Letter to Fujistas

[joshua daniels]

<p>

<p > </p>

<p >Note: I had tried posting this originally to the Fuji DSLR forum at dpreview.com. However, their server rejected it because of length. I believe that what I have to say may also be of interested to Nikon users (to be clear: I am also a Nikon user) but the primary audience is users of Fuji professional DSLRs. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >I have been a long-time member of this forum (both dpreview and photo.net) and others in which the Fuji DSLRs are discussed. I am an unabashed fan-boy of their digital SLRs. Let me say it: there is nothing on the market today that can actually replace it for--what to me--matters most about image quality: dynamic range, esp. in the highlights, and most particularly for skin tones / portrait photographers (including, of course, wedding photographers). </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Yes, we know Nikon and Sony have both pushed the envelope, and the "answer" could be the D3x. Except for obvious reasons: price and size. Perhaps there will be a lower cost body that uses the same sensor. But so far, according to DXO's database, no other camera (apart from a couple of very recent medium format back) approach the Fuji's d-range. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Lest you think I have not tried the other brands, indeed I have -- extensively. I'm a professional photographer and also a photography coach, so I see output from cameras that I myself don't own. I have owned several recent Nikon models. I shoot only RAW (as do my students) and I am adept at image-processing and extracting the best performance from a camera (prior to 'going digital' I scanned film and have been using a digital workflow for more than 10 years). </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Clearly, Fuji has missed the product cycle for an S5 replacement and by all 'net accounts appears done with DSLRs. There are rumors they may be looking at a 4/3 camera, which makes sense (these small sensors are even MORE d-range challenged than APS or 'full frame.). While a Fuji 4/3 camera with their sensor technology would be attractive, I think, their history of making competitive also-ran cameras gives me pause. Now, if they could do a digital XPAN or p/s with medium format sensor, as they did in the film category in the 90s, they would have something unique. But a 4/3 camera with the Fuji sensor, still, would be better than nothing from them. While 4/3 has a strong attraction, it is not a replacement for traditional SLR, particularly one that uses Nikon mount lenses, such as the Fuji pro cameras. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >I think we have to admit that Fuji is a very strange company on the PR front. They seem only to communicate through new product releases; they seem to have exactly zero sense of audience, and (from what I can tell) no interest in the professional market--though one does not know until the next camera appears. Why they would choose this strategy is anyone's guess, but mine is that cameras simply are not of great interest to this giant company. Also, in their home market they still sell a lot of film (as they do world-wide). Nevertheless, the wall of stone is thick. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >OK - so what is a photographer accustomed to the wonderful Fuji image quality to do? Obviously, the Nikon D700 / D300s are alternatives. But are they really? </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Speaking for myself, I wasn't persuaded to go digital until I bought and started using a Fuji S2. I took a long time to get even my toes in the way, because nearly every digital image I look at just screamed out 'digital' - usually because of the tonal roll off from mid to highlights. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >I'm a people and event photographer. Canon, Nikon, et al, digital cameras have greatly affected the average 'look' of portraits because of their limited dynamic range. I realize this is a bold, sweep statement, and I acknowledge the many exceptions. More importantly, I acknowledge that mine is a very narrow and somewhat technically grounded quibble, and that whether one uses Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Sony, or some other brand has no bearing on the quality of one's photographs as photographs--that is, their strength and communication as images. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >But for those who have experience working with film, particularly color negative and black and white, or have spent hours working in the darkroom to make a fine print, the issues of tonal scale cannot be ignored. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Much has been made of the "extra" headroom of the Fuji RAW file, as though 'if you really need it, you have it' (read: if you're technique is sloppy or you want to recover badly overexposed images you can'). What's missed here is that without the extra headroom, the tonal scale from mid to highlight, to the point of blow out, is significantly different. This difference affects the "look" of skin by causing slightly exaggerated highlights below the level of true highlight and a subtle but clear shift in color. Because the Fuji holds detail and retains color above the threshold of almost all other sensors, skin tones appear natural both in the mid and upper tones. I have tested this extensively, and I'm certain many of you on this forum have seen this phenomena. Look at any number of examples of commercial portrait work (they're everywhere if you have your limited d-range glassed on) and you can see the effects I'm talking about. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >I've used several Nikon cameras -- which, I should add, perform much better than the corresponding Fuji model, in terms of speed -- and from my forum readings have been encouraged that my 'obsession' with Fuji image quality is just that: an exaggeration on my part of the importance of the Fuji d-range capability, and that with more careful technique I could do just as well with the Nikon. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Indeed, there are things to recommend the Nikon, and I like the image quality of the D300 / D700, even consumer cameras have good color--in my opinion. But the extent to which they (easily) lose highly detail, and more importantly, show the kinds of tonal limitations with skin tones, makes them mostly unacceptable, to me at least. I realize I may be thoroughly flamed for this statement, but that's my belief. Nikon has dealt with the upper tonal range limitations of its cameras through a combination of clever work-arounds, such as improved signal processing (reducing noise to make the sensors more underexposure tolerant), bending the tonal scale (so that clipping appears to be more gradual), and improving response in the upper mid-tones. Nikon image quality, truly is excellent for many subjects, but the highlight limitations are still quite evident--though one can work around these to a degree by using the old bw technique of exposing for the shadows (to get detail) and developing (processing) for the highlights (in essence, applying a reverse "S" in processing). </p>

<p > </p>

<p >So, here's how I see it: at one point in time, Fuji assessed the market and concluded they had enough customers to justify developing a pro camera. They wanted to be players in the newly emerging DSLR marketplace, and while others had a bigger footprint in the camera market, generally, it was a new day because of the paradigm shift from film. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Over the next several models, Fuji's place in the market held steady or shrunk. I would argue that while the new cameras (S3, S5) were good they weren't compelling enough to customers who did not appreciate the unique imaging potential of their technology. On this forum and elsewhere those who come late to Fuji find these cameras a discovery if not a revelation, but Fuji itself has not done enough to make the cameras competitive in other areas (esp. speed). More importantly, they have done a miserable job marketing the product. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >In truth, we (Fujistas) would be in a much better place if some other company had the technology and was genuinely interested in the camera market; Fuji simply appears not to be. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Here is my thought: what if we could present Fuji with a special kind of petition from the customer base? I have in mind a unique proposition:</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Members of this forum who are interested in the next generation Fuji DSLR consider whether you would be willing to buy sight unseen, the next Fuji pro camera. To be clear: this is NOT a blank check to Fuji to make anything, at any price. Not all. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >However, it is an earnest and realistic proposition, as follows (full list of specs TBD by interested parties): build us a camera similar to the S5 in build quality and features, but with a 24x36 sensor and performance characteristics at least 25% better than the S5 (this is still a FAR cry from Nikon's pro camera performance). Price it within 25-35% (higher) than the equivalent Nikon MSRP (so, we're talking $3500-4000), and we, the undersigned will buy it upon release. Oh, and don't forget about the AA filter -- ease up!</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I think it is important to give Fuji both a sense of the interest and size of its customer and would-be customer base as well as a modest technical target. Clearly, the Dxxx platform has been out long enough for Nikon to reached economies of scale and thus to make this shell cost-effective for Fuji to purchase (no, we DON'T want them going their own way with a DSLR design). So, it's in everyone's interest to help Fuji think in terms of a modest upgrade to the S5, not a wish-list camera. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Speaking for myself, a full frame S5 with reduced AA filter sharpening and current Nikon AF would be a 'dream' camera. I would be fine with 12-18 MP, it doesn't really matter. Icing is welcome but not required. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >To me, the need for a new Fuji pro camera is a critical element in my work as a digital practitioner. Would I care if some other company met or surpassed Fuji's handling of highlights and d-range? Not at all! But I don't see much true development occurring in this area, and I worry that in the current economy manufacturers are trying to get maximum longevity out of existing technology. Indeed, I would like nothing more than to see some newer sensor technology developed along the Foveon line of thinking with Fuji's d-range and Nikon's low noise, maybe packaged both in SLR and rangefinder form factors. But unfortunately, the dynamics of the industry will probably not allow that to happen. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >In the meantime, the best alternative is from Fuji, and I believe 'the base' needs to take an aggressive stance with the mother ship: let's create a petition and write them on open letter. I think if we can bring them thousands of ready-to-buy prospects, they will consider (come, and they will build it). </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Thanks for giving this your consideration. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Joshua Daniels</p>

<p > </p>

</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>So I guess photo.net is just 2nd best...</p>

[huyzer]

<p>Full-frame S5 Pro like camera from Fujifilm?! I'M IN! Fuji.... pa pa paleeeeease build this! :D</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>How about ressurecting the GW and GSW 6x9 cm RF cameras. if they cannot put interchangeable lenses onto it, at least give us a semi-spot metering capability and re-tweeked lens formulas (especially the wide angle 65mm). Put some Acros 100 ISO or Rollei 25 ISO in this re-tooled baby and you have potential B&W to die for.</p>

[commtrd]

<p>I don't see any problems with nikon camera bodies relative to dynamic range or skin tones. Don't really care what fuji does or does not do. I am sticking with nikon camera equipment until / unless some other manufacturer makes something massively superior. Hasn't happened yet. Given the funding to work with, would probably go with Hasselblad MF but that's not going to happen either.</p>

<p>OP should post this long diatribe on the fuji board; this is a nikon forum.</p>

[jorgen_udvang]

<p>Ummm... I don't think there is a Fuji DSLR forum here. Most Fuji users use Nikon cameras as well, and it <strong>is </strong> an F-mount camera after all.<br>

I'm losing hope that there will be another Fuji DSLR, and it's sad indeed. Although some of the Nikon cameras, particularly the FX models, deliver very good results, there's nothing like the colour and rendering from the Fujis. When we come to DR, there's simply no competition unless I move to MF.<br>

My S3 is more or less loved to death, which leaves me with an S5 body. I would be all over a new body with more resolution, particularly one with an FX sensor, but again; I'm not very optimistic.<br>

There have been rumours circulation about a Fuji m4/3 camera for a while. It will be interesting to see if there's a camera behind the rumours. It would be sad if Fuji leaves the professional market alltogether. They have some great traditions, with DSLRs as well as MF cameras.</p>

[jannekaakinen]

<p>While I'm not a pro, and while I probably would not be able to buy one upon release, I certainly would buy one within a year from the release date. Love my S5 & S3!</p>

[joshua daniels]

<p>Bob - Thanks for your response. Actually, I'm a long-time photo.net user (since the 90s). Photo.net does not differentiate Nikon from Fuji in its forum categories, whereas dpreview does. No slight intended towards photo.net -- I'm a true fan boy! I visit photo.net daily and consider it one of the very best sites in net land. <br>

I would note that shortly after posting this I received a notification from a PN moderator, below: Thanks for notifying me. I wasn't quite sure WHERE in the Nikon forum to post this, but given that this forum has over the years been THE forum for Fuji DSLR posts, I had hoped you would -- after reading the post-- apppropriately place it somewhere within Nikon. I do not see how you determined it belongs in Casual Photo Conversations, and I'm very disappointed (given the thought and effort I put into the post) to see it land there. </p>

<p>Yours<br>

Joshua Daniels<br>

Photo.net member since the 90s. </p>

<p>On 3/5/10 9:44 AM, "photo.net Forum Alerter" <bboard-alerts@photo.net> wrote:</p>

<p>> Hello Joshua Daniels,<br>

> <br>

> <br>

> The thread below has been moved or recategorized by a moderator of the forum<br>

> you originally posted to. It is now among the uncategorized postings of the<br>

> Casual Photo Conversations forum. You can find your thread here:<br>

> <br>

> http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00VvLn<br>

> <br>

> <br>

> kind regards,<br>

> <br>

> photo.net Moderation Team</p>

[joshua daniels]

<p>Thanks for responses so far--much appreciated. To be clear (most in anticipation): this is most definitely NOT a Fuji vs. Nikon "thing." Note: I take very mild offense to having my post called a 'diatribe' -- indeed, I think I have been balanced, and appreciative if not flattering to in calling specifically for a Fuji that continues to be based on the Nikon platform - I feel it is the best for a variety of reasons. I have a cameraholic's load of Nikon gear and have strong Nikon loyalty and history with the brand. I just don't think they offer the best sensor possible. In the ideal universe, Nikon would adopt (and improve) Fuji's technology. However, for my purposes I stand by my critique of Nikon image quality and my preference for the Fuji "look" for what is most important to me: skin tones, tonal separation, and wide dynamic range. </p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Joshua, I am one of the moderators for the Nikon Forum and I moved this thread into Casual Photo Conversations.</p>

