Some Fuji X-E1 impressions

[raist3d]

@Krist8 - you do not need to own any LR or PS. BTW, I don't use PS, I was using only LR. The included software and in-camera JPEG converter can get you shots in this ball park. The camera converter included is a version of Silky Pix and it's actually pretty powerful.

I do not have much time to do an exhaustive comparison, but this shot:

Is a JPEG out of the camera that I post processed slightly. The camera comes with everything it needs out of the box to work and get files like these.

- Ricardo

 

[krist8]

Thanks Ricardo. I did try the free software that came with the camera, but it does not offer the options like the in-camera conversion. I went out today to take some pictures using my Nikon 35/2D (not bought the macro yet) as a close-up. Will post some of them in Fun with X-E1 thread.

 

[raist3d]

Thanks Ricardo. I did try the free software that came with the camera, but it does not offer the options like the in-camera conversion. I went out today to take some pictures using my Nikon 35/2D (not bought the macro yet) as a close-up. Will post some of them in Fun with X-E1 thread.

That is correct, Silky Pix does not offer the option of the in-camera conversion. Neither does LightRoom or Capture One. Basically only the in-camera RAW converter does that.

But I would say in general at that point it's a JPEG vs RAW choice and if you are going raw, you may probably want to do your own color signatures too. Another option is to shoot the JPEG and post process it a bit. The Fuji jpegs are surprisingly malleable (obviously not as much as a RAW but you can still do a few things within reason).

- Ricardo

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Hi Fuji folks. Well I will first admit having not knowing much here on Fuji and played with a X1 pro awhile back. But today I went into a local shop and played with the X-E1 and the Sony NEX 7. Okay it's like starting a jet engine , lots of stuff on these cams but one thing that I could not figure out and the Fuji does seem a little weird in a way with its setup but I could not figure how to manual focus and see 100 percent zoom to focus on either the LCD or viewfinder. I found it on the Nex 7.

Second part given if I bought either one its a totally secondary system to me and would get the kit lens in either package. The Sony is not as tall but about the same otherwise with the kit lens. I'm not sure what to get. I liked the holding of the Fuji better but the Nex seemed easier to shoot. Now I have been doing more active things in my life lately like hiking with the wife and dogs and be nice to have a small cam with me and been riding my bike a lot lately too. Not to mention golf. Photography is not my hobby . LOL it's the daily grind but I still love to shoot outside the everyday stuff. Anyway I want to like the E-x1but I need to figure it out better. Not sure what forum but would love to hear the Sony/Fuji debate. Lol

BTW I can't shoot using the LCD. I can but I don't like it so the best EVF is really the best for me.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Oh I would like to use my Nikon mount lenses as well with adapter

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Okay found the manual focus 3x and 10 x button

 

[Rich M]

Hi Fuji folks. Well I will first admit having not knowing much here on Fuji and played with a X1 pro awhile back. But today I went into a local shop and played with the X-E1 and the Sony NEX 7.

Not sure what forum but would love to hear the Sony/Fuji debate. Lol

Great Guy.....start the Fuji vs Sony fanboy wars

The NEX 7 is a very nice camera....well laid out and a nice form factor. Tri-Nav buttons make sense. It has focus peaking....nice for all of your MF lenses. A 24MP sensor and a very good EVF....the kit lens kinda sucks, but the Zeiss 24/1.8 is a VERY nice autofocus prime. Lots of adapters....even one to enable use of autofocus A-mount lenses.

So why is mine loaned out to a friend? Dunno, but the X-E1 FEELS like a real camera and the 18-55/2.8-4 is a fantastic zoom lens. The EVF is top notch, but some question the refresh rate. I haven't had a problem with it smearing. The Fuji is a constant companion; however, neither is pocketable....nor bicyleable. (is that a word?).

To me it became camera vs a piece of electronics.

Ricardo...dude....sorry for hijacking your thread.....but blame Guy....:ROTFL:

R

 

[raist3d]

Small surprise to me - X-Pro1/X-E1 RAWS are 12-bit raws, not 14-bit raws. Blah. The new X100s are 14-bit.

This may explain some minor posterization I have seen in some situations in JPEGS in darker areas though it's not uncommon for JPEGS to posterize a bit at times.

It also explains why I still found somehow the K-5 tonality to be a tad better in a few things. Not that the X-e1 does bad but I was expecting it was 14-bits. Anyway, the next body will be and Fuji really does magic with the information they have.

- Ricardo

 

[David Schneider]

I could not figure how to manual focus and see 100 percent zoom to focus on either the LCD or viewfinder.

Turn button on front of camera that has M C S to M. Press the wheel (pretty much where your thumb naturally lands) straight in. That brings focus up 300%. If you are using a Fuji autofocus lens you can also press the AF-L button (just to the right of where you thumb falls) and that will sort of autofocus manually. Don't have camera in front of me, but that should work. I use manual focus all the time (naturally) with Nikon Series E 100mm lens manufactured in something like 1981-84. It's better than my Canon 24-105 at 100mm and often equals sometimes beats the Canon 70-200L II f2.8 (probably because focus is better -lol). Love that old Nikon lens. Less than 250 grams if I remember.

 

[krist8]

Hi Fuji folks. Well I will first admit having not knowing much here on Fuji and played with a X1 pro awhile back. But today I went into a local shop and played with the X-E1 and the Sony NEX 7.

BTW I can't shoot using the LCD. I can but I don't like it so the best EVF is really the best for me.

I did a lot of research (mainly reading reviews on-line) before I bought X-E1. I find that NEX 7 is full of technological advances, like focus peaking, tiltable LCD, whereas the Fuji X are more back to the basic kind of camera where you can easily control the 3 basic settings, i.e., aperture, shutter speed, iso. There are of course some very nice advanced technology as well, such as the XTRAN sensor and the engine that gives excellence white balance, and OOC jpegs, and excellent fuji film simulations.
I did put on my Nikon 35mm f/2.8 to do some close-up flower shots. Please take a look at the Fun with X-E1 thread.
I don't like to use LCD to shoot as well. The EVF is just great for me. Some people complain about low light focusing jittery problems using EVF, but I do not see it as a big problem, as there are ways to improve it, such as using a larger focus area, using C-AF or M focus mode.
Anyway, good luck on your hunt for a light weight easy to carry camera. Oh, another thing to consider is the look. NEX7 is a modern technolgy while the X-E1 is more of a classic look which I really enjoy.

 

[raist3d]

Final comments now that I have used the camera more:

- Xtrans sensor is weird. Sometimes you get a lot of detail, sometimes you get a bit of "mush" that can make it be pretty much like standard Bayer. But it's usually detail.

- Also while you can get phenomenal color, often there's this feeling of maybe "lacking a bit of color" when it comes to small regions in red... as if some borders were slightly desaturated or something- doesn't happen all the time either. Anyway, it's not too intense or bad, and I am being really really picky when saying this.

- Phenomenal dynamic range considering it's 12 bits raw.

- Not too hot that the ISO seems to run 1/2 a stop to 1 stop behind the K-5 at some ISOs

- X35mm prime F1.4 - wow, one of the best lenses I have used

- AF is reasonably good. However, and ironically, I find the Pentax Q being able to focus into darker and faster now with the later Pentax firmware upgrade they made.

- Fuji *really* needed to put a lock button on the lens aperture ring. Really should have done the same for the X-E1's exposure compensation dial. It's very annoying that very often when I put the camera in a coat pocket and out, those two things can dial themselves to a different value.

Though in normal use they seem to have enough resistance (particularly the EV compensation button) this has happened to me more often than I like.

- The zoom lens in particular has this issue with the aperture ring too.

- The zoom lens is surprisingly good as a lens.

- Continuous or whatever it is AF is a complete utter waste. Maybe there's a use for it but I don't know why Fuji didn't go Sony's way with their RX1- just take it out.

- Overall I like the interface a lot other than the quirks mentioned above. Menus are superbly well thought out.

- Press and hold DISP button for change into silent vs non silent mode (turn off camera sound, any flash firing, AF assist light) at once = BIG WIN

- Not sure why Fuji didn't have their famous continuos drives modes where you continuously shoot until you release the shutter and then save the last 3-5 shots.

Some other pics:

I think with this I am closing my own thread and following up on the other already opened threads about the X-E1.

Final thoughts: X_E1 vs K-5.

K-5 has the better sensor, in tonal range, DR and color, imho. The Fuji is a bit sharper. A K-5IIs should outclass the Xtrans imho, but it's nice to for the most part not deal with color moire.

But I would put the Fuji sensor pretty high on the scale, more in the K-5 class than another class. Of course this doesn't ultimately matter- you pick what works for you. The Fuji works for me for being smaller. I will be selling my K-5 shortly... I believe.

Now that Pentax Q- I have a real hard time parting with that little camera. It's more than proven to me a very useful tool, and it still smaller than the Fuji, completely silent.

