crispy12
Well-known
For slightly over $1k more, you can get a used M9 or brand new M-E, and use your m lenses too. That's what I did and have never looked back. Even my film M is upset, as I haven't used her in the last two months.
Why NOT replace a DSLR with an X-Pro 1?
- Thread starter jonasv
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 26
- Views 4K
For slightly over $1k more, you can get a used M9 or brand new M-E, and use your m lenses too. That's what I did and have never looked back. Even my film M is upset, as I haven't used her in the last two months.
enero
Killer of Threads
I replaced my D700 with the X-Pro 1. Thought about the D800 for about 2 seconds and realized, why bother???...dont regret it at all!
I did all my work, work with Nikon DSLRs up until this point (I do cover work for books, CDs, etc.) and there was just no reason for all the bulk. The X-Pro 1 gives me what I need and then some. Also I have a lot of Leica mount lenses, so now I get to use those as well. I only had a hand full of Nikon glass to use, and most of the time I just defaulted to my Tamron 24-70 anyway.
The only thing I miss is having a full frame digital. But not having it has pushed me to shoot more film these days, so its win win....at least until the next new hotness comes out 🙂
I did all my work, work with Nikon DSLRs up until this point (I do cover work for books, CDs, etc.) and there was just no reason for all the bulk. The X-Pro 1 gives me what I need and then some. Also I have a lot of Leica mount lenses, so now I get to use those as well. I only had a hand full of Nikon glass to use, and most of the time I just defaulted to my Tamron 24-70 anyway.
The only thing I miss is having a full frame digital. But not having it has pushed me to shoot more film these days, so its win win....at least until the next new hotness comes out 🙂
willie_901
Veteran
jonasy
Given the description of your photography, I see no reason whatsoever not to move to the XP1. I can't think of one disadvantage for how you work now. The XP1 just isn't that hard to focus once you've spent a lot of time with the cmet. The digital zoom is especially all-suited to check and refine focus be use your applications don't require speed. The XF lens line up ranges from very good to outstanding. More lenses are on the way. You do not indicate a need for a telephoto either.
Given the description of your photography, I see no reason whatsoever not to move to the XP1. I can't think of one disadvantage for how you work now. The XP1 just isn't that hard to focus once you've spent a lot of time with the cmet. The digital zoom is especially all-suited to check and refine focus be use your applications don't require speed. The XF lens line up ranges from very good to outstanding. More lenses are on the way. You do not indicate a need for a telephoto either.
ZlatkoBatistich
Established
That would be my biggest issue. The AF would have to be very fast for it to replace a DSLR. And changing the AF point would have to be as quick as it is with a DSLR.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Ahh.. the af points - that's something I totally forgot about.
Because I never used them.
For all the AF points in my previous digital slrs (Canon 10D, 20D, 5D, Nikon D700) and even in my previous film cameras that had them (EOS 3, Elan 7) I never once used any other AF point other than the centre point and recomposed.
Now I'm not saying everyone should be like me but, for me, this is yet another reason why I don't need a DSLR - I only ever use the centre focus point.
Cheers,
Dave
jonasv
has no mustache
gswarbrick
Back to Black. And White.
I'm probably not the right person to answer as the pro stuf I primarily shoot high ISO, fast action, indoor sports - for which there is no sensible alternative to my D4 from any manufacturer...
However, I did just buy an X Pro 1 as a 'tourist' camera (see my separate post from this morning) which I suspect is somewhat closer to your usage (but a lot more casual and amateur-ish). And I am really pleased with it. It was a sensible next step from the X100, which I loved - and, so far I like the body and the three lenses I bought.
I don't have major problems with the AF (I haven't tried the upgraded firmware yet, although I have installed it) although, for most of the stuff I shoot, a little hunting isn't going to hurt - the subject isn't going there. But I was surprised to find that the continuous mode AF (with one little wrinkle) is pretty usable even for fast sports shots in poor light. I wasn't expecting that. It's no D4, but I've seen worse performance from some low-end DSLRs.
However, I did just buy an X Pro 1 as a 'tourist' camera (see my separate post from this morning) which I suspect is somewhat closer to your usage (but a lot more casual and amateur-ish). And I am really pleased with it. It was a sensible next step from the X100, which I loved - and, so far I like the body and the three lenses I bought.
I don't have major problems with the AF (I haven't tried the upgraded firmware yet, although I have installed it) although, for most of the stuff I shoot, a little hunting isn't going to hurt - the subject isn't going there. But I was surprised to find that the continuous mode AF (with one little wrinkle) is pretty usable even for fast sports shots in poor light. I wasn't expecting that. It's no D4, but I've seen worse performance from some low-end DSLRs.
Similar threads
