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

jsrockit said:
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.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean that the X100 felt more like a 'real camera' than the XPro. I was referring to the other mirrorless - Sony NEX, OMD, etc.

Still, though - the X100 did feel more solid than the XPro. The x100 felt like what i expected, maybe better. The Xpro felt much worse than i hoped/expected. I really did look at the Xpro online images and imagine something like a G2 or Leica-M. And, it felt not nearly as good as either of those.

I'm not the kind of guy who gets off on saying 'my camera can pound nails,' or 'would survive in a war,' or 'can be used to bash an attacker....' I just want gear that gives me confidence. I don't like 'flimsy.' I mean, the thing could have been designed with carbon fibre, or some Neptunian composite - i don't know. I just like the feel of solid, precision-engineered controls, and a weight that 'makes sense.' By contrast, the NEX7 'makes sense.' The X100 makes sense. The XPro1... it was like, "whoa." I suppose i could get used to it. But, it's never going to have that beautiful tactile appeal like with a G2 or M7. I hate to be so critical of something i never actually used, but it was kinda like Fuji understood the aesthetics end of it, but completely dismissed the sensual/tactile component.

I remember when i bought a Leica CM.... Out of the box, it, too, felt too light. But, then, you add the battery, and a roll of film, and then it's okay.... The XPro-1 had the battery inside, and there's nothing else to add. I guess the case or a grip might be what i need? I would rather not have to pimp it out, though. Defeats the purpose. It's like everyone with their ugly rubber cases on their iPhones..... A beautiful device, ruined.

So, back to the XPro1 - has there been a firmware update yet? Any chance the AF can be improved in THIS model?
 
Hey Kieth

Hey Kieth

Keith said:
When I saw one I wasn't so much put off by the size ... I really didn't like the look of it.

It didn't look like the relatively expensive piece of kit that it is to my eyes!
Click to expand...

I put the Olympus OM-D (EM-5) in that Size Comparison along side the Xpro-1

Wow...except for a little bit of hump... the Olympus is smaller a bit

Do you think you might get the EM-5?;)

In fact the Fuji is 3 mm wider than the Olympus OM-1 film body...
 
There have been two firmware updates so far, but none that were specific to AF speed. As I have stated before faster is usually better but I have very little problem with the XPro in the area of AF, jn fact after using both the XPro and OM-D a lot on a recent trip to Spain, I found the OM-D to be faster but the XPro more accurate, could be some operator error involved but overall, I found the Xpro more accurate. The corrected AF option is probably the reason and it works great for me. The OM-D on the other hand can get away with some astonishing hand held shutter speeds because of it IS system which could lead some to believe the Olympus AF in low light is more accurate, I have now found this to be the case, if you can hold the XPro steady it seems just slightly better on accuracy.
 
I like dense and substantial camera.
That does not always mean bigger size.
Olympus Pen E-P2 is very small, but dense.
Fuji X100 when I tried it at the store, didn't feel like that at all.
 
Well, I'd say the X1 Pro is for the "technogeek." (Reminds me of the Konica Hexar RF. A "techno" rangefinder of the Film Age, if ever there was one). The Leica is for the (ahem) "traditionalist." (Yeah, yeah, I know: yer gonna say that means "retired doctors and lawyers with too much money and too much time on their hands"...):)
 
I have the X-Pro1 now; had the X100 for the year previous. I agree that the X100 is far better if you want something compact.

I switched because I wanted to be able to switch lenses and to use 'legacy' lenses. And the X-Pro1's potential image quality boost from the bigger, no anti-aliasing filter sensor is attractive. Size-wise, the X-Pro1 is like holding a Contax G-type camera... perfect for my hands.

All the other features/quirks of the X-Pro1 are essentially the same as the X100. If I could own both, I definitely would.... hmmm (what can I sell?). :)
 
dct said:
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?
Click to expand...

Yes, it replaces the original glass which just screws out (exactly like nikon)

The thing is, you have to know what power diopter to buy - I was lucky and the first one I ordered (don't remember where) worked fine.

If you google diopters you will see that there are a number of strengths. If you wear glasses, you can figure out what strength you need from your prescription.

good luck,
 
David,

Go back and buy it, use it, fondle it some more, take it with you everywhere....it will feel better with every shutter click.
 
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.
Click to expand...


That surprised me! To me the OMD is not a camera that will appeal to everyone but to be able to pick up any camera, turn it on, hold it for a minute and decide that you hate it is odd!

I feel indifference to the Xpro and didn't think much of the styling but I can see where it's appeal is and although the X100 didn't ring my bells either I can understand why it's so popular.
 
shadowfox said:
I like dense and substantial camera.
That does not always mean bigger size.
Olympus Pen E-P2 is very small, but dense.
Fuji X100 when I tried it at the store, didn't feel like that at all.
Click to expand...

I thought the e-p1 was dense and substantial feeling when I had it... until I bent the baseplate by using it (normally) on a tripod. It just feels well made, in reality it isn't necessarily well made.

My x100 in comparison I think will prove to be more durable (apart from the viewfinder being a dust vacuum.)
 
Weight in a camera creates an illusion of build quality IMO. To me the Bessas I've owned have felt cheap but in reality they are a great camera and work perfectly. Pick up an RD-1 which is basically a Bessa with a sensor and lots of electronics and the first thing you notice is the extra weight over the film cameras from Cosina and it just feels like there is more quailty there.
 
David_Manning said:
I've been really interested in the X-Pro 1, and I've been driving my wife crazy with the puppy-dog looks and leaving the computer browser open to X-Pro 1 sites. I mean, I've been laying it on pretty thick.

I was at the local camera dealer this week, and they had one in stock with a 35/1.4 attached. Naturally I had to fondle it.

Guess what? I'm NOT so in love anymore. It's bigger than I imagined (and I knew it was larger than the X100 anyway), boxier, and with the 35 mounted, not nearly as compact as I was hoping. I went home and tried out my X100, and I like it better! It's smaller, same VF, perfect focal length for me, and so I'm not so hot after the XP1 anymore. That result was utterly unexpected...I usually love buying new cameras.

I guess at the end of the day, the X100 is the perfect compact for nondescript, quiet shooting, and if I HAVE to have several focal lengths, I can default to the 5Dmk2 and primes (which is not much bigger than the X-Pro 1 with lenses and hoods attached).
Click to expand...

Hi David

I played with my friend's XP1 and prefer the X100 too. The X100 feels more compact. The auto focus speed of XP1 seem faster to me though. I feel that if one likes the 35mm focal length only, the X100 offers better value for money IMHO.
 
If you are happy with a fixed lens, then the X100 is the best buy. The X100 lens does flare more than the XP1 when very strong point source lights are in the scene. 16 MP means more cropping flexibility. Otherwise, the X100 is better in some ways. It has an adjustable dipopter; a bigger finder; more flexibility for EVF focus confirmation and it's easier to carry in a small bag.

There are other differences of course, but these are the most important to me.
 
I sold my x100 , and now I am the very happy owner of the XPro.
Believe it or not I found it too small for my hands, so after a few months I sold it for no other reason than it's size. All in all I find the Fuji cameras and glass to be first rate.
 
X-Pro1 image qualities

X-Pro1 image qualities

David,
One more comment about the X-Pro1. Most all the comments here are about what I call the ergonomics of the camera. How it feels, how it looks, how it operates. But what about image quality?

Last night I downloaded my first memory card from the X-Pro1. When I saw the images come up on the screen I was taken aback! They are BEAUTIFUL! Over the years I've looked at a LOT of images on my computer screen, created with DSLRs, many film cameras, and most recently, the X100. The X-Pro1 images are different... stunning! I'm not much into the technical underpinnings of digital imagery, so I can't say for sure what is precisely different about the X-Pro1 images, but the impression is something like what happens when you see an old master's painting in real life for the first time. Something about the way the light seems real, the colors seem deeply saturated, and the overall impression of super-reality floating in a frame. Gorgeous.
 
Last edited:
X-Pro1 image qualities - P.S.

X-Pro1 image qualities - P.S.

Jamie Pillers said:
David,
One more comment about the X-Pro1. Most all the comments here are about what I call the ergonomics of the camera. How it feels, how it looks, how it operates. But what about image quality?

Last night I downloaded my first memory card from the X-Pro1. When I saw the images come up on the screen I was taken aback! They are BEAUTIFUL! Over the years I've looked at a LOT of images on my computer screen, created with DSLRs, many film cameras, and most recently, the X100. The X-Pro1 images are different... stunning! I'm not much into the technical underpinnings of digital imagery, so I can't say for sure what is precisely different about the X-Pro1 images, but the impression is something like what happens when you see an old master's painting in real life for the first time. Something about the way the light seems real, the colors seem deeply saturated, and the overall impression of super-reality floating in a frame. Gorgeous.
Click to expand...

And I forgot to mention... these images are straight-out-of-the-camera jpegs!! No post-processing at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom