Not overly thrilled w/X-Pro 1 in hand...

[Trius]

http://www.laroquephoto.com/blog/2012/6/20/new-beast-the-x-pro1-from-an-x100-shooter.html

 

[SausalitoDog]

The x100 is great with one of the Thumbs Up attachments... The XP-1 REQUIRES one, but with that one customization, it is a great feeling camera.

What I miss is the silent shutter and the diopter adjustment in the VF (I've finally found a screw in diopter). Even with the 18mm, the XP-1 isn't going in your pocket....

 

[SausalitoDog]

I've been wondering about the AF speed on both the X100 and the X-pro. I've been told that the GX-1 AF is faster? Many pros are using GF-1/GX-1 cameras, most of these guys also own M9 and pro DSLRs.

dmc; Your comment rings home..
"So, when I travel light, I take the X-100, otherwise you'll find the X-Pro in my bag with a mess of lenses.

Get the difference?

If I'm off to feed my family it's the 5D2. Simple".

The DSLRs rarely make the cross into the "fun photo world", but the RF and similar cameras (both film + digital) move easily into "work world" from time to time.

Have definitely heard that the GX-1 is somewhat faster to focus... All I can say is that when the xp1 or x100 locks on, it is sharp as a tack.

The x100 is literally a pocket camera, so that accounts for the wild popularity. The only one that will actually fit in your pocket that makes insanely nice pix under a variety of situations. If speed of focus is your primary concern, this is not for you; for everything else, I think it is worth trying.

Tom

 

[gavinlg]

...
That being said, if you look at the comparison photo with the M, the M's lens already has a hood attached. Throw the 35/1.4 XP1 hood on, and it magically SEEMS much bigger. I won't even mention the 60mm with the hood.

It's worth noting that the comparison picture with the 50mm summilux asph is NOT without the lens hood on - that barrel bit at the tip is part of the lens!

If the x-pro1 lenses are anything like my x100 lens, the lens hood won't make much difference anyway - they're pretty resistant to flare. I just run a b+w clear filter on my x100 and very rarely encounter flare. I'd do the same with the x-pro1 to make it a little smaller.

 

[awilder]

One thing that surprised (disappointed) me was that the X-Pro-1 didn't have a built-in diopter adjustment like their X100 or almost every other camera on the market. Rather, it required old school accessory diopter eyepieces. Maybe that's acceptable for an RF camera with a finder that dates back to the 50's but it's still a PIA. The problem for me was that the standard eyepeice power of -1 D made it impossible to see the optical finder sharply with my old presbyopic eyes. I wonder if like their old GS645 folder or Zeiss ZM, it takes Nikon F style eyepiece diopter eyepieces? I've also heard it's difficult getting accessories from Fuiji so if the eyepiece thread is unique, it may be an issue for some people.

 

[gavinlg]

One thing that surprised (disappointed) me was that the X-Pro-1 didn't have a built-in diopter adjustment like every other camera on the market but required old school accessory diopter eyepieces. Maybe that's acceptable for an RF camera with a finder that dates back to the 50's but its still a PIA. The problem for me was that the standard eyepeice power of -1 D made it hard to see the finder sharply with my old presbyopic eyes camera is difficult at this time. I wonder if like their old GS645 folder, it took Nikon F style eyepiece diopter eyepieces? I've also heard getting accessories from Fuiji is difficult so if the eyepiece thread is unique, it may be an issue.

It's 19mm - same diopter the bessa/zeiss ikon/epson r-d1 use.

The reason they didn't put an inbuilt diopter in it is probably because the viewfinder mechanism is already jam packed with technology and it wouldn't have met size constraints. Think about it - optical VF with projected LED frame lines, electronic viewfinder with curtain slider at the front, and a frame line magnification mechanism as well.

 

[thegman]

I held the XPro-1 in a shop once, liked the build, however I'm not in the market for one anyway. I will say that sometimes fondling a camera in the shop is enough to dispel GAS, the magic is gone, and it's just another camera.

 

[noimmunity]

The X-Pro1 with 35 is very well balanced, solid, and yet thankfully much lighter than the M8/M9.

Aki-Asahi now offers a full range of coverings for it, too.

 

[macjim]

I have both the M9 and the X-Pro1 and find them just right in the hand, and very similar too. Ok, the X-Pro1 is lighter, but that's a good thing. Both cameras have their good points - and bad. Ive had quite a few cameras in the last three years and I have to say, the X-Pro1 is the one I'm happiest with. Better than the Nikon D90 (smaller and lighter), Sony nex-5n (easier to handle with my big hands) Leica D-lux5 (larger and with an optical viewfinder). Yes these cameras had better features such as through the lens viewing, faster focusing, compact size etc but I would say the X-Pro1 is a good all round camera — just the right size, weight and handling abilities for most.

 

[Keith]

I held the XPro-1 in a shop once, liked the build, however I'm not in the market for one anyway. I will say that sometimes fondling a camera in the shop is enough to dispel GAS, the magic is gone, and it's just another camera.

I was working on that theory when I went into a shop to fondle the OMD ... bad move!

 

[Bike Tourist]

I have them both, not much bothered by size difference:

X100 has not enough diopter adjustment for me so I have to wear glasses when using it.

XP1 has interchangable lenses and will accumulate sensor dust.

 

[jsrockit]

Felt sort of plasticy and light weight to me. M9 is so much nicer in the hands.

But, it isn't plastic and since when is light a bad thing?

 

[dct]

It's 19mm - same diopter the bessa/zeiss ikon/epson r-d1 use.

[...]

I don't get it: Will this replace the original VF glass or will it be added like a filter on a lens? Would this also fit a Hexar RF VF?

 

[Nikon Bob]

I am a bit like the OP in that I think I prefer the X100 size wise. I was looking for a camera as a companion to my DSLR kit for those times when I want something small,light and simple. I don't want another inter changeable lens system and for versatility I'll stick to my DSLR kit. The X100 may just be it for those reasons.

Bob

 

[boomguy57]

Anyway, just an impression. I guess I expected basically an X100 with interchangeable lenses. It's bigger than that.

Yeah, I was initially lusting after it but have come to the same conclusion. After using the X100, maybe I'm spoiled--but I'll stick with my X100 for the foreseeable future.

 

[willie_901]

I didn't mean to offend anyone with my own first impressions!

I am carrying an XP1 daily and you did not offend me (but maybe I was suprised a little bit).

M lenses can deliver high performance with a compact size. The XP1 lens/sensor design means the lenses will be larger. The 18/2 XF being an obvious exception. Did you know the X100 lens is much larger than it looks? That lens is recessed into the body. Otherwise the XP1 feels like a lot of RF bodies... except it's lighter.

The X100 (which I also use regularly) has it's strengths and weaknesses compared to the XP1. I find they compliment each other. If the X100 meets all your needs, there's no reason to add the XP1. If you find the XP1 too large, there are plenty of smaller systems out there.

It's all good.

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

I completely agree.
I went to B&H yesterday, for the first time in quite a while - to look at the whole field of new cameras. Trying to decide if i should shift to Nikon for the D800e instead of the 5DIII; and sorting through the mirrorless sector.

I finally wound up at the Fuji counter.... The XPro1 looks gorgeous in all the online images. In person, not so much. And, the weight - yes, i've read some people find it to be a relief, but i just found it felt cheap. It looks like a tank online. Feels like a mock-up in the hand. I really was expecting something along the lines of a Contax G2. If the G2 is a Mercedes, the Fuji is a Honda. Nothing wrong with Hondas, of course....

The X100, though - wow. I was impressed. Of all the mirrorless cams i messed around with, this was the one that felt like a real camera. I just wish for a bigger file from it....

In other notes - the NEX7 feels like a refined Sony electronic device. Not so much a camera. It's quick and responsive and all that, but it doesn't remind me of 'photography.' And, everyone seems to love the electronic viewfinder.... I don't. It's not nearly as impressive as the reports led me to believe.

Olympus OM-D / E5.... Again, i'm bewildered by the glowing reports. I actually HATED this thing. Picked it up, turned it on, and only had it in my hands for less than a minute before i wanted to move away. Ick.

Couldn't even find the Samsung NX line. Unfortunate, as i was really interested in the NX210.... If Sony had a pancake 30/f2 like the Samsung, the NEX7 would be an easy choice.

Oooh.... Just read the above comment about the X-pro.... "a tank, a solid piece of iron." Then, perhaps the B&H rep handed me a plastic demo mock-up.... Whether or not it can take a beating is one matter. But, the thing feels light, and not of substance. Same with the lenses. I'm not sure how they can be made so light - glass and metal surely have more weight than that. Compare the fuji 35/1.4 to a Contax 45/2.... The Contax lens FEELS like something. The Fuji feels like a lot of air.

I'm not speaking of operation on the Fuji, though. The store's battery died as i was first holding it. They ought to keep a supply of batteries. Kinda ridiculous for a store like that to only have ONE for that camera.

 

[jsrockit]

I finally wound up at the Fuji counter.... The XPro1 looks gorgeous in all the online images. In person, not so much. And, the weight - yes, i've read some people find it to be a relief, but i just found it felt cheap...

...The X100, though - wow. I was impressed. Of all the mirrorless cams i messed around with, this was the one that felt like a real camera. I just wish for a bigger file from it....

It shocking to hear some say the X100 feels more like a "real" camera than the X-Pro1. I cannot agree with that at all. To me, the X-Pro1 fixed all that was cheap about the back panel of the X100.

 

[tbarker13]

Sort of funny how we all want different things. I've used both the X100 and the XPro1. And for me, the XPro1 is far and away the better camera in terms of ergonomics. I felt like the X100 was just too small and hard to control because of the tiny buttons.
The Xrpo1 is still considerably smaller (and more importantly, lighter) than my D700. But it's still large enough for me comfortably use.

 

[Landshark99]

[FONT=&quot]I have both the XPro and X100 as well as the Contax G2, I really like my X100 but since getting the Xpro, it is pretty much sitting in a case. I loved my G2s and have been looking for a digital replacement for them for a long time; with the XPro I have finally found it. They are almost exactly the same size body with the Contax lenses being a little smaller, for me I personally find the lighter weight of the XPro1 an advantage, I usually use two bodies, one wide one, short tele, the weight and comfort difference when using two, makes me forget I am carrying two. For me the XPro feels almost perfect in the hand and encourages me to use it. As to how it looks, I like the simple industrial look, but at the end of the day I want to use my cameras more than look at them. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I also have the OM-D and much prefer the ergonomics of the XPro[/FONT]