Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Good question Armin, but I think one major missing difference in your lineup is the sensors. I'd have to wait to see the IQ from the Fuji. So far I impressed with the res of the NEX7 but still find the files muddy and ill defined in detail - IMHO. Maybe thats fixable with a good lens though.-Similar cost
-Similar size (I'm guessing)
-Hybrid viewfinder
-More appealing lens lineup (on paper for most people)
-More appealing controls (aperture control on lens)
If you didn't have an M9, couldn't afford one, and had to pick between the NEX and this Fuji system, which would you pick?
I'm not sure which I'd pick, because I love a good OVF, love a good 35mm equivalent lens, and believe that Sony is committed and on the right track. However, it isn't an easy choice, so it stands to reason that a good number of people will be pulled towards the Fuji camp away from the NEX-7.
I've seen plenty on another Leica forum who bought a M8/9 and only had one lens, many with a 35mm or 50mm. I think these could be people who just want IQ no matter what, and will adapt and work with what they have. I had an MP with only 50mm for at least 12 months.People do buy the X100, and with that camera you can't even change the prime. There are even some people (according to what I've heard ) who buy the M9, even if it doesn't AF and even if it costs 4-5 times as much. This new camera seems to be perfectly placed between the NEX 7 and the M9.
I completely agree with you, and I think a lot of people who either want zooms or a "fully developed system" will be less enthusiastic about the Fuji. My point was not that the Fuji would take away all the enthusiasm for the NEX-7, only that it would successfully compete for a subset of those interested in the Sony.While having a couple of good primes are very nice, I also like having zooms.
My single opinion certainly doesn't mean that there isn't a market for a prime only camera just look at the M9. However, if you asked everyone buying the NEX 7 would you still have bought/plan to buy it if you could only use primes, I bet there are a bunch of people that would say no.
You're guessing - The X100 is considerably larger than the NEX7, and this beauty seems much more like the size of the M9 - and as far as I can see it's going to be getting on for twice the price of the NEX7.-Similar cost
-Similar size (I'm guessing).
Yes, Well, I was goggle eyed at the prospect of a hybrid viewfinder . . .-Hybrid viewfinder
Three Primes? I can fit almost anything on the NEX, from a 180 APO R lens to a 70-300 G lens to a Zeiss 18mm . . . even assuming that the adapters are there for the fuji, how on earth will the OVF handle that ?. . .and will the EVF have focus peaking?-More appealing lens lineup (on paper for most people)
. . erm . . like all the lenses I've been using with the Sony over the last few weeks? Seriously, the X100 is a beautiful and functional camera, and the external controls are great . . .but the menus? all those options you really don't want? Will this camera be different ?. . . mind you; the Sony menus aren't much to write home about either . . give me an X1 menu system anyday:ROTFL:-More appealing controls (aperture control on lens)
The NEX - in a heartbeat - because of it's flexibility - I can put virtually any lens you can think of on the NEX7.If you didn't have an M9, couldn't afford one, and had to pick between the NEX and this Fuji system, which would you pick?
Well, I love a good OVF too, which is why I'd never give up on the M9, the rangefinder experience is another thing - but although I found the OVF on the X100 very clever, I didn't find it terribly functional. The EVF was fine, but nothing like as good as the Sony ones, and missing the focus peaking.I'm not sure which I'd pick, because I love a good OVF, love a good 35mm equivalent lens, and believe that Sony is committed and on the right track. However, it isn't an easy choice, so it stands to reason that a good number of people will be pulled towards the Fuji camp away from the NEX-7.
I hadn't noticed - looks fab doesn't it:OT:I don't suppose anyone cares about the Black (Couleur Noire) X100 in the bottom right of the above picture?!
Sorry, that was a typo on my part. What I meant to say was, I love a good EVF. I haven't tried either camera, but I'm willing to bet that I would prefer the NEX-7 EVF to the new Fuji hybrid viewfinder.Well, I love a good OVF too, which is why I'd never give up on the M9, the rangefinder experience is another thing - but although I found the OVF on the X100 very clever, I didn't find it terribly functional.
Well, as far as I'm concerned you're clarifying yourself . . which is generally a good thing!Sorry, that was a typo on my part. What I meant to say was, I love a good EVF. I haven't tried either camera, but I'm willing to bet that I would prefer the NEX-7 EVF to the new Fuji hybrid viewfinder.
Jono, all of your points are good, but in large part they relate to your specific preferences. I think that if were were to take a poll of everyone considering purchase of the NEX-7, a significant portion of those folks would also consider the Fuji system. I'm not saying "everyone" or "most people".
But now I'm repeating myself, which is never a good thing in a forum .
Thanks Yes of course I will post some pics! Though, I am still wary of all the hype. On paper, the X-Pro1 looks like the perfect combo of being a serious photographer's camera IMO.Charles,
Good luck with your new purchase.
I am hoping you will show some pictures here when you have it.
Best, K-H.
If the specs match the hype, the Fujifilm X-Pro1 will be amazing
Very interesting!!! I had a call from Camera Exchange in Melbourne about 1 hour ago, and they placed an order for 20 of Fujifilm X-Pro1 cameras. They are anticipating delivery late February, at a price of AUD$2,500 for the body with the 35/1.4 lens. I have now one officially on order.
Full specs and details will be officially available Monday
I guess you have not looked at peanut sized lenses then! :ROTFL:I also freely admit to no longer being among the "adapt a any lens to a anemic sized camera",
-Marc
Lot's of good points Marc . . except about focus peaking - I've been shooting right over the Christmas period in darkened rooms and at parties and family gatherings, sometimes with candles and always in low light. At first sight it might look like focus peaking is not very operational, but there is always a sparkle in an eye or hair - in fact, at times when one would normally be grabbing focus on the end of a nose or the corner of a pair of glasses, focus peaking means you get the eye in focus - even at really oblique angles. To be honest, it's less useful in very good light where the amount of peaking may be a distraction in the viewfinder.I also freely admit to no longer being among the "adapt a any lens to a anemic sized camera", nor being a fan of stuff like focus peaking which only seem to work with a high degree of accuracy in lighting conditions where you probably don't need it.
Sorry, Jono, that can not be farther than the reality. Admittedly, my eyes aren't the same 20/10 that were just a few years ago but still very good. Focus peaking because it is contrast based is no different than the high contrast/sharpness setting trick I used in a Panasonic G1 a few years back. For some, the choice of colors may appear to help as long as the color highlights do not show show on the wrong places.Irakly asked in another place 'with an optical rangefinder I can focus on a backlit strand of hair from fifteen feet away, when everything is pitch-dark around' can you do this with focus peaking? - and the answer is an unhesitating YES.
Well, my eyes aren't as good as they used to be either - I quite agree that in low contrast situations the sparkles are transitory and fairly sparse - but that isn't necessarily a bad thing - a backlit hair at 15 ft has contrast - as does a reflection in an eyeball, and these are the things one is normally focusing on.Sorry, Jono, that can not be farther than the reality. Admittedly, my eyes aren't the same 20/10 that were just a few years ago but still very good. Focus peaking because it is contrast based is no different than the high contrast/sharpness setting trick I used in a Panasonic G1 a few years back. For some, the choice of colors may appear to help as long as the color highlights do not show show on the wrong places.
No matter how you spin it, it does not work for me. Most definitely in the quoted circumstance. It is a no go.