X Pro 1 too much info ?

[dee]

In retrospect , I think that there is rather too much negative info valid for you Pro guys , but a touch ambitious for those of us paying a fraction of the price for used or clear out cameras.Should I have approached it as a fixed lens (41mm on crop ) point and shoot on autos stating ISO etc as I have on the M8 / ancient Pan L1 , whilst being aware of slow focusing issues , using another camera where suitable , I would have managed to work my way into some of the choices at some time .
Your idiots guide plus several specifics has helped enormously and the lowlight capabilities are worth that £310 alone LOL , as they seem to say !
dee

 

[willie_901]

The X-Pro 1 is a cost effective choice for people who want to use an OVF while being able to conveniently use an EVF when needed. And the X-Pro 1 seems to work well with adapted M/LTM lenses.

The X-Pro 1 has three disadvantages:

o requires effort and patience to learn both its operation and differences required to render Xtrans raw with some post production software... people switching from DSLRs seem to have the most trouble

o AF speed is slow in some situations (but otherwise acceptable). Focus by turning a lens barrel has minimal focusing aids compared to newer models

o In extremely low light above ISO 800 shadow detail is barely acceptable in color images. This is only an issue if you like to selectively push shadows by several stops during raw rending. At ISO 1600 (again in extremely low light) shadow regions can display visible banding. These characteristics are common for many digital cameras contemporary to the X-Pro 1. I happen to like the B&W raw rendering above ISO 800 and rarely rendered color images with very low light scenes. For raw rendering electronic ISO amplification ends at ISO 1600 so you can just leave ISO there and increase the brightness during post prodcuton.