Fujifilm X-Pro1 details leaked!!!

Chriscrawfordphoto said:
Cheap D-slrs like the Canon rebels have quite fast AF, and I'll bet you they'll beat this one.

............ But you don't know that. You're just throwing out unsubstantiated assertions.

They're not $3000-$5000 cameras either. Hell, my new Canon 5D-II was only $2000 (for the body),

............ So, at $1700 for the body compared to $2000 for the Canon, do we cut any slack?


This Fuji sounds like a $600 camera,

................"sounds like"? Is that an objective statement?

sold for $1000 more because the world has an overabundance of fools

......... now there's a well researched and balanced commentary.

who screech about how they're in favor of "capitalism", yet they have zero understanding

........another really insightful analysis.

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.

........... It's not in my job description, bud.

............. "Sounds like" rhetoric from the 'Occupy Everything' stuff that's recently been in the news.

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?
Click to expand...

...... wrong, WRONG! $1700/3 = $500 plus tips. Let's face it, you don't like the economy , you don't like the camera, you don't have the facts, you don't like people disagreeing with you. Time for a strong coffee, I think.

I'm not necessarily defending Fuji or the camera. In fact I'm not going to get one - because it doesn't fit my needs at present. But it's an interesting development and bears scrutiny. Just trashing it before it is actually in use without really knowing all about it is silly. It's the emotion and lack of logical thought in so many of the comments that I object to.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
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.
Click to expand...

Who told you that this camera is expensive because of the autofocus?

As far as I know, it's about that hybrid viewfinder, the niche it occupies and the law of supply and demand.
 
While you're having a backrub or a coffee

While you're having a backrub or a coffee

Emotional is right.

But I think there is a real reason, related to the type of innovation Fuji has brought to the table, that calls forth this emotional energy.

Let's face it, what the Fuji X-Pro1 promises isn't, or isn't just, the objective criteria of a better final product (like MP count or high ISO noise performance), but the subjective criteria of user experience.

The issue Chris is raising has been elaborately discussed in numerous posts by many people, and eloquently argued by NickTrop. It boils down to this: the consumer DSLR offers a price/performance ratio that is really unmatched, but, and here's the kicker, at the penalty of a form factor and user experience that often leaves a heck of a lot to be desired. Note that the threads around this issue have almost always been highly emotional.

The cool thing that Fuji brings to the table is the evolution of the digital camera market to the point that user experience and form factor are being taken up a notch. Not too long ago, people were literally crying for a camera with this form factor to have interchangeable lenses, OVF with brightlines for multiple FLs, hard knobs, metal instead of plastic construction (i.e., a bunch of things that contribute to subjective user experience more than to objective final product) as well as excellent color, resolution and high ISO...(and what about DR? Fuji's earlier Pro series DSLRs always had better DR than the competition).

The weird thing, you gotta admit, however, is that something as subjective as experience also has to be given a price. Fuji isn't going to change that. That won't change, my friends, until we decide, collectively, to change the rules of the game for everyone.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
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.
Click to expand...

This is all based on supposition. There is no actual hands on experience with this camera that justifies unwarranted bashing of this product. In general, your complaints seem to be based upon your notion of being continually gouged by manufacturers. If the Fuji or any other camera is overpriced, then that will be borne out in the market by poor sales figures. If this camera fills a niche that photographers have been looking for at a price that is acceptable to those seeking this type of camera, then more power to Fuji. If your 5DII is doing the job, then great -- it's a fine camera. Nobody is forcing you to but this camera, and if the Fuji does not meet the needs for your type or style of work, then it would be a poor investment. This goes for any piece of photographic equipment -- a working photographer needs to choose the tools that enable them to produce their desired end product.

All of this angst over a camera that has just been announced is completely unwarranted. There is no perfect camera ... just as there is no perfect car, computer, etc. All the wailing and gnashing of teeth in search of the magic bullet that doesn't exist is a waste of energy and time.

Carry on.
 
PhotoMat said:
This is all based on supposition. There is no actual hands on experience with this camera that justifies unwarranted bashing of this product. In general, your complaints seem to be based upon your notion of being continually gouged by manufacturers. If the Fuji or any other camera is overpriced, then that will be borne out in the market by poor sales figures. If this camera fills a niche that photographers have been looking for at a price that is acceptable to those seeking this type of camera, then more power to Fuji. If your 5DII is doing the job, then great -- it's a fine camera. Nobody is forcing you to but this camera, and if the Fuji does not meet the needs for your type or style of work, then it would be a poor investment. This goes for any piece of photographic equipment -- a working photographer needs to choose the tools that enable them to produce their desired end product.

All of this angst over a camera that has just been announced is completely unwarranted. There is no perfect camera ... just as there is no perfect car, computer, etc. All the wailing and gnashing of teeth in search of the magic bullet that doesn't exist is a waste of energy and time.

Carry on.
Click to expand...
Agree, it's like a thread about.. hmmmm ah ! Yes! What is the best photo bag?

I have a feeling (oh my, another one!!) if this Fuji X1 was the Leica X1 (lol X again.. hmmm 😕 ) the fuzzz will be different.

Now, this may close the thread in flames....
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
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!
Click to expand...

I played with a D5100 - it was a very interesting camera, a great APS sensor, good handling. But the viewfinder was darker and smaller than the OVF or EVF in my X100. The Rebel T3i is similar (but darker, IMO).

Now, if I want a digital camera with a viewfinder that allows me to shoot right-eyed ala a RF, I have exactly two options right now: a NEX-7 or (soon) a XPro-1.

Nor is there a small, quality equivalent of the 23/2 on my X100 or the upcoming 17/2 from the X-line in either Canon or Nikon's APS lineup. The closest is Nikon's excellent and affordable 35/1.8.
In full-frame terms, to get a great 35mm lens from either would cost ~$1500 (more for the Nikon, I think).

As far as RF goes, contrast-detection is not as fast as phase-detection across the full spectrum of uses. Maybe it someday will be, but not right now. It is, however, accurate when locked on - something that isn't necessarily true with DSLRs (or M9s, for that matter, if the RF is off). The companies have had to build in an ability for users to manually adjust their AF for front and back focus. I appreciate not having to do that with contrast-detection systems.

The XPro-1 will not equal the AF of even a basic DSLR, I think everyone will agree with that. But if it improves on the X100, even to the level of last-generation Olympus MFT bodies, I suspect it will be at least the equal of manually-focusing a RF for most users.

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.
Click to expand...
You know, I actually hate to come out in favor of the capitalists (card-carrying Wobblie here), but no one makes you buy any of these things.

If your work demands a full-frame DSLR, great, good for you. The 5D2 is an amazing deal right now. If I were 'working' full-time, I wouldn't mind hauling it around, either. But I'm not - so a compact system that performs well but doesn't weigh 5 pounds with a lens is what I want.

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.
Click to expand...
And users will. If the XPro-1 is a bum (most likely in terms of AF), it will not sell and Fuji will lose millions. As they should, if they brought this to market without fixing the primary complaint folks had about the X100.

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?
Click to expand...
'Beat' in what way? Fuji has already announced an excellent lineup of compact prime lenses for the system. Those don't exist for budget DSLRs.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
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?
Click to expand...

Okay seriously... I've repeated this a few times directly to you Chris - the AF is perfectly fine on the x100. I know that you're basing your bias upon crappy internet reviews of the x100 that say the AF is subpar - but honestly, those reviewers are just either not using it properly, or using it out of its means - like shooting sports or running people at night. I've used mine at iso 4000, 1/30th, f2 which is REALLY dark, and it still is able to focus fairly quickly with reasonable accuracy. No, it's not foolproof, but it's far better than useable - I would call the AF simply 'good' as opposed to a 1d or d3 which I would call 'brilliant' and a 5d which I would call 'great'. By comparison, I use a couple of d3100s, a couple of d90's and a d5100 at work at the moment, and we're having big focusing problems with them. a) they're inaccurate - sometimes they're very slightly back or front focussed, b) they completely mis-focus sometimes and still light up the 'af achieved' light in the VF - which really throws the photographer off. My x100 is not only quicker, but more accurate than all these lower end nikons.

I saw someone just before post that their x100 is not noticeably worse than their d300 (which AF system is similar to the d700/d3 system), and there is (for instance) a LOT of pro photographers and photojournalists using the x100 currently - Annie leibovitz is the first one to come to mind, and some even on this board.

Now, this x-pro1 looks to be quite a bit faster still than the x100 - from the video I saw with that Kayce lady, it looked quicker than my 5d (which is the same as a 5dII).

You gotta listen to people who actually use the camera! Not testers who think it has a bad AF system because it doesn't have 3d tracking or 54 AF points....
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
[...]

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?
Click to expand...

I have no trouble at at all understanding your point, which is very valid in its own right. This type of cameras with optical, rangefinder influenced, finder is new in the digital area. I share your hunch that the new Fuji may be worse than some or most entry level DSLR regarding AF speed. Will it be still useable for a lot of photographers in not so AF speed demanding fields? I still hope so. Building products is always a trade-off, along with an estimate when a certain functionality is good enough to be released to create value.

The digital M cameras were (apart from being very expensive) certainly also not up to entry level cameras in some areas when they were released. Did they create value? Absolutely. But not for all, of course. Was the learning of the M8 used to improve the sucessor? Absolutely. Could they have done better from the beginning? Certainly in some points.

Personally I'm very content to see going camera development also in the direction of the XPro. I could never bond with a Nex 5, for example. No finder is a no-go for me.

Best
Ivo
 
Photon42 said:
I share your hunch that the new Fuji may be worse than some or most entry level DSLR regarding AF speed. Will it be still useable for a lot of photographers in not so AF speed demanding fields? I still hope so.
Click to expand...

Considering the x100 is already as fast as entry level DSLR autofocus, and more accurate, and the x-pro is supposed to be much faster than the x100, I think it will be okay.
 
Chris, of all the photographers on this forum, your body of work would seem to have the least need of fast a fast focus system. Why is that particular aspect of this camera so upsetting to you?
 
Paul T. said:
Sounds like this is about you, not a camera.
Click to expand...

C'mon Chris! Lots of people have more money than me. They date hotter women, drive faster cars and 'waste' money on expensive watches with the same functionality as a $50 Seiko. One can either try to fix all of 'those people' (and the people who make their expensive watches, cars and overpriced cameras) or sort one's own head out. I know which is more effective.

Looking at this from another perspective, this camera at least shows that Fuji is coming at the market from a different angle, designing new products that give rise to more choice and potential future products. Even if it is rubbish, it is a GOOD thing for photographers, including those who don't buy one. I suspect it won't be rubbish, but not perfect either. No surprise there...
 
I have not followed rff over 6-7 months due to my move across countries but now I see nothing has changed 🙂) Another APS size camera is out and people are talking over it...Gimme another full frame rangefinder 🙂, not that I can afford but to talk over it...
 
LeicaFoReVer, I think you mean nothing has changed in the way that people argue over minute details of a camera that is yet to be released.
People should wait until someone buys it to see some results, or buy one themselves.
Every new camera lately has so much hype around it, people speculating about how it's going to work and then when it doesn't operate as they imagined it would suddenly it becomes the worst camera ever.

I hear it all day, every day working in camera sales and then it's all over the forums and blogs. If you think a camera will be good then buy one and give it a shot, I don't see why people who aren't going to get one need to whinge about its specs anyway.
Comparing the AF of a camera like the X100 to the 1Ds III... Really?
Pssch.

Every camera has its quirks, you like it or you don't. This Fuji looks good, I've been very impressed by the quality of the X100. It'll be good to play with one when they start to ship but until then I'm just going to keep shooting with what I've got.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
Fuji has admitted it has poor AF compared to D-SLRs. A $2000+ camera should not have inferior autofocus or anything else. Sorry.
Click to expand...

You bought a 5DII lately? Why did you buy it? Everyone knows that it has the same AF module that my old 5D has. Compared to a Canon 1D or 7D it's noticeably slower and less reliable.

So you probably bought it because the AF of the 5D is fast enough for your needs and you don't need a camera for fast action. I'd better wait for real life performance measurements. Perhaps the AF of the Fuji is slow compared to a 1D but fast enough for most of us.
 
tom.w.bn said:
You bought a 5DII lately? Why did you buy it? Everyone knows that it has the same AF module that my old 5D has. Compared to a Canon 1D or 7D it's noticeably slower and less reliable.

So you probably bought it because the AF of the 5D is fast enough for your needs and you don't need a camera for fast action. I'd better wait for real life performance measurements. Perhaps the AF of the Fuji is slow compared to a 1D but fast enough for most of us.
Click to expand...

OK, point made, very well. Good enough is good enough depending on what you need. So, everyone calm down on Chris, and Chris, deep breath, you have made your point, expressed your opinions and speculation, and it is time to let everyone else have their opinions and speculation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom