View Full Version : Brought my X Pro along for a work day...
hollandphotos
04-01-2012, 18:23
Posted some thoughts and images on my blog...
http://www.hollandphotostudio.com/blog/camera-bag/fujifilm-x-pro1-wedding-photographer-review/
I'm pretty fond of it. The chatter does bug me in close quarters. Image quality is great. I can't wait for usable raw support. Auto focus is not speedy but accurate...that's at least until the light fades.
All in all Im very happy with it and it will keep a place in my bag.
Biggest set of real world photos I've seen from this camera. Thanks for posting!
hollandphotos
04-01-2012, 18:34
Biggest set of real world photos I've seen from this camera. Thanks for posting!
You're welcome:)
Nice set.. I'm sure the couple will be pleased.
So, if you were to shoot only with the Fuji and I'm not suggesting that you would, would you have the confidence to shoot OVF only? In your line of work, getting the composition right is vital.
Lax Jought
04-01-2012, 20:31
I get the feeling your review and photos are only going to fuel my gaseous feelings for this thing.
"Just when I forgot you're here I hear something that sounds like a bug coming after me"
Oh cmon, she heard that and not the shutter?
Nice photos :)
What is this RFF obsession that reporting X-Pro1 lens chatter is a crime?!
jsrockit
04-02-2012, 03:42
What is this RFF obsession that reporting X-Pro1 lens chatter is a crime?!
Crime? no. However, it is just what the camera does so it seems silly to keep harping on it.
hollandphotos
04-02-2012, 03:55
I wasn't harping. Just posting my experience in close quarters. Any other setting it would be a non issue. Several reviews said it was no big deal. I just wanted to my wedding day experience for anyone interested in that application.
hollandphotos
04-02-2012, 03:55
"Just when I forgot you're here I hear something that sounds like a bug coming after me"
Oh cmon, she heard that and not the shutter?
Nice photos :)
Thanks for the comp:)
Yes, that's right. The chatter is almost as loud as the shutter. (which is fairly soft)
LOL it does sound a bit like a bug...
A cockroach on high heels running on bathroom tiles :D
Benjamin Marks
04-02-2012, 04:59
Looks like the camera works well. Very nice set of images -- plenty of detail, v. sharp, nice colors.
jsrockit
04-02-2012, 05:18
I wasn't harping. Just posting my experience in close quarters. Any other setting it would be a non issue. Several reviews said it was no big deal. I just wanted to my wedding day experience for anyone interested in that application.
Woah, woah... sorry for the confusion. I quoted the thread I was referring to... I wasn't talking about you.
hollandphotos
04-02-2012, 05:29
Looks like the camera works well. Very nice set of images -- plenty of detail, v. sharp, nice colors.
Thanks:)
too short
hollandphotos
04-02-2012, 05:29
Woah, woah... sorry for the confusion. I quoted the thread I was referring to... I wasn't talking about you.
Oh...gotcha. No worries:)
Lax Jought
04-02-2012, 05:55
Alright I've had a chance to check out your review on your website. If Fujifilm was able to fix the aperture chatter thing, as well as speed up focus speed a little (particularly in low light) and maybe fix up the focus points option, could this camera potentially replace your standard DSLR for wedding work? Potentially? Hypothetically?
Moriturii
04-02-2012, 06:05
Can't see the difference between it and any digi camera from the past few years. What am I missing? Might as well been a Nikon D70.
I have never used this camera, but I do use an X100.
Extrapolating a little, I could not see this camera replacing an SLR as a main camera for wedding work unless you happen to hate SLRs or dislike zooms altogether.
A good SLR is so darned fast and so flexible that I cannot see it. I like using primes for some aspects of a wedding, but I would not want to give up the zooms altogether myself. Image quality is not the issue - the X-Pro is dynamite - but other utility issues. Sure, there are zooms coming for the X-Pro, but it will still involve compromises that do not affect SLRs.
As romantic as it might seem to shoot weddings with an X-Pro, or Leica M9, a 5D II/III or Nikon equivalent is a pretty well unbeatable all rounder for this line of work IMHO.
