MadMan2k
Well-known
Yes. To my eyes, the image quality of the sensor is just as good as the A7 and I think the native mount lenses for the Fuji have better glass.
Of course adapted lenses will be different animals on each.
The 56 they are coming out with will be closer to an 85mm, which I personally like more than 50-ish lenses.
The 10-24 will be a 16-37 or so, should be good
Spyro
Well-known
It's been losing money forever, it never stopped Fuji Corp from supporting it. If anything the massive losses it used to make up to 3 years ago have shrunk to near zero.
willie_901
Veteran
It turns out I very much enjoy using the X-Pro 1. The only camera I enjoyed more (but not by a lot) was my ex-Zeiss Ikon M body. My in-focus percentage is similar for with both cameras. My ex-Nikon F3 is in a close third place.
And the XTrans raw IQ is excellent, a bit better than my (now ancient) D700.
I enjoy the Fujinon lenses. I own five XF primes and the 56/1.2 is on order. These primes have better out of focus rendering (less color fringing) than the Nikon G primes I own. The XF lenses are more flare resistant too. I do prefer the Zeiss C-Sonar 50/1.5 to the Fujinon 35/1.4. The XF 23/1.4 pleases me just as much as the Zeiss 35/2 Biogon M lens did. And the 18/2 XF is a bit better than the CV Color Skopar 28/3.5 for reportage. work. The 27/2.8 XF pancake lens is far better than the Canonet QL 17 lens.
The retro style comes way behind enjoying making photographs with the camera.
Spyro
Well-known
yup
and it's not just the price difference for the camera, but it gets compounded as you add lenses. $500 more for your 50mm, $500 more for your standard zoom etc
It all adds up, and it only makes sense if you absolutely need the extra pixels for some reason, or you have a legacy lens(es) you want to try on full frame.
GaryLH
Veteran
To each their own.. I shoot on several camera platforms. They all have their stengths and weakness. But choice is good for all of us whether it is a Leica or Nikon or Canon or Sony or Fuji or Sigma, etc, etc.
As someone else has said, if u think of it as retro fad thing, I also believe u are missing the point.
For me it had nothing to do w/ fauss rf or now dslr look. It was all about getting back to basics. Critical control functionality that I did not need to power up the camera just to figure out the setup. The aperture ring, shutter speed, mode, exposure compensation are all available to me at a glance. Their ovf was icing on the cake in the xp and x100 apsc families.
Their lens lineup IMHO is superior to the Sony. The Zeiss line of lenses for the Sony cameras are some of the best out their, but Sony own lines is at best average IMHO.
Gary
YYV_146
Well-known
I used to have an X-E1, an X100 earlier than that. Now I own two A7s and a NEX-7.
I very much enjoyed the X-E1, but the files were awkward to handle in post - no amount of tweaking my usual workflow seemed to be able to make them as sharp as I wanted them. The body also felt cheap (all fuji bodies, in fact) and I desperately wanted to assign the focus magnification button to Q, but Fuji never made a firmware update for that.
If they want to make a "retro" camera, I'd like them to at least go the extra half mile and make it feel like an M6 or Bessa and provide modern functionality (fully customizable controls, deep buffer, decent peaking system, direct manual focus with XF lens). Sony gives me a $1350 full frame camera (what I paid for the A7 in Hong Kong) that is both cheap enough to put thousands of frames through and decent enough for printing at 20*30. It is a bit ugly and not nearly as well built as an M, but at least Sony doesn't hide the fact that they are making "consumer" bodies, and doesn't get stingy with crucial functions (1/8000).
I waited for an X-pro2 but judging what they did with the X-E2, it'll probably just be a EVF/feature upgrade with the same sensor and body. And it'll likely be $1699 again...
I very much enjoyed the X-E1, but the files were awkward to handle in post - no amount of tweaking my usual workflow seemed to be able to make them as sharp as I wanted them. The body also felt cheap (all fuji bodies, in fact) and I desperately wanted to assign the focus magnification button to Q, but Fuji never made a firmware update for that.
If they want to make a "retro" camera, I'd like them to at least go the extra half mile and make it feel like an M6 or Bessa and provide modern functionality (fully customizable controls, deep buffer, decent peaking system, direct manual focus with XF lens). Sony gives me a $1350 full frame camera (what I paid for the A7 in Hong Kong) that is both cheap enough to put thousands of frames through and decent enough for printing at 20*30. It is a bit ugly and not nearly as well built as an M, but at least Sony doesn't hide the fact that they are making "consumer" bodies, and doesn't get stingy with crucial functions (1/8000).
I waited for an X-pro2 but judging what they did with the X-E2, it'll probably just be a EVF/feature upgrade with the same sensor and body. And it'll likely be $1699 again...
gavinlg
Veteran
Perfect reply, end thread on this.
Add: The lenses are absolute top of field. Better than sony or canons pro lenses IMO. On par with zeiss and leica M mount lenses, but much lighter and MUCH cheaper.
gavinlg
Veteran
It really isn't about making something new. It's about making a camera for photographers, not gear and spec nerds.
DarvOz
Member
I use Fuji for the control layout more than anything, the dials are intuitive and make the experience of shooting straightforward and simple. I rarely see the menu screens or buttons. Everything about it is 2nd nature to me, and setting up for the shots I want is a flick of the wrist or a slide of the thumb without a second thought. It is a sensible camera for sensible photographers, and focuses on the basics of photography and gets them right.
back alley
IMAGES
according to mike johnson at top…cameras are a hobby for fuji!
Spyro
Well-known
"A friend with insider contacts in the business told me a decade or so ago, when Canon was the undisputed king of cameradom, that the only company Canon feared was Fuji—not Nikon, not Leica, not anybody else, just Fuji. And when Fuji throws its mighty might behind a project, you see it, brother. Note the speed with which the X100 morphed into the interchangeable-lens X-Pro1, or by which the line has proliferated (another industry insider told me in the '90s that that's how you tell when a camera has been particularly successful for a company—it sprouts variants), or by which the XF lens line has bloomed."
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2014/01/the-new-fuji-x-t1.html
I agree to a degree, when you see how small is the camera division compared to the total Fji Corp, but I think it goes a bit beyond that. Fuji mostly sells business to business products, cameras and film are the only reason your average consumer knows them. But they do know them, they are a household name. Do you know how much it would cost to make them a household name via advertising? Those imaging division losses, they're nothing.
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2014/01/the-new-fuji-x-t1.html
I agree to a degree, when you see how small is the camera division compared to the total Fji Corp, but I think it goes a bit beyond that. Fuji mostly sells business to business products, cameras and film are the only reason your average consumer knows them. But they do know them, they are a household name. Do you know how much it would cost to make them a household name via advertising? Those imaging division losses, they're nothing.
nongfuspring
Well-known
I think incremental improvement is a good thing, consumers tend to demand huge strides in technology but not refinement in usability, which IMO is more important. Entirely my opinion here, but take the Ricoh GR series, they hardly changed anything from the first GRD1, but what they did change made a significant cumulative difference for usability and now it really blows other similar cameras out of the water in terms of hardware interface. I hope Fuji continues this kind of slowly but surely development process with their X series.
I appreciate manufacturers like Sony who seem to want to produce a "game changer" every few months, but seeing as how nearly every contemporary digital camera produces competent images for nearly any purpose, I think it time camera makers started to concentrate more on user experience. That's not to say Fuji is doing everything right, but their emphasis on user experience is commendable.
Not in my opinion... I'm thankful the Fuji X series exists. It fits what i expect from a digital camera perfectly.
No need to fix what isn't broken.
burancap
Veteran
Da da dada That's All Folks!
Regarding the financial wellbeing of these companies, Sony is a whole lot closer to the brink in the consumer electronics realm.
kshapero
South Florida Man
That is the same for me.:angel:
eleskin
Well-known
X Pro -2 full frame?
X Pro -2 full frame?
If I were Fuji, I would make the X Pro 2 Full frame. Why? Because the X Pro is considered the top pro camera and most pro's want a full frame option. Now that we have the compact A7 cameras the stage is being set for more compact full frame cameras. Fuji should not wait for Nikon or Canon to be the second ones in this area. The lenses they now have are fine for what they have now. They could keep that in production and at the same time, offer a premium full frame lens selection for the pro model and at the same time, mount existing X lenses by having the camera automatically crop the sensor. IF they make a full frame with the correct offset micro lenses for legacy glass in an X Pro style body with a much improved EVF then they will have something. Heck, maybe they should take the M240 approach and have a clip on giant EVF and a single purpose superior optical viewfinder. I would like that very much and would pay over $2k for that!
X Pro -2 full frame?
If I were Fuji, I would make the X Pro 2 Full frame. Why? Because the X Pro is considered the top pro camera and most pro's want a full frame option. Now that we have the compact A7 cameras the stage is being set for more compact full frame cameras. Fuji should not wait for Nikon or Canon to be the second ones in this area. The lenses they now have are fine for what they have now. They could keep that in production and at the same time, offer a premium full frame lens selection for the pro model and at the same time, mount existing X lenses by having the camera automatically crop the sensor. IF they make a full frame with the correct offset micro lenses for legacy glass in an X Pro style body with a much improved EVF then they will have something. Heck, maybe they should take the M240 approach and have a clip on giant EVF and a single purpose superior optical viewfinder. I would like that very much and would pay over $2k for that!
eleskin
Well-known
Please morph into a full frame!!!
Please morph into a full frame!!!
God I hope Sony lit a fire under Fujis ass and they come out with full frame!!!
Please morph into a full frame!!!
God I hope Sony lit a fire under Fujis ass and they come out with full frame!!!
gavinlg
Veteran
I am a full frame fan, and I don't care that the x range is aps-c. That is saying a lot for me. The aps-c sensor is the best compromise for overall system quality, but only in the fuji X system. I don't shoot my 5d III anymore, and the reason is because the xpro1 is on the same level of IQ, but with better lighter smaller lenses, better controls, better ergonomics etc.
gavinlg
Veteran
The current XF lenses won't work on a full frame camera. They would need a whole new lens line. I can't see that happening. I think you would be more likely to see some sort of digital MF camera from fuji using the new Sony medium format CMOS.