X-Pro 1's Achilles' Heel

[dreilly]

This is exactly the same thing with the x100. Like exactly. Everyone denouncing the camera, saying it was useless and that autofocus was terrible. In reality - the x100 AF wasn't too bad to begin with, and now it's great. Give fuji a bit of time to sort the camera out. For now, learn how to use it how it is. Simple. It's not supposed to be a foolproof camera, or a point and shoot.

Okay, not everyone is denouncing the X-1. The argument seems to be more like....this thing is wonderful and totally worth the price...and on the other side...this thing might be wonderful in some respects, but for the price maybe they should have sorted the camera out BEFORE they released it, and for over two grand it would nice to have AF that was more reliable in dim light. As for the learning how to use it, sure, all cameras have limitations and a learning curve in terms of UI, but some UI designs are simply better (simpler, more transparent, better documented, better laid out). The infuriating thing about the X100, and it seems the X-1 has the same character, is that the control functions (and performance) seem to depend arbitrarily on something else, like viewfinder mode. And these nuances are not well documented. So it's an interesting way to release a camera, with unresolved issues and a mysterious user interface, and then relying on users to essentially write their own manual and then see what poorly implemented things cause an uproar and try to patch it with firmware.

I am denouncing Fuji for this peculiar style of camera design and approach to releasing a major new camera system. The X100 debacle kept me from buying that camera for over a year, and now I'm glad I did, but it didn't make their choices correct, and I'm afraid it kept people away from a camera they would have liked. Not if they had given it a chance, but if Fuji had released the darn thing right the first time.

 

[dcsang]

The more I see folks post about what they DON'T like or what they believe the bad things are about this camera, the more I keep thinking "Is this the Fuji thread or the Leica digital M thread?" 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀

Dave

 

[mouren]

You are talking about things that have complex softwares embedded in them. NOBODY can release something that was bug free or sorted-out. It's the inherent problem with complexity, at times, the interactions are unpredictable.

I don't see anything worth denouncing. I am quite happy with my X-Pro1, it's inducing me to take pictures.

 

[Frontman]

Every new camera which I have bought has a few quirks, and requires a bit of a learning curve. It took me a couple/few tries before I figured out how to load the film properly in an M4 (nothing like thinking about the great shots you are getting, and the film isn't even winding). I have a Konica Hexar AF, and though people rave about how well ita AF system is, it was slow enough to me that I missed quite a few shots until getting used to it. I love my little Panasonic LX5, but the design and location of the aspect ratio switch and selector knob are such that the settings get knocked over quite easily, which has cost me quite a few shots. So far my experience with the X-Pro has been positive. Yes, the AF is slow, but in most situations it works nearly identically to my Hexar AF. I expect Fuji will have some kind of cure available in the future, but in the meantime, it's not slowing me down.

 

[Aristophanes]

I just found that the AF was not very good for such an expensive camera designed around the premise of AF. You can kludge RF technique around that all you want, but you're overpaying for what you should really receive IMO.

I used it straight out of the box on Fuji's default settings. I did not use it in the dark, merely reasonably dim light. The CDAF was noticeably inferior to a PDAF DSLR costing 1/6 the price. The manual focus using the Fuji lens was not very good.

 

[rbelyell]

DREILLY you are right on! for 2 grand, or even 1 grand, i'm not a freaking guinea pig. yeah, there are 'things that need to sort out' but NOT AF ON AN AF CAMERA! i am an old hand fuji lover and an x100 fan, but this is no way to realease a 'pro'level camera. you know, like charging $2500 for a camera and months after release telling everyone they need to put UV filter/condoms on their multithousand dollar glass in order for the camera to properly render black. are you kidding me with this garbage! major major problems like these are just not cool and time to take these malevolent manufacturers to task for taking advantage of their customers!

 

[PhotoMat]

are you kidding me with this garbage! major major problems like these are just not cool and time to take these malevolent manufacturers to task for taking advantage of their customers!

If you purchased the X-Pro 1 and are unhappy with the performance, return the camera.

If you didn't purchase the camera, then simply wait for the perceived bugs to be worked out before you plunk down your cash.

Sheesh, it's just a damned camera. Now, wipe the spittle from your mouth and have a beer!

 

[furcafe]

Dude, it's not that it's hard, it's that the AE-L/AF-L button doesn't work the way it does on damn near every other autofocus camera (other than the X100 maybe). But no worries, turns out I only had to turn on the Power Save function to make it work normally.

Edit: It appears upon further testing that I was wrong: the "Power Save" mode doesn't make the AE-L/AF-L button behave normally.

Treat the AF-L button as a lock button. First AF where you want it to be, and then press the AF-L button. Now the focus is locked at that distance.

It's really not that hard, and works very well if you just play ball and use it the way it's supposed to be used.

 

[olelovold]

Most of the criticism stems from people not knowing the camera well enough. They expect it to work predictably and exactly as they want, without even reading the manual and to get to know their tool. Fuji makes quirky cameras, if you want to get the most out of them, you need to get to know the camera and how to use it properly.

For example, people say in regards to focusing, "focus on an edge". Much like you would with an SLR. Well, that's wrong, because the CDAF in the digital Fujis doesn't work that way. In fact, if you point it at an edge, it's likely that the focus will struggle more. This is because the CDAF tries to make everything within the AF box sharp, and if you have several planes in different lengths from the camera within the box, the focus will struggle. The correct way to focus is not on an edge, but rather on contrasty areas on the subject. Yet, people who obviously don't know the camera spread misinformation about this all over various forums. It's not an obvious thing, but it only goes to show one important thing: the X-Pro 1 is not an SLR, and it therefore shouldn't be expect to work like one either.

 

[willie_901]

I just found that the AF was not very good for such an expensive camera designed around the premise of AF. You can kludge RF technique around that all you want, but you're overpaying for what you should really receive IMO.

I used it straight out of the box on Fuji's default settings. I did not use it in the dark, merely reasonably dim light. The CDAF was noticeably inferior to a PDAF DSLR costing 1/6 the price. The manual focus using the Fuji lens was not very good.

Try using a Nikon D4 at a sporting event with the out of the box AF settings and see what you get. You will get a lot of mis-focused pictures.

Anyone who tries can focus the X100 or XP1 just like anyone who tries to focus an analog RF can succeed. In some light the Xes can fail miserably with some AF/finder settings but get the job done well with others. Having two finders that interact with the AF system differently does require some investment by the photographer to get the most of the camera. It took some investment for me to become proficient with fast mechanical lenses and an analog rangefinder. Becoming coming proficient with any camera is a enjoyable part of photography for some people.

Setting yourself up for failure by using default settings is not Fuji's fault

 

[celluloidprop]

Well, that kind of is Fuji's fault. A product should work out of the box - it wouldn't be difficult for Fuji to enable the tips and tricks (corrected AF frame, etc.) by default.

 

[Frontman]

Well, that kind of is Fuji's fault. A product should work out of the box - it wouldn't be difficult for Fuji to enable the tips and tricks (corrected AF frame, etc.) by default.

I took mine out of the box, used it, and found that it works fine. No AF camera I have ever used has had perfectly predictable autofoucs. Some are better than others, but none are perfect. And, no other AF camera I have used produces images that match in quality what I have so far gotten out of my X-Pro. Is $2000 expensive? Hell yes, but dollar for dollar it is a better value than the M9.

Lets see more comments from people who actually own and use the camera, rather than Internet hearsay.

 

[dct]

It remembers me very hard of the Contax G AF problems discussed in many threads here, like
http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2681
http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98187

Fuji should write an article explaining all the details like this user article helping the AF frustrated Contax G users...
http://www.botzilla.com/blog/archives/000378.html

Of course, who reads carefully through all these X-Pro1 thread will find similar good information.

A big thanks to all patient teaching posters here.

