Fujifilm X-Pro1 details leaked!!!

Adanac said:
That blurring noted, the XPro 1 is not a range finder focused camera so why compare them to rangefinder camera prices, given the focus mechanism is a fundamental attribute of a camera and one which attracts, or repels, camera buyers?
Click to expand...

I think I can explain this. Because of the 11 things that people like about rangefinders, it ticks off 10:

a. you have a big, bright, parallax corrected optical VF;
b. you can see outside the frame;
c. there is no mirrorbox or pentaprism and the resulting awkward triangular shape and size;
d. you have small non retrofocus lenses that sit close to the sensor;
e. there is no squeezing your nose against your LCD to look through a centrally located viewfinder or EVF;
f. there is no mirror slap, the cameras range from quiet to silent;
g. there is uninterrupted view of the subject, no mirror black out or laggy motion blurred EVFs (unless you want it);
h. it takes M lenses;
i. You have mostly dials instead of buttons; and
j. you can customize with soft releases and half cases 😀

I think part of the reason that RF focusing was always so important is that, by design, it used to make those things possible.
 
Spyro said:
e. there is no squeezing your nose against your LCD to look through a centrally located viewfinder or EVF;
Click to expand...

I'm a left-eyed shooter, like about 50% of the population (or marginally less due to conditioning). Consequently with the placement of the viewfinder on rangefinders and cameras such as this, I actually get more squeezing of the nose.

In that respect I prefer an SLR. For me the design of the X-Pro 1 is actually worse; that's probably the price to pay for the camera to look Leica-like and retro. The best would be a camera with a viewfinder on the far right, but the center would have been a nice compromise (also: less parallax!)

Now I'll get nose prints on the screen of my Fuji because Oskar Barnack was right-eyed. The power of tradition!
 
LOL I know...
most things that are considered good about RFs are a matter of perception anyway. Like this "shoot with both eyes open" thingo, which, anyway you look at it, is a sure recipe for a headache.

But anyway, we're counting similarities here. Xpro1 V RF.
 
Spyro said:
I think I can explain this. Because of the 11 things that people like about rangefinders, it ticks off 10...

...

I think part of the reason that RF focusing was always so important is that, by design, it used to make those things possible.
Click to expand...

Spyro, you nailed it. Thank you for emphasizing these facts.
 
jsrockit said:
Yeah, that always made me not want to bother with the Hexar AF. Very cool camera, but when it came out I couldn't get over the 1/250th thing. Let's hope the X1Pro is faster than the X100...but if it isn't, I'll still happily use it.
Click to expand...

LOL - me too ... till I tried it (I was going off spec sheets beforehand and discounted it "out of hand" based on the silly 1/250 maximum shutter and no speed shown in viewfinder). I'm not saying they're not annoying or that they're not a limitation (they certainly are), but once I tried the Hexar AF, I realised I was prepared to work within those limitations (you may not be - I think it's one of those things you never really know till you live with it for a while - and it's perfectly reasonable to say "not for me"). I DO use a Red Filter for the 2 stop reduction, you'd need an expensive ND filter for colour film. Why are such things so great in one way, so limited in others - Is God an RPG player with limited points to distribute amongst attributes ? Flippant, but it seems to be the way the world works !! Which means the Fuji will have a great sensor and continue the tradition of crappy AF ... sorry ... 😉
 
My expectations to a modern compact AF camera are all met, but the time lapse mode. I didn't find it in the instruction manual. Beeing a software function, I hope they will add it in a next update.
Regarding legacy lenses, page 70 (focal lenght settings and shoot without lens) might address lenses other than Fuji's own XF mount... The Manual Focus Mode (on page 45) might be one of the approaches to focus MF lenses, but I'm still not sure about the detailed implications.
 
I must admit to having been away and out of it as far as discussion of the X-Pro1 is concerned. I haven't taken the time to wade through all 39 (39!) pages of discussion here, but I have looked at the preview at dpReview and formed an initial impression.

Firstly, and pace the little bit of discussion I have read in this thread, the concept of the X-Pro1 seems more like a digital incarnation of the Contax G line (though where's the focus button for my thumb and the active infrared?) than it is like the Hexar AF. That's not a bad thing: I have a G2 and the Hexar AF and like them both in their own way, for different things, and also appreciate their pluses and minuses (for my use).

I also thought that this is a great development and that this kind of camera has been a long time coming and I wish it every success. I was even mentally budgeting for this as something "I just gotta have". And then I thought: why am I buying into a whole new camera system? Just on cost alone, would it be cheaper for me to buy a Leica M9 (gulp) than to buy an X-Pro1, lenses, flash etc. given my already substantial acquisitions for M and LTM gear? And would I actually prefer the M9?

Examining the detritus at the bottom of my bank account and quite likely (un)employment situation as my current contract winds to a close, I think such fantasy budgets might be exactly that...

...Mike
 
New Fuji Guys comments on X-Pro1 manual focus:

"MF speed is improved over x100 with #FUJIFILM X-Pro1. Seems more accurate to me when fine tuning focus."
"You will be able to use MF during video with #FUJIFILM X-Pro1. CAF also available too"

- both posted yesterday on the Fuji Guys Twitter page.
 
It seems the only reason to buy into a whole new system (given the information in your post) has to do with the practicality of using film for the next 2 - 5 years.

The XPro1 will take M lenses using an adapter sometime in 2012. No one really knows how well the sensor will respond to M optics or how practical focusing M lenses will be with the XPro1.

If the four lenses (35, 18, 60 and future 14 mm) lenses cost about $700 each and the body costs $2000, this is still much less than a new M9 but could be close in price to a used body.

My guess is the XPro1 (which I have pre-ordered with the 35/1.4 lens) will be a viable body when used with Fujinon XF lenses. I doubt that M lens owners will find the XPro1 to be useful with M lenses. The X series appears to be a pure AF platform where manual focus is only useful in limited circumstances such as macro or other tripod work where very fine focus adjustments using the LCD screen are useful.

Fuji could surprise me and release firmware in conjunction with the M adapter that invokes focus peaking or some other efficient method for focusing with analog lenses. I'd like that sort of surprise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom