« Actual Black Friday! | Main | Dachshund! (OT) »

Monday, 30 November 2020


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Yeah, but the good news is that you'll be able to get that $6,000,000,000 Leica for only... $5,900,000,000 by summer!

DPReview points out that the Fuji X100V is a reasonable alternative to the Q2 Mono, thanks to Fuji's great mono film simulations, and at a vastly lower price point. One also gets a saner 35mme FOV, longer battery life, tilting screen, flash, a hybrid finder and a smaller, lighter body.

I suppose the trade-offs (for some; on paper) are fiddlier handling, fiddlier RAW, and lower resolution. And of course cachet.


Interesting take on why Canon is beating Nikon at FF mirrorless. Spoiler: commitment and lenses.


Reminded me of Ned Bunnel's comment here a while ago that Canon plays the long game.

Mr Draper didn’t think that through because ear plugs wouldn’t be sufficient if his painting were to be accurate ;) .

Ahhhh! The thought of Fuji releasing a mono camera.

Sensor shift stabilization.
24 meg APS size Sony made sensor.
All the controls on the outside per XT4.
Big Battery.

Less than a $1k.


"...for Fuji to make a B&W-only X-T30 or even X-T200 for $450–800; is that so hard?"

Hope this doesn't come off as sarcastic or condescending, but why not just shoot your Fujifilm camera as a B&W tool by using that film simulation? I shoot my Fuji in Acros mode with red filter and with trial and error tweaks to the highlight, shadows, I get consistantly great results. The exposure compensation dial assures that the most important mid tone is right and the output is terrific.

If Fujifilm made a dedicated mono camera, it would have to do something magical to make it desirable enough to be limited to that specific output.

Every time that I go out for B&W only shooting, there are always a few color shots in the mix that I could not pass up and not having that option would be limiting.

I think you have to repeat the explanation of a digital B&W only camera is because it makes no sense. Why would you want to sacrifice the possibility to use the colour information in post processing to create the best possible B&W images from the scene?

Now to have a B&W mode on a camera where you can chose "filters" and only se in B&W (but camera raw-file have full colour) i totally get. That can be done in the camera firmware, and I can't understand why that is not a feature on every camera out there, it's only SW after all.

So maybe if you nag the vendors to make this B&W mode it will go beter than have a B&W only camera. :-)

[I added a link for you. Note that caveat, though. --Mike]

I would deeply love an X-T1 in monochrome - something about the sensor is fantastic in B/w as it stands - I'm shooting an IR converted one now and loving the results.

I'd take a Q2 Mono tho, somehow I'd suffer through. If Fuji is true to themselves, however, they'll make a GFX mono, to followup on their IR GFX camera, only available certain parties because we're still really worried about weirdos trying to see through bathing suits with IR cameras...

Mike, I may have said this in the past but I too have lusted for a high mega pixel camera of some sort. Either a medium format one like the GFX 50 R or a z7-2 or something similar. Decided to go with the Nikon only because a wise man told me to go with the camera you have the lenses for rather than the one you need to purchase the lens? I thought it was good advice at the time and still do. The man will go nameless but you get the idea? Good luck with your camera lust. Be safe my friend. Eric

RE Odysseus:
Google maps says it is a 6 hr 57 min drive from Troy to Ithica but only 3 hours if you skip Phoenicia and Naples.

Fuji already has a monochrome camera - the X-T1. Just set the simulation to monochrome. If my wife tells me to set my X-T1 to monochrome and leave it there, that is just the same as buying a monochrome only camera.

I have both my Lumix LX-100 and GX-8 viewfinder & screen set for monochrome. Doesn't that give you the same benefit of seeing in B&W, if that's the goal, without the added expense?

OTOH, I would jump at an affordable (for a retired person) B&W-only camera, because then every pixel is in play without the interference of either a Bayer array, or in-camera sorting of the digital information.

I went out Ioc the way to get a new old stock of macbook 12 end of last year for its weight (.92kg). I went to Apple store 3 days ago and confirm air is too heavily. I had to wait for ipad to run macOS or Godet.

You want heavy my 2019 15” MacBook Pro ok. Can even play flight sim a bit.

Still awaiting.

Also after waiting for the stock of the Hasselblad new back which obviously all you tuber get a copy but cannot gina any in stock. Only one nasa black I know in one guy who hold it us$3000 more if I have to buy it.

After one year wait I just got a z50 with the two kit lens. Strangely after nearly 1 year of the old digital back and except trying photo protest whilst there still one, I finally do a bit non Hasselblad wmc photography.

I wonder just go out and picture instead of waiting for the price to drop, dream camera to appear or stock to have.

Light weight help, btw. (My last post is corrected wrongly by Apple. Guess it does not like me to promote an outdated computer the macbook 12”. Btw2 unfortunately I already have 2 macmini and arm Apple has to wait. But that seems very good unless you are outdated (use old software) or use wrong os (linux or windows).

Given that many folks believe that almost all modern cameras are sufficient, eg able to make excellent images when operated properly, why would someone deliberately choose to handicap one's options with a "monochrome" camera? I spent many years with black and white film and made a heavy investment in filters to modify, albeit imprecisely, the tonalities that the film "sees." I don't miss it a bit. Also, I have not seen visual evidence of the superiority of a monochrome sensor in a print, that's all that matters, the print. I believe it's an attempt to appeal to the person who's never satisfied with what he/she has. While I also believe that amateur photographers should have the toys they want and can afford, a waste is still a waste. It may be a mild case of the emperor's new clothes when these cameras are glorified. Interesting yes, realistic not at all.

I have found my Panasonic GX1 with the 20mm f1.7 lens to be my daily digital B&W shooter. The mono mode is just fine. A few tweaks in PS and it's perfect. Super light, reliable (I shouldn't have said that now it will crater lol) and cheap. It presents enough friction to make it interesting and slows me down. Just like shooting a "real" camera with film. And if I want I can use some of my other lenses that normally go on my GH5.

All I want, camera wise, is a LNIB Olympus Pen W, that came out 55 years ago. My income demographic is such that it would be out of reach, probably about $600, money that must be saved for home maintenance (just replaced the water heater for, yes, you guessed it, $600).
I’m sure the digital Fuji, with its 8,431 different features and configurations would make much larger, and highly detailed photographs, but with the Pen, I wouldn’t need instructions that, if printed, would weigh 4.5 pounds.
*All stats presented here pulled out of thin air* But, of course, the reader already knew that.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007