dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
I've been toying with this ever since I got the camera. Is it possible to shoot a wedding. . . any wedding. . . on the X-Pro1 - I mean, the camera does have "pro" in its name right? Surely that means it's "professional" enough right? Or maybe it's just marketing . . . . nahhhhh . . . . corporations never do that do they? 
That said, I was able to tag along today to see if I could, eventually, dump my Nikon kit (and the backbreaking labour of carrying it. . . ).
I've shot weddings with my Leica M7's and Rolleiflex in the past - both formats performing flawlessly and the only issue is "pilot error" as they say - so I wonder if it would be at least the same if not better with the X-Pro 1.
Here's a quick look at what I like and dislike about the camera for this application (wedding)
Likes
1) White Balance - oh man. I rarely ever have to adjust the white balance on these files. And the skin tones seem so wonderful. I really dig that about the camera
2) The EF-42 flash - this thing is a pocket miracle worker AND it's priced at less than half the price of some of the Nikon/Canon gear. The ONLY thing it doesn't have is slave/wireless functionality (multi channel etc.) - but I guess for what it does, it does it well.
3) Weight - I swear. . . it's like walking on a cloud. I liked that about shooting with the Leicas as well.
4) The new 14mm - ridiculously good lens in my opinion. I could shoot with this thing on the camera all day but, of course, what would happen come portrait time?
5) Mirrorless - this means I can handhold slower shutter speeds easily. I shouldn't have to worry "as much" with 1/30 or even 1/15.
Dislikes / Niggles
1) "Continuous AutoFocus" - the "C" setting on the switch - I personally don't like it but I rarely use it - I will give it another shot next weekend but if you depend on continuous AF this is not your camera (per se)
2) Chromatic Aberrations - I've just noted this with the 35mm.. just keep it in mind and keep backlight (or overpower it with flash)
3) Machine Gun Shooters - I'm not one of these.. but if you are.. this camera is so not for you Don't even consider this camera if you expect FPS speed akin to the Nikons or Canons
4) Autofocus Speed/Accuracy - this is not in the league of the D700 (or higher - i.e. D800/D600/D3/D4 etc.) or their Canon counterparts. If you've ever shot with a Contax G series rangefinder, this is a lot like that. For the most part, once you get accustomed to the AF speed and how it actually focuses, it works just fine. I can deal with this - others, maybe not so much - your mileage may vary.
Overall the camera handled itself well - I found myself using the EVF quite often and the OVF not as often as I would have thought. I used the EVF exclusively with the 14mm - it was just easier that way. The 35mm, regardless of CA, is a ridiculously good lens - yet I didn't use it "enough" - I did find the 18-55 zoom useful and was probably a lens I didn't consider much until I thought about shooting weddings with the camera.
I think I will be dumping some of my Nikon kit - I can't bring myself to dump all of it but at the same time, I'm not using it as much. Once Fuji comes out with the 55-200, the 23 and the 56 - I think I'll be set and shoot with this gear regularly for all work.
Some images (larger/full size on my Flickr):
Cheers,
Dave
That said, I was able to tag along today to see if I could, eventually, dump my Nikon kit (and the backbreaking labour of carrying it. . . ).
I've shot weddings with my Leica M7's and Rolleiflex in the past - both formats performing flawlessly and the only issue is "pilot error" as they say
- so I wonder if it would be at least the same if not better with the X-Pro 1.Here's a quick look at what I like and dislike about the camera for this application (wedding)
Likes
1) White Balance - oh man. I rarely ever have to adjust the white balance on these files. And the skin tones seem so wonderful. I really dig that about the camera
2) The EF-42 flash - this thing is a pocket miracle worker AND it's priced at less than half the price of some of the Nikon/Canon gear. The ONLY thing it doesn't have is slave/wireless functionality (multi channel etc.) - but I guess for what it does, it does it well.
3) Weight - I swear. . . it's like walking on a cloud. I liked that about shooting with the Leicas as well.
4) The new 14mm - ridiculously good lens in my opinion. I could shoot with this thing on the camera all day but, of course, what would happen come portrait time?
5) Mirrorless - this means I can handhold slower shutter speeds easily. I shouldn't have to worry "as much" with 1/30 or even 1/15.
Dislikes / Niggles
1) "Continuous AutoFocus" - the "C" setting on the switch - I personally don't like it but I rarely use it - I will give it another shot next weekend but if you depend on continuous AF this is not your camera (per se)
2) Chromatic Aberrations - I've just noted this with the 35mm.. just keep it in mind and keep backlight (or overpower it with flash)
3) Machine Gun Shooters - I'm not one of these.. but if you are.. this camera is so not for you
Don't even consider this camera if you expect FPS speed akin to the Nikons or Canons 4) Autofocus Speed/Accuracy - this is not in the league of the D700 (or higher - i.e. D800/D600/D3/D4 etc.) or their Canon counterparts. If you've ever shot with a Contax G series rangefinder, this is a lot like that. For the most part, once you get accustomed to the AF speed and how it actually focuses, it works just fine. I can deal with this - others, maybe not so much - your mileage may vary.
Overall the camera handled itself well - I found myself using the EVF quite often and the OVF not as often as I would have thought. I used the EVF exclusively with the 14mm - it was just easier that way. The 35mm, regardless of CA, is a ridiculously good lens - yet I didn't use it "enough" - I did find the 18-55 zoom useful and was probably a lens I didn't consider much until I thought about shooting weddings with the camera.
I think I will be dumping some of my Nikon kit - I can't bring myself to dump all of it but at the same time, I'm not using it as much. Once Fuji comes out with the 55-200, the 23 and the 56 - I think I'll be set and shoot with this gear regularly for all work.
Some images (larger/full size on my Flickr):
Cheers,
Dave
willie_901
Veteran
Dave,
I have no doubt you saw CA with your lens. But I must say I have never seen a hint of CA with my 35/1.4 XF.
This puzzles me. Was the CA red/green? Was there any purple. I used the XP1 with the 35/1.4 as an Uncle Bob at a family wedding. I also found I worked out well.
I have no doubt you saw CA with your lens. But I must say I have never seen a hint of CA with my 35/1.4 XF.
This puzzles me. Was the CA red/green? Was there any purple. I used the XP1 with the 35/1.4 as an Uncle Bob at a family wedding. I also found I worked out well.
ricardsonwilliams
Member
Hi David,
Nice review some photographers using Fuji for weeding, which lens did you use ? 14mm and 35mm? Did you tried 60mm ? I found 60mm really good for portrait.
Tks,
Ricardson
Nice review some photographers using Fuji for weeding, which lens did you use ? 14mm and 35mm? Did you tried 60mm ? I found 60mm really good for portrait.
Tks,
Ricardson
Clint Troy
Well-known
All I see is flash work. How does it perform under natural light in a high-pace action environment? I guess very poorly.
The X100 couldn't keep my pace while my Nikon gear was just giving and giving!
I would never give up my DSLR pro gear in favor of the fuji. It just doesn't compare.
IMO.
The X100 couldn't keep my pace while my Nikon gear was just giving and giving!
I would never give up my DSLR pro gear in favor of the fuji. It just doesn't compare.
IMO.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Willie_901 - The CA was purple. I have corrected it in Lightroom. The photo of the bride, in the mirror, doing her make up. That's where i noticed it. It's rare that I see it as well but that's where it was. It was around the area where her hair and eyelash meets the back light.
Cheers,
Dave
Cheers,
Dave
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Ricardson - I used the 14mm, the 18-55mm zoom (found this very useful) and the 35mm. I also had my Summicron 90mm for reach. I never bothered to get the 60mm because I want a portrait vs a macro (although I COULD use the 60mm macro for portrait work)
Cheers,
Dave
Cheers,
Dave
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Clint, I'll find out later this year when I get a wedding that's totally outdoors (and even then, there's a requirement for fill flash).
This wedding was entirely indoors however the portrait was under natural light. I did use it with some photos not posted here with no flash and it performed fairly well. That being said, even if I used my D700 I would still be using flash.
"Natural light" doesn't exist indoors when the wedding is in a "basement room" of an old mill.
Everything is lit/was lit by either fluorescent or tungsten or halogen lighting. It is, after all, January. I would never use my Nikon gear without flash unless the light was "good enough". I would do the same with colour film when I shot with my Leica gear.
Cheers,
Dave
tony tree
Member
Great images and oh so 'clean', can you tell me - Are they RAW converted in Lightroom or ????
regards tony
ps just starting to set up my new XPro
regards tony
ps just starting to set up my new XPro
willie_901
Veteran
Thanks Dave. I think what you saw (purple in high contrast) was due to sensor micro-lens CA rather than a lens issue.
http://www.dpreview.com/glossary/optical/chromatic-aberration (scroll to the bottom).
I used to purple fringing often with my D200 and to a lesser extent with the D300. I really have to grossly overexpose to see it with the D700 (window frames). In fact with the D700 I sometimes loose window-frame detail before purple fringing appears.
Of course I am just guessing.
I guess I'll have to abuse some window exposures with the XP1 if the sun ever comes out again.
I totally agree that skillful strobe use is often required for wedding/ event work. It is difficult to overcome poor quality light with any camera/lens. Sometimes you just have to make your own and these shots show you can do that well.
http://www.dpreview.com/glossary/optical/chromatic-aberration (scroll to the bottom).
I used to purple fringing often with my D200 and to a lesser extent with the D300. I really have to grossly overexpose to see it with the D700 (window frames). In fact with the D700 I sometimes loose window-frame detail before purple fringing appears.
Of course I am just guessing.
I guess I'll have to abuse some window exposures with the XP1 if the sun ever comes out again.
I totally agree that skillful strobe use is often required for wedding/ event work. It is difficult to overcome poor quality light with any camera/lens. Sometimes you just have to make your own and these shots show you can do that well.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Tony,
Converted from RAW in Lightroom using my "custom" profiles I've created for the X-Pro1.
Cheers,
Dave
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Thanks Willie !!
I tend to agree with Niel Van Niekerk when people ask him if he doesn't shoot in available light - he says "Yes, yes I do. . . " he then holds up a flash/speedlight and says ". . . this is the light I have that's avaiable to me."
Cheers,
Dave
I tend to agree with Niel Van Niekerk when people ask him if he doesn't shoot in available light - he says "Yes, yes I do. . . " he then holds up a flash/speedlight and says ". . . this is the light I have that's avaiable to me."
Cheers,
Dave
larmarv916
Well-known
Dave, I was interested to know if you used the Fuji Zoom or have tried it to date. Also you feedback. The "Drum" shot really show off the superior quality of range that sensor captures. Thanks for sharing. I am looking at picking up a FUJI either the "X-Pro" or new "EX-1" .
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
larmarv916 - I did use the 18-55mm Fuji zoom - the lens is quite good - I wish it was a constant aperture but I can live with pretending it is by setting it to f4 throughout the zoom range.
The zoom lens was quite useful for the wedding but I really found the 14mm to be very good and great for those "candid type" photos.
Cheers,
Dave
The zoom lens was quite useful for the wedding but I really found the 14mm to be very good and great for those "candid type" photos.
Cheers,
Dave
back alley
IMAGES
i'm surprised a lens that wide would be good for a wedding...
larmarv916
Well-known
Thanks for your impressions....most helpful. I am looking at the wonderful ability to mount several different brands of other rangefinder lenses on this body. The quality of the Fuji sensor is so good, it could easily pass for a 24 Meg sensor. I am amazed at a 16 million pixel sensor when it is so small. I think the quality is better than the D7000