Fuji X-E1 Review

[JRBERNSTEIN]

"....I'm a pro so this is not for me" comments are at the very least unhelpful.

Bugleone, I'm only going to say this one more time. I never said anything like that and you're categorically misrepresenting me.

Fact of the matter is, the X-E1 is not the camera for me and the reason for this is the lack of OVF. I've been very clear on this. This has nothing to do with pro or not or anything else. I've used plenty of non-"pro" cameras and have loved using them. My Minnox 35GT is a great example!

At the end of the day, I've never used an EVF that I've liked better than an OVF and the X-E1 just doesn't do it for me. Period. And I stand by everything I've said in my review.

Between the X-Pro1 and the X-E1, you absolutely get what you pay for, and I think the extra few hundred on the X-Pro1 is entirely worth it. Whereas the X-E1 is just one of many comparable EVIL cameras...there's nothing overly special about it.

 

[Ulfric Douglas]

I must say that OVF was very comfortable and ironically the extra height it forces upon the camera body adds to the heft and quality feel of the whole.
For these two reasons the X-Pro1 'felt' better than the X-E1 when I handled them recently for a few test pictures.
Having said that : thanks for the review, I've read it ... and here's some fan for the flames : I also feel Bugleone has half a point in his post #15.
You could tweak some wording in your review to be less dismissive of folk who might prefer the X-E1, after all the only real difference seems to be the viewfinder.

 

[Vivek]

Whereas the X-E1 is just one of many comparable EVIL cameras...there's nothing overly special about it.

I always thought (still do) that it (OVF/EVF hybrid) was a carry over from the X100 where it alone was the special feature.

With the X-Pro, starting with the X-Pro, Fuji could sell something that is a special feature, its X-Trans sensor.

This X line is in danger of becoming like Leica where old fans turn against the brand for real innovations.

The XE-1 was the right step. I wish Leica had done away with the RF in the new M and completely made it an EVF only camera or atleast offer an a la carte version of one.

BTW, when you have such a strong opinion about a camera that does not have the feature you cherish, why buy one and even write a "review" about it?

 

[fotografz]

I always thought (still do) that it (OVF/EVF hybrid) was a carry over from the X100 where it alone was the special feature.

With the X-Pro, starting with the X-Pro, Fuji could sell something that is a special feature, its X-Trans sensor.

This X line is in danger of becoming like Leica where old fans turn against the brand for real innovations.

The XE-1 was the right step. I wish Leica had done away with the RF in the new M and completely made it an EVF only camera or atleast offer an a la carte version of one.

BTW, when you have such a strong opinion about a camera that does not have the feature you cherish, why buy one and even write a "review" about it?

From the OP's review, the camera and two lenses were sent to him by Fuji to evaluate ... where does it say that he bought it to write a review?

"Real innovations" are strictly a matter of personal opinion ... not all so called innovations are better than what they replace ... at least not for a while, nor for all photographers ... and sometimes they never are. EVF are here to stay, and will surely improve as time passes. However, for this photographer, and how/what I shoot they aren't there yet, so I'll let others be the technological guinea pigs.

Good thing Leica didn't do what you seem to suggest ... although a FF M version with EVF only may have garnered a following, I wonder how many would plunk down the $5 to 6K+ it most likely would have cost?

I have the opposite opinion when it comes to the Sony FF 35mm DSLRs ... I wish they also offered an OVF version of the A99 with LV and dual parallel card slots that the A900 didn't have. The A99 made some nice advancements in body design, file quality and a few features ... but the EVF only is a nightmare for rapid type shooting in diverse conditions like a wedding or sports or any demanding situation that people tend to use a 35mm DSLR for ... other than more stationary or static imagery. In this case, the "rush" to abrupt technology may not have been the best move. It has nothing to do with "old fans" turning against "real innovations" ... it has to do with premature implication of not ready for prime time technologies.

- Marc

 

[Vivek]

From the OP's review, the camera and two lenses were sent to him by Fuji to evaluate ... where does it say that he bought it to write a review?

If that is case, I am sorry that I compared it to Leica. :ROTFL:

 

[Ron (Netherlands)]

Ron, in all seriousness, can I ask what would constitute a "review" to you (seeing as you think this is not one)?

It is exactly how I read your 'review', not more than an opinion about not liking a camera. As other members here I feel that you shouldn't base your opinion upon wording that can be read as stigmatization. If you didn't meant to do so, then I would advise to choose your wording more carefully and accurate.

 

[Chuck Jones]

Wow, tough crowd here in this thread

Marc, I hear your pain old friend. There is always another opinion now days about almost everything. Seems we all need one in today's world and need to learn how and when to use them.

I will shed some light on your question about the Fuji X-E1, at least as far as using it with the new 14mm f/2.8. I decided to just go ahead and do my own review, since everybody else seems to want to. I did come to a bit of a different conclusion myself than most of the ones I've read so far.

Fujinon XF 14mm f/2.8 R First Report | The Camera Forum

Warmest Regards,
Chuck Jones

 

[glenerrolrd]

Chuck

Excellent review ..enjoyed your perspective . Leica s have always been darn expensive and even if I can afford them ...there is a risk of carrying a kit with two M bodies and 3-4 lenses ...if those lenses are summiluxes thats about $35K . A similar Fuji kit can be assembled for less than $3K . There are many times ..I might prefer something a little less expensive .

I saw some video of David Allen Harvey shooting in Rio at the beach ..he was using an X100S ...

I am waiting for Fuji to release the X Pro 2 next year which should hopefully resolve some of the quirks .

The biggest downside is the impact on my work flow required to create files that work to my aesthetic .....another project just to stay even . LOL

Roger

 

[fotografz]

Good review Chuck, especially from someone that uses ultra wides as much as you do.

I'm still iffy about EVF ... but if Fuji improves the AF so it can be used in those quick candid areas of work I suppose it's something I could live with. Responsiveness is an important criteria for me.

Maybe I'll wait and let Roger beta test the Pro-2

- Marc

 

[Chuck Jones]

Chuck

Excellent review ..enjoyed your perspective . Leica s have always been darn expensive and even if I can afford them ...there is a risk of carrying a kit with two M bodies and 3-4 lenses ...if those lenses are summiluxes thats about $35K . A similar Fuji kit can be assembled for less than $3K . There are many times ..I might prefer something a little less expensive .

I saw some video of David Allen Harvey shooting in Rio at the beach ..he was using an X100S ...

I am waiting for Fuji to release the X Pro 2 next year which should hopefully resolve some of the quirks .

The biggest downside is the impact on my work flow required to create files that work to my aesthetic .....another project just to stay even . LOL

Roger

Thank you Roger for reading it. You and I both shoot many of the same kinds of things Roger, so it does't surprise me your thinking is running along the same lines that mine is. I mean we don't always meet up in downtown San Francisco, now do we? :chug:

Frankly, with Leica raising their Brand awareness with the Hip crowd, it does give me concern about getting robbed. Once the street realizes the value of those little red dots in the pawn shops or online forums, it's game over. Mite as well just buy a can of red spray paint and draw a target on your back. Or keep to all the "safe" areas, but what kind of photographic adventure would that be? :ROTFL:

I think there is very much a place in my life for a disposable camera, should the need to beat a hasty exit towards the door arise again. It's happened only a couple of times, but back then nobody but another camera geek even knew what a Leica was. It is nice shooting again stress free, knowing that if the whole gear bag got trashed, it wouldn't be the end of the world. I hear you loud and clear too Roger, whatever your income or bank balance, you just can't get that kind of freedom with $35-40K worth of cameras around your neck. At least I can't.

But then again, maybe I am just getting old and conservative!..... :wtf:

 

[Chuck Jones]

Good review Chuck, especially from someone that uses ultra wides as much as you do.

I'm still iffy about EVF ... but if Fuji improves the AF so it can be used in those quick candid areas of work I suppose it's something I could live with. Responsiveness is an important criteria for me.

Maybe I'll wait and let Roger beta test the Pro-2

- Marc

Marc, I am still iffy about the whole EVF thing too, and I've been shooting cameras with one for a couple of years now! Some things about them I love. Others, I hate. I find little to no middle ground either. It either works well, or it fights me. If it fights me, i give up and just use the back of the body. But that said, the EVF on my X-E1 is pretty reasonable. It has decent micro contrast, which a lot of them don't. Seeing the contrast "snap" in with the focus is a big help.

As far as AF for the quick candids, it isn't there yet my friend. May make it with the next firmware update scheduled for July 25, we shall see. I shoot mainly the 14mm now, so hyperfocal set to 5 feet, and everything is sharp. My body is doggish slow with autofocus engaged, but is quick as an M9, down right snappy responsive with manual focus selected.

I've shot Leica for so many years the whole autofocus thing doesn't bug me in the least, but I can see how it would some others who didn't grow up "running all the controls" like I did. I'll even make a confession here and admit that I actually get a kick out of shooting full manual. I love seeing the differences as I change things up. I think it is all whatever you grew up with mostly myself. One isn't a damn bit better than another if you don't know how to use it, and these EVF's do require some time investment to get the hang of how to use 'em. Certainly not going to give you much of a problem at your level Marc. I wouldn't worry about it, come on in dude, the water is great! :dh2:

 

[glenerrolrd]

I am by no means experienced with EVF ..because I just have not found them acceptable for viewing . A RF is not easy to focus accurately and especially on anything that moves ..but it is exceptional for "seeing" ..not quite a SLR but you can anticipate the moment .

When I had an X100 ..I always used the OVF and put the focus button on the back ..so I could tap the button to get a slight adjustment . I found it awkward but with practice ..I could see how it would work . Most of the Fuji sites refer to this as manual focus ?

Marc s work with a wedding is a great stress test ....on the street you can miss a series of captures and forget about it . Just keeping shooting ...but in a wedding you need a few keepers out of almost every situation . I would need a lot more confidence to screw around with the Fuji s OVF/EVF on a wedding ..but for travel and most street work its fine .

This is an investment in time that hasn t made the priority list ..but its definitely attractive .

 

[Chuck Jones]

Counting up the EVF's I've played with the last couple of years, I guess it is five or six of 'em. Two were ridiculously bad. Bad enough to be the primary reason I sold the camera. Two, maybe three of them have been reasonably close to the mark. NONE of them to my mind have been useable with the same 100% certainty you get from every OVF, rangefinder, DSLR, TLR, or even the ground glass on the back of a view camera. Not a single one.

For Pro use, no question the XPro-1 is the better choice. I chose the X-E1 because I have other options like my 5D3 that have OVF, and honestly I was wanting something more serious as a small pocket camera. When the XPro-2 comes out, I'll move over to it. Fuji looks serious about this as a Pro camera line and going in a direction that fits what I do nicely, so I'm onboard.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

For me the X E1 is about the best EVF I tired so far. For me that says a lot since I have a hard time even liking them to begin with. Nice thing also is I can hook up some Nikon mounts to it and expand the kit. So it serves as a nice little backup in case of any major failures. I'm also planning on using it heavily with my strobes on a gig that needs a zoom and the files don't need to be 36mpx and I tested it yesterday and it shoots faster than I thought. I just updated all the firmware on it as well. I really like shooting this cam. I do want to get the 14mm as that would be a nice lens to have. I find the kit lens to be very good as well, reason I sold the Sony Nex was the kit lens was terrible. This is a much nicer lens. Now a XPro2 comes out than I will get that for sure. Honestly I thought I would not like this at first but once you get it under your belt a bit, its turning out to be a nice cam to work with and the files are very good.

The other thing I like is the costs and I agree its a drop it walk away cam that won't kill me in case of emergency. Agree you can walk into places without worrying about your gear. I have had lenses in my life I was afraid to even shoot because of the costs of replacing it. Not this 3k for a whole kit and your done. I think there is still a big sale when you buy a body on all the lenses and its a big sale too, saving hundreds of dollars on each lens. Might be a good idea to buy in just for the lens savings now. Something to consider

 

[mranger211]

For Pro use, no question the XPro-1 is the better choice.

I totally get that some people don't like EVFs. What I don't understand is how EVFs are somehow not "pro". It's like saying a Leica is not a pro camera because of its rangefinder.



Martin

 

[corposant]

I'm also planning on using it heavily with my strobes on a gig that needs a zoom and the files don't need to be 36mpx and I tested it yesterday and it shoots faster than I thought.

I have been using mine with strobes and I think you'll be pleased with the results (even if quiet mode has to be off to activate the hotshoe). I set it to shoot RAW+JPG and set the film simulation to Astia, and sometimes I just dump all the JPGs onto my website to use as proofs.

I used to use the 35mm at times and frankly, I think the 18-55 is so good for portrait work that I sold the 35mm and now just use the zoom.

Question to the OP: how exactly does somebody become an "Official Fuji Photographer?"

 

[glenerrolrd]

Really a lot of the discussion of EVF is just differences in shooting techniques and style . When I travel or have the opportunity to shoot a lot ..I can go into the "zone " . Now this may sound stupid ..but its quite common in many sports and some types of photography are athletic activities . The key to this is to see without the camera and execute with out really thinking . To do this you need lots of practice and repetition ..which is why those that love RF keep stressing you have to practice .

The key though is that you have to be comfortable with the "seeing " part . If you get a chance take a look thru a MF viewfinder . Or rent "War Photographer " and watch Jim Nachtwey cover a opportunity with a DSLR . An EVF seems to get in the way ...at least for me . But I concede that it depends on your requirements not mine .

 

[Chuck Jones]

I totally get that some people don't like EVFs. What I don't understand is how EVFs are somehow not "pro". It's like saying a Leica is not a pro camera because of its rangefinder.



Martin

Martin, let me clarify my remark. In no way am I saying that using an EVF is not "Professional." What I am saying is that there are TWO Fuji bodies available, the XPro-1 and the X-E1 that I own. The major difference being the XPro-1 has both the EVF and an OVF. You'll not miss a shot with the OVF due to not being able to see thru it, where I have sometimes with just the EVF. Especially in strong backlight, which is difficult enough anytime to nail the exposure.

The difference between a professional photographer and an amateur is one gets paid to deliver an ASSIGNMENT where the other takes pictures. If I am going to be delivering ASSIGNMENTS with one of these Fuji cameras, then I want the one of the two choices with the maximum capability to guarantee my "getting the shot." For that, I feel the XPro-1 is the better choice of the two. That's all. I know plenty of people using EVF's for professional work, and doing just fine with them.

 

[Chuck Jones]

How exactly does somebody become an "Official Fuji Photographer?"

Great Question!

I guess you need to become an "X-Photographer" first? :ROTFL:

 

[mranger211]

Chuck, I didn't mean to call you out. I was just questioning this meme that EVFs are somehow not suitable for professional use, and your post was nicely quotable. Sorry.

You are entirely correct. Professional photography relies on delivering the assignment, and whatever equipment gets you there is good. If you need the rangefinder in some (professional) situations, the X-Pro is certainly better. If you don't, it is just more expensive. The reason I mentioned RFs in this context is because somehow no-one ever claims a Leica is not a professional camera due to it only having a rangefinder. As someone who gets paid (occasionally) to shoot rodeos, admittedly not with my X-E1, I would not want myself to be stuck with an M9.