Fujifilm Half

[Alan Hewitt Photo]

I’ve been working with FUJIFILM UK at an event in the UK this weekend and it’s the first time I’ve seen and had a play with a Fujifilm Half.

It’s an entertaining little camera, I’ve heard it described as a gimmick and I understand why but I think that’s a bit harsh. It’s actually very engaging and fun. Of course it’s not a serious photographic tool but nor is it trying to be. It’s not about perfection and that is exactly its charm. There are lots of aspects of the camera that take a lot of getting used to, off centre optical view finder, vertical orientation in normal handholding position are just two of many. Restricting image playback is fun, three of used it wandering around a wildlife reserve limiting ourselves to 36 exposures and reviewed our shots via the app when we returned. Good entertainment from a photographic nerd point of view!

All of my photos were aesthetically utter horsesh!t to be fair but I really had no idea that all my shots I thought I was taking in vertical were horizontal and vice versa.

If this was cheaper, I’d seriously consider using it as a BTS fun camera on our safaris.













--
Wildlife photographer | Private Safari Guide | Podcaster
FUJIFILM UK Ambassador.
www.alanhewittphotography.co.uk
www.africanphotographysafaris.com
FACEBOOK: AlanHewittPhotography
INSTA & TIKTOK: alanhewittphoto
YouTube: @AlanHewittPhotography

 

[Morris0]

I got to play with one when it was first announced. It's yesterday's camera today and a lot of fun to play with. That said, it's not for me as for the same convenience I can pop out my phone.

Morris

 

[RWN Photo]

If the sensor wasn't turn 90 degrees, ir might be a better camera to get for playing. Otherwise, it is pretty silly in the orientation department.

 

[biza43]

If the sensor wasn't turn 90 degrees, ir might be a better camera to get for playing. Otherwise, it is pretty silly in the orientation department.

From what I see everyday, people using phone shoot with it vertically. Both for photos and video. So, it is not a silly decision, it is based on the practices that potential customers already have.

 

[Paulmorgan]

If the sensor wasn't turn 90 degrees, ir might be a better camera to get for playing. Otherwise, it is pretty silly in the orientation department.

From what I see everyday, people using phone shoot with it vertically. Both for photos and video. So, it is not a silly decision, it is based on the practices that potential customers already have.

You can also shoot horizontal with an x half just like you can with a mobile.

Also the x half has a 1 inch sensor, sill larger than many phones, even flagship phones.

"The average size for a mobile phone sensor is around 1/2.55 inches, though many high-end devices use larger sensors, such as 1/1.31-inch or the 1-inch type found in flagship models. These sizes are measured using a somewhat confusing notation, where a "1-inch" sensor is actually smaller than one inch diagonally, and are much smaller than DSLR sensors"

1" sensors in mobile phones are believe it or not smaller than 1" sensors in camera`s (sizes are measured differently for phones)

The picture bellow was taken on a cheap mobile phone, the X Half should be able to manage stuff like this and do an even better Job.

I like the X half myself, I have one ordered.



.

--
Hoka Hey

 

[John Gellings]

If the sensor wasn't turn 90 degrees, ir might be a better camera to get for playing. Otherwise, it is pretty silly in the orientation department.

My god, that´s hard to do...turning the camera a full 90 degrees? You never take a vertical photo with a regular camera ever?

I actually photograph more verticals than horizontals and I do not find it silly at all.

 

[biza43]

If the sensor wasn't turn 90 degrees, ir might be a better camera to get for playing. Otherwise, it is pretty silly in the orientation department.

From what I see everyday, people using phone shoot with it vertically. Both for photos and video. So, it is not a silly decision, it is based on the practices that potential customers already have.

You can also shoot horizontal with an x half just like you can with a mobile.

Also the x half has a 1 inch sensor, sill larger than many phones, even flagship phones.

"The average size for a mobile phone sensor is around 1/2.55 inches, though many high-end devices use larger sensors, such as 1/1.31-inch or the 1-inch type found in flagship models. These sizes are measured using a somewhat confusing notation, where a "1-inch" sensor is actually smaller than one inch diagonally, and are much smaller than DSLR sensors"

1" sensors in mobile phones are believe it or not smaller than 1" sensors in camera`s (sizes are measured differently for phones)

The picture bellow was taken on a cheap mobile phone, the X Half should be able to manage stuff like this and do an even better Job.

I like the X half myself, I have one ordered.



.

I know that is possible to shoot in landscape mode... I was replying to the comment above that says that the orientation chosen by Fuji for the half was silly.

--
www.paulobizarro.com

PauloBizarroPHOTOBLOG – Some of my photography

 

[Paulmorgan]

If the sensor wasn't turn 90 degrees, ir might be a better camera to get for playing. Otherwise, it is pretty silly in the orientation department.

From what I see everyday, people using phone shoot with it vertically. Both for photos and video. So, it is not a silly decision, it is based on the practices that potential customers already have.

You can also shoot horizontal with an x half just like you can with a mobile.

Also the x half has a 1 inch sensor, sill larger than many phones, even flagship phones.

"The average size for a mobile phone sensor is around 1/2.55 inches, though many high-end devices use larger sensors, such as 1/1.31-inch or the 1-inch type found in flagship models. These sizes are measured using a somewhat confusing notation, where a "1-inch" sensor is actually smaller than one inch diagonally, and are much smaller than DSLR sensors"

1" sensors in mobile phones are believe it or not smaller than 1" sensors in camera`s (sizes are measured differently for phones)

The picture bellow was taken on a cheap mobile phone, the X Half should be able to manage stuff like this and do an even better Job.

I like the X half myself, I have one ordered.



.

I know that is possible to shoot in landscape mode... I was replying to the comment above that says that the orientation chosen by Fuji for the half was silly.

My X half is being delivered tomorrow, I`ve still not yet held one but it is tiny and extremely easy to turn 90`

The case and lens shade were delivered today, it really does show how tiny the little package is.





I guess some people don't understand what a Half frame is



--
Hoka Hey

 

[RWN Photo]

If the sensor wasn't turn 90 degrees, ir might be a better camera to get for playing. Otherwise, it is pretty silly in the orientation department.

My god, that´s hard to do...turning the camera a full 90 degrees? You never take a vertical photo with a regular camera ever?

I actually photograph more verticals than horizontals and I do not find it silly at all.

Okay, let me clarify...

When the camera is in a landscape orientation, is the image going to be in landscape orientation?

When the camera is turn a FULL 90 degrees, is the image now portrait orientation?

Yeah, I thought so

 

[Paulmorgan]

If the sensor wasn't turn 90 degrees, ir might be a better camera to get for playing. Otherwise, it is pretty silly in the orientation department.

My god, that´s hard to do...turning the camera a full 90 degrees? You never take a vertical photo with a regular camera ever?

I actually photograph more verticals than horizontals and I do not find it silly at all.

Okay, let me clarify...

When the camera is in a landscape orientation, is the image going to be in landscape orientation?

Not if it's half frame

When the camera is turn a FULL 90 degrees, is the image now portrait orientation?

Yeah, I thought so

Again, not if it's half frame.

You need to understand how half frame effects a 35mm negative, remember these things go back a long way.

 

[John Gellings]

If the sensor wasn't turn 90 degrees, ir might be a better camera to get for playing. Otherwise, it is pretty silly in the orientation department.

My god, that´s hard to do...turning the camera a full 90 degrees? You never take a vertical photo with a regular camera ever?

I actually photograph more verticals than horizontals and I do not find it silly at all.

Okay, let me clarify...

When the camera is in a landscape orientation, is the image going to be in landscape orientation?

No

When the camera is turn a FULL 90 degrees, is the image now portrait orientation?

No

Yeah, I thought so

You thought what in stating the obvious?

 

[John Gellings]

If the sensor wasn't turn 90 degrees, ir might be a better camera to get for playing. Otherwise, it is pretty silly in the orientation department.

My god, that´s hard to do...turning the camera a full 90 degrees? You never take a vertical photo with a regular camera ever?

I actually photograph more verticals than horizontals and I do not find it silly at all.

Okay, let me clarify...

When the camera is in a landscape orientation, is the image going to be in landscape orientation?

Not if it's half frame

When the camera is turn a FULL 90 degrees, is the image now portrait orientation?

Yeah, I thought so

Again, not if it's half frame.

You need to understand how half frame effects a 35mm negative, remember these things go back a long way.

Also, in its medium format 645 cameras they used the vertical orientation.

 

[RWN Photo]

If the sensor wasn't turn 90 degrees, ir might be a better camera to get for playing. Otherwise, it is pretty silly in the orientation department.

My god, that´s hard to do...turning the camera a full 90 degrees? You never take a vertical photo with a regular camera ever?

