Oh I forgot to mention the shutter. To my ears the XPro-1's shutter seemed quieter than the NEX-5N shutter. Certainly not as quite as an X100 but I feel its quieter than an M9. Its also very responsive with minimal lag between pressing the shutter button and the camera capturing the image.
Somewhere around page 25 - 28 of this thread you'll find some discussion of them.
At this point I'm more impressed with the sensor implementation than the lenses. The sample shots posted by Fuji and others have for the most part not been all that impressive, particularly Fuji's own shots. Maybe raw files would tell another story.
h00ligan wrote:
In fairness, what photographers get out of the x100 is way better than what fuji's samples indicated.
That's true. I almost did not buy the X100 as the samples were not so hot overall, When I finally did get it, I was quite impressed with the file quality. The XP1 samples look even better than those from the X100 imho.
The only problem I can see with having two of these cameras is the overlapping cost of lenses. As far as raw files go that's a good point, maybe they could convert them to Adobe DNG's.
The still life gives reason to believe the file quality could be quite good, and it uses a known Sony sensor too so some aspects of performance can assumed to be solid, no?
The lenses are a book yet to be written, I think. The 18mm shot of the cool structure seems ok. The 18mm shot of sunset and trees and 35mm photo of the waterfall in particular leave me with questions. Maybe they don't know about tripods in the consumer camera division. Or maybe their own in-camera raw processor still isn't ready for prime time.
Whatever the reason, all I know is that I wouldn't be pre-ordering a camera and lenses with only a little exposure to what they can do from these first images.
Give it a little more time, there'll be plenty of review units out.
My overall impression at this point is that, of you're ok with the handling of the X100 and the size of the X-Pro1, the X-Pro1 will probably be a no brainer, as handling and AF seems improved. I can't imagine the lenses won't be good, and, while not expecting ground breaking sensor performance, it should certainly be as good as any other aps-c camera out there.
For me, I think the size and manual focus options are going to keep me away, but what a cool camera.
douglasf13 wrote:
My overall impression at this point is that, of you're ok with the handling of the X100 and the size of the X-Pro1, the X-Pro1 will probably be a no brainer, as handling and AF seems improved. I can't imagine the lenses won't be good, and, while not expecting ground breaking sensor performance, it should certainly be as good as any other aps-c camera out there.
For me, I think the size and manual focus options are going to keep me away, but what a cool camera.
It's not a no-brainer at the current speculated cost, $1700, given the specs we've seen. Even if it turns out to be a great camera.
This camera is still quite a bit smaller than a 5D ii, which is the point, so I'm not sure it's a valid comparison. Plus, we're talking about 5Dii hardware that is over 3 years old. If you put the Fuji and 5dii in front of me and told me to pick, regardless of price, I'd likely pick the Fuji. Heck, I sold my A900 after using Nex and ZM lenses, because of size.
The Nex-7 is still as much when you factor in lens cost, because the Zeiss 24 is a grand.
ontime wrote:
I'm talking about value for the camera body. Feature wise, I don't see it being worth that much, per se.
Placing the camera within the context of its system, yes, this is a different story. But you have to look at value both ways IMHO.
Well, like I mentioned, you've gotta remember that the 5Dii was $3k at release. Also, the hybrid EVF/OVF tech in the Fuji is quite complicated and likely expensive to implement.
ricardovaste wrote:
are we sure about this? Side by side comparison or just guessing fromm videos?
If so, how much quieter is the 5n compared to original 5? Tried the 5 before and was disappointed with how loud it was, louder than some slrs with mirrors
Ricardo, the dif 5 vs 5n cannot be overstated. I was shocked myself.
The fuji sounds similar to the original nex-5 to me, but we'll have to see.
Wait TDB was at ces and says it's quieter than 5n.......really?
Is he sure about that? Awesome if so
As to the fuji glass, the downside is they won't adapt to another mount ....ever, and are aps-c. In fact is this another mount which can never be ff?
Thanks Douglas for 5 vs 5N shutter sound, that is encouraging to know in general, and also good to know some say the XP1 is similar or quieter to the 5N (if that's some sort of perspective I can grasp, I'm not sure).
