View Full Version : Not overly thrilled w/X-Pro 1 in hand...
David_Manning
06-20-2012, 16:06
I've been really interested in the X-Pro 1, and I've been driving my wife crazy with the puppy-dog looks and leaving the computer browser open to X-Pro 1 sites. I mean, I've been laying it on pretty thick.
I was at the local camera dealer this week, and they had one in stock with a 35/1.4 attached. Naturally I had to fondle it.
Guess what? I'm NOT so in love anymore. It's bigger than I imagined (and I knew it was larger than the X100 anyway), boxier, and with the 35 mounted, not nearly as compact as I was hoping. I went home and tried out my X100, and I like it better! It's smaller, same VF, perfect focal length for me, and so I'm not so hot after the XP1 anymore. That result was utterly unexpected...I usually love buying new cameras.
I guess at the end of the day, the X100 is the perfect compact for nondescript, quiet shooting, and if I HAVE to have several focal lengths, I can default to the 5Dmk2 and primes (which is not much bigger than the X-Pro 1 with lenses and hoods attached).
kshapero
06-20-2012, 16:09
Really? It is that big?
When I saw one I wasn't so much put off by the size ... I really didn't like the look of it.
It didn't look like the relatively expensive piece of kit that it is to my eyes!
I've been really interested in the X-Pro 1, and I've been driving my wife crazy with the puppy-dog looks and leaving the computer browser open to X-Pro 1 sites. I mean, I've been laying it on pretty thick.
I was at the local camera dealer this week, and they had one in stock with a 35/1.4 attached. Naturally I had to fondle it.
Guess what? I'm NOT so in love anymore. It's bigger than I imagined (and I knew it was larger than the X100 anyway), boxier, and with the 35 mounted, not nearly as compact as I was hoping. I went home and tried out my X100, and I like it better! It's smaller, same VF, perfect focal length for me, and so I'm not so hot after the XP1 anymore. That result was utterly unexpected...I usually love buying new cameras.
I guess at the end of the day, the X100 is the perfect compact for nondescript, quiet shooting, and if I HAVE to have several focal lengths, I can default to the 5Dmk2 and primes (which is not much bigger than the X-Pro 1 with lenses and hoods attached).
Buddy, serious? You clearly do not have a 5D2. Comparing an X-Pro 1to a 5D2 is like comparing a Toyota Yaris to an M1 Tank! If you think the 5D2 is slightly larger than an X-Pro 1,I have a very compact 4 X 5 Speed Graphic to sell you. Lol!
back alley
06-20-2012, 16:15
it's not small...it is largish but very light in the hand and i thought it felt very comfortable.
but it's a completely different animal than the x100.
EtoileFinder
06-20-2012, 16:19
http://files.petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2012/01/compare_mini.jpg
I'm no Leica fan but the Leica is so much easier on the eye ... they are very close in size!
David_Manning
06-20-2012, 16:24
I didn't mean to offend anyone with my own first impressions!
That being said, if you look at the comparison photo with the M, the M's lens already has a hood attached. Throw the 35/1.4 XP1 hood on, and it magically SEEMS much bigger. I won't even mention the 60mm with the hood.
And...well, it just seemed really boxy. Crazy I know. I have been looking at it online for a while now, and even been looking at the videos from the Australian launch on Vimeo with Michael Coyne.
Maybe my expectations were too high. I just read the writeup in the new BJP issue about the Magnum guy (forgot his name just now) who liked it, so I just KNEW it was perfect.
David_Manning
06-20-2012, 16:29
Well, here's the comparison, and it DOES make the mark2 look like a monster...I guess I'm kind of used to it.
5Dmk2 vs. X-Pro 1 (http://camerasize.com/compare/#192,258)
David_Manning
06-20-2012, 16:31
Here are my mark2 and X100. The size difference is more substantial, obviously...
5Dmk2 vs X100 (http://camerasize.com/compare/#192,133)
David_Manning
06-20-2012, 16:32
Anyway, just an impression. I guess I expected basically an X100 with interchangeable lenses. It's bigger than that.
So I have both the X-100 and the X-Pro 1, as well as the 5D2. Both the X-Pro and the X-100 are wonderful cameras, equally capable and produce quality photos. Yes the X-Pro is larger and not as pretty, but the dog has interchangeable lenses AND I can shoot with my L and M glass, which makes me happy, happy!
So, when I travel light, I take the X-100, otherwise you'll find the X-Pro in my bag with a mess of lenses.
Get the difference?
If I'm off to feed my family it's the 5D2. Simple.
Aristophanes
06-20-2012, 16:40
I didn't mean to offend anyone with my own first impressions!
That being said, if you look at the comparison photo with the M, the M's lens already has a hood attached. Throw the 35/1.4 XP1 hood on, and it magically SEEMS much bigger. I won't even mention the 60mm with the hood.
And...well, it just seemed really boxy. Crazy I know. I have been looking at it online for a while now, and even been looking at the videos from the Australian launch on Vimeo with Michael Coyne.
Maybe my expectations were too high. I just read the writeup in the new BJP issue about the Magnum guy (forgot his name just now) who liked it, so I just KNEW it was perfect.
I was in the same mood as you (read the same BJP article!), but after trying one, was far from impressed.
Lenses are small and nice, but somehow lacked substance.
The AF was too slow for the price, by far my biggest gripe.
The rear scroll wheel on the brand new, right-outta-the-box unit I was given was very loose. So loose, in fact, the rep pulled it from, the shelf for a warranty return after tryouts.
Some of the other buttons were less than quality, again, for the price.
Each to their own, but not the camera for me. My compact DSLR with pancake lenses is less boxy and easier to hold:
http://camerasize.com/compare/#258,229
So I'm still looking for a compact RF-style product with an OVF.
jalLee2001
06-20-2012, 16:41
I agree-it does feel bigger than I thought. I was looking for something with a little more convince than the m9 (ability to auto focus, automatic, etc) for snapshots and travel. The focus seems slow.
I will admit the pics posted do seem okay.
I might look at the OMD again.
David_Manning
06-20-2012, 16:41
dmc...you hit the nail on the head. When you travel light, you reach for the X100. Me too.
I was thinking I could reach for the X-Pro 1 when traveling light. Not as much, I found out...for me anyway.
Agreed, X-Pro is not for traveling light, and I think you and I travel a lot ! Lol
I didn't like the feel of it. Felt sort of plasticy and light weight to me. M9 is so much nicer in the hands.
David_Manning
06-20-2012, 16:44
Just to be specific...I'm not against the X-Pro 1. I think the X100's focus is fast enough for what I use it for, and the image quality is top notch (I usually degrade it with b&w grain anyway). I assume the XP1 is more of the same.
My friend's M8, which looks thick, seemed more compact than the XP1. Maybe it was the 35 'Cron he had on it.
Seriously, the X-pro is a chunky solid camera, reminiscent of cameras of yore. Anyone who thinks it feels plasticky has not truly held it. It is a tank, a solid piece of iron. Mine takes a beating and keeps working. My 35/1.4 does not have any of the slow focus issues everyone that does not own one claims it has. But the real beauty is shooting with L and M glass. Sweet.
Frontman
06-20-2012, 16:52
I prefer the larger size of the X Pro, it makes the camera easy to handle, and allows the use of larger buttons and controls which can be found and operated by touch.
The X Pro is large, but it is by no means heavy. I have been using Leica M cameras for a long time, and the X Pro with a lens attached is much lighter than any M camera. The Fuji lenses may seem to lack physical substance, but they possess technical substance, and offer excellent performance, particularly for the price. I prefer the Fujinon 35/1.4 to the Summicron/Summilux lenses I often shoot, and a new Fujinon costs a lot less than a used Summicron in good condition.
I can carry the X Pro around my neck all day and scarcely notice it, I can't say the same for the other cameras I use.
http://www.laroquephoto.com/blog/2012/6/20/new-beast-the-x-pro1-from-an-x100-shooter.html
SausalitoDog
06-20-2012, 17:00
The x100 is great with one of the Thumbs Up attachments... The XP-1 REQUIRES one, but with that one customization, it is a great feeling camera.
What I miss is the silent shutter and the diopter adjustment in the VF (I've finally found a screw in diopter). Even with the 18mm, the XP-1 isn't going in your pocket....
SausalitoDog
06-20-2012, 20:49
I've been wondering about the AF speed on both the X100 and the X-pro. I've been told that the GX-1 AF is faster? Many pros are using GF-1/GX-1 cameras, most of these guys also own M9 and pro DSLRs.
dmc; Your comment rings home..
"So, when I travel light, I take the X-100, otherwise you'll find the X-Pro in my bag with a mess of lenses.
Get the difference?
If I'm off to feed my family it's the 5D2. Simple".
The DSLRs rarely make the cross into the "fun photo world", but the RF and similar cameras (both film + digital) move easily into "work world" from time to time.
Have definitely heard that the GX-1 is somewhat faster to focus... All I can say is that when the xp1 or x100 locks on, it is sharp as a tack.
The x100 is literally a pocket camera, so that accounts for the wild popularity. The only one that will actually fit in your pocket that makes insanely nice pix under a variety of situations. If speed of focus is your primary concern, this is not for you; for everything else, I think it is worth trying.
Tom
http://files.petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2012/01/compare_mini.jpg
...
That being said, if you look at the comparison photo with the M, the M's lens already has a hood attached. Throw the 35/1.4 XP1 hood on, and it magically SEEMS much bigger. I won't even mention the 60mm with the hood.
It's worth noting that the comparison picture with the 50mm summilux asph is NOT without the lens hood on - that barrel bit at the tip is part of the lens!
http://images02.olx.com/ui/6/37/41/1275589982_98093641_4-Leica-SUMMILUX-M-50mm-f14-ASPH-Lens-For-Sale-1275589982.jpg
If the x-pro1 lenses are anything like my x100 lens, the lens hood won't make much difference anyway - they're pretty resistant to flare. I just run a b+w clear filter on my x100 and very rarely encounter flare. I'd do the same with the x-pro1 to make it a little smaller.
One thing that surprised (disappointed) me was that the X-Pro-1 didn't have a built-in diopter adjustment like their X100 or almost every other camera on the market. Rather, it required old school accessory diopter eyepieces. Maybe that's acceptable for an RF camera with a finder that dates back to the 50's but it's still a PIA. The problem for me was that the standard eyepeice power of -1 D made it impossible to see the optical finder sharply with my old presbyopic eyes. I wonder if like their old GS645 folder or Zeiss ZM, it takes Nikon F style eyepiece diopter eyepieces? I've also heard it's difficult getting accessories from Fuiji so if the eyepiece thread is unique, it may be an issue for some people.
One thing that surprised (disappointed) me was that the X-Pro-1 didn't have a built-in diopter adjustment like every other camera on the market but required old school accessory diopter eyepieces. Maybe that's acceptable for an RF camera with a finder that dates back to the 50's but its still a PIA. The problem for me was that the standard eyepeice power of -1 D made it hard to see the finder sharply with my old presbyopic eyes camera is difficult at this time. I wonder if like their old GS645 folder, it took Nikon F style eyepiece diopter eyepieces? I've also heard getting accessories from Fuiji is difficult so if the eyepiece thread is unique, it may be an issue.
It's 19mm - same diopter the bessa/zeiss ikon/epson r-d1 use.
http://www.mainlinephoto.com.au/images/correction_lens.jpg
The reason they didn't put an inbuilt diopter in it is probably because the viewfinder mechanism is already jam packed with technology and it wouldn't have met size constraints. Think about it - optical VF with projected LED frame lines, electronic viewfinder with curtain slider at the front, and a frame line magnification mechanism as well.
I held the XPro-1 in a shop once, liked the build, however I'm not in the market for one anyway. I will say that sometimes fondling a camera in the shop is enough to dispel GAS, the magic is gone, and it's just another camera.
noimmunity
06-21-2012, 00:36
The X-Pro1 with 35 is very well balanced, solid, and yet thankfully much lighter than the M8/M9.
Aki-Asahi now offers a full range of coverings for it, too.
I have both the M9 and the X-Pro1 and find them just right in the hand, and very similar too. Ok, the X-Pro1 is lighter, but that's a good thing. Both cameras have their good points - and bad. Ive had quite a few cameras in the last three years and I have to say, the X-Pro1 is the one I'm happiest with. Better than the Nikon D90 (smaller and lighter), Sony nex-5n (easier to handle with my big hands) Leica D-lux5 (larger and with an optical viewfinder). Yes these cameras had better features such as through the lens viewing, faster focusing, compact size etc but I would say the X-Pro1 is a good all round camera — just the right size, weight and handling abilities for most.
I held the XPro-1 in a shop once, liked the build, however I'm not in the market for one anyway. I will say that sometimes fondling a camera in the shop is enough to dispel GAS, the magic is gone, and it's just another camera.
I was working on that theory when I went into a shop to fondle the OMD ... bad move! :p
Bike Tourist
06-21-2012, 02:48
I have them both, not much bothered by size difference:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/gallery/3829/U3829I1337880090.SEQ.0.jpg
X100 has not enough diopter adjustment for me so I have to wear glasses when using it.
XP1 has interchangable lenses and will accumulate sensor dust.
jsrockit
06-21-2012, 04:00
Felt sort of plasticy and light weight to me. M9 is so much nicer in the hands.
But, it isn't plastic and since when is light a bad thing?
It's 19mm - same diopter the bessa/zeiss ikon/epson r-d1 use.
http://www.mainlinephoto.com.au/images/correction_lens.jpg
[...]
I don't get it: Will this replace the original VF glass or will it be added like a filter on a lens? Would this also fit a Hexar RF VF?
Nikon Bob
06-21-2012, 04:24
I am a bit like the OP in that I think I prefer the X100 size wise. I was looking for a camera as a companion to my DSLR kit for those times when I want something small,light and simple. I don't want another inter changeable lens system and for versatility I'll stick to my DSLR kit. The X100 may just be it for those reasons.
Bob
boomguy57
06-21-2012, 04:41
Anyway, just an impression. I guess I expected basically an X100 with interchangeable lenses. It's bigger than that.
Yeah, I was initially lusting after it but have come to the same conclusion. After using the X100, maybe I'm spoiled--but I'll stick with my X100 for the foreseeable future.
willie_901
06-21-2012, 04:45
I didn't mean to offend anyone with my own first impressions!
I am carrying an XP1 daily and you did not offend me (but maybe I was suprised a little bit).
M lenses can deliver high performance with a compact size. The XP1 lens/sensor design means the lenses will be larger. The 18/2 XF being an obvious exception. Did you know the X100 lens is much larger than it looks? That lens is recessed into the body. Otherwise the XP1 feels like a lot of RF bodies... except it's lighter.
The X100 (which I also use regularly) has it's strengths and weaknesses compared to the XP1. I find they compliment each other. If the X100 meets all your needs, there's no reason to add the XP1. If you find the XP1 too large, there are plenty of smaller systems out there.
It's all good.
CK Dexter Haven
06-21-2012, 06:13
I completely agree.
I went to B&H yesterday, for the first time in quite a while - to look at the whole field of new cameras. Trying to decide if i should shift to Nikon for the D800e instead of the 5DIII; and sorting through the mirrorless sector.
I finally wound up at the Fuji counter.... The XPro1 looks gorgeous in all the online images. In person, not so much. And, the weight - yes, i've read some people find it to be a relief, but i just found it felt cheap. It looks like a tank online. Feels like a mock-up in the hand. I really was expecting something along the lines of a Contax G2. If the G2 is a Mercedes, the Fuji is a Honda. Nothing wrong with Hondas, of course....
The X100, though - wow. I was impressed. Of all the mirrorless cams i messed around with, this was the one that felt like a real camera. I just wish for a bigger file from it....
In other notes - the NEX7 feels like a refined Sony electronic device. Not so much a camera. It's quick and responsive and all that, but it doesn't remind me of 'photography.' And, everyone seems to love the electronic viewfinder.... I don't. It's not nearly as impressive as the reports led me to believe.
Olympus OM-D / E5.... Again, i'm bewildered by the glowing reports. I actually HATED this thing. Picked it up, turned it on, and only had it in my hands for less than a minute before i wanted to move away. Ick.
Couldn't even find the Samsung NX line. Unfortunate, as i was really interested in the NX210.... If Sony had a pancake 30/f2 like the Samsung, the NEX7 would be an easy choice.
Oooh.... Just read the above comment about the X-pro.... "a tank, a solid piece of iron." Then, perhaps the B&H rep handed me a plastic demo mock-up.... Whether or not it can take a beating is one matter. But, the thing feels light, and not of substance. Same with the lenses. I'm not sure how they can be made so light - glass and metal surely have more weight than that. Compare the fuji 35/1.4 to a Contax 45/2.... The Contax lens FEELS like something. The Fuji feels like a lot of air.
I'm not speaking of operation on the Fuji, though. The store's battery died as i was first holding it. They ought to keep a supply of batteries. Kinda ridiculous for a store like that to only have ONE for that camera.
jsrockit
06-21-2012, 06:29
I finally wound up at the Fuji counter.... The XPro1 looks gorgeous in all the online images. In person, not so much. And, the weight - yes, i've read some people find it to be a relief, but i just found it felt cheap...
...The X100, though - wow. I was impressed. Of all the mirrorless cams i messed around with, this was the one that felt like a real camera. I just wish for a bigger file from it....
It shocking to hear some say the X100 feels more like a "real" camera than the X-Pro1. I cannot agree with that at all. To me, the X-Pro1 fixed all that was cheap about the back panel of the X100.
tbarker13
06-21-2012, 06:38
Sort of funny how we all want different things. I've used both the X100 and the XPro1. And for me, the XPro1 is far and away the better camera in terms of ergonomics. I felt like the X100 was just too small and hard to control because of the tiny buttons.
The Xrpo1 is still considerably smaller (and more importantly, lighter) than my D700. But it's still large enough for me comfortably use.
Landshark99
06-21-2012, 07:05
I have both the XPro and X100 as well as the Contax G2, I really like my X100 but since getting the Xpro, it is pretty much sitting in a case. I loved my G2s and have been looking for a digital replacement for them for a long time; with the XPro I have finally found it. They are almost exactly the same size body with the Contax lenses being a little smaller, for me I personally find the lighter weight of the XPro1 an advantage, I usually use two bodies, one wide one, short tele, the weight and comfort difference when using two, makes me forget I am carrying two. For me the XPro feels almost perfect in the hand and encourages me to use it. As to how it looks, I like the simple industrial look, but at the end of the day I want to use my cameras more than look at them.
I also have the OM-D and much prefer the ergonomics of the XPro
CK Dexter Haven
06-21-2012, 07:08
It shocking to hear some say the X100 feels more like a "real" camera than the X-Pro1. I cannot agree with that at all. To me, the X-Pro1 fixed all that was cheap about the back panel of the X100.
I didn't mean that the X100 felt more like a 'real camera' than the XPro. I was referring to the other mirrorless - Sony NEX, OMD, etc.
Still, though - the X100 did feel more solid than the XPro. The x100 felt like what i expected, maybe better. The Xpro felt much worse than i hoped/expected. I really did look at the Xpro online images and imagine something like a G2 or Leica-M. And, it felt not nearly as good as either of those.
I'm not the kind of guy who gets off on saying 'my camera can pound nails,' or 'would survive in a war,' or 'can be used to bash an attacker....' I just want gear that gives me confidence. I don't like 'flimsy.' I mean, the thing could have been designed with carbon fibre, or some Neptunian composite - i don't know. I just like the feel of solid, precision-engineered controls, and a weight that 'makes sense.' By contrast, the NEX7 'makes sense.' The X100 makes sense. The XPro1... it was like, "whoa." I suppose i could get used to it. But, it's never going to have that beautiful tactile appeal like with a G2 or M7. I hate to be so critical of something i never actually used, but it was kinda like Fuji understood the aesthetics end of it, but completely dismissed the sensual/tactile component.
I remember when i bought a Leica CM.... Out of the box, it, too, felt too light. But, then, you add the battery, and a roll of film, and then it's okay.... The XPro-1 had the battery inside, and there's nothing else to add. I guess the case or a grip might be what i need? I would rather not have to pimp it out, though. Defeats the purpose. It's like everyone with their ugly rubber cases on their iPhones..... A beautiful device, ruined.
So, back to the XPro1 - has there been a firmware update yet? Any chance the AF can be improved in THIS model?
When I saw one I wasn't so much put off by the size ... I really didn't like the look of it.
It didn't look like the relatively expensive piece of kit that it is to my eyes!
I put the Olympus OM-D (EM-5) in that Size Comparison along side the Xpro-1
Wow...except for a little bit of hump... the Olympus is smaller a bit
Do you think you might get the EM-5?;)
In fact the Fuji is 3 mm wider than the Olympus OM-1 film body...
Landshark99
06-21-2012, 07:28
There have been two firmware updates so far, but none that were specific to AF speed. As I have stated before faster is usually better but I have very little problem with the XPro in the area of AF, jn fact after using both the XPro and OM-D a lot on a recent trip to Spain, I found the OM-D to be faster but the XPro more accurate, could be some operator error involved but overall, I found the Xpro more accurate. The corrected AF option is probably the reason and it works great for me. The OM-D on the other hand can get away with some astonishing hand held shutter speeds because of it IS system which could lead some to believe the Olympus AF in low light is more accurate, I have now found this to be the case, if you can hold the XPro steady it seems just slightly better on accuracy.
Landshark99
06-21-2012, 07:31
The EM-5 almost feels heavier, and because of the hump, it packs larger than it seems
shadowfox
06-21-2012, 07:44
I like dense and substantial camera.
That does not always mean bigger size.
Olympus Pen E-P2 is very small, but dense.
Fuji X100 when I tried it at the store, didn't feel like that at all.
Paul Luscher
06-21-2012, 08:00
Well, I'd say the X1 Pro is for the "technogeek." (Reminds me of the Konica Hexar RF. A "techno" rangefinder of the Film Age, if ever there was one). The Leica is for the (ahem) "traditionalist." (Yeah, yeah, I know: yer gonna say that means "retired doctors and lawyers with too much money and too much time on their hands"...):)
Jamie Pillers
06-21-2012, 08:28
I have the X-Pro1 now; had the X100 for the year previous. I agree that the X100 is far better if you want something compact.
I switched because I wanted to be able to switch lenses and to use 'legacy' lenses. And the X-Pro1's potential image quality boost from the bigger, no anti-aliasing filter sensor is attractive. Size-wise, the X-Pro1 is like holding a Contax G-type camera... perfect for my hands.
All the other features/quirks of the X-Pro1 are essentially the same as the X100. If I could own both, I definitely would.... hmmm (what can I sell?). :-)
SausalitoDog
06-21-2012, 08:57
I don't get it: Will this replace the original VF glass or will it be added like a filter on a lens? Would this also fit a Hexar RF VF?
Yes, it replaces the original glass which just screws out (exactly like nikon)
The thing is, you have to know what power diopter to buy - I was lucky and the first one I ordered (don't remember where) worked fine.
If you google diopters you will see that there are a number of strengths. If you wear glasses, you can figure out what strength you need from your prescription.
good luck,
David,
Go back and buy it, use it, fondle it some more, take it with you everywhere....it will feel better with every shutter click.
I think my xpro1 is awesome, and I would not hesitate to whack any thief or robber over the head with it.
Olympus OM-D / E5.... Again, i'm bewildered by the glowing reports. I actually HATED this thing. Picked it up, turned it on, and only had it in my hands for less than a minute before i wanted to move away. Ick.
That surprised me! To me the OMD is not a camera that will appeal to everyone but to be able to pick up any camera, turn it on, hold it for a minute and decide that you hate it is odd!
I feel indifference to the Xpro and didn't think much of the styling but I can see where it's appeal is and although the X100 didn't ring my bells either I can understand why it's so popular.
I like dense and substantial camera.
That does not always mean bigger size.
Olympus Pen E-P2 is very small, but dense.
Fuji X100 when I tried it at the store, didn't feel like that at all.
I thought the e-p1 was dense and substantial feeling when I had it... until I bent the baseplate by using it (normally) on a tripod. It just feels well made, in reality it isn't necessarily well made.
My x100 in comparison I think will prove to be more durable (apart from the viewfinder being a dust vacuum.)
Weight in a camera creates an illusion of build quality IMO. To me the Bessas I've owned have felt cheap but in reality they are a great camera and work perfectly. Pick up an RD-1 which is basically a Bessa with a sensor and lots of electronics and the first thing you notice is the extra weight over the film cameras from Cosina and it just feels like there is more quailty there.
Weight in a camera creates an illusion of build quality IMO.
That.
The M8/9 have a bunch of brass in them. The X-pro uses magnesium, which is not an inferior material.
Vincent.G
06-22-2012, 23:37
I've been really interested in the X-Pro 1, and I've been driving my wife crazy with the puppy-dog looks and leaving the computer browser open to X-Pro 1 sites. I mean, I've been laying it on pretty thick.
I was at the local camera dealer this week, and they had one in stock with a 35/1.4 attached. Naturally I had to fondle it.
Guess what? I'm NOT so in love anymore. It's bigger than I imagined (and I knew it was larger than the X100 anyway), boxier, and with the 35 mounted, not nearly as compact as I was hoping. I went home and tried out my X100, and I like it better! It's smaller, same VF, perfect focal length for me, and so I'm not so hot after the XP1 anymore. That result was utterly unexpected...I usually love buying new cameras.
I guess at the end of the day, the X100 is the perfect compact for nondescript, quiet shooting, and if I HAVE to have several focal lengths, I can default to the 5Dmk2 and primes (which is not much bigger than the X-Pro 1 with lenses and hoods attached).
Hi David
I played with my friend's XP1 and prefer the X100 too. The X100 feels more compact. The auto focus speed of XP1 seem faster to me though. I feel that if one likes the 35mm focal length only, the X100 offers better value for money IMHO.
willie_901
06-23-2012, 06:40
If you are happy with a fixed lens, then the X100 is the best buy. The X100 lens does flare more than the XP1 when very strong point source lights are in the scene. 16 MP means more cropping flexibility. Otherwise, the X100 is better in some ways. It has an adjustable dipopter; a bigger finder; more flexibility for EVF focus confirmation and it's easier to carry in a small bag.
There are other differences of course, but these are the most important to me.
I sold my x100 , and now I am the very happy owner of the XPro.
Believe it or not I found it too small for my hands, so after a few months I sold it for no other reason than it's size. All in all I find the Fuji cameras and glass to be first rate.
Jamie Pillers
06-23-2012, 07:23
David,
One more comment about the X-Pro1. Most all the comments here are about what I call the ergonomics of the camera. How it feels, how it looks, how it operates. But what about image quality?
Last night I downloaded my first memory card from the X-Pro1. When I saw the images come up on the screen I was taken aback! They are BEAUTIFUL! Over the years I've looked at a LOT of images on my computer screen, created with DSLRs, many film cameras, and most recently, the X100. The X-Pro1 images are different... stunning! I'm not much into the technical underpinnings of digital imagery, so I can't say for sure what is precisely different about the X-Pro1 images, but the impression is something like what happens when you see an old master's painting in real life for the first time. Something about the way the light seems real, the colors seem deeply saturated, and the overall impression of super-reality floating in a frame. Gorgeous.
Jamie Pillers
06-23-2012, 07:29
David,
One more comment about the X-Pro1. Most all the comments here are about what I call the ergonomics of the camera. How it feels, how it looks, how it operates. But what about image quality?
Last night I downloaded my first memory card from the X-Pro1. When I saw the images come up on the screen I was taken aback! They are BEAUTIFUL! Over the years I've looked at a LOT of images on my computer screen, created with DSLRs, many film cameras, and most recently, the X100. The X-Pro1 images are different... stunning! I'm not much into the technical underpinnings of digital imagery, so I can't say for sure what is precisely different about the X-Pro1 images, but the impression is something like what happens when you see an old master's painting in real life for the first time. Something about the way the light seems real, the colors seem deeply saturated, and the overall impression of super-reality floating in a frame. Gorgeous.
And I forgot to mention... these images are straight-out-of-the-camera jpegs!! No post-processing at all.
mobilexile
06-24-2012, 16:21
Really? It is that big?
In brief, no, it's not that big. That said it's larger than the X100.
I happen to love the X-Pro1. No complaints with the body or any of the three Fuji lenses, all of which I own.
mobilexile
06-24-2012, 16:22
it's not small...it is largish but very light in the hand and i thought it felt very comfortable.
but it's a completely different animal than the x100.
I would call it small given what it packs in terms of processor and the like.
mobilexile
06-24-2012, 16:26
Agreed, X-Pro is not for traveling light, and I think you and I travel a lot ! Lol
I travel a lot and bringing the X-Pro1 has not been an issue. That said, the X100 is the camera that's in my laptop bag 24 / 7.
SausalitoDog
06-24-2012, 16:31
I've tried taking the xp1 with me more on walks etc. It just doesn't work trying to fit it into a pocket - even in a fairly large jacket pocket. That said, it's so nice around your neck :-)
But if I really need compactness (pocket carries), then it's the x100 for me...and it's always in the side storage compartment of my car or under the seat ready to go.
boomguy57
06-25-2012, 06:37
For me, what kills the XP1 is the size of the lenses. The pancake on the X100 is great, but the 35/1.4 on the XP1 seems massive in comparison. And the 60/2.4? Forget about it. I might as well carry my D700 at that point. IMO, it's not just weight, but it's the bulk that turns me off. My M6 is probably (I haven't held the XP1) heavier than the XP1, and the body might be roughly the same size, but the lenses are far more compact-looking (again, I haven't held the XP1, so I could be wrong; I expect to be pilloried all the same).
For me, what kills the XP1 is the size of the lenses.
The 35/1.4 is essentially identical in size to the Pana/Leica 25/1.4 Summilux for µ4/3. The 18 is tiny.
And with the 35 it's a lot lighter than an M6 with comparable lens (I have both). The X-Pro1 and the OM-D weigh the same with comparable lenses. However, there's no equivalent lens to the Panasonic 20/1.7 available. That lens is probably the best reason to get into the µ4/3 system, IMO.
I spent yesterday shooting the M6 and the X-Pro side by side. In operation there's really not a lot of difference between them. Over the course of a day the low weight of the X-Pro is wonderful.
If the M6 I'd the same size as the M9, then I'd say the X-Pro1 is a better choice as its lighter and a bit smaller too. Yes, Leica lenses are smaller than the X-Pro1's but remember, they are autofocus lenses rather than the Manual ones for the Leica, and yes, the X100's lens is smaller but again, it's a fixed lens too do it will be smaller. The X-Pro1 is a good compromise over the more compact cameras with its built in viewfinder and yes it won't fit in a pocket but there a few cameras that will give you the image quality and handling that this camera does. Oh, try putting an M6/9 in your pocket… not easy! Might I suggest that a way round the problem is to buy the case for the X-Pro1 and that would allow it to be carried over the shoulder without the need for a bag. It's a nice case too.
Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner
jsrockit
06-25-2012, 08:03
For me, what kills the XP1 is the size of the lenses. The pancake on the X100 is great, but the 35/1.4 on the XP1 seems massive in comparison.
It is massive in comparison... but you get used to it. It's not much bigger than any other 50mm 1.4 equivilent lens out there (for APS-C or larger cameras). It does have an SLR feel to it though.
boomguy57
06-25-2012, 08:06
It is massive in comparison... but you get used to it. It's not much bigger than any other 50mm 1.4 equivilent lens out there (for APS-C or larger cameras). It does have an SLR feel to it though.
The idea of carrying around my M6-sized body with my Nikon 50/1.4-sized lens on the front is not only funny, but awkward (in my head).
jsrockit
06-25-2012, 08:10
The idea of carrying around my M6-sized body with my Nikon 50/1.4-sized lens on the front is not only funny, but awkward (in my head).
That said, it isn't much different than a M6 with a Voigtlander 50mm 1.5 lens. I'm with you though. I can't wait for the 28mm (42mm) pancake lens from Fuji. The 18mm is small enough.
I used the x100 since it came out last year and found it to be the perfect travel camera (small, lightweight, great image quality). As soon as the XP1 was released I picked one up and while it is larger, it is a phenomenal camera. I love the image quality that it produces and after only a few firmware upgrades, it is noticeably improved. However, recently I picked up an M9 and find it and the XP1 to be a bit redundant so I'm looking to sell the XP1. As much as I love the image quality, I can't justify having both cameras. That said, I've become spoiled by ISO performance as the XP1 is absolutely ridiculous when compared to my M, x100, or 5D2.
For those complaining about how heavy/light it is, I don't think that's a bad thing. Makes it easy to carry around all day! Coming from Canon and using a 5D2, anything that's smaller/lighter is a joy to use/carry.
If anyone's interested in my XP1, let me know.
custom875
06-25-2012, 09:00
I love the size and weight. Hardly ever use the Canon anymore.
chrism_scotland
06-25-2012, 10:21
Size wise I agree the X-Pro 1 is larger than I expected but it is very light and well balanced with the 35mm attached.
That said compared to my previous camera (Olympus EP2 with a pancake lens) the X-Pro 1 isn't as readily convenient for carrying.
My EP2 used to simply get put in my bag each day with the 17mm attached and another pancake lens in the bag taking up little space but the X-Pro 1 if I want to carry it with me (and I do because thats why I bought it!) takes up a lot more room so I can see times where I would have to leave it at home.
That said the IQ is outstanding although I do think sometimes that having £2000 worth of camera equipment tied up in a Compact System might have been better invested in a DSLR, especially as some, certainly with a prime lens attached wouldn't take up all that much more room (D7000 & 35mm)
jsrockit
06-25-2012, 10:35
That said the IQ is outstanding although I do think sometimes that having £2000 worth of camera equipment tied up in a Compact System might have been better invested in a DSLR, especially as some, certainly with a prime lens attached wouldn't take up all that much more room (D7000 & 35mm)
I always thought of the X-Pro1 as an alternative to a DSLR. If you are into DSLRs, they are always the better value... but ergonomically, a lot of us RF users (former / current) do not like DSLRs much.
chrism_scotland
06-25-2012, 10:57
I always thought of the X-Pro1 as an alternative to a DSLR. If you are into DSLRs, they are always the better value... but ergonomically, a lot of us RF user (former / current) do not like DSLRs much.
I can't blame you, I certainly would be wary of DSLR handling if I was used to RF cameras!!
I suspect part of my issue is the other way around is being used to large DSLR's (Sony A700, Pentax K20D) and then trying to get use to smaller bodies, I've found smaller DSLR's a struggle to be comfortable as well though as I seem to have hands too large for a lot of the grips!!!
For me I think I'm going to pass my X-Pro 1 on for now, with the 35mm its easily the best camera I've ever owned but the 18mm just hasn't done anything for me and I really need wider glass. The 14mm looks very interesting but I really need wider glass just now rather than later in the year, easily best IQ and I would certainly have another when there are more lenses but for me I think I might go back to a full DSLR again, especially as I've just enrolled on a photography degree which will need more kit (lenses) than the X-Pro can supply at present.
brandonskinner
06-26-2012, 17:33
Don't know about you guys, but as a street photographer the worst thing you can do is put your camera in your pocket... you will miss the shot every time.
Also, I can't believe anyone complains about the X-Pro being too heavy. Heavy vs. what, your iPhone?
Pocketable is not about having it in your pocket when you are actually engaged in photographing.
SausalitoDog
06-26-2012, 19:37
Don't know about you guys, but as a street photographer the worst thing you can do is put your camera in your pocket... you will miss the shot every time.
Also, I can't believe anyone complains about the X-Pro being too heavy. Heavy vs. what, your iPhone?
You're right about that. I originally bought the x100 because it was the largest sensor that would fit in my pocket.
But when I'm out with it, even if it starts in the pocket, i find it around my neck most of the time. With the xp1, since it won't fit in my pocket, it's always around by neck :-)
Tom
willie_901
06-27-2012, 06:57
I don't own any pockets large enough for the X100.
SausalitoDog
06-27-2012, 07:54
I don't own any pockets large enough for the X100.
Willie-
Though it"s not exactly Fashion Forward, let me suggest a pair of cargo shorts for Summer
I can easily get my X-Pro1 into a jacket pocket with the 18mm lens mounted.
jsrockit
06-27-2012, 08:00
Willie-
Though it"s not exactly Fashion Forward, let me suggest a pair of cargo shorts for Summer
Might bruise your leg though one that camera starts swinging around... ;)
Aristophanes
06-27-2012, 08:11
Willie-
Though it"s not exactly Fashion Forward, let me suggest a pair of cargo shorts for Summer
Better than capri pants :p
jsrockit
06-27-2012, 08:58
http://a2.zassets.com/images/z/1/3/1/4/6/8/1314687-p-MULTIVIEW.jpg
This thread should have an NSFW label. I mean, Capri pants and bare midriff? Some of us Americans are still Puritans, you know! :)
SausalitoDog
06-27-2012, 09:22
If you dress like that, you have to skip the morning donut...
This thread should have an NSFW label. I mean, Capri pants and bare midriff? Some of us Americans are still Puritans, you know! :)
I'm a proud Scotsman!
Aristophanes
06-27-2012, 10:56
I'm a proud Scotsman!
Like this?
https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTcNNHSfqA33N_aF_SnzzDMeA44j1hRZ kvQAPZ2k0v6ueEYNXcxvw
Oh, boys, really: normally I'm strictly against censorship, but these last "fashion" posts... :eek:
David_Manning
06-27-2012, 13:41
I can't believe what happened to my post!!! ;)
Archiver
06-27-2012, 19:04
Capri pants are stylish on women. The right women.
http://stewardshipoflifeinstitute.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/hepburn.jpg
As for the X-Pro 1, it's interesting how people's opinions vary on the handling and perception of build quality. Many love how light it is, particularly compared with a Leica or DSLR. Others think it feels hollow or plasticky. I very much like its lightness compared with the M9, but in terms of feel there is nothing like the feel of a M and manual focus lens.
Dave, you would find it weirdly boxy at first because of the edges. The M9 and X100 have rounded ends, but the X-Pro 1 is very much like a box with hard edges. The grip part is quite nice, and I could shoot with it one-handed.
SausalitoDog
06-27-2012, 19:48
Now THAT'S a classic photo !!!
willie_901
06-27-2012, 21:11
Hilarious. I needed the laughs. Thanks!
Capri pants are stylish on women. The right women.
As for the X-Pro 1, it's interesting how people's opinions vary on the handling and perception of build quality. Many love how light it is, particularly compared with a Leica or DSLR. Others think it feels hollow or plasticky. I very much like its lightness compared with the M9, but in terms of feel there is nothing like the feel of a M and manual focus lens.
Dave, you would find it weirdly boxy at first because of the edges. The M9 and X100 have rounded ends, but the X-Pro 1 is very much like a box with hard edges. The grip part is quite nice, and I could shoot with it one-handed.
The right woman... Yes!
The tartan trousers... Nope!
To have a laugh!... Yes!
Yes, I do like the small hand grip on the X-Pro1. It just big enough without becoming bulky. The M9 really only needs a thumb rest like the ones from Match. I still say the X-Pro1's size and build is just right as it gives me just the tight weight, grip area, and the right build size to make it a comfortable camera to use. Much like the M9.
Aristophanes
06-28-2012, 01:58
Like capri pants, the X-Pro 1 appears to be a polarizing camera.
Capris depend on the right legs ... ;)
David_Manning
07-02-2012, 17:55
Okay everyone, time to eat some crow.
I am a flip-flopper. Read that clearly!
I went shooting today with a friend, a new X-Pro 1 owner. I toted along my X100 and my 5DmkII (we drove my car so I could leave a camera in the trunk). He has the 35/1.4, and an 18mm is shipping. So, I put my 50/1.4 on my markII, and away we went, strolling the streets of Fort Worth, Texas, looking for nothing in particular to photograph.
My shutter went *clunk*, his went *snick.* His XP1 began looking sexier in the hand...compact, black, with that beautiful hunk of glass in front. Yes, we traded. Yes, I shot with it. Yes, I held it longer than the thirty seconds in the camera store.
Guess what? I have GAS really bad! I want one!
So, ignore all my previous whining. It's got right all the things I love about the X100, and it's got the interchangeable lens stuff that I sometimes miss.
So, I'm a flippin' flip-flopper!!! Bring it on!
(saving my pennies).
Okay everyone, time to eat some crow.
I am a flip-flopper. Read that clearly!
I went shooting today with a friend, a new X-Pro 1 owner. I toted along my X100 and my 5DmkII (we drove my car so I could leave a camera in the trunk). He has the 35/1.4, and an 18mm is shipping. So, I put my 50/1.4 on my markII, and away we went, strolling the streets of Fort Worth, Texas, looking for nothing in particular to photograph.
My shutter went *clunk*, his went *snick.* His XP1 began looking sexier in the hand...compact, black, with that beautiful hunk of glass in front. Yes, we traded. Yes, I shot with it. Yes, I held it longer than the thirty seconds in the camera store.
Guess what? I have GAS really bad! I want one!
So, ignore all my previous whining. It's got right all the things I love about the X100, and it's got the interchangeable lens stuff that I sometimes miss.
So, I'm a flippin' flip-flopper!!! Bring it on!
(saving my pennies).
Lol :D
Xp1 takes a while to get used to, even for those of us with x100 sometimes. I don't think there is a camera w/o quirks out there. In the end of he day, the Fuji cameras hit the marks that were important to me and I figured out ways to live with its quirks.
I still have my Nikon slr and dslr setups, but they are awful lonely lately...
Hope u decide to keep the x100 after u buy the xp1! They both have there place in the tool kit. And of course "resistance is futile" :p u know u want it.
Good luck
Gary
SausalitoDog
07-02-2012, 21:16
Yeah... Resistance is quite futile...
For walkaround jaunts, it's pretty hard to beat one of the Fuji hybrid beauties :-)
It's not for sports or wildlife, it's for walking around taking great shots. It will be quite nice in a studio, but probably you still would rather use the slr in that setting. I haven't even bothered to order a really right stuff bracket for it - I don't plan to ever put it on a tripod. This is a camera to walk and run with and have fun with and be unobtrusive with and make some great photos that way for a very nice change (just mho :-)
tom
I can't believe some of these replies and what you guys are focusing on.. Seriously? Capri pants? it really makes me wonder if some of you would cry at the thought of carrying around a GW690 or something of that ilk. None of the M-series or X-series are anything even remotely worth worrying about, size-wise.
CK Dexter Haven
07-02-2012, 22:18
Okay everyone, time to eat some crow.
I am a flip-flopper. Read that clearly!
Guess what? I have GAS really bad! I want one! ....So, I'm a flippin' flip-flopper!!! Bring it on!
(saving my pennies).
I understand.
I posted earlier that i really didn't like the feel of it, in the five minutes i spent with it at B&H. But, since then, i seem to be readjusting my thoughts, and now i'm considering the Pro again. Still wish it were more 'dense' and closer in size to the X100, but the reviews of the 35mm and the sensor have been making an impression. I could now see myself traveling with the Pro and a TLR or Hasselblad.
I do need to re-scold B&H, thought. Not having a charged battery in the demo model is inexcusable.
Okay everyone, time to eat some crow.
I am a flip-flopper. Read that clearly!
I went shooting today with a friend, a new X-Pro 1 owner. I toted along my X100 and my 5DmkII (we drove my car so I could leave a camera in the trunk). He has the 35/1.4, and an 18mm is shipping. So, I put my 50/1.4 on my markII, and away we went, strolling the streets of Fort Worth, Texas, looking for nothing in particular to photograph.
My shutter went *clunk*, his went *snick.* His XP1 began looking sexier in the hand...compact, black, with that beautiful hunk of glass in front. Yes, we traded. Yes, I shot with it. Yes, I held it longer than the thirty seconds in the camera store.
Guess what? I have GAS really bad! I want one!
So, ignore all my previous whining. It's got right all the things I love about the X100, and it's got the interchangeable lens stuff that I sometimes miss.
So, I'm a flippin' flip-flopper!!! Bring it on!
(saving my pennies).
Haha yup. You have expectations when you hold them at a shop for the first time, and when it turns out to be different to your pre-conceptions you get that kickback - but when you have thrown those away and spent a little more time with it with an open mind it certainly does grow on you. I think all the fujifilm cameras - digital and film are a bit like that.
David,
This happens so often... A change of heart with the x pro. Hence my original post. Your not the only one. I let a guy with a main brand felt use mine in the store for a while. He came around too.
Welcome...
jsrockit
07-03-2012, 04:13
I can't believe some of these replies and what you guys are focusing on.. Seriously? Capri pants? it really makes me wonder if some of you would cry at the thought of carrying around a GW690 or something of that ilk. None of the M-series or X-series are anything even remotely worth worrying about, size-wise.
Lighten up man, its only the internet. :)
Lighten up man, its only the internet. :)
My reply was a touch of light hearted humour ;-)
Having both the M9 and the X-Pro1, I can say they are very similar in size and handling. Both have their merits and frustrations too in equal measure. The M9 viewfinder can be difficult to focus due to the small focusing window especially if like myself, you wear glasses. The X-Pro1 is a pig to manually focus due to the excessive travel of the focusing ring, but I'd say both are very rewarding to use too in their different ways. Either way, it's down to the individual to make up their mind as to whether these cameras will suit. But it can be argued that there are no cameras made that will satisfy all photographer's but this camera - the X-Pro1 - is a very nice camera and will get better as each update is added.
texchappy
07-14-2012, 19:26
So which is closer to my Zorki 4 - the X100 or the X Pro 1. It’s the only thing I have to reference off of for this comparison.
So which is closer to my Zorki 4 - the X100 or the X Pro 1. It’s the only thing I have to reference off of for this comparison.
The closest thing to a zorki 4 is a lada niva that mated with a brick and one of those old telescopes that pirates used.
But seriously, they're not very alike at all...
willie_901
07-15-2012, 05:59
I vote for the old telescope... thanks for giving me a the first smile of the day.
Herjulfr
07-15-2012, 08:33
My first thoughts... I come from a canon slr system : 350d, Eos 1n (which is about the same size as a 5D), 17-40mm, 50mm and 135mm lens. The xPro is much lighter, much smaller than the 1n alone. I think it is lighter than the 135mm... I also have a Canonet, and with a lens mounted, the Fuji is still lighter.
The overall feeling is nice, the body seems to be solid, it doesn't feel plastic at all. However, the buttons seem a little cheap, as if they were made of an inferior kind of plastic. Maybe is it due to the texture. The on/off switch is especially dubious, it almost feels fragile.
The lens feels nice and solid, even if extremely light.
About the look : i like it, i prefer it to the curvy leica look, as i like more square formats, like the zeiss ikon. I still prefer the ZI, look-wise...
texchappy
07-15-2012, 08:41
The closest thing to a zorki 4 is a lada niva that mated with a brick and one of those old telescopes that pirates used.
But seriously, they're not very alike at all...
I was talking size wise.
Jamie Pillers
07-15-2012, 08:48
The closest thing to a zorki 4 is a lada niva that mated with a brick and one of those old telescopes that pirates used.
Seriously funny! :)
Jamie Pillers
07-15-2012, 08:49
My reply was a touch of light hearted humour ;-)
Having both the M9 and the X-Pro1, I can say they are very similar in size and handling. Both have their merits and frustrations too in equal measure. The M9 viewfinder can be difficult to focus due to the small focusing window especially if like myself, you wear glasses. The X-Pro1 is a pig to manually focus due to the excessive travel of the focusing ring, but I'd say both are very rewarding to use too in their different ways. Either way, it's down to the individual to make up their mind as to whether these cameras will suit. But it can be argued that there are no cameras made that will satisfy all photographer's but this camera - the X-Pro1 - is a very nice camera and will get better as each update is added.
Nicely put.
guys i just found out about this point and shoot and it looks like xpro
called dmc-lc1
Audii-Dudii
07-15-2012, 12:55
guys i just found out about this point and shoot and it looks like xpro
called dmc-lc1
The DMC-LC1 was not a point and shoot! It was, in fact, the first serious digital camera I ever bought, as I couldn't resist its traditional form-factor and (for the time) very good image quality. It's a shame Panasonic never saw fit to upgrade its 5MP sensor, as the lens/sensor combo produced some very nice files, especially when converted to IR-only use. I ultimately ended up with two of them, as well as Leica's version, the Digilux 2 ... and still have them.
That said, I think the DMC-L1 looks more like the X-Pro1 than the LC1 does. And Yes, I have one of those in my closet, too ... when I did I become a camera packrat? <sigh>
David_Manning
02-15-2013, 19:58
Time for a thread revival!
My X-Pro 1 ships Monday. I'm hoping my "new found" positive opinion is still accurate.
It didn't look like the relatively expensive piece of kit that it is to my eyes!
But that's a good thing, no?
willie_901
02-15-2013, 20:07
What changed your mind David?
Try an X-E1. It is a LOT smaller. Right in between a CLE and an M6 (I have all three). Perfect. Though not as small as a NEX-7. And if you want a slight counterweight just add one of these (http://reallyrightstuff.com/Items.aspx?code=BodyFujiXE1&key=cat). Best digital I've ever used, including (by a bit) the X-Pro1.
back alley
02-15-2013, 20:14
Time for a thread revival!
My X-Pro 1 ships Monday. I'm hoping my "new found" positive opinion is still accurate.
as much as i love the size of the x-e1...the x-pro1 is growing on me again!
Time for a thread revival!
My X-Pro 1 ships Monday. I'm hoping my "new found" positive opinion is still accurate.
I'm sure you wont regret it! Enjoy!
David_Manning
02-16-2013, 07:50
Once the X-Pro 1 got into my hands in the real world (a friend's purchase), it was very reminiscent of my M6. Size, view, handling. And, it was very similar to my X100.
It's grown on me...which is why I bought one.
For a pocket-carry camera, I have a Sony RX100, which truly is awesome. But for more focused photography, the X-Pro 1 should fit the ticket.
I'm glad I came around.
David_Manning
02-16-2013, 07:54
As an added note, I'm a viewfinder snob of sorts. EVF can't fully replace a nice bright OVF. Even my little RX100 has that fact as a chink in it's armor.
I have an M8 wth a grip attached and an X Pro 1 with a Really Right Stuff grip. I cannot see any differance in size at all. For my hands, the X Pro is perfect. I have also a NEX 5n and it is too small for my hands. My fingers trip over each other with the NEX. I also held the x100 and my fingers were not happy. Too small. X Pro just right for me. I guess this is because I used to be a defensive lineman in college football and still bench 359lbs at 47 years old!
As an added note, I'm a viewfinder snob of sorts. EVF can't fully replace a nice bright OVF. Even my little RX100 has that fact as a chink in it's armor.
I use a Zeiss hot-shoe finder on my X-E1. Blows everything else (especially any finder made by Leica) out of the water.
Stephen G
02-17-2013, 12:33
For the first year of M8 usage, I went "bare".
Then I added the M grip. Then I added the Thumbs-Up.
Then sold the grip & bought an A&A half case.
Settled on A&A half case PLUS ThumbsUp combo in the end.
I've gone through a similar process with the XPro1...
Bare.. not quite right.
Fuji grip.. nice, but not enough.
Added the ThumbsUp to the Fuji grip.. better, not perfect, but working for now.
Going to come down to personal ergonomic preferences.. you can't tell for sure until you try.
Best thing to do is be aware of the grip/case/etc options, and try them if you can.
shadowfox
02-18-2013, 17:58
Last week I went to the camera store to pick up some print developer and stopbath.
On the way out, my eyes caught a glimpse of the Fuji X-100 and X-Pro in the display case.
I have to say, it looks like a very usable camera, size wise it is par with my M-4P, and the 18/2 lens would make a what... 27mm f2 equivalent of film? That's almost good enough for me to be the only lens. Tempting, but good thing I'm not in the market for another digital camera.
Last week I went to the camera store to pick up some print developer and stopbath.
On the way out, my eyes caught a glimpse of the Fuji X-100 and X-Pro in the display case.
I have to say, it looks like a very usable camera, size wise it is par with my M-4P, and the 18/2 lens would make a what... 27mm f2 equivalent of film? That's almost good enough for me to be the only lens. Tempting, but good thing I'm not in the market for another digital camera.
My most used RF combination prior to purchasing the XE-! was the M4-2 and the 28/1.9 Ultron. Which is why I got the 18/2. A combination that works very well indeed. I don't care that the 35/1.4 trumps it in the sharpness stakes, the 18/2 is a very good lens regardless.
The 18mm lens is actually superb. Sharp right to the corners from f4 and up, and fantastic close up and f2 for documentary style portraiture. Flare resistance is off the charts too. Don't know where it's average rep comes from...
jsrockit
02-19-2013, 05:07
Don't know where it's average rep comes from...
From comparing it to the 35mm 1.4. ;)
willie_901
02-19-2013, 05:46
The 18mm lens is actually superb. Sharp right to the corners from f4 and up, and fantastic close up and f2 for documentary style portraiture. Flare resistance is off the charts too. Don't know where it's average rep comes from...
The lack of love for the 18/2 is due to what is jsrocket wrote and because the lens relies on a large amount of software barrel correction. In about 10% of my photos the combination of ACR's rendering and the high degree of barrel distortion correction don't work well together. It takes a bit of extra time to remove edge artifacts that look like CA, but aren't. Otherwise Lightroom quickly corrects the actual CA which is minimal but greater than the 35/1.4.
At the same time, the center performance is excellent, and this compact lens is a joy to have on the camera. The AF performance is good too. For reportage work it is a must have lens. I will keep my 18/2 even though I am about to order the new 14/2.8.
shadowfox
02-19-2013, 16:37
The perfect lens for me would be a 24mm f/2 which is roughly 35mm.
I can't wait for full-frame models to come out, then we can do away with all these barrel distortion stuff.
willie_901
02-19-2013, 18:30
The perfect lens for me would be a 24mm f/2 which is roughly 35mm.
I can't wait for full-frame models to come out, then we can do away with all these barrel distortion stuff.
The Nikkor 16-35/4 and 17-35/2.8 have their fair share of barrel distortion and these are not DX lenses. The former has predominantly first order distortion while the latter has significant second order distortion as well. The 16-35/4 is particularly bad at 16 mm and the Adobe lens correction profiles can't fully correct. By 20 mm the barrel distortion is well controlled by the ACR lens profile.
It seems the Fujinon 14/2.8 XF lens has very low barrel distortion and it is also relatively large. The 18/2 pancake design trades compactness for in-lens barrel distortion correction.
shadowfox
02-20-2013, 06:06
The Nikkor 16-35/4 and 17-35/2.8 have their fair share of barrel distortion and these are not DX lenses. The former has predominantly first order distortion while the latter has significant second order distortion as well. The 16-35/4 is particularly bad at 16 mm and the Adobe lens correction profiles can't fully correct. By 20 mm the barrel distortion is well controlled by the ACR lens profile.
It seems the Fujinon 14/2.8 XF lens has very low barrel distortion and it is also relatively large. The 18/2 pancake design trades compactness for in-lens barrel distortion correction.
I understand that.
What I meant was no more using 18mm to simulate 28mm, causing us to jump through software hoops to correct distortions.
With full frame, you don't have to contend with it unless you really are getting super wide view in return.
willie_901
02-20-2013, 11:28
Shadow fox
Exactly what type of distortion are you refering to?
Darthfeeble
02-20-2013, 16:47
I would love to have someone explain to me the worth of the camera's looks. Two things are relevant, is it easy to use and more importantly does it take a good image. I find the XP1 to fill the bill rather well on both counts.
Herjulfr
02-20-2013, 17:22
I would love to have someone explain to me the worth of the camera's looks. Two things are relevant, is it easy to use and more importantly does it take a good image. I find the XP1 to fill the bill rather well on both counts.
The worth? Just like for everything else. People tend to like pretty objects, be it a toaster, a coffee machine etc. Why not a camera?
jsrockit
02-21-2013, 04:05
I would love to have someone explain to me the worth of the camera's looks.
Sometimes a pretty camera may make you want to go out and use it more. Anything that helps you connect with a camera surely can't be a bad thing. The more connected you are to the camera, the better chance you have of making good images. Just my opinion.
David_Manning
02-26-2013, 06:49
A few observations from my first day with the X-Pro 1.
As a refresher to this post, I wasn't thrilled with it when I saw it for a few minutes in the camera store. Later, a good friend bought one and we spent an afternoon shooting together (his XP1 and my 5DmkII, both with 50mm FoV lenses). I then ate crow, flip-flopped, and stated my desire to own one.
Flash forward to today. My impressions...
The X-Pro 1 is a very solid camera. It's heavier than my X100 and handles like I remember my M6...actually, a little better with the small built-in grip. I added a Lensmate thumb rest, and it's terrific. It feels like a professional camera.
My X100 is terrific, but I always wondered about delicate electronic parts, the aperture, and the little leaf shutter. The XP1 feels tough, and the shutter is solid and sounds/feels like a well-damped Nikon F6 shutter, which I thought was the best focal-plane shutter I've ever used.
The lens is solid and professional-feeling.
Overall, it doesn't feel like consumer electronics, it feels like a professional camera...the quality (my perception) is on par with the 5DmkII I also shoot.
Now, if they could get the RAW issue worked out for Apple's Aperture...
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8228/8509072336_f93b2e49dd_c.jpg
Jamie Pillers
02-26-2013, 06:59
Regarding RAW processing, I saw yesterday on dpreview that Adobe has apparently figured out the Xtrans RAW output. So maybe Apple is not far behind?? I hope so, as Aperture has become my all-time favorite image handling software.
PeterPrism
02-27-2013, 04:17
I come from 6x4.5 format (mamiya 645 super). i think that my x-Pro1 is really small !!! (Theory of relativity)
Referring to the diopter lens, my +2 Cosina Lens fitted in for me is a MUST not a disadvantage (Theory of relativity II)
:-)
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.