Tag: camera comparison

Classic Chrome Meets Portra 160: Evaluating the Pentax ME Super and Fujifilm X100F

Posted on Posted in Black and White Photography, Film Photography, Landscape Photography, Northumberland, Travel photography, United KingdomTagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 3 Comments

Let’s talk about two of my favorite cameras—the Fujifilm X100F and the Pentax ME Super. While these cameras belong to entirely different eras of photography, they share a surprising similarity in size and portability. I’ve used both extensively, and today, I want to compare their unique qualities without turning it into a clichéd “film vs. digital” debate.

Photography enthusiasts often find themselves in one of two camps: those who champion the convenience and immediacy of digital, and the purists who swear by the timelessness of film. But if you’ve followed this blog for a while, you’ll know I don’t see things that way. Instead, I value what each format brings to the table, and more importantly, how both contribute to the experience of photography.

A Tale of Two Cameras

For me, photography is more than just the final image—it’s about the journey of capturing it. Any Lomography fan will agree: the process is as important as the outcome. When I shoot with the Fujifilm X100F, I appreciate the immediate feedback of seeing the image on the screen and knowing right away what I’ve captured. But with the Pentax ME Super, it’s a different experience. I have a rough idea of what the film will deliver, but the magic isn’t fully revealed until the film is developed. That anticipation is part of the charm.

For this comparison, I’ve chosen photographs from Northumberland. Its moody, windswept landscapes—places like Alnmouth and the Northumbrian moors—present the perfect canvas for both film and digital. The X100F’s Classic Chrome simulation delivers a retro, muted look, while Kodak Portra 160 film, shot through the Pentax, brings warmth and richness to the tones.

The Fujifilm X100F

The X100F has often been called a bridge between the analogue and digital worlds, and I tend to agree. It’s packed with modern features like autofocus and an electronic viewfinder (EVF), but the controls are refreshingly tactile, with dedicated dials for aperture, shutter speed, and ISO. For anyone with a background in film photography, this setup feels familiar and intuitive.

What sets the X100F apart for me, though, is its Classic Chrome film simulation. It offers a subdued color palette that echoes old film stock, perfect when I want a slightly desaturated, vintage aesthetic. Unlike some over-the-top digital filters, Classic Chrome feels organic and subtle—bringing out details in the shadows without overwhelming the shot with contrast.

The X100F Photos

The Pentax ME Super

On the other hand, the Pentax ME Super is all about slowing down. There’s no EVF, no digital screen, and definitely no autofocus. Instead, you rely on a split-prism focusing system and aperture-priority mode. It forces you to be deliberate with each shot, a process that I find incredibly satisfying.

You’ll often hear film photographers talk about being more “in the moment” when shooting on film, and that’s exactly how I feel with the ME Super. The process of carefully composing each shot, setting exposure manually, and waiting for the film to be developed encourages patience and thoughtfulness.

For this outing, I paired the ME Super with Kodak Portra 160, a film that’s become known for its natural skin tones and soft, warm colors. Paired with the 50mm f/1.7 lens, this combination creates images with that unmistakable film character—shallow depth of field, soft highlights, and rich colors.

Lenses and Sensor Size

One of the most noticeable technical differences between these two cameras is their lenses and sensor sizes. The X100F features a 35mm equivalent f/2.0 fixed lens, while I usually use the 50mm f/1.7 on the Pentax. On the sensor front, the X100F has an APS-C crop sensor, giving it a narrower field of view compared to the full-frame 35mm film in the Pentax.

This technical difference goes beyond field of view. The Pentax ME Super has fixed ISO based on the film I choose, so I need to plan ahead for the lighting conditions I’ll be working in. In contrast, the X100F allows me to adjust ISO on the fly, providing flexibility in rapidly changing environments. This is something digital photographers have come to rely on, and it’s undeniably convenient when shooting in variable light.

The Pentax ME Super photos

Comparing the Images

Now, the big question: which is better, the Pentax ME Super or the Fujifilm X100F? Honestly, neither. They’re different tools for different purposes. Whether you’re drawn to the organic feel of film or the convenience of digital, both formats offer something unique. And that’s the beauty of photography—there’s no one-size-fits-all approach.

The slideshow features shots from both cameras. As you look at them, you might favour one look over the other. The film shots have a warmth and texture that digital sometimes struggles to replicate, while the digital photos are sharp, detailed, and offer instant gratification. But ultimately, this comes down to personal preference, not a matter of one being objectively better.

Final Thoughts

At the end of the day, a camera is just a tool for capturing a scene in a particular way. As long as the final image is pleasing to the eye, I’d say the job is done. So don’t limit yourself to just one format—if you haven’t tried shooting film, give it a go. If you’re a film photographer who’s hesitant to try digital, maybe the X100F will ease that transition with its analogue-like feel.

More than anything, I encourage you to enjoy the process, whether it’s with film, digital, or both. Get out there, take your time, and remember that photography isn’t just about the images you capture—it’s about the experience.

If you’d like to go deeper on the Pentax ME Super specifically, I’ve written a full dedicated review: Why the Pentax ME Super Is the Perfect First Film Camera (Even in 2026).

Post Scriptum: if you’re new here, this blog is mostly camera reviews, photography tips, and whatever I got up to that week with a camera in hand. Have a poke around, and if you’ve got questions about either of these two, drop them in the comments.

Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2026): Still Worth Buying?

Posted on Posted in Bikes, Black and White Photography, Camera reviews, France, Landscape Photography, Nantes Photography, Paris, Street Photography, Travel photographyTagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 9 Comments

The Fujifilm X-T2 is pushing ten years old now, but it’s still a capable, good-looking camera that holds its own against plenty of newer options. Here’s an honest assessment from someone who’s used it alongside film cameras in everyday life, based in Nantes.

The X100F made me do it

It’s no secret to regular readers of this blog that I have a deep fondness, bordering on obsession, for my Fujifilm X100F. It’s a great little camera that gets me excited every time I take it out of the bag. So what does that have to do with the X-T2, Dear Reader? Well, they’re both made by Fuji, they both have an X in the name, and I have a deep affection for a nice cup of tea. Not the same T, I know. Ah well.

How the two compare

I bought the X-T2 as a complement to the X100F, not a replacement, so it’s worth talking about how they actually differ. Both use the same 24 megapixel sensor with an anti-aliasing filter and the same ISO range, 200 to 128000. Both have excellent viewfinders. The X100F’s screen is fixed, the X-T2’s tilts, which matters more than you’d think for waist-level shots. The X100F shoots at 8fps, the X-T2 up to 14fps, and for video the X100F is limited to Full HD while the X-T2 does 4K and can hit 120fps for slow motion. Both have built-in wireless. Weight-wise there’s barely anything in it: 469g for the X100F, 507g for the X-T2.

The real difference is the lens. The X100F is stuck with its fixed 23mm f/2.0 (35mm equivalent), which is no bad thing, but the X-T2 takes the whole X-mount range. That’s the entire reason to own both. The X-T2 also has weather sealing, which the X100F doesn’t.

Why bother with an older body

Because I could, and because it used the same batteries and the same film simulations I already loved on the X100F, even if there were fewer of them back then. That was more than enough for me.

My first lens for it was the 16mm f/2.8 (24mm equivalent), the natural partner to the X100F’s 35mm equivalent. Later I found TTArtisan and 7Artisans, two Chinese firms making cheap manual focus lenses for X-mount. I’ve now got their 35mm f/1.2 (50mm equivalent), 58mm f/1.4 (85mm equivalent), and a 7mm f/2.8 fisheye from each, all for a fraction of the price of the autofocus Fuji glass. The only concession I made to Fuji’s own lenses was the 18-55mm f/2.8 kit zoom, which has image stabilisation built in and earns its keep for that reason alone.

Is it still worth it

Buying secondhand made the decision easy. It doesn’t have as many megapixels as the newer X-T5, and it doesn’t match its spec sheet either, but for someone shooting as an amateur, and I count myself one, that doesn’t matter nearly as much as camera shops would have you believe. Twenty-four megapixels prints comfortably at 20 by 30 inches, which is bigger than most people will ever need.

I’ve just checked mpb.com and X-T2 bodies are going for 487 to 729 euros depending on condition. Lenses range from around 104 euros for a 7Artisans 35mm f/1.2 up to 279 to 340 euros for the Fuji 16mm f/2.8. Considerably cheaper than buying into a current model, and the results aren’t far off.

Ten years on, the X-T2 still holds up: excellent image quality, classic dial-based handling, weather sealing, and access to the whole X-mount lens range. It suits street work and landscapes equally well. It’s never going to out-spec a current camera, and it doesn’t need to. If you want good results without paying current prices, the used market probably has a decent X-T2 waiting for you.

café tables in the street
woman walking near bikes
dog
my daughter
People sitting down eating
tramlines in Nantes
Bike
Sergio
street lights in the Place Graslina
bar de quartier
street crossing in Nanates
building in Nantes
Art School in Nantes
the bird nest
the Île de Nantes
bikes
TGV in Paris Montparnasse
Winged Victory of Samothrace
Winged Victory of Samothrace
The Louvre
the Eiffel Tower
Fujifilm X-T2 mirrorless camera with interchangeable lens

Post script

This camera also shoots 4K video, and I use it at work for training videos for new staff. It’s lighter than my Canon 6D Mark II and gives me a picture style I like straight out of camera. It has no in-body stabilisation, but I use it on a tripod for that work anyway, and if I reach for the 18-55mm kit lens there’s stabilisation in the lens itself.

I’ll try to find you an excerpt of the latest video.

And here it is…

I want it, but do I really need it?

Posted on Posted in Black and White Photography, Camera reviews, ReportageTagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 12 Comments

The camera gear industry is a powerful beast and it tries to convince us that this piece of kit, that is conveniently in stock, will help you become that photographer that you are destined to be.  Be that in magazines, be that in youtube influencer videos that “try out the camera” that the manufacturer has just lent us to show you what it’s like.  I’ve watched loads of these videos especially when thinking about the kit I wanted to buy.  Come on in and I’ll make sure you have the best camera possible, and the best possible lens.  What’s your budget?  OK, I’m sure we can work something out.  What kind of photography do you want to do?  Well, you’ll need this, and this, and this, etc.

That nice man in the shop will be more than happy to take your money and sell a high end camera that will be a thing of beauty.  But look at the title again.  “I want it, but do I really need it?”  You have fallen into their trap.  I’m not trying to put down these sales people, and their wealth of knowledge, but know that there are other options out there.

I’m going to dare say it.  You don’t need the latest and greatest equipment to take great photos.  Instead prioritise value, and mindful shooting, over gear acquisition.  Think about boys and toys.  I get exactly the same feeling as you when I enter a camera store.  I want it all.  Of course I do.  Who doesn’t?  But,what would my wife say?  What would my bank manager say?  What would reason tell me instead of letting my emotions get the better of me?  Can I really justify this acquisition?  Do I really need it, or is there a less onerous solution?  I know.  I’ve just pissed on your bonfire, but it’s time for a reality check here…

So what can I do about that?  You can realise that there is a huge market of second hand gear out there.  I have taken this route in the past and have no regrets.  Yes, I did it my way…

Where do you go to discover all these hidden gems?  There is of course E-Bay, that huge online auction site which I used to acquire the majority of my film cameras.  When I was a customer of the site the film cameras were fairly cheap, since those pesky hipsters hadn’t cottoned on to the fact that film photography is cool.  So yes, each purchase was a gamble, but I had less money to lose, and the return would be greater.  The old cameras were simpler, the lenses were great, and there are still lots of examples of reasonable cameras out there.  Would I use it for digital?  Probably not.  I’m not really a gambling man, and don’t have a huge wad of cash that I am willing to possibly waste.

But E-Bay is not the only option.  There are various online sites such as mpb.com that have a very good reputation, and have tested each piece of equipment that they sell.  They give you an honest appraisal of the piece of kit and are honest about the state of said piece of kit.  They guarantee each purchase, and have a generous returns policy.  I might consider using it if I were interested in buying some new kit.  But at the moment I’m not.  There are also second hand areas of our beloved camera shops that will have used gear.  

When buying second hand, you will generally be spending less money, or at worst, getting more kit for your hard earned cash.  Older models of camera might not be as super duper as the latest models that look so sexy in that shop window, but for what most us mere mortals need, they are more than adequate.   You really have to look at which features are most important to you.  Thanks to you, there will be one less camera going to landfill.

Talking of features, let’s talk about the 80/20 rule.  For 80% of your photographs, you will use about 20% of your gear, and features on your camera. I urge you to identify the essential features for your type of photography (e.g., autofocus, image stabilisation, dynamic range), and maybe avoid spending money on features or lenses that you won’t use frequently.  Shutter speed when doing sports photography, or high dynamic range for landscape photography.  Is an F1.2 lens really what you need, or will F2.0 pr F2.8 still get the effect you want?

I’m going to talk about the X100F (again!) and compare it to the latest version from Fujifilm, the X100V and the X100VI

FeatureFujifilm X100FFujifilm X100VFujifilm X100VI
Sensor24.3MP APS-C X-Trans CMOS III26.1MP APS-C X-Trans CMOS 440.2MP APS-C X-Trans CMOS 5 HR Sensor
Lens23mm f/2 (35mm equivalent)23mm f/2 (35mm equivalent) with improved optics23mm f/2 (35mm equivalent) with further improved optics
Autofocus91-point hybrid autofocus425-point hybrid autofocus with improved face/eye detection425-point hybrid autofocus with further improved face/eye detection and subject tracking
ViewfinderHybrid viewfinder (optical/electronic)Hybrid viewfinder (optical/electronic) with improved EVFHybrid viewfinder (optical/electronic) with a larger and higher resolution EVF
Screen3-inch fixed LCD3-inch tilting touchscreen3-inch tilting touchscreen
Image StabilisationN/AN/A6-Stop In-Body Image Stabilization
Video1080p up to 60fps4K up to 30fps6.2K (cropped) and 4K up to 30fps
Weather SealingNoYesYes
Price (approx.)€800-€1000 (used)€1300-€1500 (used)€1700-€1800 (new)

The X100VI wins on paper everywhere it matters: more resolution, a proper autofocus system, a bigger viewfinder, real video, weather sealing. The X100V sits in between on all of it, and costs less. The X100F is the oldest and least capable by the spec sheet, and it’s also the cheapest by a wide margin secondhand.

So which one do you actually need? If you’re shooting video seriously or need every autofocus point you can get, fine, go newer. But if you’re mostly doing what I do with mine — street shots, travel, the odd portrait — the X100F still does the job, and does it for a fraction of the price. I bought mine used and it’s more camera than I’ve ever needed. Sometimes the “worse” spec sheet is the right answer.

If you are a professional, then I think the same logic will apply.  Even though a nice kit is an investment you need to consider the returns on your investment?  Is the purchase justified and will it bring more work for you?  Will it expand my offer enough?  If you are an amateur, then you can spend any amount of money you want, but if you could do more, with less, wouldn’t that be an appealing option? Have I not managed to convince you yet? Look at the film archives… And look at the pictures from the X100F…