Its really surprising to me that Fuji did not produce a very good, all around wide angle lens for the X-Pro1. This either points to a possible issue with all compact wides on this camera in the future or sloppiness on Fuji's part. Given the severe CA outside of the center of the frame, I don't really buy this noition that the lens is intentionally this way simply because Fuji optimized it only for closer subject distances. That CA points to a mediocre optic imo. As someone who is extremely impressed by the 23mm lens on the X100, this is really surprising.
"It is awesome for the price" according to many on various forum, go figure.
Fuji probably figure out if they make a lens with similar performance to NEX 16/2.8 and sell it for $600, people will still buy it and call it "awesome for the price"
We'll find out when the 14mm arrives... and should have a very good idea with the wide zoom about Fuji's capabilities and/or philosophy for this system.
Reads pretty balanced to me - calling Fuji out on a number of issues while praising them where they deserve it. He was also disappointed with the 18mm lens, finding it not up to the high caliber of the other two in the current lineup.
You'd think that Fuji would have learned more from the X100. It really seems like the X-Pro 1 is suffering from 'death by a thousand paper cuts', many of which are issues that were also present in the X100. It's a good thing Fuji seem to have nailed image quality and the 35mm f/1.4 lens, or the camera would be a colossal disappointment. As it is, I'm still interested, but sticking to m43 is looking more tempting. The image quality looks great, but is it enough to overlook the increasing number of usability problems? After all, even m43 can produce great results in many situations.
itai195 wrote:
You'd think that Fuji would have learned more from the X100. It really seems like the X-Pro 1 is suffering from 'death by a thousand paper cuts', many of which are issues that were also present in the X100. It's a good thing Fuji seem to have nailed image quality and the 35mm f/1.4 lens, or the camera would be a colossal disappointment. As it is, I'm still interested, but sticking to m43 is looking more tempting. The image quality looks great, but is it enough to overlook the increasing number of usability problems? After all, even m43 can produce great results in many situations....Show more →
The only small question about the image quality I have is a possible issue with the color gamut. Nicks was the second review I have read where this has come up. He mentioned it was noticeable in comparison to the Leica M9 for instance.
"The Leica had a barely perceptible edge in micro-contrast and, curiously, a clearly noticeable edge in colour gammut and sensitivity."
The other huge issue is raw support. Nick's is the first review I have read where he claims Fuji has not been working with Adobe for raw support.
"And Lightroom does not support it, because Fuji has not cooperated with the resident RAW processing geniuses at Adobe to make it happen. This is kind of a disaster."
This was actually my biggest fear when I first read about the new color filter array Fuji implemented and if they really have not been working close with third party raw developers, that's a huge deal.
Ugh, same stupid Auto ISO as Canon used to have - and different from the X100's usable version.
I wonder if it will work better shooting manually - if you need to freeze subjects, set the camera at, say f/2@1/125 and the ISO will take care of exposure?
I'm actually not that worried about raw support... they'll face an enormous backlash if they don't at least work with Adobe. I'm more worried about relying on a firmware update to get things like a histogram in image review and a functional auto ISO.
The camera hasn't even been released in the US yet. There are a number of cameras that have taken time for LR/Camera RAW to catch up with. Of course it's going to be supported by LR/Aperture/etc. and it won't take long. Fuji isn't stupid.
As to Fuji learning from the X100 and suffering from 'death by a thousand paper cuts' - the X100 is a smash hit. It still sells well, used prices haven't dropped much for a year old camera and it captured enough buzz to encourage them to bring out an entire system based on it. The Fuji is quirky. So is a Leica. If the quirks don't work for you, then the Fuji won't work for you either.
I'm not doubting that the X100 is successful and a great camera, but I'd like to see some progress made in resolving firmware issues over the course of a year. Quirks are also a bigger deal to me when you start talking about buying into a camera system and spending several thousands of dollars over the course of a few years... They're easier to overlook in a one-off purchase like the X100.
That said, I didn't say I've lost interest in the X-Pro1. I'm willing to overlook a lot of quirkiness, but I do hope Fuji will address some of the issues in firmware.
Fuji, unfortunately, does have a poor track record when it comes to working with third parties for raw support. This happened with the SuperCCD sensor S2 I owned. They really should have been way out in front with this.
I do have to wonder if Nick's remark about not working with Adobe is based on any facts or first hand knowledge. Quite a statement to make if it's not. I thought Fuji said something about working with Adobe back in February when the camera was introduced, no?
miloz wrote:
It still sells well, used prices haven't dropped much for a year old camera and it captured enough buzz to encourage them to bring out an entire system based on it.
nah they had been working on the system for 3 years
Let's not count Fuji out on the wide angles just yet, they still have a shot at bringing out some fantastic wide angles.
I am most worried about the X Pro 1 being a can of bugs, software bugs. Maybe they should have out out a more of a market feeler camera named the X (insert acronym here) first, instead of releasing the top model first. Now there is the chance/risk a cheaper alternative will surface, with less teething problems and possibly something useful that the X Pro 1 lacks.
I too find the auto iso less than helpful, especially when on the street.
There is a strightforward workaround by using the camera in full manual mode but with auto iso enabled - I have scribbled a short article on this at http://picabroad.com/
