Fuji New firmware for X-A1, X-M1, X-E1, X-Pro1, X-E2, X100S, XF27mm, XF18mm

[alessandro]

Manual + Auto-ISO = control over shutter and aperture without using any menus, and I have control over 2/3rds of the exposure triangle. If exposure comp worked in that scenario, I could adjust the ISO up and down with the exposure comp dial also, meaning all 3 sides of the triangle are accessible from hardware controls with no menu diving.

Nicely said. Someone's still thinking the old film way, while now we have three variables and one nice dial to trick the light-meter. Fix two variables, have the third auto-set, allow compensation. It works BUT when you fix A and S and this is a miss.

 

[Ambler]

Sorry, posted in error

 

[Felix]

Right - what John said

Manual + Auto-ISO = control over shutter and aperture without using any menus, and I have control over 2/3rds of the exposure triangle. If exposure comp worked in that scenario, I could adjust the ISO up and down with the exposure comp dial also, meaning all 3 sides of the triangle are accessible from hardware controls with no menu diving.

Very nice explanation, thanks John & jloden.

It sounds like this should be really easy to implement since A & S are fixed. (+1 = suggested ISO doubled, -1 = suggested ISO halved)
This gives me hope that we will see it if a future firmware update.

One problem (only minor, for me at least) I have found with the new 3.10 firmware on the X-Pro1:
If in Auto ISO you set a base ISO of 400 and then point the camera directly at a light source the software will attempt to exceed the maximum shutter speed 1/4000, decide this is impossible, and complain.
It will not reduce ISO to 200 and shutter speed to say, 1/3200 and take a properly exposed shot.

I can't see any benefit in this, especially since the setting under Auto ISO is called 'Default Sensitivity' not 'Min. Sensitivity'. 'Default' suggests to me a starting position which the camera will attempt to achieve but may alter if absolutely necessary.

Anyway, I really like the camera with this update.
However, I am hoping that there will be a new model in January with the following features:

• longer eye-point than X-Pro1 (I have a real problem with this)
• Faster Focusing
• altered body shape (like OM-D) to provide improved grip
• PDAF sensor like X-E2, with 'split-prism' manual focus assist
• Faster processing like X-E2
• View mode button still present unlike the X-E2
• full metal construction like X-Pro1
• weather sealed body

If this model is announced, even if it doesn't have the optical view-finder, then I will upgrade.
Since the X-Pro1 was announced at CES on 9th January 2012, I am eagerly anticipating an announcement 3 weeks from today.

 

[flysurfer]

Default Sensitivity is the lower ISO limit, Max. Sensitivity is the upper ISO limit. Just like it always was in the X100, X100S, X20, X-M1, X-A1 and X-E2 (and now, finally, also in the X-E1 and X-Pro1).

The classic X100 isn't offering a Default Sensitivity menu item, instead it's using the standard ISO setting (the one applies when Auto-ISO is switched off) as the lower Auto-ISO boundery. The expanded Auto-ISO menu came about when Auto-ISO was integrated in the normal ISO menu by popular request.

 

[Isoterica]

First time updating Firmware. X100s. Seems like all is well thus far. Had to tinker and rename image file number because I could. Now I do wish you could put copyright info in the files like you can with the GR.

 

[faberryman]

One problem (only minor, for me at least) I have found with the new 3.10 firmware on the X-Pro1:
If in Auto ISO you set a base ISO of 400 and then point the camera directly at a light source the software will attempt to exceed the maximum shutter speed 1/4000, decide this is impossible, and complain. It will not reduce ISO to 200 and shutter speed to say, 1/3200 and take a properly exposed shot. I can't see any benefit in this, especially since the setting under Auto ISO is called 'Default Sensitivity' not 'Min. Sensitivity'. 'Default' suggests to me a starting position which the camera will attempt to achieve but may alter if absolutely necessary.

Why not just set the default ISO to 200? Is there a situation where you would prefer a minimum ISO of 400 rather than 200?

 

[romi.gilles]

is there something wrong with the v2.10 update page for the x-e1? when i go to the firmware page, it shows: v2.10, then when i click 'agree' to begin download, it takes me to the previous v2.00 update page.

edit: just tried it from my phone just to see what would happen. when it worked, fine, i knew i just had to clear my cache in chome on my macbook.

 

[ean10775]

Am I correct that there have now been two firmware updates that added features for the X-E1 and X-Pro1? (from what I recall, the first update improved AF performance and added focus peaking among other things and the second update dealt with Auto ISO and exposure preview issues) If so is anyone aware of a summary that shows all the features/functionalities for both updates? I have divested both an X-E1 and an X100S in part due to shortcomings that affected the way I like to shoot that from what I understand appear to have been remedied by these two firmware updates, but I want to be sure before I jump back into the Fuji waters.

 

[entropic remnants]

Am I correct that there have now been two firmware updates that added features for the X-E1 and X-Pro1? (from what I recall, the first update improved AF performance and added focus peaking among other things and the second update dealt with Auto ISO and exposure preview issues) If so is anyone aware of a summary that shows all the features/functionalities for both updates? I have divested both an X-E1 and an X100S in part due to shortcomings that affected the way I like to shoot that from what I understand appear to have been remedied by these two firmware updates, but I want to be sure before I jump back into the Fuji waters.

The X-E1 was improved but it's still no E-M5 or whatever. X-E2 is much more responsive.

 

[cwolffensperger]

And... If you upgrade: make a real good check on your presets (custom settings), because you'll lose them after the upgrade. But it very worthwhile to do so!

 

[ean10775]

The X-E1 was improved but it's still no E-M5 or whatever. X-E2 is much more responsive.

Well, since I'm planning on picking up a body exclusively for use with MF lenses, the AF performance is of little importance to me. My issues were surrounding how you selected the AF point, auto ISO and the histogram/ exposure preview in manual. I agree the the X-E2 is surely the better camera, but seeing as X-E1 bodies can now be had for $450 I don't think it's worth paying double that for features I wouldn't likely use.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk