I think that the perceived image quality is most important to me - but I certainly don't think that the figures are unconnected with this - just that it's not necessarily a very tight connection.
Certainly, a fine IQ doesn't necessarily relate to a good dXo score (M9 is a case in point, but there are many others, some Olympus sensors I can think of). In the same way, the Nikon D7000/Pentax K5 has a stonking good DXO score - and doubtless the IQ is good as well, but I'm not sure that it's quite as good as the ranking suggests.
the remarks before were nothing to do with Dxo - so this post is probably entirely irrelevant - apologies to shashin.
I shall now go and wash my head in a bucket of water!
I would delete it, but I do believe what I said - and anyway, deleting it would invalidate Shashin and Vivek's responses.
Last edited by jonoslack; 9th March 2012 at 14:39.
Just this guy you know
Now, don't you start!
These things are easier if people question what I say, rather than inventing up stuff I didn't say.
1 Member(s) liked this post
Sometimes a hands on review by an every day pro photographer with sample images can speak louder than words written by those who have never handled the camera or don't even wish to handle the camera.
This one is by Nick Devlin, who is also an experienced M9 users and Leica enthusiast:Fuji X-Pro1 Review
1) I so far do not see any results I could not get with an M9 or with a Nikon or Canon XYZ.
2) In contrast there is the uncertainty what right feel and quality means - obviously something different for each individual.
3) coming finally to Luminous Landscape - I have read most of their reviews and almost no one reflected what I finally felt when I held a specific camera in hand. So why should that be different this time????
Point is - maybe Fuji will once get to have a great system here, maybe, but for sure what we see today is just a try and far from being a system.
peter, i need to comment on this. you know me and have seen me with big cameras in my hand and loving them and their feel. but since i picked up the fuji last week in japan i have changed my mind-somewhat. camera + three lenses < 1kg, built quality is not leica-ish but beats pana and oly hands down, ergonomic buttons on the camera, good but not nikon-ish fast autofocus, very good lenses (the 35mm f1.4 gets close to the summilux in my view, the 60mm macro is fantastic), IQ excellent up to 3200iso, hardly any moiree (you really need to provoke it, even fabric comes out very good normally), excellent optical viewfinder, ok EVF, great live view...i could go on but you get the picture. IMHO fuji has created a marvel with breakthrough technlogy (dual VF, sensor randomized arry). is it perfect, no, there are a few minor issues i do not like (rubber lens caps fall off all the time, the sunshade of the 90mm is ridicolously large, silky pix is a pain..).
can it do things the M9 cannot do? clearly above base iso it beats the M9 hands down, i even concur with steve huff that base iso IQ (including color representation) beat the M9 IQ.
i am going to wait for the M10 but it is hard for me to imagine that leica will get close to the fuji overall package. surely enough, the M9 will have FF, live view hopefully focus confirmation and more MPX but i think that retro-looking leica (see the ridicolous M9 bottom plate) is unable to do a project like fuji did. i'd be happy to err on this.
well we still have to see fuji's quality control, but i have seen enough of leica's. in japan both my leica systems turned into rather useless paper weight (M9 sensor crack and S2 exposimeter and/or shutter failure). i dragged the stuff from saudi arabia to japan and back for nothing.
this is why i bought the fuji and i love it.
give it a try, you will be surprised.
Any feedback on the manual focus capabilities and their impact on using manual focus lenses would be appreciated. Also feedback on the 18mm, so far I've seen nothing outstanding from it but I live in hope.
On the positive side, this X Pro1 may be the first foray into XPan territory that many have wished for. Anyone that had a XPan has no doubts about Fuji's ability to make stellar optics ... and the XPan quality wasn't too shabby ... as are the Hasselblad designed, Fuji made lenses I use daily on my H4D/60 ... none of which are like the S2 optics I use ... the character is simply different.
Whether "breakthrough" technology results in better images, or simply offers a different route to making images, remains to be proven over time. I see no evidence of that at this very early stage. Words about the X Pro's IQ are quite convincing ... the images so far are not. To my eye, what you see as being "clearly" so, is subjectively not evidenced by actual results ... I do see decent images from the X Pro 1 so far, but I do not see the specific look, snap, blacks and a bunch of other characteristics that identify a M8/9 shot from all others ... even when viewed on a Lightoom Library array mixed in with shots from other cameras ... like I do every week.
My caveat to all of the above, is that I've become a raging skeptic regarding marketing hype and the initial enthusiastic subjectivity of early adopters, and/or technology chasers ... no matter who they are. I also admit to being loath to return to a crop frame camera of any flavor, and if a camera incorporates AF, it had better be as good as the Nikon at this stage of available technology, or why even bother? AF needs to work well where it is needed ... in very fast situations, or in very low light where MF is more difficult.
Last edited by fotografz; 10th March 2012 at 04:12.
I also don't quite understand what the urgency is. If manual focus on an M8 or M9 is acceptable, then reasonably fast and accurate AF should be, too.
--press center of command dial to magnify (this button is on the center right of the camera)
--press AF button and then the arrow buttons to move the focus point (AF button on far left of camera; arrow buttons back to center right)
It should instead be:
--press center of command dial to magnify
--press arrow buttons to move focus point
Press an AF button for manual focus? hmm.
If adapted lenses were my priority I'd go for a Ricoh or NEX first.
--The EVF on the NEX is pretty much agreed to be the best available
That said, the fantastic sensor and amazing high ISO might be enough for some users to go with the Fuji anyway.
A wide manual focus lens like a 15mm Voigtlander might be quite enjoyable on the Fuji by presetting the focus.
Perhaps Fuji will improve the UI and add focus peaking...that would change the game quite a lot.
If the 18mm proved to be an outstanding lens I'd probably buy into the X-Pro1system, but everything I've seen so far indicates it's the weak link.
I'll probably wait for the M10.
A slew of 18mm images here.
X-Pro1 Samples - Fuji X Forum
Probably best to buy the camera and do your own tests.
I think that holds good for a lot of people!
I appreciate your post on how the manual focus assist works in the Fuji X pro1, Robert! Very clear and concise!
The question is, can you evaluate anything over the web? I say yes you can because it is all relative ... if what you are comparing to is also evaluated in the same manner. Is it definitive? No! The final evaluation is how well it fits your needs, and how the prints look. However, the initial cut can often be determined by that relative web comparison if you have a decent eye and know what to look for ... otherwise, why do it t all?
I do not think anyone wants to sabotage any new camera, yet no one wants to buy into something that doesn't match the hyperbolic hype that accompanies almost any new camera that comes out these days. After a few buy-ins to these type pitches, you get a little skeptical and thus all the questions and frank evaluations.
To be honest, I read claims as to better performance than the M9 even at base ISO, better this than the M9, better that than the M9 ... and I look at my own M9 stuff, the shots from Jono's M9, or Irakly's M9, etc. etc. etc., and then look at these X Pro sample shots and ... well ... I become even more skeptical and unconvinced, based on those claims.
Perhaps the Fuji should stand on its own merits, or lack of same ... it is an interesting camera for a decent price. So what if the IQ is not all that distinguishable from other offerings? It is a new sort of form factor that offers at least a taste of rangefinder photography ... with added do-dads that some folks want ... it's NOT a Leica and setting it for that comparison is doomed to failure just like a zillion other M pretenders in past which are now in history's dust bin. On its own it seems to be quite a camera and may full-fill a lot of photographers specific needs and fit their budget like a glove.
All the best ...
I for one would hope that the M9 plus 28 cron, 50 lux and 90 summarit would be better (tried to match focal and lens speed).
The whole Fuji kit would be....
$1700 + $599 + $599 + $699 = $3,600
The M9 is kit is
$7,000 + $4295 + $3995 + $1895 = $17,185
The M9 is probably the best camera ever (this is null and void when the M10 shows up, of course) that I am unlikely to buy ever.
On the Fuji X Pro 1, I can not be that certain.
Paid $9,250. for Leica 50/0.95 ... sold 2 years later @ $10,650. 2 years use plus $1,400. profit.
I personally haven't lost a penny on any Leica M Lens for the past 6 or 7 years, and made money on most.
So, let's come back 2 years from now and see how this "spread sheet" stacks up
Again, it's a waste of time comparing on any front ... let the Fuji bark on its own ... who cares if it can run with the big dogs ... does it work for you and your work? That's all that matters isn't it?
If users were screaming from the rooftops about the amazing AF in any situation and any light ... THAT would pique my interest because of my lousy old eye sight. Excellent focus ability is the first attribute of IQ IMO ... be it manual or AF.
A 13% "profit" is contingent on how the gear is cared for while it is in one's possession.
I understand that "mint", "mint -", ......,user grades determine the value of such goods.
Besides all that, just the feeling of a $10,000 lens being used for a snap in the kitchen ought give a huge morale boost.
Just to be clear, I really hope the X-Pro1 delivers. I'd far rather spend £2,500 on a Fuji kit rather than £10,000 on a M10 kit.
When good full size and relevant images are available I'll make the decision to test or not. If and when I test I'll base my decision to buy or not on the quality of the files. Same applies to the M10.
As I said above though, it's probably best to just buy the camera. There are plenty of places that take returns if you don't like it. Unless you have your favorite reviewer who has over time proven to see the same things you do yourself, this is the best way.
Of course for most here, the final analysis won't happen until there is raw support. How many here like SilkyPix? Thought so...heh.
"... because of my lousy old eye sight. Excellent focus ability is the first attribute of IQ IMO ... be it manual or AF."
amen. led me to the Nex 7. amazing ability to see focus with peaking and wide open apertures. light years beyond the rangefinder. And yet, Sony has added those amazing features...like smile recognition and toy camera mode. Who buys into this part?
I'm hoping the fuji will be as good with focus and have less gimmicky baggage.
The X Pro 1, based on specs and photos of the camera and lenses I have seen, is appealing to me but I am in no hurry to place an order. After being let down by the X10 (orb issues) I will not (fingers crossed) be an early adopter of any new camera.
That said, I love the form factor of the X Pro 1 and the fact that Fuji introduced three lenses with it. It is tantalizing in many ways.
Short of winning the lottery, I will never own another Leica M. Too much money, among other things I will not venture to mention as I do not wish to argue or defend my personal feelings about Leica with any other forum members.
The entire appeal of the M system to me boils down to the Leica glass and relatively compact size of the M body and full frame sensor. Just can't see shelling out $7K for a body that has no upgrade path other than buying another body for $7K or more. So, Leica is out and thus the appeal of the Fuji X Pro 1. (Note: I still play the lottery.)
I do not believe the Fuji lenses will match the Leica M lenses in any way but for my purposes, close may be good enough. I'm beginning to see excellent photos from the X Pro 1 and frankly, some of them look very Leicaesque (is that a word?).
I am not one of those individuals who is caught up in "The Rangefinder Experience". I just want capability in a relatively small form factor and some decent lenses to use with the camera.
I'm not one who wants to dump my DSLR. I am getting great results from my Pentax K5 and the assortment of lenses I have bought for it and I don't plan to move away from it anytime soon. But.. I would like a second camera that is of the form factor of the Fuji X Pro 1 or Leica M. (No, the Nex has no appeal to me.. tried it, did not like it.)
As the X Pro 1 is now getting into the hands of real photographers I find my daily search for images from it to be fun and informative. I'm looking forward to seeing what those in this forum do with the camera. Can't wait to see the "Fun with the X Pro 1" thread begin.
My eventual decision to buy the camera or not will be based not on specs or reviews but by the images I see produced by the X Pro 1 in the hands of competent photographers. I can live with camera quirks as long as the images it delivers demonstrate that it will work for me and what I shoot.
And so I wait to see what the X Pro 1 can produce and if any un-documented features cause issues.
"Overall it appears that these three objectives-served by the X-Trans sensor and processor, the key to this team, they behave almost exactly as it was hoped that they would do in theory: an extraordinary image quality, reminiscent of the best times of the optical telemetry and high-definition movies.
XF Fujinon 18 mm f / 2 R for Fujifilm X-Pro1: Conclusion
In short, a superb angular light equivalent to a 28 mm f / 2, which can be used without complex from full aperture of f / 2, rivaling the best of fixed optical market with similar characteristics.
XF Fujinon 35 mm f / 1.4 R for Fujifilm X-Pro1: Conclusion
In sum, a goal that more than satisfy fans of the optical bright, able to open up to f / 1.4. One wonders what a leap in performance could have been achieved by limiting this view to an aperture of f / 2 (4), but the marketing needs demanded, more than likely, the aperture of f / 1.4.
XF Fujinon 60 mm f / 2.4 Macro R Fujifilm X-Pro1: Conclusion
Overall, probably the best digital lens and its focal category, more than likely a new optical paradigm."
Fujifilm X-Pro1, La Prueba - Ópticas XF - DSLR Magazine
Feel free to ignore at your leisure.
I posted this link earlier but there are are lot more samples now.
great you like the X Pro 1! What you write is all true and I really hope that there are other vendors than Leica coming with great and well performing systems, but .... I am still not convinced. Maybe because my X10 adventure - I know it is in a totally different league - was just a shot in the knee for me!
I could not become friend with the OVF, just inferior, I also could not get friend with the control and operation of the camera (and here I fear the X Pro 1 will be similar) and I finally was NOT impressed with the sensor - sure again a different beast from the X Pro 1, but I am burned because I read a lot of great reviews and tests but for me it did not work out.
In my eyes Leica is sure superior WRT IQ, but they are very conservative and also their quality control and camera reliability seems still to be questionable. Which is a pretty bad issue considering the high premium price. Well I skipped the M9 so far and will wait and see what their M10 will look like
Enjoy your Fuji!
I've seen many other rather good images from the X-Pro1 lenses but as yet I've not seen anything remotely like outstanding IQ. I'd truly love to see something exceptional, something akin to the snap, crackle and pop of a Zeiss Planar f2, or the dream world of a Zeiss Sonnar f1.5. What I am seeing is adequacy.
There's always the possibility of using these lenses on the Fuji and it's something I'm keen to try, but what of the wides? If the Sony NEX-7 is anything to go by there could well be colour issues.
Time will tell.
I am looking for snap, crackle and pop example as well some dream world example, especially because I haven't got a clue what they entail.
Got any to share?
You think you can guess which I would refer to as having snap crackle and pop and which has a dream world quality, or do you need some kinda clue?
I do not see why Robert's sample of his dog under diffused light fails to qualify as having snap pop and crackle while a sun backed, contrasty light capture would!
Hmm.. if this is dream world example then it isn't exclusive to Zeiss or Sonnar. Check out: http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/4-3rds...our-bokeh.html
BTW, I thank you for posting the samples. First images you posted here if I am not mistaken!
I hadn't realised I had said it was.Hmm.. if this is dream world example then it isn't exclusive to Zeiss or Sonnar.
Hey, you want images you can always click my link.I thank you for posting the samples. First images you posted here if I am not mistaken!
My point was that it is easy to see "snap, pop and crackle" under contrasty light while it is not always the case under diffused light. Despite being shot under diffused light and not a hard reflecting subject, Robert's photo does show a contrasty image.
You can see the snaps I post here (this site) almost every day!
Definitely dreamy! The kind of photo that cares not about pixels, resolution, AA filters, autofocus, or what glass produced it. Examples of the 35 and 60 look similarly dreamy although they all have a point of focus.
I really like both those images. Many cameras can take similar ones, I don't think an X-Pro1 is necessary to produce something similar.