christian.rudman
digital to analog convert
Save for what may happen with the D4, primary reports of the low light capabilities of the X-Pro1 are beyond current DSLRs, and are completely useable up to an 11x17 print at 25,600 ISO, which is the extent of the cameras range. Far out performing the 5D MkII and D700 even at 12,800. So you might have to change your tool soon for that situation here soon, and save a few bucks over any of your other current options.
Focal Plane Circus
Member
apodeictic
Established
Ha, well that comment got me a bit miffed because now people are just making things up to hate about a camera they've never even touched! Aren't we forgetting what the real reason we're all here? We love photographs! If this camera isn't what one wants in making a photograph, so be it! Go back to your M3, F1, G2 or whatever it is that floats your boat. We get so hung up on technology that I think we forget what we truly enjoy- seeing that final piece of art that started in our head and ended up on a piece of paper (or on a screen if that's your thing).
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
All this "discussion around here" is simply people frothing at the mouth. And nobody can say for sure whether or not it has addressed the "focus issue" because (a) nobody has actually been able to objectively handle a production camera and test the various "issues" and (b) there are so many "issues" of different kinds being raised by different people that any answer about one will still not satisfy the long list of real or imaginary deficiencies or rebut the unsubstantiated opinions that are being paraded in this thread.
Time for everyone to take a cold shower, stop speculating, and if you've really decided it's a bummer and you're not interested - butt out! (Not directed at anyone in particular and everyone in general).
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Maybe some RFF members prefer to have a specific new thread or subforum dedicated exclusively to this new digital camera praise. I (and perhaps other members) understood this thread -about leaking info on that camera- was here precisely to hold a mix of perceptions and points of view. Personally, I don't feel bad after other members comments reflecting no worries about the lack of great manual focus... Obviously on another, imaginary thread titled "Let's comment how great this new camera is indeed and feel happy and buy" I wouldn't even tell what I feel or consider true... But right now, this early, with the mixed feelings of what's about to come and what we'd like to get, it seems perfectly normal -and healthy- to comment with a tiny bit of freedom... Isn't it? Especially when we all appreciate Fuji's efforts (my only digital, S3Pro is Fuji) and the nice direction this market segment seems to take...
Cheers,
Juan
Cheers,
Juan
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
I can't disagree with what you say. That's why I don't see any need to disregard the new Fuji as potential professional's tool. If it can do the job that's asked of it, then it works. I've already ordered one, so I'll soon see for myself whether it fits my needs.
I too use a D700, though I primarily use prime AF lenses. I also spent a little time with an X100. I'd still be using it now if weren't limited to the 35mm FL. The focus wasn't as strong as my D700. But at the same time, it was quite adequate for my needs.
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
Fundamentally I wouldn't disagree with the thrust of your argument. But what really gets to me is people complaining - not commenting or questioning or asking, but complaining - about aspects of the design they don't even have detailed knowledge about. If we're going to complain, please let it be about something we know is factual and not assumption or guesswork.
Reddot9
This Is Not Here
I tried zone focusing with a Lumix G1 with S/lux 35 f1.4 attached via a Novaflex adapter. Terrible results. So was focusing with the external electronic view finder. Awful. Crop factor is terrible. Its not what Leica lenses are made for. 4/3 cameras like the G1 work best with their dedicated lenses. IMHO.
Tin
Well-known
Would you (or others) kindly explain why and how the crop factor affect the depth of focus of a lens? Isn't it the same lens whether it is used on a full frame camera or a cropped camera?
Tin
Focal Plane Circus
Member
I've had pretty good results with Exakta lenses as long as 500mm on my Olympus E-PL2. On a tripod, of course.
Focal Plane Circus
Member
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Damn, I guess all my M- Leica cameras are a super rip off considering that they have no AF of any kind
This camera IS AN AUTOFOCUS CAMERA, not a manual rangefinder. That means, and I'll say it s-l-o-w-l-y for you: we have every right to expect top quality autofocus from an AUTOFOCUS camera that costs 3 times (for the body) what Nikon or Canon charge for cameras (like the digital rebel bodies) that Fuji admits have better AF than this bauble they're pushing.
Put in rangefinder terms, the Cosina Voigtlander cameras have inferior rangefinders compared to Leicas or the Zeiss Ikon body. Its ok because they cost half what the Zeiss does and 1/9 what a Leica film body costs (new prices being compared here).
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
Chris, do you mean to come across as angry as you do? I read your posts and think you are just really irritated about something.
Regarding what you just wrote, I don't remember Fuji ever saying that this camera's autofocus will be worse than a Canon Rebel. Or if they did, I missed it.
I've watched a video of one of their reps saying it would be smoking fast. And I've seen a blog post on Gizmodo where the author says that Fuji told him the AF "won't be as snappy as it is on other cameras."
As far as I know, we have no idea which cameras he's referring to. Surely you would agree that it would be unfair to expect a $1,700 camera to keep pace with the $3,000-$5,000 offerings from Canon and Nikon.
Or does this Fuji have to beat every other camera in existence to avoid being labeled a "bauble?"
Regarding what you just wrote, I don't remember Fuji ever saying that this camera's autofocus will be worse than a Canon Rebel. Or if they did, I missed it.
I've watched a video of one of their reps saying it would be smoking fast. And I've seen a blog post on Gizmodo where the author says that Fuji told him the AF "won't be as snappy as it is on other cameras."
As far as I know, we have no idea which cameras he's referring to. Surely you would agree that it would be unfair to expect a $1,700 camera to keep pace with the $3,000-$5,000 offerings from Canon and Nikon.
Or does this Fuji have to beat every other camera in existence to avoid being labeled a "bauble?"
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
So what makes a camera a "bauble" Chris? Please explain in detail what "bauble" means to you. At what point of autofocus excellence does a camera cease being a "bauble" and become a "real" camera for "professionals"? Please be explicit and lay down some measurable criteria for "top quality autofocus" so in future we'll know for sure when Fuji (or any other manufacturer) has crossed the Rubicon.
Or are you just having an emotive vent. Or are you upset because people aren't necessarily agreeing with you and you think they should be?
You do excellent work that we all admire, but .... of well, maybe it's just the Winter blues.
Or are you just having an emotive vent. Or are you upset because people aren't necessarily agreeing with you and you think they should be?
You do excellent work that we all admire, but .... of well, maybe it's just the Winter blues.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Cheap D-slrs like the Canon rebels (They're the cameras I mentioned in my post you responded to) have quite fast AF, and I'll bet you they'll beat this one. They're not $3000-$5000 cameras either. Hell, my new Canon 5D-II was only $2000 (for the body), and its a fullframe body with the same sensor that the top-line Canon EOS 1DsIII has!
It irritates me to see companies bring out stuff that really isn't that great, then charging outrageous prices for the crap. As a working photographer, I can tell you that I am not a walking ATM for gear makers. Few of us are,and its getting tiresome being treated as one. Even really cheap-to-make things like sensor cleaning swabs are sold at prices that make precious metals look cheap. Enough is enough.
This Fuji sounds like a $600 camera, sold for $1000 more because the world has an overabundance of fools who screech about how they're in favor of "capitalism", yet they have zero understanding of the role of the customer in a free market (hint: it doesn't involve bending over and moaning about how good it feels). Our job is to hold businesses to account with our wallets.
Does the new Fuji have to beat $7000 cameras? Heck no, but it damned well better beat cameras costing 1/3 what it does. Right? RIGHT?
koven
Well-known
This camera is getting people real emotional.
By the way the AF on my x100 is not that much worse than my d300s. I never really noticed a difference.
By the way the AF on my x100 is not that much worse than my d300s. I never really noticed a difference.
migtex
Don't eXchange Freedom!
Don't worry folks it will come down on price.. as all cameras do.
Then... then, we will see....
You know what?
I hate this camera!
You know why?
Because I Luv it! :bang:
Then... then, we will see....
You know what?
I hate this camera!
You know why?
Because I Luv it!
:bang:
migtex
Don't eXchange Freedom!
f6andBthere
Well-known
koven
Well-known
As the X100 did from memory!
I was one of the biggest haters and probably one of the loudest voices showing my outrage x100 when the sample pics came out. It took a couple good pictures from good photographers to change my mind. Now I love this camera and have taken many great pictures I wouldn't have been able to take carrying a DSLR. I cant wait to see what the x- Pro will do.