[BruceBanner]

Thanks for the video Eddy.
There is a Fuji camera that grabs my attention: the X100V, because the leaf shutter and internal ND filters.

I liked your thoughts about the backup camera. You decided on a super light solution that are just stored in your bag, just in case you need it. That is, you are not using the classic two cameras + two lenses in your events, but just your main camera. You talk about the XT30II but of course the reasoning is valid for other systems.

As a backup camera I think you have 3 options
1. Same as your main camera
2. Same brand but more 'budget' model
3. Other brand

I suppose option 1 is the ideal one, if you live on photography, you need it and can afford the cost. Two cameras, two lenses and you can cover any event without mounting or dismounting lenses. Backup camera with exactly the same controls, ergonomics... than main camera.
Option 3 I think it's not recommendable for obvious reasons.
I chose option 2 in my case, when I still had Pentax. At the beggining I used a double strap for my cameras, but it was a bit uncomfortable for me, so I 'evolved' to a simpler solution: main camera with a classic strap (peak design one) and for my backup camera I used a 'peak design clip' so this camera was at my left side attached to my belt. Not bad solution, cameras were accesible and they were not hanging.
This year I don't have a second camera. Well, I still had my K3-II that I grabbed with me, but it was just stored into a bag to use it just in case of a disaster. So I used just a camera and two prime lenses (I couldn't get the 24-120).

I'm not planning to buy another camera by now.

I agree about the importance of weight and simplifying equipment (as others have pointed). The lighter and smaller a camera is, the easier it is to take it with you.
I don't have the most compact system right now (by Fuji standards), but it's lighter than what I was carrying before (considering I have FF now), and that's something I really appreciate. As an example, Z6II+ Z40 = 876grams
What I still haven't found is a flash as good as the V1 but lighter. The fill flash part is what I need to simplify now, still searching...



There are a lot of rumous about a Z8 to be announced this month, others say that it will be a Z6/7 III, who knows.
I'm quite happy with the Z6II at the moment, I'm just 'collecting' lenses to cover wide angle and tele. I still have a bit of cash and I'm trying to decide what to do: new monitor, Z 35 f1.8, Z 24-120/4, Viltrox 20mm, or wait for a hypothetical 70-200/f4.

Regards.

I found a good solution to the problem of one expensive filter sharing among different lenses: H&Y Revorings. They work very well so far, and aren't expensive. You might want to check into them.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1602983-REG/h_y_filters_rs82_revoring...981&

As for the recommendation of carrying two cameras, I could not agree more. One ecosystem with similar ergonomics, and the ability to carry a spare lens that can be used with either one is simple and darn useful.

For myself I rarely bother carrying even the spare lens, making sure that each camera has a lens with a range not shared with the other before I leave. A more compact crop and a full-frame camera works wonderfully together, but others might opt for two of the same format or even two identical bodies if you can afford to do so. Avoiding field lens changes because you only have a single body with you has major upsides. It's faster shooting, less dust on the sensor, and less chance of damaging a lens when changing it out.

Get a backup, a cheap one will do.

Thanks for chiming in fellas.

I guess there is a slight difference between the term 'backup body' and 'second body'. I think with backup body we mean just that, if things go pear shaped we can still soldier on and get the job done with a backup camera. I use the term backup with strobes too, I own 2xV1, 2xtriggers, 2xAD200pros even though I will rarely crack out all 4 on a job, or even use two at a time, but the backup is there for which ever if things go south.

Second body I think means that the intent is to use the body along side, in fact with no seeming bias which body is used. I think a good example of this is some shooters that like the 24-70 on one body and the 70-200 on the other, feeling fairly well rounded out for the days event. But even then there will be lens swapping, a 50 or 85mm prime occasionally etc.

And then there are those that have worked up to using something incredibly liberating like just a 50mm prime on one body for the days shoot (example);

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

I used to do the 'second body' approach to my event work when I was using Pentax. If I could of afforded 2x K-1's I would have but alas my budget did not extend to that degree so made do with a K-1/KP combo. But with Pentax it felt a necessity because during certain times of the event I would choke on the buffer on one of the cameras, so I needed to give it a brief break and continue shooting with the other body even if that meant using a focal length that was possibly not the same or as ideal, I just needed to keep recording the moment till body one recovered.
Using Fuji (XT4 specifically) taught me I am not tethered to such an approach, I can continue documenting without a fps or buffer barrier. There is also something really liberating using one body, not having to be preoccupied with the second body dangling from a harness or being bumped and bashed by something, I could change my compositions more easily and lead to greater creativity for my work.

I have learned that when you gain more experience in weddings and event work you understand the times where shooting two bodies can be really advantageous, to have two different focal lengths to record the same moment is really great, but that doesn't mean it's a flow that exists all day long. After these rather intense sessions are over, pacing is slower and I have not found a moment where lens changing and using one body is really a problem or that critical moments are lost because of it. It becomes a trade off, in using one body and lens swapping you absolutely run the risk of missing a moment, but conversely using one body and one lens can put you in moments better also, and lead to lower fatigue, higher energy/enthusiasm, these things matter also for creativity and end results. If you have a good system for lens swapping you can also make it so that really its 5secs tops that you're missing out in, vs 10-20secs.

I was actually brand mixing to begin with, K-1 and XT4, it was actually not a bad combo. As long as you shoot RAW I found I could steer both files to looking consistent and cohesive. I decided to ditch the Pentax entirely when I learned I could actually get away a lot more with using the Fuji Jpgs. Fuji as a system I do not think works too well for two bodies and two zooms. ISO is Fuji's enemy and f2.8 on zooms is cutting it fine. I prefer to use primes where I am getting f1.4-2 at least, which then means lens swapping throughout, but at least the lenses themselves are typically light and very portable.

I'm pretty glad I am not that guy running an event with 2xDSLR's, a 70-200 and 24-70 as well as still a sling bag with 50 or 85mm prime and speedlites etc. Oof... that stuff is really fatiguing.

---------- Post added 08-16-22 at 09:09 AM ----------

Anyway, I just wanted to do this video because the XT30II seems to miss out on a lot of attention. Even today on a forum when someone asked for the cheapest Fujifilm camera that supports all the filmsims... it was hardly mentioned. XS10 was a favorite as well as XE4 (which actually might be the cheapest) but hardly an uttering for the XT30II, it seems to get omitted a lot for some reason.

Oh and X100V, make sure you watch this first, the wide open bokeh is a deal breaker for me;

https://youtu.be/b_Smp1bEXlY?t=626

[gatorguy]

I think we do the same thing Eddy. I always carry two cameras to an important event and would assume you do too. But I primarily rely on just one, again as you write you do too. That second is for those times the lens on my primary is too wide, or not wide enough, or would benefit from something different. I don't typically bother to carry a third lens, too much trouble to be changing lenses in a crowd or when action is going on. For the most part I decide on one camera and lens combo and that's what I lean on for most of a shoot. You're right, it's liberating and a lot more relaxing. We're on the same page.

But where you prefer JPEG I much prefer shooting raw and deciding on my processing direction once I've had a chance to review the entire shoot. Plus, I just like the entire PP experience. Sometimes what I envisioned beforehand gets replaced by an even better idea for crafting a series of images once it's all laid in front of me.

JPEG for fun shoots or quick social postings is something I'm not against, but for paid (or should be paid LOL) stuff I always do raw. We both have our very valid reasons, no right way or wrong way.

Love the video by the way.

[BruceBanner]

I think we do the same thing Eddy. I always carry two cameras to an important event and would assume you do too. But I primarily rely on just one, again as you write you do too. That second is for those times the lens on my primary is too wide, or not wide enough, or would benefit from something different For the most part I decide on one camera and lens combo and that's what I lean on for most of a shoot. You're right, it's liberating and a lot more relaxing, altho I much prefer shooting raw and deciding on my processing direction once I've had a chance to review the entire shoot.

Sometimes what I envisioned beforehand gets replaced by an even better idea for crafting a series of images once it's all laid in front of me. JPEG for fun shoots or quick social postings is something I'm not against, but for paid (or should be paid LOL) stuff I always do raw.

For me I no longer see a difference really in my work between professional/paid vs personal. It's a standard I want to meet for both. There was a time when I was just with Pentax that I tried to SOOC and PSOOC (lightly retouch Jpgs) but felt they always lacked and looked 'SOOCY' (but that was partly down to me not understanding and exploiting certain aspects).