Alright I've had a chance to check out your review on your website. If Fujifilm was able to fix the aperture chatter thing, as well as speed up focus speed a little (particularly in low light) and maybe fix up the focus points option, could this camera potentially replace your standard DSLR for wedding work? Potentially? Hypothetically?
Can't see the difference between it and any digi camera from the past few years. What am I missing? Might as well been a Nikon D70.
I think the difference is that if you used a digital mirrorless camera from the past few years you would be able to tell from the photos that it's crap :p
(that is, if you managed to get the photos with it in the first place)
The fact that the camera pulled its weight in a wedding environment and you cant really distinguish the result from a DSLR is an achievement in its own right.
Lax Jought
04-02-2012, 06:17
Can't see the difference between it and any digi camera from the past few years. What am I missing? Might as well been a Nikon D70.
That's awesome, wish I could see things through your eyes where digi cameras from the past few years all look the same to you, and any of them would do fine for your photographic needs, professional or otherwise.
Lax Jought
04-02-2012, 06:23
As romantic as it might seem to shoot weddings with an X-Pro, or Leica M9, a 5D II/III or Nikon equivalent is a pretty well unbeatable all rounder for this line of work IMHO.
One can dream I guess. There are a couple of wedding photogs who go into a wedding armed with only a Leica or two, and only two or three primes, and they do produce some really amazing work.
I understand the utility of having a good zoom so I'm not attemping to argue the point.
Incidentally I read somewhere that Fujifilm is intending to produce a zoom lens for the X-Pro1 .....
Lax Jought
04-02-2012, 06:28
I should add that I would totally go into a wedding armed with a two Leica M9s, one with a 50mm lens attached, and the other with a 90mm.
I should also add that I am not a professional (nor amateur wedding photographer) in any way, shape, or form. I do have a Leica M8.2 and I know my way around what it can and cannot do, I think I could do it.
hollandphotos
04-02-2012, 06:31
Alright I've had a chance to check out your review on your website. If Fujifilm was able to fix the aperture chatter thing, as well as speed up focus speed a little (particularly in low light) and maybe fix up the focus points option, could this camera potentially replace your standard DSLR for wedding work? Potentially? Hypothetically?
Not replace, but definitely supplement to a large degree.
hollandphotos
04-02-2012, 06:33
Can't see the difference between it and any digi camera from the past few years. What am I missing? Might as well been a Nikon D70.
The difference is there. No way could I have shot 1600 or 3200 in a d70.
jsrockit
04-02-2012, 06:47
Can't see the difference between it and any digi camera from the past few years. What am I missing? Might as well been a Nikon D70.
Well, even if the quality was the same (which it is not), don't you think they are different ergonomically? DSLRs aren't an option for many of us.
hollandphotos
04-02-2012, 06:48
Well, even if the quality was the same (which it is not), don't you think they are different ergonomically? DSLRs aren't an option for many of us.
...What he said:)
paulfish4570
04-02-2012, 07:07
i think it worked very well for you.
the colors are fuji-lovely.
hollandphotos
04-02-2012, 07:22
i think it worked very well for you.
the colors are fuji-lovely.
Thank you Paul. That's very kind:)
Lax Jought
04-02-2012, 07:45
Not replace, but definitely supplement to a large degree.
That says a lot for a non-DSLR mirrorless, APS-C camera.
shadowfox
04-02-2012, 07:58
Can't see the difference between it and any digi camera from the past few years. What am I missing? Might as well been a Nikon D70.
Maybe because the point of the review is how the camera handles?
celluloidprop
04-02-2012, 07:59
There's some truth to the XP1 not being different from other digital cameras from the last few years - if you're just looking at web images.
I see a lot of posts trumpeting the 5D3/D800/XP1 performance that use 800-1000-pixel wide images as evidence. Well, duh, it looks good at that size. There aren't many cameras on the market today that can't handle that size even up to 3200 or 6400, and very few lenses that aren't going to look great. Contact prints from 4x5 look amazing too!
But I say with some degree of comfort that the 16-megapixel XP1 (or insert contemporary camera here) will make a better-looking 10x15-inch print than that old 6-megapixel D70.
hollandphotos
04-02-2012, 08:02
That's correct. I'm going to post some full size images and crops here soon for comparison. The detail is excellent.
rjbuzzclick
04-02-2012, 08:14
LOL it does sound a bit like a bug...
A cockroach on high heels running on bathroom tiles :D
As a professional sound designer, I applaud your description!
David_Manning
04-02-2012, 08:34
A true wedding fantasy...she married Mr. Hung ;)
Good pictures. I'm still trying to figure out how the OVF works with different focal lengths mounted.
I am glad you said it David, I was thinking the same thing!
Lax, the issue for me would be focus. The camera has great high ISO performance, but arguably not the AF system to take advantage of it where you need to shoot at wider apertures and focus on specific subjects. That's weddings all over, in my experience, unless you want to use flash a lot. Focusing under such conditions would arguably be easier with a Leica, but there you lack the high ISO performance for the shot! The only cameras that combine both strengths are DSLRs.
Yes, there are some weddings being shot very nicely on non-DSLRs, but IMHO the very best - the ones that make me go 'wow, those are stunning albums' - all seem to be shot on DSLRs and I think there is a reason for that.
I've shot with both and whilst I deteste DSLRs for much of my work, for a wedding I would have the same feeling about my Leicas now that I am familiar with what I can do with my DSLRs. Walk out of the wedding and down a street and the DSLR becomes the awkward beast and all I want is the Leica M (or X100)! But hey, you might find it works perfectly for you!
My first observation of those shots are that the blues seem over saturated and the skin tones look strange - don't know its its processing or out of the camera!
Lax Jought
04-03-2012, 04:31
Lax, the issue for me would be focus. The camera has great high ISO performance, but arguably not the AF system to take advantage of it where you need to shoot at wider apertures and focus on specific subjects. That's weddings all over, in my experience, unless you want to use flash a lot. Focusing under such conditions would arguably be easier with a Leica, but there you lack the high ISO performance for the shot! The only cameras that combine both strengths are DSLRs.
Yes, there are some weddings being shot very nicely on non-DSLRs, but IMHO the very best - the ones that make me go 'wow, those are stunning albums' - all seem to be shot on DSLRs and I think there is a reason for that.
I've shot with both and whilst I deteste DSLRs for much of my work, for a wedding I would have the same feeling about my Leicas now that I am familiar with what I can do with my DSLRs. Walk out of the wedding and down a street and the DSLR becomes the awkward beast and all I want is the Leica M (or X100)! But hey, you might find it works perfectly for you!
This is the part where my inexperience kicks in. I've been photographing this past year almost exclusively with my Leica and the single prime lens attached to it. I've had my Canon 7D for about a year longer than that but I very much prefer manual focus now, especially when trying to photograph moving objects in low light. The DSLR never caught on with me as much as the Leica/rangefinder has.
So this is why I think the AF speed (or lack of it) of the X-Pro1 wouldn't matter so much for me because I'd probably be going manual with it too. But again it could be my inexperience talking here.
But other than that, yeah I can totally understand where you're coming from with what you're saying there. The DSLR is the tool of choice for all(?) of the top wedding photogrphers and I can understand why.
willie_901
04-03-2012, 06:18
If the XP-1 focuses as well as the X100, I would not hesitate shooting per-ceremony or reception/party activities using the EVF, AFS, a small focus region and focus recompose via the shutter button.
I would practice first of course in some public situation but I would do this with any new camera.
I can focus the X100 with the same sucess I enjoyed with my Zeiss Ikon M. The advantage of the X series is you can increase the shutter speed and DOF because ISO 1600 can be printed for color and ISO 3200 for B&W. If you don't need the high ISO the AF is that much better because there is more light which usually means more contrast.
Switching to the OVF once focus is set is quick so you get the advantage of seeing out of the frame if you want it. The reason I would start with the EVF is the small focus box decreases the possibility the focus will lock on an union tended nearby target with very high contrast.
The key is anticipation which many rangefiner photographers seem to develop naturally. After all as quick as focusing with an analog RF is, it's slower than my D700 (and people expect large noisy DSLRs at weddings).
If the XP-1 focuses as well as the X100, I would not hesitate shooting per-ceremony or reception/party activities using the EVF, AFS, a small focus region and focus recompose via the shutter button.
Yeah I was going to say, with the latest firmware, my x100 is a weapon in the dark. I can get down to iso 6400, f2, 1/8th of a second and still get reliable AF lock with the x100.
If the x-pro is as good as the x100, it won't be a problem at all. And apparently fujifilm is working hard on upgrading AF in the next firmware update.
hollandphotos
04-03-2012, 18:53
A true wedding fantasy...she married Mr. Hung ;)
Good pictures. I'm still trying to figure out how the OVF works with different focal lengths mounted.
Too funny!!
Thank you:)
hollandphotos
04-03-2012, 18:54
I fire up SilkyPix (which is terrible!)
Reprocessed a few for comparison. You can see the update toward the bottom of the post.
http://www.hollandphotostudio.com/blog/camera-bag/fujifilm-x-pro1-wedding-photographer-review/
I fire up SilkyPix (which is terrible!)
Reprocessed a few for comparison. You can see the update toward the bottom of the post.
http://www.hollandphotostudio.com/blog/camera-bag/fujifilm-x-pro1-wedding-photographer-review/
I took the time to tell you what I thought was not very good in the original images so I will do the same for the reposts to state that the skin tones are markedly improved. The blue still seems a little more saturated than natural but the original skin was terrible so I agree, Silkypix is not good :D
Deep Fried
04-11-2012, 13:37
I am a former wedding photographer (was a nasty business to be in...LOL). I used to shoot primes on DSLR's and that was not a problem, although I also had a second shooter running a zoom with me. What would be a problem however is just overall speed, at least with my X100 I could see it being a bit of a handicap. I would suplement a DSLR with it, but can't see it taking over. Certainly usable, but not ideal
hollandphotos
05-25-2012, 17:42
Here are a couple from day one of my three day Indian wedding blitz.
http://pcdn.500px.net/7938677/bc5dd48526d9541a042a1d3ab8a64495fda75c4a/4.jpg
http://pcdn.500px.net/7938672/4ddb2cce2aa4a3943f06069538c0c04cc300ce91/4.jpg
http://pcdn.500px.net/7938668/84cff5e8bcf81b73786049ae6ff670f15e85980b/4.jpg
http://pcdn.500px.net/7938653/db87ca252b12a0b491dd482cc9d998f4b8364923/4.jpg
Archiver
06-06-2012, 03:40
A true wedding fantasy...she married Mr. Hung ;)
And when he puts the wedding photos on the wall, she says, 'Well hung, Mr. Hung, well hung!' :D
Generally I shoot architecture and interiors, and my people shooting is with family and friends, or some street work. So when a wedding came along last month, I used the M9 and Ricoh GXR to see if I could handle shooting only manual focus primes in that environment. I worked very hard and took as many photos as the hired pros, and the bride and groom are very happy with my work.
But there were many times when I wished for AF, and I flubbed a lot of shots due to the GXR's poor shot to shot time; maybe sometimes I could have done with zoom, but two bodies with sufficiently different focal lengths was usually good enough. At some stages I wished I'd picked up the X-Pro 1 beforehand because I knew that the image quality, shot to shot time and AF was adequate for daylight and pre-ceremony work, as the OP mentioned. Certainly better than the GXR which takes a second or two to be ready for the next shot.
On the other hand, one of my options was to rent a M8.2 for the weekend to shoot alongside the M9, covering tele focal lengths and offering a similar control system. That would have worked very well for daylight shooting, but once the night set in and the dinner started I would have needed the high ISO capabilities of the GXR. I just wonder if the X-Pro 1's AF is good enough to shoot quickly and accurately in those conditions; its high ISO is a dream, but does the AF allow it to be fully exploited in a mostly candle light dinner?
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.