Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
I think folks are completely over-blowing the focusing issues with this camera. Auto-focus is plenty fast enough for any situation I've run into thus far. I don't have any more focus failures than with any other camera I've ever owned.
Manual focus? If you treat the X-100 or X-Pro1 as ZONE focusing cameras, they are superb. Use the AE-L/AF-L button for instant focus. Focusing with the lens focus ring is really designed only to provide super fine focusing (using the magnified view) for things like macro or portraits.
Manual focus? If you treat the X-100 or X-Pro1 as ZONE focusing cameras, they are superb. Use the AE-L/AF-L button for instant focus. Focusing with the lens focus ring is really designed only to provide super fine focusing (using the magnified view) for things like macro or portraits.
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
No.. not yet. However it does give you a choice of how high you want to let the Auto-ISO to go. For example, you can set it to Auto-ISO(400), or (800), .. on up.
gavinlg
Veteran
Agreed 100%. The same talk applies to the x100, which in my opinion is a great AF-er. In fact I got more frustrated with my 5d/d300/e-3 than I do with my x100 - all of which had much much lower focussing accuracy. Once you've enabled the AF correction frame in the x100/xpro, when it says it's focused, it's 100% focussed. And using the manual focus as it's intended (zone focusing) it's really quite brilliant.
gavinlg
Veteran
AF correction frame needs to be on, which was probably the problem there. Without it you're basically blind to parallax.
Archlich
Well-known
- No face detection AF system
I apologize for my ignorance, but do the D4 and the 1Dx have face detection?
I apologize for my ignorance, but do the D4 and the 1Dx have face detection?
SausalitoDog
Well-known
The focusing is SLOW, but the accuracy is fantastic.
Best used in manual focus, with "auto" AF button to approximate the focus - manual only to fine tune.
Best used in manual focus, with "auto" AF button to approximate the focus - manual only to fine tune.
jarski
Veteran
when discussing about reviews from DPreview and others, the "weakest link" (that's always there, no matter how good camera) turns to utter trash feature in these Internet boards. its then escalated in other threads by referring "yeah but that AF speed, that DP tested...". so occasional visitor sees choir of commentators who all seem to agree that "XPro1 has crap AF" (in this example). hard to put things into perspective these days...
gavinlg
Veteran
Exactly. It's like car reviewers when they review a car like any of the BMW sedans - they'll start off saying "this car handles beautifully - it's wonderfully sharp and is the best handling car in its class" and then in the very next paragraph they'll say something like "the ride is harsh and too firm unlike X competition which is lovely and supple." They don't acknowledge the fact that the reason why it's the best handling car in its class is BECAUSE it's more firm than the competition.
The x-pro is literally under a third of the cost of a 'pro' nikon or canon system, and has completely different design objectives - the DSLRs are made for versatility and speed, the x-pro is made for compact/lightweight/IQ balance, and a direct view (rangefinder like) experience. They don't mention in the conclusion 'pros' that it's less weight than an entry level DSLR with the IQ of a 7K pro dslr - they don't mention that all the lenses are top quality and a quarter of the weight of equivalent quality DSLR lenses - they don't mention that the optical finder is much nicer in some instances than a DSLR tunnel view VF.
Similarly, why so much mention of the 'oddities and glitches' of the x-pro1, when there is nothing of the sort in the Nikon d800 review, despite serious af problems widely documented with that camera (mis-focusses with outer AF points as per 'diglloyds' testing), lock ups, poorly calibrated screens, reports of exploding cameras etc.
bugmenot
Well-known
Surprisingly, yes. So does all the other so-called Professional and Prosumer cameras.
gavinlg
Veteran
Only as far as metering and color sensors as far as I know, not face detection in terms of point and shoot appears in the VF style face detect.
