Yeah, it definitely feels plastic. All the Fujis are very lightweight, even the metal bodies, which makes them feel less solid. The E-P5 is definitely a more robust camera as far as build goes, as is the Panny GX1. I think the 16-50 is built pretty well for an all plastic lens. It doesn't feel high end, but it's tightly assembled with no wobbles. I think Fuji's decision to go for a smooth finish makes it feel a little cheaper than if they'd gone matte on the plastic, but I don't think that actually affects the solidity of the construction. It is a very light camera/lens combo, which is nice.
The one thing I like about the X-M1 is that the controls are well laid out, at least in my opinion. You may not like the macro button, but it is on all the Fuji X cameras...it's the way of doing internal focus limiting without having to put a focus limiter on the lenses (for instance, entering macro mode with the 60/2.4 mounted changes the MFD and dictates where it looks for focus first. It works pretty well). I really like the vertical thumb dial. It's super easy to access, and still clicks down, but its vertical positioning means I don't knock it accidentally and it doesn't take up valuable space on the back.
Yeah, the vertical thumb dial is a win for me. I do like the twin control dial on a camera this size, that's great.
In normal shooting, (ie not on tripod or with flash), I shoot mostly in A mode. I'm not sure the dial clicks do anything in A mode or if I can program something?
I guess I might just be really used to Olympus where you can program even the dial modes into custom settings.
The dial click zooms in. It doesn't do anything in AF mode during normal operation, but in manual focus mode, it magnifies the image (you can also press and hold to toggle focus peaking on or off). It also magnifies the image to maximum during image review.
I've used it a little. It works fine...it doesn't have the eye priority setting that the Olympus cameras have, but it seems to generally focus on the closest eye, but not always. It will get the majority of the face in focus when it can. Sometimes you need to focus once with the center point before it will recognize a face, because it has trouble (understandably) if the lens is a fair bit out of focus, but once close to focus, it'll snag the face and go.
One thing I haven't mentioned is that I am finding the focus peaking on the X-M1 to work a lot better than it does on the X-E1. Not that it's bad on the X-E1, just that the rear screen is lower res, and in the EVF, the peaking is more of a 'clearer focus' than a real outline...it helps a lot, but it's not always a 'bam...this is in focus' feeling. On the X-M1, with its very nice high res rear screen, the focus peaking is very easy to see and very easy to use. I was testing with my Rokinon 85/1.4 and it was just nailing focus very easily, without having to zoom in.
I can't deny how good the dynamic range is and the camera feels very responsive... but man the body feels cheap. Fuji really needs to copy Canon on the EOS-M or anyone else. The AF when shooting near the MFD seems to get easily confused. Still had a bunch of AF locks that were completely out of focus....
The 16-50 is pretty good. Decent micro contrast but not great, sharpness at 16mm at infinity at F5.6+ is pretty good even at extremes. Easily removed CA.
I never use them. Basically, you get a little extra DR in the JPEGs at the expense of noise. From what I have seen, there is essentially no benefit in the RAW files. You can only access DR200 at ISO 400 and up and DR400 at ISO 800 and up...basically, it underexposes two stops at higher ISO, then pulls the highlights down and pushes the shadows up, allowing you to have a lot more highlight headroom.
Frankly, there's enough DR in the these images that I never really have to worry about hitting the wall. I can pull enough detail from the highlights and shadows to make a single image almost appear HDR like...in fact in many cases it produces better and more natural results than HDR.
Take this example. This is the X-E1, but same sensor...will hold true the same for the X-M1.
Here's the shot straight out of camera...RAW conversion with no adjustments:
And here's the middle exposure with shadows brought up and highlights pulled down in Lightroom, then processed in Color Efex to give sort of an HDR look (I could also process this much more naturally)...I find this looks even better and much more even. This was without the DR boosters, but a single exposure with deep shadows and bright afternoon sunlight on clouds. Where would I truly need more DR?
Played with an X-M1 tonight. I definitely like the small size and the tilt screen, however I really wish I could customize the record button to AF-L. I'm pretty surprised that the record button doesn't appear to be customizable?
Ok. A weird thing has happened. I think I'm liking the X-M1 better than the X-E1. I miss the viewfinder, but the X-M1 is just more responsive, the tilt screen comes in so handy, and its actually better for manual focus. Focus peaking works really well on the screen of the X-M1, and the fact I can finally zoom in if needed while the camera is writing an image makes it much more usable for MF. The size is great too. So, if the X-E2 has a less leggy viewfinder, incorporates all the XM1 stuff and adds a tilt screen, I'll be one happy camper.
I have not played with an MX-1.
