X Pro 1 vs NEX 7

[Ario Arioldi]

I have been using the X Pro 1 for a couple of weeks now with all the three Fujinon lenses and with some M lens and the following are my findings:

Image quality is in my view excellent and I do expect to see further improvement once the support from Adobe and Capture One is available.

The AF is reasonably fast even in low light and generally accurate. Focusing with the OVF required to me some training but now is ok and I do not have much to complain.

Manual focus on the contrary is not implemented in an optimal way, both with native lenses and with legacy lenses. Focus peacking is missing and the image enlargement is not stable enough to allow easy and accurate focusing.

OVF is nice but the frames are not accurate enough (M8.2 and M9 are much better in this regard). The frame lines are available only for a limited range of focal lenght.

The use of legacy lenses is limited by the rather poor manual focus implementation and by the sub optimal performances of most WA's (I have tested only RF lenses).

The operability of the camera is pretty good with the provided knobs and wheels and accessing the menu is seldom required in normal operation.

Light metering is accurate but the auto-iso function is very poorly implemented: the shutter speed from which ISO values start to move up is fixed by tjhe camera at unreasonably low values.

 

[Terry]

whose AF has been reported to be blind as a bat in low light.

I've only had the camera for a couple of hours. This thread is comparing the X-Pro1 vs the NEX 7. I would not call the X-Pro 1 blind as a bat as if the NEX 7 had 20/20 vision. My NEX 7 can be woefully bad in the same low light and inexplicably I've had it refuse to lock focus even in much better light. In very low light the X-Pro1 gives you OVF and a less noisy EVF than Sony.

Clearly the two mirroless systems with the best focus are m4/3 and Nikon. M4/3 got there through brute force - high refresh rates and hard engineering work from Panny and Oly (including lens design). Nikon got there with phase detect. Nikon may beat m4/3 in good light m4/3 pulls ahead when the Nikon switches over to CDAF.

I haven't used either the GXR or the Samsung mirrorless (but neither are ever cited good or bad for focus so I will put them at the middle of the pack).






.

 

[Vivek]

I had the NX10 for about a month. Even in good light, even with the 30/2, it hunted for focus. That was the least of its worries though. Samsung is yet to release a camera with a decent sensor that I know of.

The m4/3rds have it when it comes to EVF and the AF (in any light).

Sony (NEX-7) hunts and can not even find focus (and gives up) in low light.

Since a bat is mentioned, perhaps someone should try using Sonar for focusing like Polaroid did. :ROTFL:

 

[PenSon]

Since I have them both I shot some pictures on the same object.
Not a scientific test (handheld and different focuslenght with the optics).
What I noticed from the jpg´s out of the cameras was that Sony had a bit more color punch.
Fuji and Sony with the object.

Fuji picture

Sony picture

btw. The Sony LA2 adpter make a very fast autofocus with the old Minolta optics

Trygve

 

[peterb]

Penson,

Maybe it's me but I kinda prefer the Fuji image. Which is closer to what you shot?

Peter

 

[ptomsu]

I also clearly prefer the Fuji image

Peter

 

[PenSon]

The fuji is most correct with colors. Maybe I will try once more with a greycard correction tomorrow and also with a tripod, if any interest. The fuji tends overexpose so I have to adjust 1 to 2 step with the exposure control.

 

[Woody Campbell]

I'm very happy with the Nex-7's performance with M mount lenses. (At the wide end I'm using the WATE which being retrofocus doesn't have the issues that the short Voigtlanders exhibit). Focus peaking usually works and in low contrast situations I've mastered the magnify button. It took a bit of practice.

I find the Fuji very interesting but I'll wait until they sort out the software. No LR support is a complete non-starter for me.

 

[Vivek]

Has anyone used the flashes (external)? How good is the TTL? Is the delay between the pre and the actual flash negligible?

This is a big plus with the Sony Alpha E system.

No one?

 

[Shashin]

Sony has kept the slight yellow/warm shift of Minolta. I prefer the Fuji rendering.

