Fujifilm X-mount Image Thread
/forum/topic/1097477/63

1       2       3              63      
64
       65              578       579       end

frezeiss
Registered: Sep 13, 2011
Total Posts: 587
Country: Indonesia

Nice set Jordan!

Anyone here owning and XE-1 but resisting badly the GAS of getting the X100s?



naturephoto1
Registered: Nov 09, 2005
Total Posts: 3756
Country: United States

Here are some photos taken with my X-E1 camera and my Leica 35-70mm f4 Vario Elmar zoom lens. I had to work these in LR4.4RC, particularly the ones of the Sunset. I did not have time to use my Singh-Ray Grad ND filters and had to do the work in LR. A little sharpening was used in the original file before resizing. The only file with additional sharpening after resizing was the first.

Rich



naturephoto1
Registered: Nov 09, 2005
Total Posts: 3756
Country: United States

Here are some photos taken with my X-E1 camera and my Leica 280mm f4 Apo Telyt lens. I had to work these in LR4.4RC, I did not have time to use my Singh-Ray Grad ND filters and had to do the work in LR. A little sharpening was used in the original file before resizing. No additional sharpening after re-sizing.

Rich



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 13007
Country: United States

frezeiss wrote:
Nice set Jordan!

Anyone here owning and XE-1 but resisting badly the GAS of getting the X100s?


Thanks! I had the X100s on pre-order, but canceled it when I decided to get the X-E1 and 35/1.4 instead (for the same price). I think I made the right decision. Even though I only have the 35/1.4 and 18-55 at the moment, I, of course, now have access to tons of my lenses via adapter as well, so it made more sense. I only sometimes enjoy the 35mm FOV anyway, and I realized that my OM-D and 14mm f/2.5 makes for a package just as small, but with awesome IBIS for times I want to go really small, and with the GX1, it's even smaller. If I wanted a fast 35mm equivalent, the Olympus 17mm f/1.8 is less than half the price of an X100s, so it didnt' make a lot of sense for me to go that route...but getting a higher image quality system for the same cost? Made a little more sense.



WavecrestPhoto
Registered: Sep 02, 2011
Total Posts: 179
Country: United States

Anybody using the Xpro or X-E1 care to comment on using it with manual adapted glass? Is it easy to achieve focus? Possible to shoot somewhat quickly on the fly?



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 13007
Country: United States

Generally, it's pretty easy. The EVF in the X-E1 is very high res, so in decent light, it is pretty easy to see where the focus point is, though in low light, it gets a little laggy and can be difficult at times. It is easy to zoom by pressing the rear wheel, which easily allows for extremely precise focus, though for some reason you can't zoom the viewfinder when it's writing an image to the card, so after shooting, you need to wait for the buffer to clear before zooming again. Overall, I find it easier with something like the X-E1 over a DSLR...it's easier to see what's in and out of focus.



Brody LeBlanc
Registered: Oct 04, 2007
Total Posts: 1052
Country: Canada

WavecrestPhoto wrote:
Brody - these look great! How do you find focusing the manual glass on your fuji? I've been giving it a lot of thought for my m mount glass. I'm ok with moderately moving subjects on the Leica, but wondered how it would be with the X1. Apologies if this question has been asked and answered already! Thanks!!
Kevin


Hey Kevin,

Focusing manual glass isn't too hard with the X-Pro1, obviously you need to get use to the EVF first.
Having the 3x magnification is great, but I often can focus without magnifying.
Using the Leica R glass with the Speed Booster helps a lot of being able to see the depth of field more clearly.
If you're buying an X series camera to use third party glass, I'd highly recommend the XE-1 over the X-Pro1 due to the higher resolution EVF. Hope this helps .



WavecrestPhoto
Registered: Sep 02, 2011
Total Posts: 179
Country: United States

Thanks Brody - this helps a lot! I've been shooting M8 for a while now and love the RF System, but wanted to add something smaller and lighter. It sounds like the X-E1 would be the way to go. I'm going to road test an NEX7 tomorrow to try the focus peaking, but I prefer the ergonomics and the look of the Fuji files much more from what I've seen so far. Getting feedback from people who have been down this road helps very much! It will be awesome to have a portable body with great IQ for long shooting days!



WavecrestPhoto
Registered: Sep 02, 2011
Total Posts: 179
Country: United States

Jman - thank you as well. I use Zeiss manual glass on my Canons and do fairly well with the 35mm and 50 mp. The focus confirmation is dialed in so that tends to help a great deal. Are the write times to card very long? Hopefully I'll be able to focus without zoom so this won't slow things down. Looking forward to learning the new system - and also to a weight reduced additional body



Jochenb
Registered: May 25, 2010
Total Posts: 2078
Country: Belgium

frezeiss wrote:
Jochenb, thanks you! Haven't seen a photo from you for a while..


I haven't been shooting much lately. Also bought a Sony RX1 which I've been using instead of my X-E1.
I'm sure that'll change now I have the Fuji 14mm lens. It's lovely. Maybe not on the same level as my 21 distagon, but great nonetheless. It's much smaller and lighter.
BTW, apart from the IQ (the FF sony sensor is amazing) I think I like my X-E1 better than the RX1.



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 13007
Country: United States

I'd be interested in your thoughts between the 14/2.8 and the 21 Distagon. I don't expect the fuji to match that legendary glass, but I'd be interested in knowing how close it comes.



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 16163
Country: Germany

Jman13 wrote:
I'd be interested in your thoughts between the 14/2.8 and the 21 Distagon. I don't expect the fuji to match that legendary glass, but I'd be interested in knowing how close it comes.


I am interested in the RX1 vs X-E1 comparison myself



Jochenb
Registered: May 25, 2010
Total Posts: 2078
Country: Belgium

I'm usually not really into making 'technical' A/B pixelpeeping comparisons, but who knows I might do some when my new website is finished.

Some quick thoughts (I'm sorry if it looks a bit chaotic ):

The biggest optical differences between the xf14 and 21 distagon (on a 5DII) are the almost lack of distortion of the Fuji vs the better fine detail of the Zeiss (the x-trans sensor also can't handle fine detail as well as bayer). Colors and general look are also different. The Zeiss always gives me a stronge sense of 'being there', Fuji is more about a nice tonality to me. Both are sharp corner to corner stopped down. Both seem to handle flare well.
The fuji sensor has better dynamic range, which is nice. The xf14 is a fantastic lens for this system, without a doubt. I'm going to use it instead of the Zeiss when traveling.

The X-E1 doesn't have that nice Zeiss sonnar lens of the RX1. It also doesn't feel as solid. The sensor in the RX1 is incredible. Huge dynamic range and files that just feel very robust. I'm always very pleased with the results.
The Fuji feels more like a camera though. The layout is better, the ergonomics are better (I use the grip on my X-E1), built-in EVF, better menus, ability to use an electronic shutter release, you can make the AF box really small, standard hotshoe which isn't occupied by an EVF,...
I have the EVF for my RX1 and yes it's faster, but it has more eye strain. You have to look around to see the whole frame. Looking through the X-E1 EVF feels more relaxed and sharp. I also like the location of it better (built-in on the left vs external on top).
Right now I'm really happy with both cameras.



buggz2k
Registered: Mar 10, 2010
Total Posts: 1938
Country: United States

Shrug, not that I'm in any way an expert, but, I'm not understanding why some find the Fuji X-Trans sensor isn't that great for sharpness.
I guess that is why there are different choices for different people, we all like differing things, to some degree.
Anywho, I have no complaints.
Guess I don't like crunchy sharpness, I rarely sharpen any of my 5DMkII files.
Nor do I understand all the AF complaints, I take it for what it is, and you have to learn the idiosyncrasies of the system, of ANY system.
I like my X-E1, a lot.
I don't have another small system to compare it to, only a DSLR.
I hope to run some of my own tests soon and compare it against my Canon 5DMkII, AND, use the same lens on both.



Jman13
Registered: May 02, 2005
Total Posts: 13007
Country: United States

Some quick night shots with the 35/1.4. The first one is one of my favorite shots I've taken in the past few weeks.

Footsteps:






Trinity Church:












frezeiss
Registered: Sep 13, 2011
Total Posts: 587
Country: Indonesia

Jman13 wrote:
I'd be interested in your thoughts between the 14/2.8 and the 21 Distagon. I don't expect the fuji to match that legendary glass, but I'd be interested in knowing how close it comes.


Jordan, I have both the ZF 21 and the Fuji 14 and so far I'm quite confident to keep the D700 at home when doing landscape shots. A few reason behind this:

1. The XE-1 combo is lighter and produces better colors than the D700 + ZF 21. This might change when I decided to upgrade to the D600 or the M 240.

2. The 14 mm doesnt vignette with the Cokin Z or Lee 100 holder while the ZF 21 does so and required cropping so it essetianly becomes a 23 mm.

3. Sharpness of the 14 mm is excellent, photozone says it aint that sharp in the corners but I havent detect it in real world samples to be worried. Perhaps this is what separates the 14 to the 21 though

However, I will still buy the Zeiss 12 as I prefer 18 mm equiv. to 21.



frezeiss
Registered: Sep 13, 2011
Total Posts: 587
Country: Indonesia

Jochenb wrote:
I'm usually not really into making 'technical' A/B pixelpeeping comparisons, but who knows I might do some when my new website is finished.

Some quick thoughts (I'm sorry if it looks a bit chaotic ):

The biggest optical differences between the xf14 and 21 distagon (on a 5DII) are the almost lack of distortion of the Fuji vs the better fine detail of the Zeiss (the x-trans sensor also can't handle fine detail as well as bayer). Colors and general look are also different. The Zeiss always gives me a stronge sense of 'being there', Fuji is more about a nice tonality to me. Both are sharp corner to corner stopped down. Both seem to handle flare well.
The fuji sensor has better dynamic range, which is nice. The xf14 is a fantastic lens for this system, without a doubt. I'm going to use it instead of the Zeiss when traveling.

The X-E1 doesn't have that nice Zeiss sonnar lens of the RX1. It also doesn't feel as solid. The sensor in the RX1 is incredible. Huge dynamic range and files that just feel very robust. I'm always very pleased with the results.
The Fuji feels more like a camera though. The layout is better, the ergonomics are better (I use the grip on my X-E1), built-in EVF, better menus, ability to use an electronic shutter release, you can make the AF box really small, standard hotshoe which isn't occupied by an EVF,...
I have the EVF for my RX1 and yes it's faster, but it has more eye strain. You have to look around to see the whole frame. Looking through the X-E1 EVF feels more relaxed and sharp. I also like the location of it better (built-in on the left vs external on top).
Right now I'm really happy with both cameras.


Agree on the Zeiss 21 in having a strongger presence than the Fuji 14, I think that goes for Zeiss vs Fuji in general.

Re XE-1 vs RX-1, per pixel basis which one is sharper? from steve huff's M 240 review I come up to the conclusion that the X-trans is sharper than the RX-1. I could be wrong though.



frezeiss
Registered: Sep 13, 2011
Total Posts: 587
Country: Indonesia

buggz2k wrote:
Shrug, not that I'm in any way an expert, but, I'm not understanding why some find the Fuji X-Trans sensor isn't that great for sharpness.
I guess that is why there are different choices for different people, we all like differing things, to some degree.
Anywho, I have no complaints.
Guess I don't like crunchy sharpness, I rarely sharpen any of my 5DMkII files.
Nor do I understand all the AF complaints, I take it for what it is, and you have to learn the idiosyncrasies of the system, of ANY system.
I like my X-E1, a lot.
I don't have another small system to compare it to, only a DSLR.
I hope to run some of my own tests soon and compare it against my Canon 5DMkII, AND, use the same lens on both.


No not really.. the XE-1 is sharper than my NEX 5N and D700



corposant
Registered: Jul 14, 2010
Total Posts: 2960
Country: United States

frezeiss wrote:

However, I will still buy the Zeiss 12 as I prefer 18 mm equiv. to 21.


It will be interesting to see if Zeiss is able to capture any of their larger-format mysticism in lenses that don't require you to look through them via a mirror.



Jochenb
Registered: May 25, 2010
Total Posts: 2078
Country: Belgium

Frezeiss, I agree. I'm even thinking about maybe selling the Zeiss 21. It might be my favorite lens ever, but what's the use if it stays at home all the time.
Personally I feel the RX1 is sharper than my X-E1 with a good lens. Here you also get better fine detail / microcontrast from the sonnar + great sony bayer sensor IMHO.
The sensor in my 5DII really feels dated now.



1       2       3              63      
64
       65              578       579       end