<p>As far as I know from people who are familiar with the situation, Fuji has disbanded their DSLR team. Therefore, as far as I am concerned, any discussion about the future of Fuji DSLRs after the S5 is pointless and does not belong to the Nikon Fourm.</p>

<p>Moreover, any post this long will merely discourage people from reading it.</p>

[commtrd]

<p>The length of the post was the reason I referred to it as a "diatribe". Not a disparaging remark per se just that it was extremely verbose and does not pertain to nikon camera equipment. Maybe fuji will someday decide to start developing another DSLR camera platform.</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>Just as a matter of record, I didn't move the thread here. I presume it was one of the Nikon forum moderators (Shun, Lex or Todd) who decided it didn't belong there. As you say, there is no dedicated Fuji forum.</p>

<p>My guess is Fuji aren't interested in a few people guaranteeing to buy a camera "sight unseen" that would probably cost them several million dollars in R&D, unless those customers write them a check for $1million each - and probably not even then.</p>

<p>I doubt that DSLRs are much of a factor in Fuji's profits and in the end it's the bottom line that counts. A major company probably isn't interested in what is in effect a "niche" product with probably way less than a 1% share of the market. If fact I'd be surprised if they had more than 0.1% of the DSLR market. To be honest I'm not even sure I've ever seen a Fuji DSLR in use. There's a LOT more money to be made in digicams, especially by a company that doesn't even sell their own lenses for their DSLRs.</p>

<p>I suspect that the chances of Fuji dropping their entire DSLR line is probably higher then them developing a new model. From a business viewpoint that makes perfect sense.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Bob, I moved this thread, as I pointed out in the post above at 2:22pm.</p>

[joshua daniels]

<p>Bob, Shun - thanks for clarifying. I'm fine if you guys want to leave it here. However, it would be greatly appreciated if you could at least provide some linking from Nikon, as I think the potential audience would very likely be under that category. Honestly, in all my years visiting and lurking on photo.net, I have yet to go to the Casual forum!<br>

Thanks,<br>

Joshua</p>

[jorgen_udvang]

<p>I find moving this thread away from the Nikon forum rather strange.</p>

<p>- A Fuji DSLR is basically a Nikon camera with a different sensor.<br>

- Most Fuji DSLR users use a mix of Fuji and Nikon bodies with Nikkor lenses. The natural upgrade path for a large number of Fuji photographers has been to the Nikon D700.<br>

- Except for dpreview, which is a huge forum, all other internet forums I know of discuss Fuji DSLR cameras in the Nikon section, which is also where photographers will look for these discussions.</p>

<p>If this thread had been posted to "Casual" from the beginning, I wouldn't have found it since, as a Fuji/Nikon user, I subrcribe to the Nikon forum, but not to the Casual forum. But if the moderators think that discussions aboy Fuji cameras can be damaging to the health of ordinary Nikon users and want to protect them from threads like this, I guess that's something we have to respect. Fuji users can always find discussions about their cameras at the Nikon forums of FM, GetDpi or NikonCafe if needed, or obviously at the dpreview Fuji DSLR forum.</p>

[joshua daniels]

<p>For those interested, I have created a petition at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/fujifilm_dslr_plea/.<br>

Thanks for giving this your attention (apologies to photo.net moderators who feel this subject is off topic).</p>

[Karim Ghantous]

<p>Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. ;-)</p>

<p>But seriously. I agree with you. I don't want to pay that much money for a camera right now so it would be wrong of me to sign the petition. However, I have been thinking of the Fujis today and see your post as a bit of 'synchronicity'.</p>

<p>Shame that they aren't doing DSLRs anymore. But a 4/3 camera would be sweet. I mean, the possibilities are quite tempting. Imagine a camera the size of the Olympus E-P1 but with a sensor that's at least equal to many DSLRs.</p>

[joshua daniels]

<p>Hi Karim -<br>

I'll definitely put you on the 'subscribers' list'!<br>

I agree: a 4/3 with a Fuji sensor <em>could</em> be a wonderful addition to the current 'tools set.' At this point, 4/3 is about as close as we have to an 'open source' system, and the issue of having Fuji sensor quality available to us might best be answered by a camera of this form factor using its technology. Apart from the issues raised about Fuji's lack of good marketing and, related to that, overall commitment to the professional market after the S3, buying camera bodies from Nikon clearly puts the S pro series cameras in a niche category because of costs. However, I would argue that the virtues of the sensor alone merit a significant premium over the Nikon counterpart (D200 vs. S5--what a diff!) and this would, I believe, extend to a 43 camera as well.</p>

 

[sfcole]

<p>Josh,<br>

1. Who's going to deal with a petition that is so long and verbose that their eyes (mine, at least) glaze over before making it to the end? These things MUST be concise if you wish anyone to actually read them.<br>

2. Is there any evidence that a consumer corporation has actually responded to a petition in the past?<br>

Scott</p>

[joshua daniels]

<p>Scott - point taken on length! I offered this more as an "argument" than a petition. I feel that users (maybe not Fuji users) need to a) be educated on this issue and b) my first hand experience cannot be briefly incapsulated. But I for a petition, indeed, we'd want a summary and not more than that. However, I am asking folks to read and contribute to this discussion, and also to recognize that the larger issues here are 1) generally lack of innovation on the sensor development front relative to new product introductions and 2) general inattention to what I at least feel is one of THE most pressing issues in digital imaging--d-range.<br>

I don't have evidence that a corporation has responded to a petition. I do know (because I'm in the industry) that companies watch forums and take the pulse regularly. There's fairly wide consensus that Japanese companies (though I think it applies more widely) do not listen to customers, but I don't believe this is an absolute. There are economic reasons for what we're seeing now, but I think that camera companies are extremely interested in the dynamics of the market, and all of the big (and smaller) players are desperately looking for ways to differentiate themselves. All the more surprising, for that reasons, that Fuji has withdrawn.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Over the years Fuji has produced many interesting cameras, especially medium format film cameras and dSLRs. And in nearly every case Fuji discontinued those cameras without providing a comparable or superior replacement, despite assurances from fans of those cameras that Fuji indeed produced very good equipment that filled a market niche.</p>

<p>It's reasonable to conclude that either:</p>

<ol>

<li>Fuji is clueless regarding its own market, or</li>

<li>They've actually done their market research and concluded that despite the pleas of devoted fans, there isn't a large enough market to make Fuji economically viable as a camera producer.</li>

</ol>

<p>I'd tend to suspect the latter is true. Fuji has produced some excellent cameras. And not enough people actually buy them to make Fuji's involvement in high end camera production economically sustainable.</p>

<p>But since we don't know for certain what market research Fuji has done, there's no harm in trying the petition process. Occasionally a similar approach has saved a favorite TV show from the chopping block, when it turned out the Nielson ratings didn't accurately poll the actual viewers of a particular program.</p>

[commtrd]

<p>I kind of feel like this whole thing is beating on a dead horse. These companies do not listen to their customers. A petition is OK to try but more than likely the company is not going to pursue this as they have already dropped the line some time ago.</p>

[lovcom_photo]

<p>Joshua Daniels, you could've said what you wrote in like 1/10th the number words, sentences and paragraphs. It is exceedingly tedious to read your diatribe...efficiency man, EFFICIENCY of words please...write for your audience, sir ;-)</p>

<p>I think you make a huge mountain out of a small mole hill....sure the DR is narrow but how often do your portraits cover more then 7 stops of light?</p>

<p>If I were you I'd do what a lot of us DSLR shooters do: find ways to balance the light between the background and foreground through creative posing, angles, flash/camera workflow...you can get it done with digital...but to be fair I love film no less then you and others...</p>

[joshua daniels]

<p>Folks - I take your point on length. Look, I feel very strongly on this subject. I maintain: no other DSLR allows you to produce work like the Fuji pro cameras. I have no axe to grind, and I'm happy to buy something comparable (better I hope!) from another manufacturer. I own many different cameras, and I'm not hung up on these.<br>

But I think that until you've made comparisons yourselves the Fuji RAW file and those out of Nikon or Canon, you may be undervaluing this issue. The issue of highlight detail is <em>major</em> , and a significant aspect of image quality, particularly tonality in skin and even for convincing (read: film like) black and white.<br>

I rest my case.</p>