My experience with Fuji taught me I could derive a certain look and standard that I I felt matched my own RAW interpretations straight out of camera or a lightly retouched Jpg. I could invite you to look at my Instagram or Flickr page where the SOOCs and PSOOCs sit among the RAWs and really there is no obvious tell-tale sign which is which. If you get to that standard I think then that matters, if my SOOCs were really obvious and seemingly lacking then I don't think I would care at all about Jpgs anymore. But alas that is not the case and I often get asked what LUT or Preset I used for this shot or that and actually none... it was a SOOC from Fuji or (PSOOC). Many have commented that Fuji seem to be the only brand that manages to portray a loot right out of camera that looks like it has visited LR and had a LUT or render applied, I tend to agree with that assessment.

But Fuji was a learning experience and it opened my eyes to how a 'recipe' can impact the overall image and I am pleased to report that taking such fundamental principles and applying to Pentax has also went a long way to producing a look that I am more than happy to have sit along side my RAW interpretations. So basically I was doing Pentax SOOCs/PSOOCs 'wrong' or poorly initially, now I can derive much better results.

What actually dictates the use of RAWs over Jpgs or vice versa really comes down to the brief and the available light. Events differ from one to the other, some I can get away with being a little 'edgy' with a rendering approach, others I need a far more dull/boring and flatter approach as the intent is for those images to be used standard uniformed publications (sitting along side other peoples work where it wouldn't be so stylized either if that makes sense).

If the light is difficult I may actually have to use the RAWs to fix things, its just quicker and less painful, but if the moons align I do love an event where some style can be stamped with authority and the use of Jpgs is fitting, it's a fantastic earner with minimal fuss, even operating LR is night and day difference as it whizzes through an album of 1000 Jpgs vs RAWs.

One thing I will say, sometimes I shoot a funky mono or whatever at the shoot and end up not using the Jpgs for reasons, but the actual shooting experience of being in mono can be incredibly helpful in choosing an exposure that will work for that shot, and when it comes to using RAWs I might often have the Jpg next to it and I am steering the RAW more towards the Jpg vibe with the benefits of the RAW perks, it's like I'm using the Jpgs like a piece of tracing paper or something.

[biz-engineer]

Many have commented that Fuji seem to be the only brand that manages to portray a loot right out of camera that looks like it has visited LR and had a LUT or render applied, I tend to agree with that assessment.

I like and I dislike the idea of fuji film simulations. While color profile can really contribute to make the most out of photographs, I don't like the idea that we must rely on a specific camera brand to get such color profiles. The day you want to change camera brand because you want a different hardware, how are you going to ensure continuity in your photographic work if color rendering is some of the value you deliver to your customers ? Jpeg styles is like proprietary lens mounts, it's an industry related thing and the evidence that the camera industry isn't well organized.... Look at OS standardization in smartphones, such standard OSes made it possible to have apps developed by anyone, and such openness increased utility for customers. I'd prefer to have standard color profile standard , such that as a professional and hobby photographer you could just install your own jpeg presets into any camera model of any brand and get consistent results for your customers regardless what camera you use. Using proprietary Fuji Jpeg for your work makes you depend on Fuji.

[surfar]

Using proprietary Fuji Jpeg for your work makes you depend on Fuji.

Or you can use your own recipes stored in camera for the look that you like.

[biz-engineer]

Or you can use your own recipes stored in camera for the look that you like.

really?

[Jonathan Mac]

I'd agree that the Fujifilm cameras are all good value considering the current market and that it's almost totally devoid of entry-level ILCs. I also agree that the X-T30 II gets little attention, I think because it's virtually the same price as the S10, which has IBIS, and the E4, which is very compact. It's a shame really as I would still buy the T30 II, given the choice of those three, since it has the traditional (fantastic) control scheme that Fujifilm is known for.

There aren't really any bad options with Fujifilm though and they all provide somewhere to use those great lenses.

[BruceBanner]

I like and I dislike the idea of fuji film simulations. While color profile can really contribute to make the most out of photographs, I don't like the idea that we must rely on a specific camera brand to get such color profiles. The day you want to change camera brand because you want a different hardware, how are you going to ensure continuity in your photographic work if color rendering is some of the value you deliver to your customers ? Jpeg styles is like proprietary lens mounts, it's an industry related thing and the evidence that the camera industry isn't well organized.... Look at OS standardization in smartphones, such standard OSes made it possible to have apps developed by anyone, and such openness increased utility for customers. I'd prefer to have standard color profile standard , such that as a professional and hobby photographer you could just install your own jpeg presets into any camera model of any brand and get consistent results for your customers regardless what camera you use. Using proprietary Fuji Jpeg for your work makes you depend on Fuji.

I don't really agree with this, it's going a bit over the top imo. It's like saying someone who shoots film isn't allowed to explore different film stocks and that somehow if they do they ruin their entire catalog and consistency lol. As I said, Fuji opened my eyes when it came to how their system worked, the huge backlog of recipes available for the user to choose from, but its not restricted to Fuji anymore. I have come up with a few of my own for Pentax that I enjoy and look over here!

https://fujixweekly.com/2022/08/15/3-more-nikon-z-film-simulation-recipes/

https://ricohrecipes.com/ricoh-gr-iii-recipes/

So yeh, you can do this in camera profiling with many other brands I'm sure. It's just another tool in the box, you don't have to use it if you don't like. You can also now get Lightroom Presets/Profiles that contain all the Pentax profiles that you can use on any brand camera, and same for Fuji filmsim profiles. You might have to pay for them but you could if you like shoot Classic Negative till the day you die across multiple brands, just that Fuji is the only one to let you do it in camera (thus far)... It won't be long till in camera options get even better for colour manipulation and that you can dial in Classic Negative on a Sony easily once the 'recipe' is shared, or like you say it will be something done on computer and imported into camera. Heck wasn't there a Zeiss camera with LR installed? The future is now!

I just find this a bit of a weird angle to take, like saying an artist can only use pink and blue paint, otherwise they ruin their reputation or client expectations if they stray away. Photographers are artists and should not feel tethered to any camera, brand, jpg, style. Like all things in life its fluid, go with the flow. I like Fuji for now, maybe in 10yrs I will be bored with classical rendering and want to seek out extremely clean and clinical rendering for which another brand may fulfill that need better.

---------- Post added 08-16-22 at 09:15 PM ----------

I'd agree that the Fujifilm cameras are all good value considering the current market and that it's almost totally devoid of entry-level ILCs. I also agree that the X-T30 II gets little attention, I think because it's virtually the same price as the S10, which has IBIS, and the E4, which is very compact. It's a shame really as I would still buy the T30 II, given the choice of those three, since it has the traditional (fantastic) control scheme that Fujifilm is known for.

There aren't really any bad options with Fujifilm though and they all provide somewhere to use those great lenses.

As my video stated, XT30II here is about $300AUD cheaper, what's the price comparison over your way?

[gatorguy]

As my video stated, XT30II here is about $300AUD cheaper, what's the price comparison over your way?

Compare FUJIFILM X-T30 II vs FUJIFILM X-S10 vs FUJIFILM X-E4

It looks like Aussie prices are pretty often a bit out-of-line with other regions

[biz-engineer]

I don't really agree with this, it's going a bit over the top imo. It's like saying someone who shoots film isn't allowed to explore different film stocks and that somehow if they do they ruin their entire catalog and consistency lol.

I obviously had that same thought, but we aren't neither going to work ridding a horse , nor limiting digital technology to the limits of film technology. Of course there is the retro appeal of film simulations, but simulations are what they are simulations and they actually don't quite look like the real film look was, what in Fuji film simulations is mostly in the name.

So yeh, you can do this in camera profiling with many other brands I'm sure. It's just another tool in the box, you don't have to use it if you don't like.

Can you load a Fuji Provia profile file into a Nikon Z7 camera and get the Fuji Provia Jpeg straight out of the Z7 ? Or can you load the Pentax Satobi profile file into an XT-4 and get Satobi Jpeg SOOCs as you shoot ? That were my questions.

[reh321]

I found a good solution to the problem of one expensive filter sharing among different lenses: H&Y Revorings. They work very well so far, and aren't expensive. You might want to check into them.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1602983-REG/h_y_filters_rs82_revoring...981&

As for the recommendation of carrying two cameras, I could not agree more. One ecosystem with similar ergonomics, and the ability to carry a spare lens that can be used with either one is simple and darn useful.

