new Fuji X Pro1 camera

[jonoslack]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

Jono, I am genuinely curious. We saw many pictures when you had the NEX-7. What do you do with your M9s?

HI Vivek

They go on the website (often not on the front page if they relate to personal events), some get printed. Sometimes they get posted on the M images thread, but to be honest I find it too much work to keep up with that thread politely, and I find it confusing having everybody reposting images - simply not to my taste.

Last night I shot a gig with the M9 with the noctilux and the A77 with the 135 f1.8

∆ at the Waterfront Norwich

Hmm -

 

[Vivek]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

Hi Jono, Thanks for your kind response! Totally understandable.

 

[Vivek]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

Demanding sods, aren't we all?

Indeed, Kit. I get confused when the M9 is declared as the "perfect" one and folks keep talking about depreciation and appreciation of value of gear. I would not let go of a tool if I find it to be "perfect" neither would I look at the others to keep reinforcing the thought.

An example is the humble Leica Summicron R 50/2. I have had it since I bought it along with my SL2. Despite having gone through various brands/formats, etc. I still have it. By far it is the best 50mm I have come across. It still finds use, occasionally.

But, that is me.

 

[jonoslack]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

Hi Jono, Thanks for your kind response! Totally understandable.

I tend to post lots of shots when I get a new camera - it's fun being involved with the discoveries, and interesting to see how others feel. Perhaps it's even helpful.

One of the great pleasures of this site I think.

.. . unfortunately I had the Fuji X10 for such a short time (because of the issue with DNG files and Apple:facesmack , and the weather was so dreadful, that I didn't post anything.

I took it back, and, still wanting something coat-pocketable with a zoom, I changed it for a panasonic GX1 with the teeny weeny 14-42 power zoom. We'll see. I wanted the lens anyway (for a pocketable with the OMD) which made the body pretty reasonable (about £250 if you take off the cost of the lens).

I rather resent the X Pro1 for being so much not the camera I need, that I won't have a chance to be part of the fun

 

[jonoslack]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

The problem with the X1 (again, and to pick up on something Jono said) is the external finder if you want to *see* what you are shooting: I had to leave this morning for Italy, and I am in Milano now, so could not take delivery of the NEX 5N with its EVF before I left: we know its sensor is good, but it's likely that its ergonomics will not suit either for the same reason (external EVF).

HI Kit
If I were to go back to NEX, I'd get a 5n with a viewfinder again - the fact that the camera is very low without the viewfinder, and, more to the point, the fact that it screws solidly into the camera somehow makes the ergonomics much better.

Mine is now in Silas hands, with the viewfinder screwed right in and his 35 color-skopar with a hawks adapter welded to the front. Looks good, works well, great high ISO, good corners . . what's not to like!

 

[KeithL]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

What is your primary camera at the moment?

Hasselblad H series.

 

[KeithL]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

The last thing I need when making images is to have to worry about cameras. As far as I'm concerned simplicity is key.

Simple things for simple minds?

 

[monza]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

Indeed. This is one reason I prefer to shoot film cameras.

FWIW, I don't think the X-Pro1 is a good candidate for adapting lenses. If you want to do that, there are better options. An exception would be wide angles like 12mm or 15mm Voigtlanders using zone focus.

If one works slow and can live with multiple button presses, the sensor is fantastic, probably the best APS-C by a wide margin, and better than currently shipping full-frame cameras. This *may* be all the reason anyone needs, but to me, if you buy an X-Pro1, buy the native lenses.

 

[Vivek]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

The last thing I need when making images is to have to worry about cameras. As far as I'm concerned simplicity is key.

Simple things for simple minds?

Indeed. This is one reason I prefer to shoot film cameras.

FWIW, I don't think the X-Pro1 is a good candidate for adapting lenses. If you want to do that, there are better options. An exception would be wide angles like 12mm or 15mm Voigtlanders using zone focus.

If one works slow and can live with multiple button presses, the sensor is fantastic, probably the best APS-C by a wide margin, and better than currently shipping full-frame cameras. This *may* be all the reason anyone needs, but to me, if you buy an X-Pro1, buy the native lenses.

+1

I got the feeling that Fuji intend to promote this as a system camera. I also suspect that other lenses would not do as well as Fuji's own when adapted and even when one is willing to put up with the maze of operations to make them work.

 

[jonoslack]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

Indeed. This is one reason I prefer to shoot film cameras.

The hassle just comes further on!

FWIW, I don't think the X-Pro1 is a good candidate for adapting lenses. If you want to do that, there are better options. An exception would be wide angles like 12mm or 15mm Voigtlanders using zone focus.

Basically - the corollary of this is that the X-Pro1 is no good for manual focus (or am I missing something here?).

 

[monza]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

Film cameras aren't computers. A well designed film camera has an 'interface' that doesn't get in the way of the photography. Too many digitals don't.

What is your definition of 'no good?'

What is the subject matter?

As usual in photography, 'it depends.'

 

[jonoslack]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

Film cameras aren't computers. A well designed film camera has an 'interface' that doesn't get in the way of the photography. Too many digitals don't.

I quite agree . . . but I don't think the M9 gets in the way, and, come to think of it, I don't feel the Sony A900 does either - for basically the same reasons, i.e. they behave like film cameras with digital film.

What is your definition of 'no good?'

What is the subject matter?

As usual in photography, 'it depends.'

Ah! definitions! . . . and then subject matter as well! If we have to define both of these things before a discussion there'll never be rook for disagreement, and then where would we be?

I wasn't really being precise, but when you said you felt the X-Pro1 wasn't a good camera for adapting lenses, and explained the multiple presses required to get MF, I assumed you meant that the MF was not that great? (not that great means, in this context, that you wouldn't use it).

 

[KeithL]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

Basically - the corollary of this is that the X-Pro1 is no good for manual focus (or am I missing something here?).

Sadly, based on the evidence I've seen so far, this seems increasingly likely.

It's also looking more and more likely that I'll wait until the announcement of the M10 before making any commitment.

Best

 

[monza]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

I wasn't really being precise, but when you said you felt the X-Pro1 wasn't a good camera for adapting lenses, and explained the multiple presses required to get MF, I assumed you meant that the MF was not that great? (not that great means, in this context, that you wouldn't use it).

Probably better wording would be that it may not be the best choice. It doesn't mean it's not a 'good camera' for adapting lenses, because the sensor may trump everything else, depending on what one shoots. But we are talking about a 'rangefinder-style' camera; i.e., decisive moment. To me, that means adapted lenses would be limited to super wides using zone focus. If you have to take the time to manually focus, well, there goes the moment.

Now, if instead the plan is to use the Fuji as a digital back on a tripod for landscapes to take advantage of that amazing sensor, that's an entirely different matter. But if it were me, I am not sure I'd buy the Fuji for that...maybe that is the perfect scenario for someone else, tho. EDIT: I guess in general still subjects don't necessarily mean landscapes and/or tripods. Like I said, it just depends on what one shoots as to whether it's a good choice.

So, I guess what I'm saying is that if the camera is going to be used in the traditional manner of an RF, just get the Fuji lenses.

 

[monza]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

On the other hand, this shooter seemed to think focus was pretty easy...shooting with an f/0.95 lens, too boot:

"Personally I found it a lot easier to use just the EVF (i normally hate EVF viewfinders) to focus it and found I could do it quickly and accurately most of the time, even wide open was easier than I thought….this gives a slight advantage over the M9, as with that of course it is always manual rangefinder focus with available light…which is fine during daylight, but much more difficult in low light, the EVF on the Fuji brightened up the scene and made it relatively simple to nail the focus."

EXCLUSIVE: SLR Magic Hyperprime 50mm 0.95 on Fuji XPro1 & Leica M9

And this post with the Fuji lenses:

http://www.f8photography.com.hk/blog/2012/03/xpro1firstthoughts/

 

[Vivek]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

Thanks for the links, Robert.

Though the SLR magic shooter could have paid a bit more attention to leveling the cameras, it is a clever post with XPro1 and M9 shots.

Hmm....

 

[cam]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

"Personally I found it a lot easier to use just the EVF (i normally hate EVF viewfinders) to focus it and found I could do it quickly and accurately most of the time, even wide open was easier than I thought….this gives a slight advantage over the M9, as with that of course it is always manual rangefinder focus with available light…which is fine during daylight, but much more difficult in low light, the EVF on the Fuji brightened up the scene and made it relatively simple to nail the focus."

i have not shot on this camera, obviously, but i can speak about going back and forth between an M and the EVF (M8 and X100 in my case) in very dim light.

the EVF was so bright as to almost blind me but, yes, i could see very clearly what i was focusing on (using AF). when i went back to the M, it was almost as if someone had dimmed the lights -- a lot. it was a significant difference. once my eyes adjusted, however, my eyes adjusted and the M was just right... and then the blinding as i changed back again to the X100. it was a very odd experience.

 

[jonoslack]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

i have not shot on this camera, obviously, but i can speak about going back and forth between an M and the EVF (M8 and X100 in my case) in very dim light.

the EVF was so bright as to almost blind me but, yes, i could see very clearly what i was focusing on (using AF). when i went back to the M, it was almost as if someone had dimmed the lights -- a lot. it was a significant difference. once my eyes adjusted, however, my eyes adjusted and the M was just right... and then the blinding as i changed back again to the X100. it was a very odd experience.

Funny you should mention that. I was in exactly the same position last night.

I was shooting a concert in Norwich last night, with the A77 and the M9 - same thing, back and forth between the EVF on the A77 and the rangefinder. As you say, the EVF was often quite blinding for a few seconds . . and then the M9 seemed really dim, but it only took a few seconds to equilibrate - the Nikon shooter next to me with his D3s agreed that AF was impossible (I think he was using the 24-70), so it was MF in all directions.

Focus peaking on the A77 worked splendidly . . . as did the rangefinder on the M9 - I'd guess that the level of keepers was pretty much equivalent. I think this would be a situation where the Fuji might not be perfect.

 

[kit laughlin]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

Jono wrote:

If I were to go back to NEX, I'd get a 5n with a viewfinder again - the fact that the camera is very low without the viewfinder, and, more to the point, the fact that it screws solidly into the camera somehow makes the ergonomics much better.

Well, that's great, because I have one in transit (bought from a member here) and one of the Hawk's adapters, too.

The 5N, EVF, Hawk's, and the 35/2.5 Color Skopar will be, possibly, the walk-around combo I have been looking for. The GXR works very well with the CV 12 and 15 (and now I know how to dial in the corner corrections, even better; we'll see). The GXR EVF is definitely good enough for tripod work, which is what I use the GXR for (interiors).

Once I have the NEX 5N in hand, I will ask for suggestions on focus setup. I really want to use just one lens on whatever body I settle on and get practised with it.

I will check out the SLR Magic thread now!

 

[jonoslack]

Re: new Fuji X Pro1 camera (formerly called "new camera")

Thanks for the links, Robert.

Though the SLR magic shooter could have paid a bit more attention to leveling the cameras, it is a clever post with XPro1 and M9 shots.

Hmm....

- I liked the shots too - I also rather liked his sense of a level horizon. On the P1ss is the new straight