Tell me why I want an X-E1

Chrisrw said:
Does anyone know if you can use collapsible lenses with the XE 1? Namely the CV 50/3.5 Heliar?
Click to expand...

Use it? Yes. Collapse it? No.

BTW, just to bring closure to this (I thought I had, but apparently not), I bought a lovely X-E1 from the classifieds here and have been enjoying it with my CV 21/4 more or less permanently mounted. Really a big step closer to what I want in a digital camera. Thanks again for all the advice.
 
I know it's a bit late, but my $.02.

I'd sell the K-5. You can run your K mount lenses on the XE1 as well as your LTMs...
 
I recommend the Fujifilm M Adapter. It is more money, but you avoid the quality control issues common with thrid-party adapters. But...

With a lot of LTM lenses, I would be tempted to try one of the inexpensive LTM adapter mentioned above because if you get one that works well, things are simplified.

The XE-1 lag time can be minimized by not using any power saving options or automation whatsoever. With appropriate menu parameters shutter lag is not an issue.

The card write times are relatively slow, even with fast SDHC cards. This affects using burst modes (I find exposure bracketing useful).

As others have mentioned the battery life is shorter than many DSLRs'. While the price is higher, I use the Fujifilm OEM batteries. Dozens of people will report their less expensive third-party batteries are just fine. Good for them. The third-party batteries I tried were a waste of money.

The reason you shouldn't get an XE-1 is that XE-2 has superior manual focusing modes. More MF flexibility may not be worth the extra money.
 
Yeah, the XE-2 may be superior in some ways relevant to my usage, but there's no way I'm paying the premium they command right now.

I may consider selling both of my other digitals, as you're quite right that I can run the K mount lenses on the X-E1. I would want to get an adapter and try it first, however. I do find the K-5 much more suited to longer lenses (much better balance), but I prefer the images from the Fuji.

As far as the LTM adapter, I decided to try one of the cheap ones first. As predicted, it allowed focusing past infinity. The two-piece construction of these adapters makes fixing it really easy, however. You simply loosen the screws, remove the threaded portion and insert a thin shim (I cut one from copier paper) between the two, then reassemble. That worked for me, but you might have to play around with shim thickness. Still, very easy to do and solves the problem completely.
 
willie_901 said:
I
The reason you shouldn't get an XE-1 is that XE-2 has superior manual focusing modes.
Click to expand...

Could someone expand on this for me?
Does the split screen digital image improve vs. the focus peaking.

I shoot film unless I need to shoot digital and when I do I use a digital SLR or X100. I do not need more digital cameras.

However after toying with a Monochrom idea, I have decided that I just need an XE-1/XE-2 for covenience of trying legacy lenses. (I collect LTM lenses and the lack of an immediate digital feed-back is a bit inconvenient for the cost of a used XE-1).

I am also very loyal to film and I own and enjoy using a lot of beautiful film cameras, therefore I am scared by introducing a Monochrom in my life...

I also read that B&W on XE-1 maybe better than XE-2 as the sensor is less compromised to seek performance at higher ISO (which I do not need)

Back to the XE-1:
I would therefore use only MF and predominantly black & white to walk-about shooting of legacy lenses.

Prices:
I find now a new XE-1 for 350 USD equiv. and a new XE-2 for 580 usd. I also hate paying for fast depreciating digital gear.


XE-1 or XE-2?

Thanks.
 
mretina said:
Could someone expand on this for me?
Does the split screen digital image improve vs. the focus peaking.

I shoot film unless I need to shoot digital and when I do I use a digital SLR or X100. I do not need more digital cameras.

However after toying with a Monochrom idea, I have decided that I just need an XE-1/XE-2 for covenience of trying legacy lenses. (I collect LTM lenses and the lack of an immediate digital feed-back is a bit inconvenient for the cost of a used XE-1).

I am also very loyal to film and I own and enjoy using a lot of beautiful film cameras, therefore I am scared by introducing a Monochrom in my life...

I also read that B&W on XE-1 maybe better than XE-2 as the sensor is less compromised to seek performance at higher ISO (which I do not need)

Back to the XE-1:
I would therefore use only MF and predominantly black & white to walk-about shooting of legacy lenses.

Prices:
I find now a new XE-1 for 350 USD equiv. and a new XE-2 for 580 usd. I also hate paying for fast depreciating digital gear.


XE-1 or XE-2?

Thanks.
Click to expand...