 

[ashwinrao1]

Exactly Vivek . . . . still, I've reconsidered my position on the NEX7 . . . Fortunately prices have dropped, so I managed to replace the one I sold 6 weeks ago for almost what I sold the old one for (it actually cost me £99). The lenses were still here - it's interesting re-discovering it.

I fear I sold it in a fit of pique on discovering that it wasn't the perfect camera for ski-ing.

It's nice to have it back again.

Good to see you back with it, Jono. I am still debating the X-pro -1 , mainly curious about issues of AF and function over form, and your comments make me further consider holding off...

 

[k-hawinkler]

I have both the NEX-5N and NEX-7. I like using both of them for different purposes.
However, I have been rediscovering the virtues of my M9.
WOW, that's all I can say.

To me the most interesting feature of the X-Pro1 is its sensor.
I would love to see that type of sensor in a Leica.

K-H.

 

[dhsimmonds]

How is the X1-Pro AF in lower light? I've seen blog reports from owners that it is not so hot in lower light, being slow and unreliable. Perhaps the comparison to focusing the M camera should take that into account since that is where a rangefinder shines?

-M

Sorry Marc I have only just spotted your post!

It all depends on how low the light is! I imagine though that you might be thinking of darkish church interiors? If so if you can see the bride, you should be able to use the AF.

it is a little slower to lock on but not impossibly so. X1P users with a bit more experience with the camera than myself, tell me that by turning off various functions like sleep mode and other unwanted shooting functions the low light focusing is not so different from when using it in good lighting.

However yesterday I did need to shoot in a very dark west of England ancient pub with smoke darkened panelled walls with very dim lighting, it did need ISO 1600 at max aperture of F1.4 and focused with AF OK.

If I knew in advance where I would need to do the shoot I would have taken my A77 as I know that it's excellent EVF allows shooting in almost darkness.

I have to say that the X1pro did a pretty good job of it without fiddling with the set up menu which was just as well as I only had the X1Pro with me!

The Fuji X1P is a camera that needs to be learned and mastered just like the X100. I still have a lot of learning to do but I enjoy every minute using it, whereas my Sony DSLR's are relatively easy cameras to learn but not quite so satisfying somehow to use.

 

[dhsimmonds]

A real users review of the X1Pro here, warts and all:
CAMERA: Fuji X-Pro 1 by FUJIFILM | Photo Madd – Real world compact system camera reviews

This in my opinion is a darned good but realistic review, describing exactly what the camera was designed for and also the typical users.It is not a camera for everyone, especially "died in the wool" DSLR users!

 

[Sapphie]

A real users review of the X1Pro here, warts and all:
CAMERA: Fuji X-Pro 1 by FUJIFILM | Photo Madd – Real world compact system camera reviews

This in my opinion is a darned good but realistic review, describing exactly what the camera was designed for and also the typical users.It is not a camera for everyone, especially "died in the wool" DSLR users!

Totally agree.

Lee

 

[Terry]

That review feels pretty accurate.

 

[Brian Mosley]

Beautiful images too... Love the tonality.

Cheers

Brian

 

[ustein]

The issues with the NEX-7 are:

- Noise even at ISO 100 (e.g. skies). Only really a problem for pixel peeping though)
- No to AF lenses with good quality/price like the XP1. The 24mm is too expensive and the wrong FOV for me.
- If I would not own the NEX-7 and D800 I would be tempted to get the XP1
- I like the tele range on the NEX-7
- I like the handling of the NEX-7 (e.g. MF)
- I like the video pn the NEX-7

 

[monza]

The 24mm Zeiss is now $100 higher ($1100 retail)

 

[charlesphoto]

Good to see you back with it, Jono. I am still debating the X-pro -1 , mainly curious about issues of AF and function over form, and your comments make me further consider holding off...

I see absolutely no reason to own this camera if one already has an M9. Same size body, not full fame, probably slower to focus than you can do manually with an M. Yes, hi-iso is better but the focus issues would seem to null and void that. Take a deep breath, put away the credit card, relish in the amazing gear you already own, and wait to see what Leica have up their sleeve in a month.....