In fact, the Q has made me think maybe I should sell the Fuji I just got and keep the K-5 and Q for all my needs, but I think at this point I am getting more used to the Fuji and liking it more overall.

I am not sure if I will be selling my Pentax Q. I just like it *that much*.

- Ricardo

 

[willie_901]

I enjoyed reading your impressions and how they evolved.

I do not think the difference between 12 and 14 bits is significant. The extra two bits typically are wasted digitizing noise. However at base ISO where exposure (light recorded by the sensor) is highest and demands the most from the signsl path the extra bits could become relevant. At the same time careful comparisons have been published showing that occasionally 14 bits is superior at extreme magnification. However theses differences would be irrelevant otherwise, especially for prints. At ISO above base ISO the sensor is underexposed (less light hits the sensor and the data is amplified or multiplied afterwards). Now the extra two bits are less important as the signal to noise ratio (and dynamic range) for all but the the highlight regions is low compared to base ISO.

I find X-Pro 1 focus performance similar to what I experienced with a mechanical rangefinder camera. I think most user frustration with AF is due to Fuji not educating their customers about how to focus the camera instead of fundimental AF design and engineering limitations. For instance there are countless posts where people naively use the OVF at subject distances where parallax error causes problems. The newer lenses have faster AF motors and improved firmware. But other camera systems do have better overall AF performance for a variety of reasons. What has changed over the past two years is the performance gap is much smaller.

What I very much enjoy about the Fuji APS-C cameras is using them. In tems of use, the Fuji's are pleasantly similar to the two film cameras I used to miss the most... the Canonet QL17-III and the Ziess Ikon M.

 

[raist3d]

I enjoyed reading your impressions and how they evolved.

Thanks

I do not think the difference between 12 and 14 bits is significant. The extra two bits typically are wasted digitizing noise. However at base ISO where exposure (light recorded by the sensor) is highest and demands the most from the signsl path the extra bits could become relevant. At the same time careful comparisons have been published showing that occasionally 14 bits is superior at extreme magnification. However theses differences would be irrelevant otherwise, especially for prints. At ISO above base ISO the sensor is underexposed (less light hits the sensor and the data is amplified or multiplied afterwards). Now the extra two bits are less important as the signal to noise ratio (and dynamic range) for all but the the highlight regions is low compared to base ISO.

I have to say I can't agree to this. People have said that in the past, perhaps when the sensors first started to do this, but at this point perhaps technology has moved further enough that perhaps that's not the case anymore. The K-5 sensor has insane DR, insane shadow recovery and insane high iso performance. I do believe these things are somewhat related. Also the tonality seems in post somewhat superior to the Fuji in some situations. It may not be a huge difference- the Fuji does very well indeed, but I will give the nod to the K-5.

I find X-Pro 1 focus performance similar to what I experienced with a mechanical rangefinder camera. I think most user frustration with AF is due to Fuji not educating their customers about how to focus the camera instead of fundimental AF design and engineering limitations. For instance there are countless posts where people naively use the OVF at subject distances where parallax error causes problems. The newer lenses have faster AF motors and improved firmware. But other camera systems do have better overall AF performance for a variety of reasons. What has changed over the past two years is the performance gap is much smaller.

Well, that's fine but I am not talking about the X-Pro1, I am talking about the X-E1. The X-E1 does not have an optical view finder so there are no parallax issues. The AF issues I described are compared to other contrast AF systems (same type of system Fuji is using in the X-E1).

What I very much enjoy about the Fuji APS-C cameras is using them. In tems of use, the Fuji's are pleasantly similar to the two film cameras I used to miss the most... the Canonet QL17-III and the Ziess Ikon M.

I like the manual controls though I wish the manual focus was manual focus and not fly by wire, and if it was fly by wire I wish the refresh rate on the interface was 3x or 4x what it is, but I understand making it small was also a priority so be it.

- Ricardo

 

[raist3d]

A couple more things:

- Video on the Fuji X-E1 is not that hot, and I would not use it for a professional scenario where a client may want a bit of video. Noticed the following:
+ compression artifacts in low light (like every so frames you get a "snap" with some artifacts). As "filmy" in a wierd way it makes it look, it's just not very good.
+ in good light you can get nasty color moire

After examining more shots, seems to me that for sure, the K-5 has more DR than the Fuji and better ISO performance. A bit of a bummer since these are areas I am interested in, but then Pentax doesn't have an F1.4 that seems as sharp as the Fuji, so it's a bit of give and take.

- Ricardo