Should I buy the NEX 6 Or Fuji Xpro 1?

I had not heard that "Leitz" was planning lenses for the NEX. Zeiss, however, is planning to release AF lenses for BOTH the Sony NEX and Fuji XF mounts... as is Schneider.
 
Call me stupid, but in my eyes the Fuji X-E1 is only a perfect looking camera.
Two days ago I touched it the first time in my local store.
It feels like plastic fantastic. Remember the standard 50mm 1-8 II from Canon and you know how it feels.
I never can imagine to put my fine Nokton and Heliar lenses on that.
This, plus the problems with the (non-existing) RAW workflow in my loved Lightroom is a no go for me.

Cameras are often like wifes: some are good looking, some work perfect... ;-)

Sorry, but just my personal feelings.
 
TKH said:
Call me stupid, but in my eyes the Fuji X-E1 is only a perfect looking camera.
Two days ago I touched it the first time in my local store.
It feels like plastic fantastic. Remember the standard 50mm 1-8 II from Canon and you know how it feels.
I never can imagine to put my fine Nokton and Heliar lenses on that.
This, plus the problems with the (non-existing) RAW workflow in my loved Lightroom is a no go for me.

Cameras are often like wifes: some are good looking, some work perfect... ;-)

Sorry, but just my personal feelings.
Click to expand...

The fuji X camers are lightweight, thats one of the reasons why they're so nice to use (note I said use, not fondle).

Secondly, lightroom works fine with the fuji X RAF raw files. I've been running x-pro1 files through lightroom all week. No problems. All the kafuffle about the raw conversion being bad is rubbish. The raw conversion COULD be better in very special circumstances, but the flaws are overshadowed by the positives - like color noise being extremely low without the need for reduction (almost non-existant) and the fact that the files don't need sharpening.
 
TKH said:
Call me stupid, but in my eyes the Fuji X-E1 is only a perfect looking camera.
Two days ago I touched it the first time in my local store.
It feels like plastic fantastic. Remember the standard 50mm 1-8 II from Canon and you know how it feels.
I never can imagine to put my fine Nokton and Heliar lenses on that.
This, plus the problems with the (non-existing) RAW workflow in my loved Lightroom is a no go for me.

Cameras are often like wifes: some are good looking, some work perfect... ;-)

Sorry, but just my personal feelings.
Click to expand...

I believe that the Fuji's are made using a magnesium alloy frame which is the reason they are much lighter than the frame of say a Leica. I would not judge a camera purely on perception such as this.

But to each their own... Btw as I have said before I own a Nex5n, they are lighter than the Fuji xp1.

Gary
 
TKH said:
It feels like plastic fantastic. Remember the standard 50mm 1-8 II from Canon and you know how it feels.
I never can imagine to put my fine Nokton and Heliar lenses on that.
Click to expand...

Not meaning to pick on you or anything, but just wanted to add that I've owned 3-4 canon ef 50mm 1.8 II's (I broke every one of them) and the x-pro1 I'm using now is nothing like those in build. If I had to compare it to a canon lens, I'd compare it to the 50mm f1.2L or any of the L primes. I'm careful to distinguish from weight relating to build quality though - I've travelled enough with a 5d and 2 lenses to know more weight = more pain in the shoulder. Interestingly enough also I feel the MF rings on the fujinon lenses have a much nicer feel than the L lenses, despite being about 1/3 of the price.
 
In my experience the LR rendering of X-Trans raw files is inferior to the X100's and NEF raw files.

However, the default LR sharpening parameters and color correction (CA and fringing) artifact parameters make matters much worse. The default LR import parameters for standard Bayer demosaicing with an AA filter degrade images from the X-Trans sensor with no AA filter.

I apply a custom Development preset upon import. I fine tune the defringing parameter as needed. Much of my experience for optimizing Bayer/AA images did not apply to X-Trans images.

The 18/2 lens requires more care than the 35/1.4.

There is no doubt Adobe must do better. At the same time, I would not hesitate delivering 12 x 18 prints to clients, especially from the 35/1.4. Some of the raw results from that lens are the best I have ever seen.

Gavinig's observation about the color noise is accurate. Hardly anyone mentions how nice the color noise looks.
 
TKH said:
Call me stupid, but in my eyes the Fuji X-E1 is only a perfect looking camera.
Two days ago I touched it the first time in my local store.
It feels like plastic fantastic.
Click to expand...

So you can tell the difference between heavy and light, but can't tell the difference between metal (aluminum, magnesium) and plastic.
 
willie_901 said:
In my experience the LR rendering of X-Trans raw files is inferior to the X100's and NEF raw files.

However, the default LR sharpening parameters and color correction (CA and fringing) artifact parameters make matters much worse. The default LR import parameters for standard Bayer demosaicing with an AA filter degrade images from the X-Trans sensor with no AA filter.

I apply a custom Development preset upon import. I fine tune the defringing parameter as needed. Much of my experience for optimizing Bayer/AA images did not apply to X-Trans images.

The 18/2 lens requires more care than the 35/1.4.

There is no doubt Adobe must do better. At the same time, I would not hesitate delivering 12 x 18 prints to clients, especially from the 35/1.4. Some of the raw results from that lens are the best I have ever seen.

Gavinig's observation about the color noise is accurate. Hardly anyone mentions how nice the color noise looks.
Click to expand...


Spot-on. I agree in all respects.
 
semilog said:
So you can tell the difference between heavy and light, but can't tell the difference between metal (aluminum, magnesium) and plastic.
Click to expand...

Exactly. That why I said that it feels like plastic. Dont understand me the wrong way. I´m here at the rangefinderforum because I like rangefinder cameras very much. For my eyes the Fuji X Range cameras are absolute beautiful looking cameras.
We have to say thanks to Fuji building cameras that way.

My personal disappointment is only that they feel in my hands not the way they look. And that is not the weight I feel. My own Ricoh GXR weights the same and feels much better. But that camera is technical history. I look for a new body for my m-lenses and what me shocked is that the Sony Nex 7 feels (again in my hands) a lot better. With the X-E1 my feelings are: "Oh, what a nice point and shoot around $300..." And with the Sony Nex 7: "Damn, what a great 1 K$ photo machine...".

So I will wait for the Nex 6 and check that with my m-lenses. Its a tough decision because I dont like Sony that much. Owning a Fuji camera is much more sexy than owning a Sony camera...

But for me the feeling of grabbing the camera is a big point of the complete fun with the camera.
 
A little story:
I was looking for a Voigtländer Heliar 15mm for my Ricoh GXR for weeks. On eBay I didnt find one with a price tag I like and so I started this night a call on the biggest German photo forum, dslr-forum.de .
In the first twenty minutes I received two offers. Both are used lenses with original papers from this summer. Both are from owners of Fuji X-E1. Both told me that the results with there new cameras were horrible because color smearing and no sharpness under f8...
__________________
 
^-- The Fuji sensor is known not to play very well with lenses that have a rear nodal point too close to the sensor. The native lenses are a lot better.
 
TKH said:
A little story:
I was looking for a Voigtländer Heliar 15mm for my Ricoh GXR for weeks. On eBay I didnt find one with a price tag I like and so I started this night a call on the biggest German photo forum, dslr-forum.de .
In the first twenty minutes I received two offers. Both are used lenses with original papers from this summer. Both are from owners of Fuji X-E1. Both told me that the results with there new cameras were horrible because color smearing and no sharpness under f8...
__________________
Click to expand...

A lot depends on the lens whether it will look good... Just because the 15 is not good does not mean other wide angle rf lenses are going to be bad. If u want good wide angle support get a Ricoh gxr w/ a12 m module. No AA filter and micro lenses designed for rf lenses. Sony Nex can be hit or miss. The nex5n worked well but the nex7 did not plus it has AA filter.

Gary
 
I'd like to have the focusing speed of the NEX with the optical quality of Fuji lenses.
 
I had zero experience with the Sony until about 2 weeks ago. I helped my sister-in law buy a new camera and the Nex 5N was a great fit in both $ and features. Frankly, I considered it a toy....and then I saw the images coming out of it. The image quality out of this silly little NEX5 was crushing my Nikon d300. What??
I started poking around and the sensor in the sony is very, very good. Take a look at what people are doing with this camera on Flickr or Vimeo. Its pretty amazing for a $400 body that will fit in your pocket.

I haven't shot the Fuji, but am certainly am more familiar with the form factor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom