "xTrans" sensor. Some who loved the x100 and x100s output were not thrilled at the difference in post-working xTrans files vs the earlier ordinary Bayer-filter files. By now, raw software packages have been updated to better handle xTrans, but there might still be an adjustment period while you figure out how xTrans interacts with your particular style.

Where is "here"? Your shot above is from NYC subway. If any future tourist or business venture brings you back, stop in at B&H Photo for a comparo. If thats not in the offing, but you do reside in North America, perhaps buy a used 100T from popular web dealer KEH (you'll have 30 days to audition it, if no go return it for refund). Outside North America, I guess options will be limited to the camera dealers or eBay/Amazon variation in your country.

Sometimes you find amazing camera handling opportunities in unexpected places: when I was in London three years ago, a dealer in Heathrow airport had every Fuji, Olympus, Canon, Nikon and Sony model on open tethered display, for anyone to play with as long as they wished. It was really nice to examine them without a high pressure B&H salesman on my back.

I've shot Fuji for years, albeit the old out of date models. (12mp - 16mp) The AF is terrible on them all. I was shooting the X1000S today, lost a lot of shots due to slow / no AF. How I wish they made a Leica-like M43 rangefinder. Zone focus, either in focus or not, but the shutter fires. Yes, you can force fire some of the digital cams even if AF is not locked, but the 'focus by wire' is screwy on the Fuji plus no focus scale.

 

Save you time lecturing me how to do it. I'm no beginner, I know my stuff. You can't shoot AF while walking and moving around in low light well. Always a delay or fail. I'm a very fast shooter and the time needed for the AF lock and the shot is gone sometimes. Maybe the newer Fuji's are a little better. But you still can't swing any AF cam around and expect it to lock on what you are after. I still got some decent shots with the crappy Fuji, but missing shots is irritating.

 

As much as I hate the Fuji's, they are the cheapest thing to a Leica. And they produce very nice IQ photos. And from what I see on the forums, their AF is fine for the type of work people do. But for hi level candid work in poor light they are not too good a choice.

 

A fashionable boomer - NYC (Candid) (Sony)

 

[ATTACH=full]1293905[/ATTACH]

But rangefinder don't have autofocus at all:)

Its simply a case of the wrong tool for the job for a given photographer. The Fuji X100 series has always been a bit of a "bait and switch" proposition: looks for all the world like the affordable compact "Digital Leica" of our dreams, but try shooting it like one and you'll likely be bitterly disappointed. Some do manage to make it work for them in your type of scenario, but it requires a certain degree of warping your instincts to follow the camera's lead instead of the other way around. Most would resent this requirement, as it runs against the grain and defeats the whole attraction of x100 in the first place.

 

It is what it is, but Fuji does at least try to improve it every three years or so. The X100S wasn't toe-curlingly better than the original X100, but the third-generation X100T is generally thought to finally have a reasonable approximation of usable AF. The latest X100F may be even better. If you otherwise love the concept, consider bringing your X100S to a Fuji dealer and comparing it to the newer T or F versions. They may be sufficiently AF-improved for your work to merit a trade-in. If not, you'll need to consider alternatives to the x100 series.

 

A possible drawback of the T and F versions is their change to "xTrans" sensor. Some who loved the x100 and x100s output were not thrilled at the difference in post-working xTrans files vs the earlier ordinary Bayer-filter files. By now, raw software packages have been updated to better handle xTrans, but there might still be an adjustment period while you figure out how xTrans interacts with your particular style.

FYI, the X100S has an X-Trans sensor. Do you actually own/shoot any of the X100 series Fujis?

FUJIFILM X100S | X Series | Digital Cameras | Fujifilm Canada

Want AF frustration in a digital p&s? Try the killer Ricoh GR II. What saves it is the "Snap Focus" feature that overrides AF and substitutes a selectable zone focus range--a unique feature.

I've found AF speed on the X100T to be dependent to a degree on the size of the focus patch selected. There's always manual with focus-peaking, too.

I wish they made a Leica-like M43 rangefinder. Zone focus, either in focus or not, but the shutter fires.

is generally thought to finally have a reasonable approximation of usable AF

I missed my share of shots due to not so great AF performance of my elderly Pentax / Samsung SLRs. But even those can somehow compete with me struggling to focus RFs manually. The RF advantage, if there is one, must be on the subjective side: Nothing besides yourself to blame and get angry about.

Going for a smaller sensor would surely help a lot; the zone focusing component of RF shooting would benefit from the extra DOF. - I never understood why the ultra compact digitals became slowly AFing point & waits, instead of manually pre-focused realP&Ss. - Was it that expensive to build something like a Minox A/B/C's focusing knob? - Or did they just consider it impossible to sell enough copies to consumers? - I recall a Nokia phone with a focusing lever...

I have no clue why a Leica M inspired camera shape seems that popular. - Yes the result is a sufficiently compact 35mm camera, but is it "ideal", does it give serious advantages in daily candid shooting? Wouldn't a WLF help more? How unobtrusive is a big guy making a lunge, to bring a camera at his eye level lower?

Perhaps there is a certain peace in not owning any AF lenses (to be truthful, none in Fuji, only the 14-42 kit zoom in micro 4/3). There are certainly times when AF is useful, but more often than not, it just gets in the way. Only problem is the lack of wide-angle adapted glass.

Try an X-E1(2,3) with an adapted 35 or 40mm rangefinder lens (or wider if that floats your boat), I think you'll be pleasantly surprised, I know it's not the cheap digital rangefinder we all want, but it's about as close as we're going to get and works rather better than you'd think.

FYI, the X100S has an X-Trans sensor. Do you actually own/shoot any of the X100 series Fujis?

Slip of the tongue. I had the original, sold it to a friend who later upgraded to a later model and had teething pains with xtrans. I momentarily spaced on where the xtrans change was made in the lineup: sorry, all.

Try an X-E1(2,3) with an adapted 35 or 40mm rangefinder lens

I rather quickly packed up and forgot about the whole idea. - It might work outdoors by daylight or on a tripod but indoors the dropped EVF refresh rate already vexed me on the X-E1.

I rather quickly packed up and forgot about the whole idea. - It might work outdoors by daylight or on a tripod but indoors the dropped EVF refresh rate already vexed me on the X-E1.

I can't say I find the lower refresh rate particularly bothersome, it's a small price to pay for being able to just about see in the dark. I just need to hunt through the settings a bit more and see if I can find a way to have the "gain-up" image applied to the magnified view for focusing.

By comparison, my Panasonic G3 doesn't "gain-up" the EVF, so you get a smoother image, but you can't see anything.

Testing in conditions that give around 1 second at ISO 3200, f2, how low is "low light"?

I'm running the latest firmware, 2.70

5 seconds at ISO 3200, f2, Helios-44. Focused, if you can call it that, by half-pressing the shutter and using the brighter EVF, without the magnified view. Handheld.

Edit window expired...

I tried the same shot (the cat hasn't moved) with a Zorki 3m rangefinder and a Konica FT1 SLR with f1.7 lens, in neither case could I see the cat or even the chair to focus.

For candid shots like the OP, I'd most likely be using zone focus or the lens preset to it's hyperfocal distance, which with a wide lens is pretty much everything, then just point and shoot, or even shoot without pointing. All of which renders the camera pretty much irrelevant, it's just a shutter and sensor by that point.

... The latest X100F may be even better...

I'm currently shooting the F version, and same feeling; the AF is not fast enough to my liking.

But, is there a fast enough compact AF camera? Manual focus cameras are faster but no AF. You can switch to manual focus but very likely most shots will appear unsharp.

Better to use a big DSLR (of course older models don't have great AF too), but the compactness is then lost.

So at the end, I find the X100F a "reasonable" compromise... not for fast shooting but good for IQ and convenience (perfect size, great optic system, the hybrid/OVF is wonderful... ).

My main complain is about menu and controls... too much buttons, some a bit awkward to use and in the wrong place, and a not so nice menu system. But still, a great camera.

...Manual focus cameras are faster but no AF. You can switch to manual focus but very likely most shots will appear unsharp.

I don't see why manual focus would be "less sharp" that shots taken with AF, in fact rather the opposite, as with MF, you'll have focused where you wanted to, as opposed to where the camera thought you wanted to.

I think we're getting so blinded by the technology that we've forgotten the basics, "can't see the wood for the trees" if you like.

Before we had autofocus, a great many photographs and in particular, many "street" photos, were taken with zone focus. The X100 has a 23mm lens for goodness sake, if it were to be focused at 2 metres, at f8, my handy depth of field calculator tells me that the zone of acceptable sharpness would be 1.3m to 3.9m, that would cover most snap portraits nicely with that focal length. It's not hard to judge 2 metres. I assume the X100 has some kind of distance indication for manual focus?

I'm happily shooting snap portraits (not "street" though, French law makes it difficult) with my X-E1 and a 40mm lens, works just fine, even with less margin for error with the longer focal length, it's faster to take a step back than it is to focus.

If you're not printing posters and not shooting wide open, then zone/guess focus should be sharp enough for real world use.