I actually photograph more verticals than horizontals and I do not find it silly at all.

Okay, let me clarify...

When the camera is in a landscape orientation, is the image going to be in landscape orientation?

Not if it's half frame

When the camera is turn a FULL 90 degrees, is the image now portrait orientation?

Yeah, I thought so

Again, not if it's half frame.

You need to understand how half frame effects a 35mm negative, remember these things go back a long way.

I'm well aware of how half frame works, even on film.

To me, it is silly. To you, it is not silly, and you probably love yours, if you have one.

Also to me, if Fuji would stick to revamping their existing lineup instead of trying to roll out all kinds of different "retro" cameras, they might be better off.

How many times in the last few years has anyone posted "Boy, I wish Fuji would make a new half frame camera", versus how many have posted "Where the heck is the X-Pro4"...

But a silly, sensor oriented different than any other camera ticks someone at Fuji's boxes, and they just had to roll that thing out, instead of, oh, maybe spending some time and effort to make their 40-150 f/2.8 lens 40% lighter and maybe shorter (like they did the 16-55 f/2.8), or rework their 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 to have the same diet. But, nope.

Oh, and sorry to bang on about your beloved and defendable camera manufacturer...

 

[RWN Photo]

If the sensor wasn't turn 90 degrees, ir might be a better camera to get for playing. Otherwise, it is pretty silly in the orientation department.

My god, that´s hard to do...turning the camera a full 90 degrees? You never take a vertical photo with a regular camera ever?

I actually photograph more verticals than horizontals and I do not find it silly at all.

Okay, let me clarify...

When the camera is in a landscape orientation, is the image going to be in landscape orientation?

No

When the camera is turn a FULL 90 degrees, is the image now portrait orientation?

No

Yeah, I thought so

You thought what in stating the obvious?

That it is SILLY.... you have an opinion worth nothing to me, and I have one worth nothing to you.

 

[John Gellings]

Also to me, if Fuji would stick to revamping their existing lineup instead of trying to roll out all kinds of different "retro" cameras, they might be better off.

Better off how? They are a company that keeps gaining market share by making cameras that no-one else makes. How can you be mad at Fuji for "Retro" cameras when that always been its DNA with X cameras.

How many times in the last few years has anyone posted "Boy, I wish Fuji would make a new half frame camera", versus how many have posted "Where the heck is the X-Pro4"...

Well, Fuji made a camera that nobody was thinking about and that is why they should be celebrated. I'll never understand why people think companies should only make me too products. The X-Pro4 will eventually come, but it is very strange that they've waited this long. The X-Pro3 screen issue was traumatic for the company I think.

But a silly, sensor oriented different than any other camera ticks someone at Fuji's boxes, and they just had to roll that thing out,

Yes, they did... and it worked. You do not like it, but people do.

instead of, oh, maybe spending some time and effort to make their 40-150 f/2.8 lens 40% lighter and maybe shorter (like they did the 16-55 f/2.8), or rework their 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 to have the same diet. But, nope.

We get it, you like birding. Fuji probably isn´t the company for you.

Oh, and sorry to bang on about your beloved and defendable camera manufacturer...

It is no problem, but to be so upset over one damn camera that did something a little different from the norm is silly.

 

[John Gellings]

If the sensor wasn't turn 90 degrees, ir might be a better camera to get for playing. Otherwise, it is pretty silly in the orientation department.

My god, that´s hard to do...turning the camera a full 90 degrees? You never take a vertical photo with a regular camera ever?

I actually photograph more verticals than horizontals and I do not find it silly at all.

Okay, let me clarify...

When the camera is in a landscape orientation, is the image going to be in landscape orientation?

No

When the camera is turn a FULL 90 degrees, is the image now portrait orientation?

No

Yeah, I thought so

You thought what in stating the obvious?

That it is SILLY.... you have an opinion worth nothing to me, and I have one worth nothing to you.

My goodness... you have a fantastic day.

 

[RWN Photo]

Also to me, if Fuji would stick to revamping their existing lineup instead of trying to roll out all kinds of different "retro" cameras, they might be better off.

Better off how? They are a company that keeps gaining market share by making cameras that no-one else makes. How can you be mad at Fuji for "Retro" cameras when that always been its DNA with X cameras.

How many times in the last few years has anyone posted "Boy, I wish Fuji would make a new half frame camera", versus how many have posted "Where the heck is the X-Pro4"...

Well, Fuji made a camera that nobody was thinking about and that is why they should be celebrated. I'll never understand why people think companies should only make me too products. The X-Pro4 will eventually come, but it is very strange that they've waited this long. The X-Pro3 screen issue was traumatic for the company I think.

But a silly, sensor oriented different than any other camera ticks someone at Fuji's boxes, and they just had to roll that thing out,

Yes, they did... and it worked. You do not like it, but people do.

instead of, oh, maybe spending some time and effort to make their 40-150 f/2.8 lens 40% lighter and maybe shorter (like they did the 16-55 f/2.8), or rework their 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 to have the same diet. But, nope.

We get it, you like birding. Fuji probably isn´t the company for you.

Oh, and sorry to bang on about your beloved and defendable camera manufacturer...

It is no problem, but to be so upset over one damn camera that did something a little different from the norm is silly.

Maybe you need to go fact check something. First, I'm not upset over one damn camera. I said it was silly, and you pulled out a compressor and blew a whole bunch of air in to it.

Also, I'm not a birder. I don't take pictures or birds. I din't think I have a picture of a bird, either one 2 feet away, or 50 feet away.

And I don't have some Fuji zooms, because they are bloated. And I'm not the only one that thinks that. 2024 and 2025, Fuji has released or announced 8 cameras... and 6 lenses. YMMV on that.

 

[John Gellings]

Also to me, if Fuji would stick to revamping their existing lineup instead of trying to roll out all kinds of different "retro" cameras, they might be better off.

Better off how? They are a company that keeps gaining market share by making cameras that no-one else makes. How can you be mad at Fuji for "Retro" cameras when that always been its DNA with X cameras.

How many times in the last few years has anyone posted "Boy, I wish Fuji would make a new half frame camera", versus how many have posted "Where the heck is the X-Pro4"...

Well, Fuji made a camera that nobody was thinking about and that is why they should be celebrated. I'll never understand why people think companies should only make me too products. The X-Pro4 will eventually come, but it is very strange that they've waited this long. The X-Pro3 screen issue was traumatic for the company I think.

But a silly, sensor oriented different than any other camera ticks someone at Fuji's boxes, and they just had to roll that thing out,

Yes, they did... and it worked. You do not like it, but people do.

instead of, oh, maybe spending some time and effort to make their 40-150 f/2.8 lens 40% lighter and maybe shorter (like they did the 16-55 f/2.8), or rework their 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 to have the same diet. But, nope.

We get it, you like birding. Fuji probably isn´t the company for you.

Oh, and sorry to bang on about your beloved and defendable camera manufacturer...

It is no problem, but to be so upset over one damn camera that did something a little different from the norm is silly.

Maybe you need to go fact check something. First, I'm not upset over one damn camera. I said it was silly,

Uhm, silly / upset, still blabbing about a camera you do not care about.

and you pulled out a compressor and blew a whole bunch of air in to it.

What an analogy...

Also, I'm not a birder. I don't take pictures or birds. I din't think I have a picture of a bird, either one 2 feet away, or 50 feet away.

Uh huh

And I don't have some Fuji zooms, because they are bloated. And I'm not the only one that thinks that. 2024 and 2025, Fuji has released or announced 8 cameras... and 6 lenses. YMMV on that.

Huh

 

[Jeff Biscuits]

First, I'm not upset over one damn camera. I said it was silly, and you pulled out a compressor and blew a whole bunch of air in to it.

FWIW, as a third party reading this, that’s not how it comes across to me.

It’s a camera that you don’t want to buy. That’s all. Nothing more, nothing less. All you have to do is not buy it, and everything will be fine.

I’ve never quite worked out why some people feel obliged to tell the world how emphatically they don’t understand the existence of a camera that plenty of other people clearly like. What is there to be gained—by anyone—from that?

 

[Sam in Hawaii]

First, I'm not upset over one damn camera. I said it was silly, and you pulled out a compressor and blew a whole bunch of air in to it.

FWIW, as a third party reading this, that’s not how it comes across to me.

It’s a camera that you don’t want to buy. That’s all. Nothing more, nothing less. All you have to do is not buy it, and everything will be fine.

I’ve never quite worked out why some people feel obliged to tell the world how emphatically they don’t understand the existence of a camera that plenty of other people clearly like. What is there to be gained—by anyone—from that?

See also, thread about xt30 iii.