Full Frame X Trans M Mount with Rangefinder. What if? Would you buy?

NicoM said:
I think that the general consensus is that the X-Tran technology is capable of matching the quality that comes out of full-fram cameras, both in detail, dynamic range and high ISO performance. There are a lot of side by side comparisons that are only a google search away. I presume that a FF version would be even better. ...
Click to expand...

I remain unconvinced. I've not seen anything out of the XPro1 that surpasses what I've seen out of other top notch APS-C cameras, never mind the larger sensor cameras.

G
 
Honestly, the fujinon lenses are better than M-mount equivalents at a fraction of the cost. What other 50mm f1.4 equiv lens for M-mount is as good at 1.4 as the fujinon? The summilux ASPH? Maybe, but at 6k or whatever it is.

I'd buy a full frame x-trans fuji with fujinon lens mount. The M-mount thing I don't really get.
 
Godfrey said:
I remain unconvinced. I've not seen anything out of the XPro1 that surpasses what I've seen out of other top notch APS-C cameras, never mind the larger sensor cameras.

G
Click to expand...

After using the x100 for a year (with the excellent sony bayer sensor) and then using a loan x-pro1 from Fuji Aus for 2 weeks, I can safely say that the x-trans sensor blows away the regular bayer unit in IQ. The x100 is good, but still quite far away from my 5d mkIII in IQ. The x-pro1 is VERY close to my 5d mkIII in IQ. There's still not replacement for sensor size, but the x-trans brings it much closer.

You should try and borrow one for a week or two and find out for yourself.
 
gavinlg said:
After using the x100 for a year (with the excellent sony bayer sensor) and then using a loan x-pro1 from Fuji Aus for 2 weeks, I can safely say that the x-trans sensor blows away the regular bayer unit in IQ. The x100 is good, but still quite far away from my 5d mkIII in IQ. The x-pro1 is VERY close to my 5d mkIII in IQ. There's still not replacement for sensor size, but the x-trans brings it much closer.

You should try and borrow one for a week or two and find out for yourself.
Click to expand...

I have. The X2 produces image quality that is far nicer to my eye than the X100 (and is more to my liking as a camera). Output from the Xpro1 is not even near par with the M9, it's about on par with what I see from my old Pentax K10D with Pentax Limited lenses.

That's my personal assessment based on what I see. I don't care about reviews, chartis, graphs et al... :)

G
 
gavinlg said:
I'd buy a full frame x-trans fuji with fujinon lens mount. The M-mount thing I don't really get.
Click to expand...
For me, it is mainly about focusing. I have no problem with the optical quality of M/LTM lenses I am already using, nor of the Fujinon lenses that I would need to buy.
 
Godfrey said:
I have. The X2 produces image quality that is far nicer to my eye than the X100 (and is more to my liking as a camera). Output from the Xpro1 is not even near par with the M9, it's about on par with what I see from my old Pentax K10D with Pentax Limited lenses.

That's my personal assessment based on what I see. I don't care about reviews, chartis, graphs et al... :)

G
Click to expand...

Lets compare M9 iso 6400 photos to photos from the x-pro1... Oh wait.
X2 doesn't even have a built in finder. K10 used an ancient ccd, so that's definitely a huge stretch.

No offense, just my opinion. Obviously we have very different criteria for what makes a good camera :angel:
 
No thanks.

I like the size and weight of the X-Pro 1. The Fujinon lenses are well-matched to the sensor. The signal to noise ratio does not limit my work (although more SNR is alway welcome). The cost:benefit ratio of the body is acceptable. The cost:benefit of the lenses is very attractive. I don't own M lenses now and I don't miss them. I don't enjoy experimenting with lenses.
 
i would certainly buy a 24 by 36mm xtrans body with improved manual focus support for legacy lenses.
Not because i think i would gain appreciably in IQ but because i can use my M lenses at their native focal lengths. I think 2-2500 US $ would be a reasonable price.
 
redisburning said:
no.

would change my mind if it were a Fovean set up though.

the Fuji sensor is certainly nice but the D800 and 1DX are in a different world from what I've seen.
Click to expand...

Same here. A true rangefinder camera with a Foveon sensor, hmm that would be something I would think about. Put like 25 mp per layer, the magic CMOSIS gapless sensor design, omd 5way stabilizer and all in a film M size body. I would buy that. I think I would...
 
aeturnum said:
Finances allowing, yes.

I rented an RX1 last weekend. It's a good camera, and can really produce some great images, but the IQ (especially the high-iso) out of the X-Pro is equal or better. I'd be very interested in a FF x-trans, though it wouldn't be using X-mount lenses (they're only aps-c sized).
Click to expand...


The main issue is the whole mount is designed for APS-C, there's just not enough room to get a FF sensor within the confines of the X mount itself.
 
gavinlg said:
...
Obviously we have very different criteria for what makes a good camera. ...
Click to expand...

Obviously. I know what I want/need to make photographs that satisfy me, and it's neither a bazillion Mpixels nor ISO 200000.

(I used the Pentax *ist DS and K10D bodies with a nice selection of their best lenses for four years and some. Sold a heck of a lot of work made with them. Although the K10D is old, it's a very good camera.

I wouldn't discount the quality of a camera solely on the basis of it being old or having ancient technology in it. My last remaining DSLR—an Olympus E-1 made in October 2003—is still producing some of the nicest photographs I've seen despite its ancient 5Mpixel sensor with ISO 800 ceiling and lethargic file write times. )

"Equipment is transitory. Photographs endure."

G
 
Godfrey, are you a Fuji user or are you going by what you see online? If it's the latter, then we all know that once you actually use something for yourself, one can have a totally different view of a camera. Conversely, perhaps the same should be said of the Pentax and my assumptions.
 
Nope. I just got rid of all my M-gear and lenses - lost my hopes in an affordable digital M system coming anytime soon.
Plan on using the X100 for general everyday use until X100s gets cheaper. That's enough rangefinder-like for me and the files are superb.
For traveling I'll try the OMD route, have one on order.
 
jsrockit said:
Godfrey, are you a Fuji user or are you going by what you see online? If it's the latter, then we all know that once you actually use something for yourself, one can have a totally different view of a camera. Conversely, perhaps the same should be said of the Pentax and my assumptions.
Click to expand...

I bought and tried to get on with three Fuji digitals, but returned them as they didn't do it for me. The best Fuji cameras I've owned have been their Medium Format line—I currently own and use a Voigtländer Bessa III which is sibling to the Fuji GF667, both built by Fuji: excellent cameras.

But so far none of their digitals has hit that level of being outstanding and all of them have proven more difficult than other cameras to get what I want out of them. I've never had to work very hard to get my desired results out of the Pentax, Olympus, Panasonic, and Leica cameras.

G
 
Godfrey
I respect your last opinion... The fuji is simply not what your looking for and you should look elsewhere....nuff said

It does work for me...I just want to adjust minimum auto shutter speed in the future
For me it's about the experience and the fuji gives me that in *****s

If it was full frame? Perhaps...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom