All New, All Different Blog

Welcome to the new blog!

After giving it much thought I decided to redesign the blog from the ground up. Now there’s more space for larger images and text, making the content much more readable and easier to sift through. I love how images are presented, large and in charge on bigger monitors or even on mobile. It makes me want to share more than before.

I’m also back to the usual blog schedule of posting once every Friday. Of course, I’ll be occassionally posting on off days just for fun or if I have a random thing I wish to share.

A goal I’ve set for myself is to have about 100 posts on the blog within a year. I’m committed to writing on a consistent basis so this goal will help keep me on track.

As outlined in this post, the direction of the blog will still focus predominantly on my work, career news, projects I’m working on, and general things that interest me. Think of the blog as more of a glimpse into my thoughts and life as an artist than your typical photography blog.

Being a person of numerous interests, I’m in the midst of rebranding myself as an artist. Before I was “just” a photographer, but I find the moniker a bit limiting now. You’ll notice it’s not “Jamiya Wilson Photography” but “Jamiya Wilson Studio”. ” Studio” in the name is akin to an umbrella that houses all of my creative endeavors. If I write a book, direct a film, etc. simply being “Jamiya Wilson Photography” wouldn’t suffice.

Let’s just say I’m “mainly” or “mostly” a photographer. Marketing says I should say “Multifaceted artist” but that just sounds egotistic.

Yeah, I’ll talk about cameras here and there, but this isn’t the place for gear reviews. There are plenty of sites that serve that purpose and will do a much better job than I ever could. We have enough of that already. Don’t you want something different?

So if you like my work or just want to keep up with what I’ve been up to, this is the place for you.

Hope you enjoy!

— Jamiya, Multifaceted artist

Thoughts on the Fujifilm GFX 100 II Announcement

It isn’t cheap. But quality rarely is.

Oh look, a gear post! I’ll post one every now and then, but not as much as in the past. Moving on.

I’ve very impressed with the new GFX 100 II. Upfront, I must stress that Fuji should tell all of their ambassadors and influencers with the camera to refer to it as the “GFX 100 Mark II” or even “GFX 100 II”. Not the god awful “GFX 100 The Second” as Fujifilm seems to want to call it. Please get marketing on this branding blunder asap. They’ll probably adjust the spoken name since everyone seems inclined to call it the GFX 100 Mark II anyway. Sort of like Nike just going with what the people want (Nike-e) instead of the actual pronunciation (Nike).

I digress.

The 100 Mark II is pretty much everything I want in a medium format system. The 100S was on its way, but still felt like a compromise in key areas. No battery grip, lower resolution viewfinder than the GFX100, slow shot-to-shot speed, SD Cards instead of CF Express. The size and form-factor were great, but I felt like the overall camera was being held back in attempt to not encroach on the sales of its big brother.

Enter the GFX 100 Mark II and Fujifilm has righted a lot of the wrongs.

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

The design is beautiful. Very modern, sleek, and refined compared to previous models. Good job Fuji.

What I Loved

• The New EVF. I raved about the 9.44m Dot EVF in the Sony A1 and I’m so glad to see one added to the GFX. Once you look through one of these, every other EVF seems subpar. It really makes you feel immersed in the image and is more reminiscent of using a classic viewfinder found on say a DSLR or film camera. I also like the round eyecup they used versus the more pill shaped eyecup found on their GFX 100S. The rounder design just feels much more comfortable in my opinion.

• Top LCD design. The 45-degree slope is a very clever and an innovative design choice. Apple-esque even. It’s a small thing, but something I’m surprised other manufacturers haven’t thought of. Just a small incline that makes reading your important data easier. Brilliant.

• Increased FPS. The previous GFX cameras offered shot-to-shot FPS from 3fps-5fps. Not exactly speed demons but tolerable given the format. The 100 Mark II gets a speed bump up to 8fps. That puts it almost on par with my beloved Panasonic S1R which I find more than fast enough for what I shoot. This alone makes the camera a worthwhile upgrade. I shoot fast and more speed is always welcome. Slow and deliberate be damned.

• Overall body design. The original GFX 100 was a brilliant technical achievement but I wouldn’t call it a looker. With its bulky brutalist design, it wasn’t winning any beauty contests. The 100 Mark II is sleeker, smaller, and more supple looking. It looks more organic then the machine like nature of its predecessor. The original had that odd gray finish which, ahem, made the camera look unfinished. The grip was also thinner than expected which gave the camera odd ergonomics for vertical shooting. One element that sets the Hasselblad X2D apart is its beautiful design. The 100 Mark II isn’t quite on par with the Hasselblad, but it’s a much more pleasing on the eye than prior GFX bodies.

• CF Express Type B support. Supporting larger capacity and faster cards is a plus. I welcome this addition with excitement as I have several of these cards that I used with my Panasonic S1R. Not having to buy additional memory cards is a boon. That money can go towards lenses or shoots.

• Optional Battery grip. As someone who primarily shoots portraits, I love battery grips. Improved ergonomics are always welcome and one of the biggest selling points for using a grip. Extended battery life is just the icing on the cake. Being able to shoot vertically in a more comfortable position alleviates a lot of unnecessary stress on the body. I think we’re so caught up in tech specs that we forget ergonomics and how it impacts our physical health. Our eyes get older, joints get stiff, and muscles get sore from repeated use. Putting your arm in that awkward vertical shooting position when using a camera without a grip is terrible for your body. Especially with heavy setups and for extended periods. But I get it, grips are heavy. I primarily use mine in the studio and go without it on location. Still, a welcome option for Fuji’s new camera.

• SSD Recording. While I wish they would have gone with an integrated SSD design like Hasselblad’s X2D, being able to record to an external hard drive is great. I could see this being a very useful feature for video, but surprisingly for stills shooters. Imagine being in the field, on top of some icy mountain shooting landscapes, and you can record right to an SSD. An extra layer of data redundancy is never a bad thing.

There are countless other great features, little quality of life things that I appreciate but those are the ones that stood out most. The price seems right and they added enough new features to warrant an upgrade.

Things I Didn’t Like

• Same Flash Sync Speed. I’m no engineer but it would have been greet to see a bump in the flash sync speed. I’m not sure how they would achieve this, but come on. 1/125th of a second is still rather limiting but I’ve gotten used to it on the previous GFX bodies. Just gotta live with it I guess.

• No RAW compression options. Fuji still doesn’t have a smaller RAW file option. It would be great to be able to capture a 50MP Raw file in the camera for times when you don’t need/want 100MP’s. Maybe that will come eventually but I think Fuji sees it as an option that would potentially cannibalize sales of their other cameras.

• EVF Blackout. Form what I’ve gathered, it doesn’t look particularly faster than its predecessor. They’re touting double the speed of the camera so a larger speed bump for the EVF blackout would have been very much appreciated. That’s one of the downsides of shooting with the system. Although I do find shooting in burst mode alleviates many of the blackout concerns, but it would be nice for it to be blackout free.

My Biggest Gripe

Nothing to do with the camera, but the coverage from the industry. One of the reasons I’ve never been interested in being sponsored by a big company or being an ambassador for a brand is the fact your hands are tied. You don’t have the same freedom of expression as an artist because you have to be mindful about your relationship with the brand. Maybe you like a camera or even just the features from another camera brand? That’s great. You probably can’t talk about it. They send you a new camera to “review” during the announcement period and you’re not allowed to comment critically on any of the features. What results is this odd scenario where the brand affiliate has to tip toe around giving basic information least they ruin their relationship with the brand.

I watched several videos on the GFX 100 II. And, besides many using the dumb moniker “Fuji GFX 100 The Second” (bleh), they also seemed to be directed in what they could say. You can tell because nearly all of them had the same talking points. Like they were all reading from the same press release sounding script. Most had a disclaimer like, “This is a preproduction model of the camera so things may change before release.” Probably to quell any fears about features or performance. The release is 2-weeks away from the announcement mind you, so I doubt the pre-production model will be significantly different than the release model. It usually isn’t.

The whole thing just felt weird, overly controlled, and veiled in secrecy. I shudder to think of the NDA’s they must sign and how their hands are tied. And I guarantee most of the people with their dumb goofy Youtuber smiles, “102 Megapixels!”, won’t actually buy the camera. They just want to praise it so YOU will. Spend YOUR money. I’m going to write more extensively on this subject in a future post, but I don’t think these sort of fluffy, criticism free videos are helpful to brands.

If you stand by your product, it should hold up to criticism. Help your customers make an informed decision so they make the right purchase for them. Not just to improve your bottom line.

Below is one video I found that was no-nonsense and honest in it’s breakdown on the appeal of the camera. I love how he starts off not wanting it, but by the end he’s convinced himself. I know your pain.

Credit: Christian Santiago via YouTube

Bias Against Medium Format

Another note about coverage of the camera is this seemingly inherent bias many reviewers have against medium format. No one is saying you have to shoot medium format or use it in that oddly specific use case you have. It actually, I know this is going to sound crazy, may not be for you. You’re a sports shooter? Well duh there are much better options for your use case than medium format. You want to make films? There are better options. You want smaller? Again, there are better options. Even in the medium format space their are options that can accommodate different shooting styles.

Incoming tangent: Fast forward to 4:29. Chris and Jordan are my guys but…

His take on the GFX 100 II is dumb. Yes I said dumb.
He says(rather smugly):
“At no point was I thinking, man I wish this shot faster.”
“I don’t need it to shoot faster, I just need it to look nicer!”
“Medium format is used for product photography, portraits in the studio, and landscapes.”

Bless your heart. Ye of little sense and knowledge. So there’s no need for the camera to shoot faster? No possible need for that? No one shoots medium format on location? Outdoors? Natural settings? No?! So you don’t want increased functionality and versatility for medium format? None of that would be beneficial? You just care about image quality? Then why don’t you shoot large format film. Or Phase One’s, $53,000 XF IQ4.

It’s dismissive, ignorant, and dumb takes like these that gain traction in the photo community and are parroted by commenters with little experience with or knowledge of the format. It’s best to know what you’re talking about before you chime in in such a matter-of-factly way of speaking.

Back to our regularly scheduled program.

I think comparing the format from a technical perspective to full-frame is utter folly. Smaller formats will always possess inherent advantages while larger formats will as well. Both will have trade-offs. Cameras like the Sony A1 can do a blistering 30fps in stills shooting. Its specialty is speed and being an all rounder. Compared to Sony’s own A7RV which is their “ultimate image quality” option. Reviewers understand this as evidenced by them making the same comparisons in their videos. However, when it comes to medium format they don’t give it the same level of grace. They expect the GFX 100 II to be as fast as the A1 or pocketable like a Ricoh GR.

Watch their reviews on a Leica camera and listen as they salivate over every feature. But get this, the Leica is heavier, almost as expensive(then lenses ARE more expensive), and the GFX beats it in many direct comparisons. Autofocus being one of them. They don’t compare the Leica SL2, a full-frame mirrorless camera, to Sony’s A1. No, they cover for it and say, “You’re paying for that Leica experience. You’re someone who loves the art of photography.” They review medium format and its met with skepticism, “Who is this camera for?”.

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

Credit: CameraSize.com

Size wise, it’s about the same size as the Nikon Z8, Panasonic S1R, and Leica SL2. All of which are well reviewed and well received cameras. Speed wise it’s on par with Leica and Panasonic. Autofocus wise, it beats both. Image quality wise, it beats them all. Sure the other systems may be more mature and have more lenses, but how many lenses do you need? The GFX has plenty of native options to cover most needs. So what’s the issue? Why does its existence upset you so? Why compare it to full frame and not Hasselblad or Phase One? I’ve yet to see a single video from a big photography outlet directly comparing the GFX 100II against any of Hasselblad or Phase One’s offerings. You know, actual medium format systems.

Granted Fuji didn’t do themselves any favors with that “Beyond Full Frame” marketing campaign with the launch of the 100S in 2021. But ever since Fuji launched the original GFX 50S years ago, I feel they’ve both revitalized medium format and activated the defenses of those who seem hellbent on a mission to protect their precious full-frame cameras. Why? Some childhood emotional attachment you have with a format? Or because maybe those other companies cut you a fatter check? Your bias is showing and it ain’t pretty.

Cameras in Limbo

Lately I’ve been mulling over my existing camera system. What to keep, what to get rid of. I have too many options and that can be paralyzing at times. I’m about to head out the door and it’s, “Which camera should I bring? Which lens? Both? One? All? Argh!” At times I’m as indecisive as a 5-year old in a candy store. Over the summer I started going out more and doing street photography. I’ve tried different cameras and finally settled on the Fuji X-S20. It’s small enough to be unobtrusive and versatile enough to capture fast action or day-to-day life stuff. The video quality is also great, but I have no plans to use it in that capacity as of yet.

With my full-frame Panasonics, I’ve just never enjoyed carrying them around. None of them. Not even the smaller S5/S5II’s. The size and weight of both the bodies and available lenses don’t make them practical for discreet street photography. And they’re too bulky for everyday stuff.

However, sometimes I want better image quality for posed portraits when I’m out. I love taking candids but there are times I see someone sitting or standing in interesting light and it would make for a better portrait than candid photograph. For those times, I want to reach for a larger format camera with stellar image quality. I considered my S1R, but again, I don’t enjoy carrying it. And, to me, the system doesn’t have a compact but uncompromising portrait lens option. Sigma has the 85mm DG DN but it’s distorted beyond belief and relies heavily on either in-camera or raw software correction. Leica has the amazing 90mm but it’s $5,000. What is a photographer to do?

Then it dawned on me. I could carry my GFX. Duh! It’s roughly the same size as the S1R, but lighter and with better image quality. It’s also small enough to fit in my bag alongside my X-S20. Slap the 80mm f/1.7 or new 55mm f/1.7 on there and I’m golden.

So that’s my plan, to carry my GFX for street portraits. My S1R’s are now on the auction block.

I’m even considering JUST shooting medium format for client work as well. But then that may not be practical for the odd event or lifestyle shoot I need to photograph. So maybe I’ll just be shooting predominantly with the GFX. Additionally, while I appreciate the new GFX 100 II’s video features, I’d still pick the the S5IIX as my video option. It’s just a much more practical system. I also prefer Panasonic’s “look” in the realm of video.

My proposed kit would look like this:

• Fuji GFX 100S II (main camera)

• Fuji X-S20 (street photography, day-to-day ‘fun’ camera)

• S5IIX (video camera, backup full frame camera for the GFX)

To my chagrin, all three use different lenses. There’s always a tradeoff ya know. But I really like this kit. All my bases are covered.

In regards to a backup, I can’t justify buying two GFX 100 II bodies, so I’ll use my S5IIX as a backup/alternative camera. I have the GFX 50S II, but will be selling that one to fund the 100 Mark II purchase.

In Conclusion

I’m excited for this release. I think this one moves the GFX system into a very compelling space for a lot of people sitting on the fence. Before, the slow speed was off-putting(especially for me). Or the size. And while it’s still a big system compared to smaller mirrorless systems like Sony’s Alpha series, if you value image quality, you’re probably willing to deal with the heft. The price will make it unobtainable for most and in that price range, many will also consider the value proposition and pass with arguments like, “For that price I could buy two Sony A7 IV’s!” or “For that price, I could buy a used car!”.

No, this camera isn’t meant for your day-to-day, hobbyist shooter. Or the trendy shooter who just posts to Instagram. If they have disposable income, maybe. I see it built for the professional or the photo enthusiast who enjoys the experience of photography. Whether or not you should upgrade from your previous GFX is personal preference. Image quality wise, I don’t think it will be much different from the original 100 or 100S. But if the improved ergonomics, speed, ports, video features, and autofocus capability are what you’ve been looking for, then look no further.

I’m getting one.

Physical Media and The Film That Made Me A Photographer

War Photographer. A brilliant film from beginning to end. Highly recommended.

In 2006, I was exposed to a brilliant documentary entitled War Photographer. The film covered the work, life, and career of famed war photographer James Nachtwey. Having little to no knowledge about the masters of photography at that point, Nachtwey was completely foreign to me. But from the opening sequence of the documentary, I found myself having immense respect and appreciation for both the man and his work. Check out the trailer below.

The level of dedication Nachtwey has to his work, the people depicted in these war torn scenes, and the sensitivity in which he approached it all left a deep impression on me. It was then, I chose to be a photographer. I’ve always admired those with a zen like self-discipline to their craft or an endeavor they deem important. David Goggins comes to mind. Being laser focused in a pursuit or dedicating your life to some admirable goal is a quality I’ve always respected. Nachtwey’s documentary lit a fire under me that still burns to this day.

Recently I wanted to revisit the documentary; with my last viewing being in the early 2010’s. It would be nice to see it again with a more educated eye gained from years of experience as a photographer and just growth as a human being. But alas, it’s no where to be found on streaming websites. And that’s the challenge with streaming. While it offers us vast convenience and an incredible amount of new and old entertainment to consume, a lot of older and obscure films run the risk of being lost to time. Our culture has gotten away from physical media for a variety of reasons, but recently I’ve started to see the value physical media still holds.

After viewing the brilliant Oppenheimer in theaters, I considered what it would be like viewing at home. As a photographer, it’s often about image quality. We don’t want to obscure our precious images with low quality optics such as bad lenses or even UV filters. The quality of the image matters. With streaming, due to bandwidth limitations, you undoubtedly lose a lot from the original high quality footage. The shadows aren’t as deep, the colors aren’t as vivid, and the image isn’t as pristine as the original. So a film like Oppenheimer won’t look as good while streaming as it would on the 4K Blu-Ray that will release alongside it. The Blu-Ray can hold more data and isn’t limited by an internet connection. Most people won’t care, but for the enthusiast, or the image maker, it matters.

While I couldn’t find War Photographer on streaming, I could still purchase the DVD on Amazon, which I did. Buying a DVD in 2023 seems rather odd. Almost like buying a cassette tape in 2010. Admittedly, I haven’t bought an actual DVD since prior to 2010. I was one of those people who saw where the industry was going and jumped on the streaming bandwagon. How short-sighted and naive I was.

This DVD will become the first in a growing collection of films, documentaries, and tv shows I wish to have as a sort of personal archive. I want to experience these works in their highest quality and also have access to view them when they’re not available on streaming services. The industry pushes us to streaming and touts the benefits of convenience and abundance of options, but what about works that aren’t available? What about old movies or tv shows? Or even modern films known for their visual or audio fidelity? What’s being done to ensure older media stays accessible to a new generation of viewers?

Disney recently announced that Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 will be its last physical media release. I expect much of the industry to follow suit with declining physical media sales yet manufacturing costs remain largely the same. Why sell physical media when no ones buying it? I get it. But it’s still sad and somewhat worrisome. Hopefully the industry is able to course correct and offer some sort of premium streaming option that delivers content in the best possible quality for those who meet the bandwidth requirements and/or willing to pay for the service. Or maybe an enterprising company will make an effort to archive a lot of older media to make available via streaming. I’m just brainstorming as I know the process will be complicated and mired in litigation over copyright, residuals, etc.

But in an age where we have access to near “sci-fi film” level technology, there’s no reason for us to lose so many wonderful films, tv shows, and documentaries due to laziness and bureaucracy.

A Fork Is Not A Knife

I’ve spoken about the importance of acquiring gear for a specific purpose and I think it’s often something we overlook during the purchasing phase. Blown away by specs or trying to get the most bang for our buck, it’s easy to expect one item to do it all. A swiss army knife if you will.

We only have to look to our common dining utensils, the fork and the knife, to understand the principle of specificity. The fork is for picking, lifting, and holding food. The knife is for cutting. It can be used in other ways, but its primary and best use is cutting. The fork is perhaps the more versatile of the two as if you were eating a piece of meat or vegetable, such as asparagus, you can pick it up and bite it like the caveman you are. But when you really need to cut something, the knife is the best choice.

Much discussion has occurred around camera formats in the digital age, namely due to sensor size. Medium format, Full frame, APSC, Micro four thirds, etc. Mirrorless. Mirrored. Or even the cameras within each of those formats. From full frame to smaller sensor formats there are a plethora of options available. Cameras for speed, cameras for image quality, cameras for video, cameras for fun. Some with interchangeable lenses. Some with fixed lenses. Some that are small and nimble. Some that are large and slow.

Budget is often a concern, so I do understand the importance of value. You want to squeeze as much use out of a single camera as possible. You want it to be able to handle any particular job you throw at it. But alas, this is often met by hitting the proverbial brick wall. In some way, it’s not quite suited for the task you’ve set for it. Like the fork, it may be versatile, but it isn’t a knife.

My advice? From the onset, think of your task. Can the fork work? Or do you need a knife? Maybe get the fork for now then add a knife later.

Food for thought. Terrible pun.

Oppenheimer

Oppenheimer is a tour de force of filmmaking. A three-hour epic that captivates from beginning to end. It should be required viewing in film schools. No obtuse, pretentious camera angles or overwrought, hideous color grading or fast cuts all over the place. It’s wonderfully nuanced with lots of attention paid to the pace of the film. Sometimes you experience art whether it be a film, an album, a drawing, etc. and you feel that what you’re experiencing was created with love and care. You can tell that Christopher Nolan loved every minute of the making this film. It shows on the screen. It’s like his own personal little love letter to cinema. Perhaps even a thank you note, lavishing cinema with his appreciation for making him the person he is.

The credits appeared and I sat in my seat in silence. I slowly got up and exited the theater in awe, pondering what I had just saw. I found myself struggling to find the words to critique it. I couldn’t find a single negative thing to say about the film. I daresay it’s perfect (to me).

It checks every conceivable box for greatness:

• Captivating, nuanced, and emotionally stirring performances from the star-studded cast? Check.

• A well written and an utterly fascinating story? Check.

• Cinematography that’s breathtakingly beautiful yet purposeful? Check.

• Sound design that gives weight, tension, and realism to the action and emotions onscreen? Check.

• Editing that pushes the pace of the film without feeling like whiplash or a slog? Check.

• Living up to the hype? Check. And check.

I really can’t fault the film. Bravo Nolan. Bravo. This is your masterpiece.

Oppenheimer is why I love films. Why I went to film school. Why I love going to the theater even if it’s waned in popularity in the past decade. It’s Best Picture and it’s not even close. My guess is Killers of the Flower Moon will win(for…reasons), but Oppenheimer deserves it most.

I’ll be seeing it a few more times during it’s theatrical window. Partly to study the film from a filmmaking perspective and also to enjoy the story again as a member of the audience.

I can’t recommend it enough.

Bravo.