Thinking more broadly about this as a system, I guess it really has to work for Fuji and work well, otherwise it could end rather miserably. As the lenses are electronically controlled, you won't be able to use them on any other body, so if Fuji ditch the system one day you're pretty much stuck with useless lenses. They're not manual, so you won't be able to move them onto another body (or similar format, eg nex), nor will you be able to move them onto an old film body as... well it's a new mount so there isn't a film format, nor obviously compatability with other film cameras because of them being electronic. Does that sound overly paranoid? I guess it's because it's Fuji and they ditched the Nikon mount before, but then again they are creating their own system here with all the freedom they want, so they must be pretty confident that it's going to work... and of course have already shown their ambitions with the initial lens release and roadmap.
uhoh7 wrote:
As to the fuji glass, the downside is they won't adapt to another mount ....ever, and are aps-c. In fact is this another mount which can never be ff?
It'll never be full-frame, just look at the mount, no way a full-frame sensor will fit in there. But that isn't the end of the world. As many have mentioned on here, digital technology has advance so far that APS-C really can shine as a format on it's own. Some of the best sensors on the market are in APS-C and that alone allows for a smaller/lighter and less expensive system overall, yet with high all-round "image quality"... I don't look at such stats, but I imagine the "best" aps-c sensors of today would trump the earlier full-frame models in overall "image quality". So, y'know, I guess you accept such a product for what it is or simply don't like it, if one desires full-frame there are affordable options these days. ontime wrote:
Anyways, don't get me wrong, I'd love to have this camera. If you're sitting on a huge pile of cash and this is your perfect camera, then you don't have to make these judgments. However, for most people, it's going to be tough to stomach a $1700 XPro1 body with the NEX-7 and the 5D II sitting beside it - especially if either of those cameras are in consideration.
I've been very interested in this system even since it was mumbled about many months ago, then when there were initial leaks, then when it actually got announced. I have a complete a-mount system (complete for me meaning it does everything required, not meaning I own every a-mount item in existence) so having a 5D2 or a similar SLR model isn't in consideration (all my SLRs are in very low miles). Yet I still find it very hard to justify, or put down the cash as you might say.... but I think that's more about the value of another camera for me, how I'd actually fit it in and whether it would really get used that much...
douglasf13 wrote:
Well, like I mentioned, you've gotta remember that the 5Dii was $3k at release. Also, the hybrid EVF/OVF tech in the Fuji is quite complicated and likely expensive to implement.
From the buyer's standpoint, it doesn't matter how complicated anything is to implement. And it also doesn't matter how much the 5D II was at release - it's all about the current environment.
Anyways, don't get me wrong, I'd love to have this camera. If you're sitting on a huge pile of cash and this is your perfect camera, then you don't have to make these judgments. However, for most people, it's going to be tough to stomach a $1700 XPro1 body with the NEX-7 and the 5D II sitting beside it - especially if either of those cameras are in consideration.
Ricardo, in my opinion your concern over lens portability is warranted but probably you can rest easy about one thing - the X Pro 1 is highly unlikely to be the last Fujifilm camera that will accept these lenses. Buying into the X mount does tie one to Fujifilm to be sure. Probably there'll be other X cameras that can take the lenses; we are still barely into the early evolution of mirrorless compact interchangeable lens digital cameras.
If the lenses perform well then they'll be worth their price tag but at roughly 60% of the cost of a decent Zeiss rangefinder lens, albeit faster in some cases, some buyers may question whether it makes sense to tie themselves to one maker even if they do perform quite well, not that vendor lock in is a new phenomena.
Exactly! No one has brought up this point before, the investment in lenses that might be better but basically useless if Fuji wants to produce a full frame camera. I know with the Sony the same thing applies, but at least with the Sony you can put an adapter on the NEX-7 and use the A lenses which in many cases are way better then the E lenses. One of the first experiments if the NEX-7 becomes available before the Fuji is trying out the adapter with the Zeiss 24mm f2 and seeing how it compares to the 24 mm F1.8. I know this option is a heavier one but if Sony does hit the market with a professional 35mm 36 megapixel full frame it might be the way to go.You could still have one or two e lenses like the 50 mm 1.8 and a Zoom. Has anyone tried the 16 to 50 2.8? Can't wait to see the comparison between the Fuji and Sony.
