Looked at some 18mm f/2 and f/2.8 samples on the Fuji microsite, and someone else has shots from the same rail station up at the x100forum.com forum.
I'd been wary, but I'm starting to think it's going to turn out to be a good piece of glass - I'd only be shooting wide open or close in low-light, when absolute sharpness is less relevant. By f/4 or f/5.6 it appears to sharpen up just fine for cityscapes and the like. (It's not that different from my X100, which isn't the sharpest lens on Earth at f/2 but sharpens up nicely by f/2.8 and moves into outstanding range at f/4 and f/5.6.)
The 35mm and 60mm look like killer lenses from wide open onward.
If the 18mm isn't ultimately stellar, I'd welcome the future 14mm being a 'premium' lens, more expensive but tack sharp. I'm okay with paying $1000 or $1200 for a killer lens if necessary.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I agree about the 18. The recently added, 100% samples at the Fuji link above also show the lens to be disappointing. The other two look great though.
Two DPReview example landscapes from Australia taken with the XF 18mm f/2 R (stopped down) showed very good sharpness right into the corners. Unfortunately, these images were pulled from DPR very soon after the original posting. I just went through 25 pages of "X-Pro 1" hits on DRP and couldn't find the original thread. There's a lot more hits, but I lost interest.
Anyway, a few examples that I've seen show me that I can expect good corners when the lens is stopped down. However, most of my shooting with the X-Pro 1 will be of people in low light, with the lens wide open, or nearly so. In this case, I usually want the corners to be soft, as they're probably OOF, anyway.
I haven't had time to review any of the samples out there. One review site in particular keeps saying that the files at base ISO are mushy and soft, worse than something with an AA filter.
I find that hard to believe, as the particular reviewer seems to just be trying to talk himself out of buying it.
So what do the 100% crops look like at base ISO? As detailed as a Nex-7 shot?
I am either getting this or the OM-D. Image quality (at base ISO) usually trumps all for me so I'm waiting for initial reviews.
theophilus wrote:
I haven't had time to review any of the samples out there. One review site in particular keeps saying that the files at base ISO are mushy and soft, worse than something with an AA filter.
I find that hard to believe, as the particular reviewer seems to just be trying to talk himself out of buying it.
So what do the 100% crops look like at base ISO? As detailed as a Nex-7 shot?
I am either getting this or the OM-D. Image quality (at base ISO) usually trumps all for me so I'm waiting for initial reviews.
If you're sensitive to colour resolution, and want optimal detail on base ISO this might not be for you. The luminance detail is certainly very good, but at least the in-camera jpg renditions of base ISO shots is VERY blurred in chroma. Colors "bleed" into each other in a most disconcerting way.
At higher ISO's, this might be a "plus". At base ISO, it's definitely a "minus".
theSuede wrote:
If you're sensitive to colour resolution, and want optimal detail on base ISO this might not be for you. The luminance detail is certainly very good, but at least the in-camera jpg renditions of base ISO shots is VERY blurred in chroma. Colors "bleed" into each other in a most disconcerting way.
At higher ISO's, this might be a "plus". At base ISO, it's definitely a "minus".
Thanks. I'm coming from a 5Dc used with C/Y and Zuiko glass, and currently an X100. Look for a do-it-all MILC for landscapes, portraits, walk-around.
I am growing weary of the high-ISO battle. Give me super-clean, no-AA at ISO 100. I could afford an M9 but my wife would demand that I buy her a horse as penance
Here's hoping Camera Raw will pull the detail out of the new Fuji sensor when all is said and done. Maybe Reichman will be able to look at one with a pre-release of Lightroom.
theophilus wrote:
I am growing weary of the high-ISO battle. Give me super-clean, no-AA at ISO 100. I could afford an M9 but my wife would demand that I buy her a horse as penance
Tell her a horse has a much higher maintenance cost.
I'm massively interested in this camera personally, but I want to see what some of the reviews are like before I make the move. I'm quite ready to move to a compact system as my photographic needs are changing these days. I would only hang on to my 5DmkII with the 35L and 135L, but everything else would go towards this X-Pro1 and the three lenses.
That is.... Unless it turns out to be a bummer, then perhaps the OM-D would be the route I'd take.
I think I've pretty much decided that I'm getting both this one and an M4:3kit at some point, just not sure it will be an OMD. I dont think it's better than Panasonic in any way that matters and I'm not paying extra just for looks, especially considering how often Oly facelifts cameras. But m4:3 will make a nice kit for anything from 45mm and longer, or when fast AF is needed, and I like the 12/2 as a "no focus" option. The Xpro1 will do everything else and I'm also keeping the x100 for the quiet shutter and everyday pocketable camera.
I've started offloading all my other digicams and film rangefinders and keeping only 6X6.
I got to spend a few minutes playing with an Xpro1 yesterday. It was at a promotional event. First off it is a very light camera - much lighter than the M9. The lenses are light as well.
I was not allowed to put in a memory card. I did notice that the viewfinder was very clean and very nice. The focus confirmation tab( rangefinder style) worked very well. The screen appeared to have a very low refresh rate, it would definitely lag when moving the camera.
Spyro P. wrote:
I think I've pretty much decided that I'm getting both this one and an M4:3kit at some point, just not sure it will be an OMD. I dont think it's better than Panasonic in any way that matters and I'm not paying extra just for looks, especially considering how often Oly facelifts cameras. But m4:3 will make a nice kit for anything from 45mm and longer, or when fast AF is needed, and I like the 12/2 as a "no focus" option. The Xpro1 will do everything else and I'm also keeping the x100 for the quiet shutter and everyday pocketable camera. ...Show more →
oly IBIS would certainly be a way that matters for me. i'd just wait a year though and get the OMD for $400. that seems to be the plight of olympus cameras.
Andrew Gough wrote:
I got to spend a few minutes playing with an Xpro1 yesterday. It was at a promotional event. First off it is a very light camera - much lighter than the M9. The lenses are light as well.
I was not allowed to put in a memory card. I did notice that the viewfinder was very clean and very nice. The focus confirmation tab( rangefinder style) worked very well. The screen appeared to have a very low refresh rate, it would definitely lag when moving the camera.
I did not try movie mode.
Andrew
I have been reading that a few people who have handled it found the lenses had a rather cheap and plasticy feel and the body did not quite feel as premium/ substantial as they thought it would (perhaps it's lighter than it's size would lead one to believe). This coming from happy X100 users really makes me wonder about the camera.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I have been reading that a few people who have handled it found the lenses had a rather cheap and plasticy feel and the body did not quite feel as premium/ substantial as they thought it would (perhaps it's lighter than it's size would lead one to believe). This coming from happy X100 users really makes me wonder about the camera.
That sounds like the feeling I got from my old manual focus Fuji GS645S Wide 60 rangefinder. It was kind of light and plasticy, but man did it take good photos! It was also extremely well built, despite its "feel". The more modern "old" AF Fuji 645 rangefinders were even worse, as far as feel and especially operating sounds goes.
As far as I'm concerned, lighter is better, especially when you consider I'll typically be toting at least two bodies and four or five lenses while using them. Right now, it's an X100 and 1DIV. I think an X100 and X-Pro 1, or two X-Pro 1, would be better in a lot of ways, as long as the IQ is there. Here's hoping...
