X pro-1 or X-E1 with M lenses

[kennylovrin]

Hey

I've been eyeing the Fuji cameras a while, had an X100 before that I really liked but ended up selling it anyway for various reasons.

Since I got my M6 I'm not really feeling my 5DmkII, but I don't want to give up digital completely. So I was thinking now that really the only downside of going 5D -> X Pro-1 / X-E1 is the loss of full frame in my personal case (I don't shoot much fast moving stuff etc and the 5D isn't that fast anyway).

One bigger upside was that it would be nice to share lenses a bit, which is why I started to think that maybe I should sell of my DSLR kit, get a Fuji body with M adapter and start off with my C Biogon ZM lens. Then after that I could potentially get a macro lens etc for the fuji (I like to do a little macro now and then, one reason why I am not prepared to go fully range finder at the moment).

But one thing that it would be nice to hear some more specifics on is the handling of the Fujis with M-lenses. I don't mean image quality wise etc, I can read on that everywhere, I'm more interested in the handling.

How easy is it REALLY to focus it, I always disliked having to zoom to focus as I find I loose track completely of what is going on in the frame. Also, is it "required" to focus wide open, then stop down and shoot? I would imagine that is another thing that would tick me off pretty bad after a while. Or is the DOF enough for it to hide potential focus inaccuracies if you were to focus stopped down (within reason, I don't know how dark the EVF goes if you would stop down to f/16 for example).

Really what I'm asking here is if it is a viable solution to get one of the Fuji bodies and start of with only one lens which is an M lens.

Thanks!

Kenny

 

[Ezzie]

I have done what you are thinking of. But I am so happy with the Fuji XF 18/f2 that I haven't really got round to testing the M mount with my VC and M-Hexanon lenses. I'll see what I can get round to testing over the next few days.

EDIT: I have the X-E1 by the way.

 

[crispy12]

Don't forget the other APS-C mirrorless camera, NEX. A NEX-C3 or 5N is a lot cheaper... the only biggest loss is the inbuilt viewfinder, but you have a very good focus peaking on the Sony.

Also these MF lenses can be quite cumbersome to use on mirrorless cameras, if you're shooting at anything other than wide open aperture, you'll need to stop down manually everytime you take a shot (unless you zone focus or plain guess). You can estimate using the focus peaking but it depends on how fussy you are with sharpness. It's ok for wide angles but for 35mm and up...hmm.

What len's do you have? If you only have one lens, then you really should look at the Fuji 35/1.4. I don't have it but the results that I've seen are fantastic.

Have you considered a used M8? The prices are dropping every day..

 

[Pickett Wilson]

From a very limited handling of the X-E1 (a friend has one), I was impressed. But my experience with a lot of these cameras is that native lenses perform so well on them I've always ended up just using them. I initially got into M4/3 because I could use all my older manual lenses, but now rarely do.

The M8, IMO, is now just an antique. Too many limitations (ISO, etc) compared to the current crop of aps-c mirrorless cameras to consider. Even if the camera says Leica on it, advances in technology aren't kind to older digicams. Go with something current.

 

[kennylovrin]

Hey

A body without a viewfinder is out of the question for me, otherwise I'd consider a NEX. Also a body with an externally attached view finder is also out of the question. It's just my preference. 🙂

I understand the complications in theory of using M lenses on the Fuji cameras, the problem is that I don't know how much of a problem it is in real life. If it turns out though that I have to focus wide open then stop down to shooting aperture I will have to consider it a no-go for me. I was hoping that when stopping down it would still be possible to focus accurately within the limits of the DOF. Maybe it isn't though.

One reason I was considering the Fuji cameras was because I would then have both a view finder and possibility to share lenses with my M6. But it does sound like it's more of a hack than it is a "everyday setup".

And yes, I have considered the M8, but then I lose the possibility to shoot macro etc when I want. I want only one digital camera, and I'm not sure I want to give up the macro stuff completely, so I need to decide that before an M8 is even an option. Also, I might wait a little longer if I was to go that route and try to get a M9, I'm pretty sure they will go down in price as well. I mean, I really WANT a digital Leica, I'm just not sure sure if it where I should put the money. 🙂

Thanks for the input!

 

[noimmunity]

For lenses 28 and below, it is easiest/most fun to use the OVF and zone focus. I use a 24 Elmar M and really enjoy it, as long as I keep it away from situations that require unsmeared corners.

For lenses 40 and above, it is best to use the EVF. I use a C Sonnar on the XP1 all the time, really like its rendering, and find it quite easy to focus in most situations without having to resort to any magnification at all.

 

[kennylovrin]

From a very limited handling of the X-E1 (a friend has one), I was impressed. But my experience with a lot of these cameras is that native lenses perform so well on them I've always ended up just using them. I initially got into M4/3 because I could use all my older manual lenses, but now rarely do.

The M8, IMO, is now just an antique. Too many limitations (ISO, etc) compared to the current crop of aps-c mirrorless cameras to consider. Even if the camera says Leica on it, advances in technology aren't kind to older digicams. Go with something current.

It's a good point there with ending up not sharing lenses anyway.

Really the problem for me is that I would like something like this:

* At least APS-C
* Built in viewfinder
* Smaller and lighter than my 5Dmkii
* Preferably with the same ISO performance as my 5Dmkii
* Preferably something that can do the odd macro shot

This seems to leave me with little else than the Fuji cameras.

Sharing lenses is kind of a bonus, but even if I wasn't to share lenses, it seems there really is only two options, and it is either the X-Pro 1 or the X-E1. From what I can tell the x-trans sensor performs as well as my 5dmkii when it comes to ISO. (I'm not super picky, but I'd prefer to not lose too many stops of ISO, if that makes sense).

An M9 would be nice, and it could work in practice because even though I like the higher iso performance, I don't need it often enough to make it a critical thing. What is more of a problem for me is that with a digital camera it would be nice to be slightly more versatile than the M9, at least for that kind of money.

But as always it's really hard to decide, one day I want one thing, the other day something else. And the fact is that lately I've been shooting mainly rangefinders (R-D1 first, now M6).

The Fujis seem like nice middle grounds, but on the other hand a middle ground could also mean the most compromises..

 

[Pickett Wilson]

Kenny, I agree. The X-E1 would handle most of what I shoot, except sports, and the benefits of lighter weight over my Canon DSLR gear for most of my work grow more relevant as I get older. Pure RF's aren't versatile enough, though. Gotta have an EVF, etc. And I'm hooked on good high ISO. I have no problem using manual lenses on these cameras, but my experience has been that the native lenses perform just as well for my needs.

You takes your choice and you pay your price, I guess.

 

[kennylovrin]

Kenny, I agree. The X-E1 would handle most of what I shoot, except sports, and the benefits of lighter weight over my Canon DSLR gear for most of my work grow more relevant as I get older. Pure RF's aren't versatile enough, though. Gotta have an EVF, etc. And I'm hooked on good high ISO. I have no problem using manual lenses on these cameras, but my experience has been that the native lenses perform just as well for my needs.

You takes your choice and you pay your price, I guess.

But let's say I'd go and buy a X-E1 body + m-adapter and no lens. Do you think I would after a few weeks/months think "ok this isn't working, I must have a proper fuji lens", or you think it would still be a workable solution?

I have nothing against buying fuji lenses, I only want to avoid buying another 35mm in a different mount and so on, if I can. I also find the fuji lenses somewhat bulky, they kind of negate the size of the body in a sense. At least when I look at photos of kits. On the other hand, the M-adapter does add a bit of thickness to an otherwise small lens.

 

[leicapixie]

The cameras and lenses are too large, in comparison to the actual format!
i would keep the Canon. A friend went Leica. Leica will not share space with other cameras..Push them out the bag. Later he added a EOS-I for film. Now back shooting with his 5D..and the Leica, but not at same time!

 

[willie_901]

Kenny,

The Fujinon XF lens are definitely a a workable solution if it turns out adapted lenses aren't for you. They are well made and they are light weight. In practice the Fujinon lenses are not bulkier than the Zeiss Biogon 35/2 or even the C-Sonnar 50/1.5, for instance. 0f course there must be some LTM/M mount lenses that are shorter than the corresponding XF lenses. but they probably won't be lighter.

I would be suprised if you saw more than a one stop difference in signal to noise ratio compared to your 5Dmkii and I'm being conservative with this guess. My XP-1 is close to my D700 when it comes to high ISO performance.

I messed around with adaptive lenses when I dabbled in m4/3. That was not a rewarding experience. I haven't even thought about trying with the XP-1.

 

[lcpr]

Hey Kenny, I actually ended up trading the R-D1 you sold me for a XP1 kit! Anyway, the EVF on the XP1 is actually quite usable (I'm using my 35/2 UC-Hex + the Fuji adapter), it's not as amazing as the Sony NEX/XE-1, but it's good enough to confirm focus and compose even in pretty low light. It does feel slower to focus than an actual RF but it's to be expected, I don't think it actually is slower, it just feels so (I found that to be the case even with the NEX and Ricoh GXR I tried, even with peaking enabled) If you don't plan on using the X-mount lenses I'd say go for the XE1, otherwise save up a bit more and buy the XP1 if you're going to use the native lenses (which I will later this month).

 

[Ezzie]

I´ve tried the VC Ultron 28/1.9, VC Color Skopar 50/2 and M-Hexanon 90/2.8 on the X-E1 today. Its not really that difficult. Once focusing set to manual the multi dial works as a switch between 1x, 3x and 10x magnification. I found using the 3x magnification easiest for minute focusing with shallow depth of field. There´s no focus peaking, but as others have said you get an edge shimmer when in accurate focus. Probably not an intended feature but it works. I focus wide open and then stop down before taking the shot. On the VC lenses that works well due to indented stops, you need not look up to adjust the aperture.

Here´s a shot from the VC 50/2.5

Kalloflex centre stage by Eirik0304, on Flickr

 

[kennylovrin]

Thanks! It seems it's kind of "ok" to use M lenses then when I read all your replies. I mean ok as in "it works but it's not optimal". I don't know though, I might just hang on to my 5D a bit longer until I really grow tired of it. Then on the other hand, that could be days or months. 😉