I can't help you with the X-E1/X-E2 question, but I can say that your proposed usage of the camera is pretty much how I'm using mine (legacy LTM lenses, monochrome, secondary to film), and in that role I'm very pleased with it. I don't find any reason why I would need better focusing capability; with focus peaking it's quite easy to focus, and with wide lenses I just zone focus the same way I do with film cameras.
 
Thank you. I have now purchased an XE-1. (i also think I am quite good at focusing). I am wondering now why I have not done this before.
 
The XE-2's faster CPU and improved EVF supports focus peaking and digital split screen modes. The EVF improvements make evaluating MF easier and quicker.

I doubt raw renderings are significantly different between the XE-1 and XE-2. However JPEG rendering may be different as Fujifilm changed the in-camera JPEG rendering because the CPU speed improved. Some people claim the XTrans II JPEG rendering at high ISO is inferior to the original XTrans renderings. I can't comment since I only record raw files.

I prefer the X-T1 raw (XTrans II) to the X-Pro 1's raw, but the difference is almost not worth mentioning.

I agree about zone focusing. In fact the focus peaking will indicate everything is in focus (peaking) with wide-angle lenses at medium apertures. Of course the peaking intensity is also a function of contrast. So it takes a bit of practice to interpret peaking when DOF is wide.

Whether the XE-2's advantages are worth the price difference is clearly a subjective decision.
 
Okay I purchased a XE-1 off ebay, it's looks like a nice one from Robert's Camera,
it has a 14 day return and a six month warranty and free shipping! to boot.

Range
 
mretina said:
Could someone expand on this for me?
Does the split screen digital image improve vs. the focus peaking.

I shoot film unless I need to shoot digital and when I do I use a digital SLR or X100. I do not need more digital cameras.

However after toying with a Monochrom idea, I have decided that I just need an XE-1/XE-2 for covenience of trying legacy lenses. (I collect LTM lenses and the lack of an immediate digital feed-back is a bit inconvenient for the cost of a used XE-1).

I am also very loyal to film and I own and enjoy using a lot of beautiful film cameras, therefore I am scared by introducing a Monochrom in my life...

I also read that B&W on XE-1 maybe better than XE-2 as the sensor is less compromised to seek performance at higher ISO (which I do not need)

Back to the XE-1:
I would therefore use only MF and predominantly black & white to walk-about shooting of legacy lenses.

Prices:
I find now a new XE-1 for 350 USD equiv. and a new XE-2 for 580 usd. I also hate paying for fast depreciating digital gear.


XE-1 or XE-2?

Thanks.
Click to expand...

The X-E1 is pretty adequate for MF focussing, and the X-E2's split image assist while clever is not actually as useful as focus peaking in practice. That said, the X-E2 has improved focus peaking modes, the implementation in the X-E1 so far has been a bit hesitant and the outlines harder to see. Otherwise there's very little difference between the two cameras for what you'll be using them for. As I think I may have mentioned elsewhere, the sensor doesn't perform very well with wide RF lenses and then there's the crop factor which will lengthen all your normal lenses into short-medium telephotos etc.

While I own an X-E1 and love it, I don't think it's the best option for using RF glass. Maybe because of it's rangefinder-ish looks and traditional control layout film shooters are drawn to it. If I were only using adapted m mount lenses I'd consider a GXR with M mount module (better focus peaking, sensor optimised for short flange distance retrofocal lenses) or an A7 (better focus peaking, no crop factor).
 
OK thanks a lot, you've all persuaded me that I must have an XE-1 to use with my M lenses :D. However, before I bite the bullet I do have one question, how does the viewfinder go with glasses? I know there is a built-in diopter but I've given up using one on my M6 as taking my glasses on and off repeatedly has become annoying (must be getting old :)). Will I be able to see the full viewfinder image wearing glasses?

TIA,
clay
 
I wear glasses and have used an X-E1 with only legacy lenses for a year. I love it. There is a lot to like about this setup.
 
Thanks for the replies. I handled one the other day and I can see the full view but only just. My glasses must fit further from my eyes than most as I can't see the 35mm framelines in the M6 which seems to be possible for most people.

Anyway black X-E1 and Metabones adaptor are on order. I'm backpacking in Laos with my family through January and will take just the X-E1 and 35 'cron. Can't wait :D.

cheers,
clay
 
Went to B&H and picked up a battery today, charged it and took a few test shots
wow they are really nice and JPEG will have to take some RAW tomorrow outside.

Range
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom