I haven't yet bought the Fuji X-Pro 1, but I have had my eye on it for some time. It's not an urgent matter for me, because I have other cameras and while this may be a better tool for many of the photos I like to take, it's by no means impossible with what I have already got. However, with the recent confirmation of the lens roadmap, it is beginning to look like a more versatile system that could replace with advantage (rather than merely add to) some of what I already have.

However, this would be a significant investment, including (eventually) virtually all of the lenses, so I would like some practical hands-on feedback about the camera's strong and weak points. I think I have already read just about every review on the web about this camera, and several different forums, but there seem to be a number of issues about which there is considerable controversy, such as ...

1. The "green smearing" which seem to occur in some situations, and which some believe to be a hardware (rather than firmware) problem. How serious is it in real life?

2. The slow AF - how slow is it? For comparison, I mostly use Canon cameras (5D2, 7D and G1X), if anyone has experience of these. The 7D probably has the fastest AF of the three, and the G1X the slowest. This latter is a bit marginal at times, but I can live with them all.

3. The sometimes inaccurate AF? While no AF system is fool-proof 100% of the time, I find the three Canon cameras mentioned above quite satisfactory. On the Canon 5D2, I just use the "expanded" centre AF point. How would the X-Pro 1 compare?

4. Have I missed anything important?

I'll probably decide when the 27 / 2.8 pancake comes out - or maybe I'll wait for the X-Pro 2, depending on what I hear from you all. I don't need information that I can already get from the standard sources - it's hands-on feedback and opinion I need. In theory I already know this is a great camera with some - shall we say - imperfections! I'd really appreciate this sort of information.

Thanks, John

Here is an entire thread dedicated to hands on, user feedback from members of this forum:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1102074

To me, the size/shape of the camera was a deal breaker and sent it back. It not something like I would grab on my way out of the house and enjoy a whole day. Maybe is just me having small hands. As for the AF, it is slow. If you have a kid or a pet moving forget about it even with the updated software. For static objects it is perfect. Best thing: the output is simply amazing. I would easily consider it a studio camera more like a street camera.

I have an Xpro-1 and really enjoy using it. If you appreciate the experience of making images with a
'rangefined style' camera you might like an Xpro-1. It sin't nearly as full featured/flexible as a big honking DSLR but I find that is is a bunch of fun to use.

rasterdosg

I returned the camera with strong regret. If I could keep it as a personal use only - I would have happily done so but for me the cost of the whole system is just too high if I can not use it professionally. For professional use it is too slow - it is not just autofocus which is slower then any of your dslr bodies it's also the refresh lag of the EVF and speed of writing files to the card... Basically after a single engagement session I realized that I will loose too many moments that would have been great shots... On the other hand I really loved the image quality, the handling and the lenses... 35mm especially is brilliant - it is as good as pretty much any canon L prime... I most likely will get the next generation -whenever it gets here...

Many thanks to you all!

Tariq,
I did a search for "X-Pro 1" on this forum but I must have missed this one.

I guess I'll wait and watch a while longer!

JohnLL wrote:
I haven't yet bought the Fuji X-Pro 1, but I have had my eye on it for some time. It's not an urgent matter for me, because I have other cameras and while this may be a better tool for many of the photos I like to take, it's by no means impossible with what I have already got. However, with the recent confirmation of the lens roadmap, it is beginning to look like a more versatile system that could replace with advantage (rather than merely add to) some of what I already have.

However, this would be a significant investment, including (eventually) virtually all of the lenses, so I would like some practical hands-on feedback about the camera's strong and weak points. I think I have already read just about every review on the web about this camera, and several different forums, but there seem to be a number of issues about which there is considerable controversy, such as ...

1. The "green smearing" which seem to occur in some situations, and which some believe to be a hardware (rather than firmware) problem. How serious is it in real life?


2. The slow AF - how slow is it? For comparison, I mostly use Canon cameras (5D2, 7D and G1X), if anyone has experience of these. The 7D probably has the fastest AF of the three, and the G1X the slowest. This latter is a bit marginal at times, but I can live with them all.


3. The sometimes inaccurate AF? While no AF system is fool-proof 100% of the time, I find the three Canon cameras mentioned above quite satisfactory. On the Canon 5D2, I just use the "expanded" centre AF point. How would the X-Pro 1 compare?


4. Have I missed anything important?

I'll probably decide when the 27 / 2.8 pancake comes out - or maybe I'll wait for the X-Pro 2, depending on what I hear from you all. I don't need information that I can already get from the standard sources - it's hands-on feedback and opinion I need. In theory I already know this is a great camera with some - shall we say - imperfections! I'd really appreciate this sort of information.

Thanks, John




1. from my tests printing at 360 dpi 15 inch long dimension on an Epson 3800 far too much has been made of this.
I have experienced it on a few images but find it to be pretty much a non issue. Go look at the Xpro-1 images on Flickr. Check out the DPreview review - I find that to be objective - some internet pixel peeper experts beg to differ.I figure the DPreview folks have peeped a fair number of pixels in their day and know of what they speak.


2. AF speed:
I have and use a Canon Rebel, I did have a 1D mark II. Using the Xpro-1 is a more deliberative process. It is not nearly as flexible as a DSLR. I use the camea almost exclusively with the OVF. I enjoy that a bunch.

3. AF accuracy
I find the AF to be very accurate. That accuracy is dependent on the user learning to use the camera correctly.
With the OVF the parallax error between viewfinder and lens can mislead the user.

4.Well, the camera is very different to use than a DSLR. It is also far less obvious and massive. I'm having much more fun going on photo walks with it than I was with my Canon gear. I have a a pretty nice collection of Canon 'L' lenses that are languishing on the shelf. Thought I would keep them but am starting to wonder.
This is a niche kind of camera, if a user is used to 'rangefinder style' cameras they know, and are likely looking forward to the Xpro-1. Otherwise if you user experience and expectations come from DSLRs it would be prudent to try the camera before making a decision .
And finally, other folks who are fond of the Xpro-1 use it mainly in EVF mode and ike that use model as much as I do the EVF.


Cheers,
rasterdogs

I'm not sure that 15" long is a particularly telling print size. Either way, I could be imagining it, but there seems to be a certain kind of plasticky-ness to the web images I see at various places like flickr. Love it or hate it, this camera's output certainly seems different, from what I can tell.

douglasf13 wrote:
I'm not sure that 15" long is a particularly telling print size. Either way, I could be imagining it, but there seems to be a certain kind of plasticky-ness to the web images I see at various places like flickr. Love it or hate it, this camera's output certainly seems different, from what I can tell.

Do you have an Xpro-1?

-rasterdogs

I had an X-Pro1 and returned it after I found the image quality did not match my expectations for what a $2300 camera plus lens should produce. But that's just me (I need more than web quality and 15" sized prints). I did like how it handled and could have overlooked it's other flaws but not IQ. It was certainly a step down from what I'm used to from my old Sony a900 and NEX-7 at low ISO's. If I was a high ISO, street/ people shooter only, it would be a camera on my short list but the IQ is not good enough for higher quality demands IMO (particularly landscape). I found it about on par with an average to decent 16MP $700 - $1000 APS/m43 camera at low ISO and certainly nowhere close to matching a FF 20+MP camera such as a 5DII, a900, etc...at least in it's current state and poor raw output quality.

A couple of interesting reviews of the X-pro1
http://zackarias.com/for-photographers/gear-gadgets/ummm-maybe-ummm-yes-fuji-x-pro-1-review/
and
http://www.michaelcaliblog.com/my-first-x-pro-1-engagement/

I do not own the camera, but I handled one for a little while. My snap impressions? The AF is embarrassing. My old original Digital Rebel absolutely demolished this thing in speed, and it's clunky as well and has a hard time locking on any time the light gets even a little low. (I'm talking 30-40fc...about what a typical interior office or store is lit at). I can't even imagine what it would do in truly low light.

I have had one for awhile and I really enjoy using it. I carry with me all the time, which is one of the main reasons I wanted to the camera, something that was easier to carry around for day to day use that had acceptable use. I am still keeping my Canon dslrs.

There is an issue with color smearing, hopefully that can be corrected with a better demosaic algorithm or some other fix, but it is not a deal breaker for me, for what I do. A lot of the smearing can be dealt with in processing, but it depends on what you need to do and individual images.

Focusing is much slower than a dslr, but then it is not a dslr. I have found that with some experience, I have no problems focusing at all. Like any tool there is a learning curve. It is faster than my wife's G-10 and seems to be more accurate.

I love the feel and the ergonomics and it is a lot less obtrusive camera than a big dslr. What I did was rent one from Lensrentals.com with a couple of lenses and tried it out. I liked it and bought it. You might want to try renting one for a week and really put it through its paces and learn some of the ins and out of the camera. Remember there is a learning curve.

Alan

apsphoto wrote:
Focusing is much slower than a dslr, but then it is not a dslr. I have found that with some experience, I have no problems focusing at all. Like any tool there is a learning curve. It is faster than my wife's G-10 and seems to be more accurate.


I'd buy this as an excuse for the poor AF performance except for the fact that Olympus, Panasonic, Sony and Nikon all managed to find ways to make their mirrorless cameras have single shot AF that is at least on par with DSLRs, and in some cases faster than DSLRs (Olympus/Panasonic). The fact the live view freezes during AF is unacceptable to me as well.

BUT...if you can overlook the AF performance and the bad manual focus implementation as well, it's a high quality imaging machine with outstanding lenses.

Thanks to you all. I'm not going to rush into this, and may wait for the next iteration, if there is one. I have used film RF cameras quite a bit in the past, and that's just what interests me about this one. I also had an EP3 for a while, but although the AF was fast and generally accurate, it seemed to me that under some conditions (which I could not define) the IS actually caused image blur, rather than suppressing it, so I sold it.

JohnLL wrote:
Thanks to you all. I'm not going to rush into this, and may wait for the next iteration, if there is one. I have used film RF cameras quite a bit in the past, and that's just what interests me about this one. I also had an EP3 for a while, but although the AF was fast and generally accurate, it seemed to me that under some conditions (which I could not define) the IS actually caused image blur, rather than suppressing it, so I sold it.

FWIW, I've been loving an X100, which is a fantastic, smaller, cheaper alternative, if you can stand a fixed lens.

The Olympus OSS issues at certain focal lengths and shutter speeds have been documented in other forums. It seems even the OM-D's OSS isn't immune to it, at certain settings.

Don;t want to hijack the thread, but I keep hearing about the "green" issues with the XP1. I'm wondering where it shows up? Obviously not on all shots. Is it just in images focused at infinity? Here's an example in which I don't see any problems with the greens....perhaps there aren't enough of them? Or maybe the last firmware update corrected it...I dunno...as far as hands-on feedback, I love the camera, but wish Fuji had better speedlight options...

Greg

FWIW, I plan to buy it if AF with the 18-55 will be as fast as my 7D + 17-55/2.8 IS. Up to now the the things I've read don't seem too encouraging but I hope this will improve with future FW updates.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Yakim Peled wrote:
FWIW, I plan to buy it if AF with the 18-55 will be as fast as my 7D + 17-55/2.8 IS. Up to now the the things I've read don't seem too encouraging but I hope this will improve with future FW updates.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

I think you would have a hard time beating the 7d and 17-55 in focus speed with anything less than a 1D or 5D3 with a 70-200 2.8 IS II. It is an amazing combo, big but amazing.

Yakim Peled wrote:
FWIW, I plan to buy it if AF with the 18-55 will be as fast as my 7D + 17-55/2.8 IS. Up to now the the things I've read don't seem too encouraging but I hope this will improve with future FW updates.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Interesting. You just mentioned my next purchase...but I'll keep the XP1 and use the 7D for the point and shoot stuff.....

Greg