Fuji Fuji X-Pro 1 hands on and samples

For the Pixel Peepers from RAW/JPEGS:

Fujifilm X-Pro1 Photos | PhotographyBLOG

I do like the 18mm shot at F2.0 of the purple flowers.

If it's the same shot I'm looking at, I agree, it's really nice, however some of the flower shots look rather out of focus or soft to me. This may be the shooters intent to get a soft effect. Personally, I like things sharp. I have high hopes for the Xpro1 but I've seen some shots early on that disappoint,(but I take plenty of those myself:cool:) but lately many of the samples I've seen look fantastic! Can't wait for more reviews to come out!
 
Dynamic range was good although I'm yet to come to terms with some of the advanced settings.

I'm very skeptical about reviewers who still have to come to terms with the settings of the camera they have published a review about. I guess the translation of the statement I quoted is: "I have no clue what I'm doing or writing about, but that didn't stop me from publishing this review." ;)

But it's refreshing that at least he's admitting it.
 
I flew to Singapore today and took the PP set to Siloso beach tonight, taking some snaps in really bad, terrible, mixed light at high ISO (mostly 3200). I tried the 60mm and found the AF very fast and accurate. I used DR100, AF-S and the OVF.

RAW-Workflow:
6818455182_88c71c3f33_b.jpg

DSCF0070 by ricopress, on Flickr

JPEG-Workflow:
6964651435_f35fe62d2a_b.jpg

DSCF0212 by ricopress, on Flickr

Two more RAW examples:

6964577591_bec95a1332_b.jpg

DSCF0086 by ricopress, on Flickr

6964578791_7aba01c9eb_b.jpg

DSCF0114 by ricopress, on Flickr

Hopefully, there'll soon be good LR4 support for the XP1.
 
I flew to Singapore today and took the PP set to Siloso beach tonight, taking some snaps in really bad, terrible, mixed light at high ISO (mostly 3200). I tried the 60mm and found the AF very fast and accurate. I used DR100, AF-S and the OVF.

RAW-Workflow:
6818455182_88c71c3f33_b.jpg

DSCF0070 by ricopress, on Flickr

JPEG-Workflow:
6964651435_f35fe62d2a_b.jpg

DSCF0212 by ricopress, on Flickr

Two more RAW examples:

6964577591_bec95a1332_b.jpg

DSCF0086 by ricopress, on Flickr

6964578791_7aba01c9eb_b.jpg

DSCF0114 by ricopress, on Flickr

Hopefully, there'll soon be good LR4 support for the XP1.

WOW! These are excellent! Were you shooting in shutter priority?
 
Three excellent real world photos from a documentary photographer:

Daily Inspiration #324 by Jon Cook – Three from the X-Pro 1 | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

This has the Leica crowd on Steve Huff's blog going bananas:

"Lastly, I don’t want to turn this into a review but I know people are anxious to hear about the gear. I’m not a reviewer, a pixel peeper, or even much of a gear head but I really love this camera in the short time I’ve had it. Previously I shot with the Leica M9 and M-glass for nearly two years (virtually every photo on my website was taken with the Leica) and I have to say I prefer the file quality of the little Fuji hands down"

Haha. I just went over and left a few words of wisdom to the Leica fanboys. It's quite amusing!
 

Thanks for the link Stanley! Good write up by the author.

Even the 25600 looks really good!!! Definitely better than the 25600 from the Pentax K-5, which was one of the best APS-C cameras when it came to high ISO. I'm a little weary of samples of high ISO taken under good lighting conditions though. I'd like to have seen what shutter speed the tester was getting with ISO 25600. Plus, I'm not sure if the crops were actual size crops (which is a must for a pixel peeper like me).

XP1 is looking good though!!
 
You have a a very pleasant mean streak, sir. ;)

LOL! I'm probably the nicest "mean" guy in the world! :) I have a love/hate relationship with Steve's site. I love it, but sometimes, some of the Leica fanboys there can get annoying. I've been flamed a number of times by some posters for daring to use non-Leica lenses on the M9! LOL!
 
LOL! I'm probably the nicest "mean" guy in the world! :) I have a love/hate relationship with Steve's site. I love it, but sometimes, some of the Leica fanboys there can get annoying. I've been flamed a number of times by some posters for daring to use non-Leica lenses on the M9! LOL!

I know what you mean about Steve's site. I now only skim the comments, looking for the sane ones, whcih are often really useful.
 
Nice reviews by both Daisuki and DigitalRev. I just skimmed through the Daisuki one though. Didn't watch all of it. Highlights for me where the following comments:

By Daisuki

- AF speed with XP1 using OVF is slower than X100
- AF speed is the same as X100 when using EVF
- AF speed is faster than GF1 + 20/1.7 (which was no speed champ, but at least faster than the EP1/2 and EPL1)
- lenses come with hood and also a separate cap that goes over hood (rare to have a hood cap, unless it's a Leica)


By Kai

- High ISO on the XP1 is better than 5DMk2 (that is pretty awesome for APS-c)

What neither discussed is the AF accuracy. I don't expect any camera to give me lightning quick low light auto focus speed. BUT, what I hate is when a camera tells me I have AF lock (whether in good or bad lighting) and then the focus ends up off anyway!! Super annoying when that happens. And it happens with the X100. So hopefully, that doesn't happen with the XP1.
 
I've only seen a couple of DigiialRev vids but I do like that chap's style.

Anyway - it's a big ol' lump of a camera ... I'm sure if it handles well that wouldn't be a problem, but there's no doubt it's a bit of a chubster
 
I cracked up laughing when Daisuki introduced the X100 so matter of factly as "the X100 which I love and hate very much". I don't actually hate it at all, but given the mixed feelings so many have about it, I thought he summed it up pretty well.

Kai really got down the bottom line well for me. After going through the amazing image quality and and various shooting pros and cons, he factored in the price and concluded something along the lines of 'a camera that anyone would enjoy seeing and playing with, but I'm not sure how many people will actually want to LIVE with it'. I'd very much like to play with one and, if the price was something I could justify for less than my be-all, end-all camera, I'd love to own one. But I doubt it would ever be my primary camera and the price is just too high for something that wouldn't be. If I'd USE it like that, it would be worth the money to me, but I know how I shoot and I wouldn't use it enough to justify that kind of money. I'm just not enough of a viewfinder kind of guy...

I will get the OMD but I fully agree that I don't expect the IQ, in low light or anywhere else, to come close to the X-Pro 1. But it will actually be able to get the shot in most of the same low light situations and the IQ will be good enough for the way I end up treating 95% of my photographs anyway, so it should suit my needs better. And I already own the lenses - not a small factor!

But someday, someday, someday. The X-Pro will bring out those additional wide angle lenses that I live for and in future bodies might hit a mix of features that I'd personally find more useful and maybe at a lower price point. And I could see myself in that system someday.

-Ray
 
IMO, the pricing of the XP1 isn't bad at $1700 as a starting point. The body price will come down after the initial launch. If I recall correctly, the Pentax K-5 was about $1500-1600 at launch with a crappy kit lens. The D7000 was about $1400. The 7D was also around that price. If all the Fuji lenses end up being priced at about $600, and assuming that they all have good optics, then the pricing is quite fair. The PL25/1.4 was $600 at launch. The Oly 12/2 is still $900. Most Pentax Ltd lenses are priced at around $500 and ranging up to a $1000. And the Zeiss 24 for the NEX is $1000 (and rumored to go to $1100 in April).

That being said, it's all still quite a lot of money!
 
Agreed - I wasn't suggesting its not FAIR. Just that its more than I'd pay for something that wasn't my primary go-to camera. If I was the kind of shooter who used a viewfinder even MOST of the time, I'd spend the money. The lenses are reasonably priced for how good they appear to be. Perhaps the body will come down in price too, but the X100 has been around for about a year now and really hasn't slipped at all yet. So the X-Pro 1 might hold its price for quite a while too - too soon to say. And I'd say the body is priced reasonably for the quality of the sensor and the whole hybrid viewfinder business, which I really wondered if they'd be able to pull off with an ILC. Well, they have. The next question is whether they'll be able to with their proposed zooms or whether they'll be EVF only propositions. Ii think it was the Luminous Landscapes review that concluded they'd be EVF only, but I wouldn't completely put it past Fuji to find a way to make them work with the OVF. But will THIS ovf handle zooms and a wide end that appears to cover a broader field of view than the OVF with no magnification? So, that, along with Fuji's suggestion that there will be future, lower priced, X-compatible bodies coming along later, make waiting on this one an easy call for me. But I wouldn't even BEGIN to criticize anyone for paying full freight for this system. Its tempting enough as is, and if I was a viewfinder kind of guy, it would be an easy call to sell some other stuff and go all-in.

-Ray
 
Back
Top