For myself I rarely bother carrying even the spare lens, making sure that each camera has a lens with a range not shared with the other before I leave. A more compact crop and a full-frame camera works wonderfully together, but others might opt for two of the same format or even two identical bodies if you can afford to do so. Avoiding field lens changes because you only have a single body with you has major upsides. It's faster shooting, less dust on the sensor, and less chance of damaging a lens when changing it out.
Of
Get a backup, a cheap one will do.

Each of our daughters hired a ‘pro’ for her wedding {one wedding in Jan 2019 and one in summer 2020}. The one in 2019 used a Nikon “FF” with a 70mm lens, and made it work by moving herself around. The 2020 wedding was a small affair of course, held outside on a deck with 10 guests. In each case I first introduced myself to the ‘pro’ and took photos for the family. The pro in 2019 stage managed, had each couple hesitate at a marked point so she could ‘do her thing’. I believe the pro in 2020 used a Canon camera with a zoom lens. In any case, each woman got by with a single camera, but I don’t know what she had in reserve.

When I was my sister-in-laws ‘official photographer’ in 1988, I showed up with the only two working cameras I owned, a Pentax “Super Program” and a Canon rangefinder camera, each loaded with a different.speed of film.

This is a hobby for me. I purchase only what I need, and try to keep everything within one brand, although I do have both K-mount and Q-mount lenses, although I suppose two mounts from two different manufacturers are the same idea.

[morenjavi]

So yeh, you can do this in camera profiling with many other brands I'm sure. It's just another tool in the box, you don't have to use it if you don't like. You can also now get Lightroom Presets/Profiles that contain all the Pentax profiles that you can use on any brand camera, and same for Fuji filmsim profiles.

Can you load a Fuji Provia profile file into a Nikon Z7 camera and get the Fuji Provia Jpeg straight out of the Z7 ?

I'm not sure if changes in contrast, saturation, tone, etc. can create a good profile simulating a Fuji or Kodak film. But I admit that I've barely played with that.

I got a set of LUTs from lutify.me (and others) time ago. There are dozens of LUTs but I just use some favourites for portraits, general landscapes, sunsets, etc. They work great with Nikon Z RAW files. Nikon of course have some profiles for JPEG and you can create new ones (there is an app just for creating profiles). I usually select the Standard or Landscape profile (with some touches). But, when I want something different, I just shoot using the Neutral or Flat profile, then later I apply some of my favourite LUTs, and it works for me. Yes I can modify camera profiles and create new ones, but I prefer the 'shoot neutral and apply some LUT later' method.
I have LUTs based on Fuji Provia and others, that I can use on a flat/neutral JPEG (or RAW), but whether the results are similar to a real Provia... I don't know. Well, I get some film look and I like it
So this is my approach to Provia look on a Z camera

[gatorguy]

I'm not sure if changes in contrast, saturation, tone, etc. can create a good profile simulating a Fuji or Kodak film. But I admit that I've barely played with that.

I have LUTs based on Fuji Provia and others, that I can use on a flat/neutral JPEG (or RAW), but whether the results are similar to a real Provia... I don't know. Well, I get some film look and I like it

I used DxO Filmpack for simulations which seem to be accurate representations for at least those films I'm familiar with. Maybe Eddy knows whether DxO and what his Fuji film emulations produce are similar, or one more accurate than the other.

[surfar]

really?

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

---------- Post added 08-17-22 at 08:34 AM ----------

It looks like Aussie prices are pretty often a bit out-of-line with other regions

They can be all over the place.Sometimes cheaper and sometimes more than the RRP that your link shows.

My mk 1 XT30 (2019)was only $ 60 less than my XS10,so it depends when one is looking to buy.The Mk2 T30 is exactly the same RRP as the mk1 was but it added the latest AF and extended the video recording time limits.They were the only 2 significant updates to me.However Fuji says there were 87!

[morenjavi]

I used DxO Filmpack for simulations which seem to be accurate representations for at least those films I'm familiar with. Maybe Eddy knows whether DxO and what his Fuji film emulations produce are similar, or one more accurate than the other.

Lutify LUTs are only 'inspired by', I think they don't look for any accuracy. I found a good value in these LUTs because they were compatible with Capture One, Affinity Photo and Davinci Resolve.