P
Paul T
Guest
Very true, and he didn't mention the light leaks on the new Canon either!
but the xpro is a niche camera, looking from a mainstream perspective it's only reasonable to point out its quirks. I don't thnk fuji fans should be too defensive. I have owned a hexar af for many years now, and over those years people would often slag it off for, say, the limited higher shutter speeds. But it's now acknowledged as a classic. fuji have made their mark and I would guess have outperformed their budgets - but some criticism would be a good thing, if it means they iron out more of those quirks.
Aristophanes
Well-known
Comparing the FF models to the APS-C X-Pro is inaccurate in its own way.
The Fuji compares to a D7000. IQ is mostly sensore-derived and all models above $1,000 perform well. The X-Pro sensor is not better, frankly, than the D3200 sensor.
The Fuji weighs less, but can do less. Versatility and speed of DSLR's vs. a slightly smaller RF-like experience. Those are the trade-offs.
gavinlg
Veteran
Sorry, but no - LINK - just select the d3200 as one of the comparison cameras, and move the dotted box around in the picture above to change what you see in the crops. You'll see the x-pro out resolves the d3200, is significantly less noisy at every ISO. And these are RAW files - the JPEGs will show an even greater difference in the x-pros favor. Dpreview themselves said it the sensor is compatible in IQ to the 5d mkIII.
Monochrom
Well-known
Maybe he really wants one but doesn't want to admit it. His user ID is Monochrom, after all
hahahha, maybe right
but not really...in fact i love the m9 because i can set an elmar, collpase it and pocket the whole outfit...i wouldn´t go for th x-pro because the smaller sensor and the incapacity of collapsing a lens...so it´s larger in practical way...I think the x100 and x-pro are very bold cameras in terms fuji dismisses mirrors...i firmly believe mirrors are no longer needed...they appeared to make things easier and to use zooms....but they´ve always been cumebrsome in every way...
since technology allow manufacturers to quit on mirrors the camera desing (people think) tends to be more like leicas...but i don´t think is necessarily true...i think desing tends to be more like"mirrorless", with smaller bodies also quitting huge lenses...
It´s not by chance that canon and nikon are not developing and offering mirrorless systems such as fuji, they dont want to kill their mirrors...so i´m a fan of fuji...in the short term fuji will eventually make an af system that will rival those of the high end dsrl´s and then they will take over the market...as they are doing today in a smaller way...
I´ve epxerienced many AF cameras...and none were as accurate as a MF rangefinder camera...sorry to say that..the only camera that was faster and acc was the contax t3....but again we have 2.8 and wide angle lens (more base dof)
The other very fast camera was the sony nex but only with the pancake 16mm f2.8 lens, but again large dof from the beginning...
Lighter lenses and shorter lenses mean faster and acc autofocus...
The photofactory canon 5d that i once had was a fast devil in every sense...but it wasn´t usable on the streets...it was ike carrying a ball and chain attached to my ankle...
Cheers!
Aristophanes
Well-known
Bu the D7000 and Pentax K-5 smoke the X-Pro from what I am seeing at all ISO's. And the performance above the D3200 is maybe not a $,1200 difference, considering the D3200 has faster, more reliable autofocus, in a $499 camera (w/kit lens).
I'm an early Fuji convert to their SuperCCD system and subsequent tweaks, and they make very good sensors. But it is not FF and it is no better than anything Sony puts out now (the D3200 is an Aptina sensor). Fuji does great JPEG's but switch to RAW and there's no advantage. I actually think the Sony sensors are 1/2 stop better.
You're paying for a unique, smaller package and VF experience with the Fuji over a sea of sameness in DSLR's, but you get similar AP-C sensor performance and worse AF. Make your choices but the X-Pro 1 is a compromise and to get there, you pay a solid $500 premium on the body alone.
I tried the Nikon V1 beside the X-Pro about 3 evenings ago at my local shop and the V1 with its hybrid AF is much, much faster and equally as accurate. I'll wait to try Fuji again when I see them move towards that superior tech.
Paul T.
