FujiFilm X100F

[Out to Lunch]

In short, you can't go wrong.

 

[cz23]

The analog controls and having all settings visible on top is a large part of what keeps me with Fuji. But I agree the exposure compensation has a mind of its own sometimes and must always be monitored.

Are you all happy with the current X-Trans BW rendering (from raw)? Maybe I'm seeing things, but my X-Pro1 BW output seems nicer to me.

John

 

[willie_901]

...
Are you all happy with the current X-Trans BW rendering (from raw)? Maybe I'm seeing things, but my X-Pro1 BW output seems nicer to me.

John

My experience is with the X-Pro 2. The sensor and data pipeline is essentially identical to the X-100F

I often render B&W from raw files. I am happy with the rendering in LR Classic CC. However, I use very different rendering parameters than I did with X-100.

I think the X-100 has a higher read noise level than the X-100F. This would affect shadow region rendering at ISO 800 (where noise is dominated by photon noise) and below and the image in general above ISO 800. Perhaps the noise rendering difference is responsible for what you observe?

Occasionally I use Silver Efex Pro 2 for X-Pro 2 B&W raw rendering.

 

[davhill]

Since I need interchangeable lenses, I use a Fuji X-Pro2 with a 23mm f/2 lens.

Only the one lens? Tell me again why you need interchangeable lenses?

<<ok, ok, stop hitting me>>