Veteran
But... so what? This is just like the infinitely tedious argument from SLR fans who maintain their camera is better than an RF. They're simply not comparable. It's like saying I should own a Ford Mondeo over a mini. I'm not going to, and I never will. (Own a Mondeo, and quite possibly a digital SLR, not unless they come in at the size of my old film SLRs).
gavinlg
Veteran
Use that little comparison tool in the link I sent you. There's no way the k5 and d7000 are better. You can see it plainly in there. If you can't see it there must be something wrong with your eyes. Can you buy a pancake 18mm f2 for the d7000 and k5? Or a small/light 35mm f1.4? No? You can't compare the x-pro to a dslr, they're completely different concepts. The d3200 is $700 on b&h, not 500. I use d3100's at work a lot, and they're ergonomically akin to a dog turd. Once again, not nearly comparable.
The nikon v1 is even less comparable - I'm not even going to go there.
Aristophanes
Well-known
Really?
Sensor: ISO 800, for middle of the spectrum on the referenced DP Review samples:
Fuji X-Pro 1
Nikon D7000
Pentax K-5 (for good measure)
The Fuji sensor has great resolution and low overall chroma, lower than the other 2 models by a hair, but that proprietary mosaic demonstrates issues with colour fidelity, especially along narrow boundaries. Look at the word "Fujitsu". The Fuji sensor clearly bleeds into whites whereas the Sony sensor does not; those lines are discrete as they should be. Where the text should be bright white, it is pink on the Fuji samples.
There are other places on the DP Review shots where the Fuji sensor similarly bleeds, such as where it says "Tin Light" and "Mr. Robot" on the little Robot. The reds are muddy with blues on the Fuji, not at all on the Sony sensor.
In fact, the Fuji bleeds everywhere. Look at the transition along the perpendicular axis of the battery. On the Fuji the orange line distinctly changes from orange to grey. Not on the Sony sensor. The Fuji sensor has proximity issues.
But that's the way it has always been with Fuji sensors. The S5 was designed to smooth skin tones, and for all the low-light performance of the SuperCD series, they achieved that with some smearing effects, just as seen here.
The colour fidelity of the Sony sensor looks to be better at retaining the DR. Go up ISO and the difference increases in favour of the Sony chip. Look anywhere there is text or fine lines and the Fuji bleeds. I'd say that's a function of the sensor design itself.
Overall I'd also say the Sony sensor in either Pentax or Nikon is a modest 1/4 stop better in the shadows. But that's where the inferior chroma arises. Every sensor has its compromises.
Both are excellent sensors, but I value having whites white, not pink, because overall chroma can be handled beer in PP, but one a white has gone pink at the pixel level, I'm not getting it back unless I edit each pixel
I also don't like line edge colour shifts. No amount of PP is getting those back.I'm a big time Fuji fanboy currently sporting 3 models of their product line, but I'm not looking at a sensor with the X-Pro 1 that outpaces the competition, certainly not at $1,800. I'll leave the FF or 1" sensor comparisons out of this. It's not a class-leading sensor, but one that keeps pace with other APS-C cameras if you can deal with non-correctable colour bleeds and shifts.
So, no, nothing wrong with my eyes.
The major knock against the Fuji is poor AF for an AF-biased $1,800 camera (its MF is worse than some entry-level DSLR's). AF-biased cameras at less than 1/3 the price focus much faster be it DSLR or the V1. The sensor doesn't make up the difference with the compromises noted above, and pretty much every manufacturer puts out super-sharp primes. So the Fuji X-Pro 1 premium appears primarily to be for a unique VF experience, lots of old school control, and a modestly smaller kit.
Just an honest criticism using the same DP Review material and on track with the OP.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
People who are confused often mistakenly think that others are also confused.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
I know some great street shooters who use 5D(I/II/II)'s working streets from the shopping districts of London to the shanties of Jakarta. More really good shooters than I know who use M9s and X-Pros combined, actually. In capable hands these are all outstanding tools capable of yielding superb results.
See my signature below.