 

[jsrockit]

The X100 debacle kept me from buying that camera for over a year, and now I'm glad I did, but it didn't make their choices correct, and I'm afraid it kept people away from a camera they would have liked. Not if they had given it a chance, but if Fuji had released the darn thing right the first time.

What debacle? I've been using it since day one and can't think of a debacle.

 

[RealXenuis]

I took mine out of the box, used it, and found that it works fine. No AF camera I have ever used has had perfectly predictable autofoucs. Some are better than others, but none are perfect. And, no other AF camera I have used produces images that match in quality what I have so far gotten out of my X-Pro. Is $2000 expensive? Hell yes, but dollar for dollar it is a better value than the M9.

Lets see more comments from people who actually own and use the camera, rather than Internet hearsay.

What debacle? I've been using it since day one and can't think of a debacle.

Try using a Nikon D4 at a sporting event with the out of the box AF settings and see what you get. You will get a lot of mis-focused pictures.

Anyone who tries can focus the X100 or XP1 just like anyone who tries to focus an analog RF can succeed. In some light the Xes can fail miserably with some AF/finder settings but get the job done well with others. Having two finders that interact with the AF system differently does require some investment by the photographer to get the most of the camera. It took some investment for me to become proficient with fast mechanical lenses and an analog rangefinder. Becoming coming proficient with any camera is a enjoyable part of photography for some people.

Setting yourself up for failure by using default settings is not Fuji's fault

Agree with all of this. I don't know what people mean by "doesn't work out of the box". By expectations that b/c the camera costs $____, that it's AF should work ______ way. That their "afraid" perceived issues with the X100 hurt sales. That the manual is not as complete as other manuals. That it should not have any glitches etc. This borders on the absurd. It feels like someone who's cornered themselves with extreme expectations and is now fighting in a corner, or something. I bought the camera, received it, took it out of it's box, placed the lens on it, and it worked. Miraculous. It even AF'd. Incredible. Could it be faster? Sure. Nothing more or less than that. I've had great success and keeper rates with it, out of box. I didn't buy it for it's stellar AF performance. Did anyone? That would be extremely confused if so. MF'g has been absolutely fine, for me. With the Fuji lenses and with an M lens. Nothing about the experience held me back from attaining focus or becoming frustrated in the process. The manual seemed complete to me. What was excluded? How to turn off the aperture noises? That's not supposed to be in the manual. And, amazingly, some people who own it don't think of it as annoying or as a defect. Again, amazing. The X100 did pretty well, from my understanding. There seem to be plenty of rabid fans of it, regardless of perception. There also seem to be plenty of people buying it new, still. The result sort of nullifies the perception that it's hindered itself in sales. And that's not really the point, is it? It's not a camera that was made to appeal to the masses, not that if it did that would be a bad thing. Fuji is a fraction of the size of it's competitors. It's very strange that arguments are not turning toward how well the X100 or the XP1 have sold. Esp considering the XP1 has only been out what, a month? It's a pretty easy leap to assume that a $700 will appeal to more ppl than an $1200 or $2300 camera, right? Regardless, the perspectives and comments of those who actually own and have spent a lot of time with the camera should, rightly, carry a lot more weight than someone who hasn't, or who tried it once. That's not to suggest others shouldn't and don't have legitimate perspectives, but when someone who's never touched the cameras makes claims to it's performance or quality or output, that shouldn't be taken with too much seriousness, should it? That would be confused, as well.

 

[CopperB]

Good lord this has mushroomed. My original comment about the AF was specific to low light music shooting compared to other cameras I've used in similar situations. I'm not new to concert shooting and I know the techniques for working a camera to advantage in these venues. I certainly did not expect this one to be miraculous. No camera is, in that situation. I was merely making an observation that the xpro1 seemed to be particularly challenging here. I think the xpro is a great camera but it has its weak points like any model does and for me, this is it. That doesn't mean I don't think there will be ways to improve on my technique with this camera. It does mean that it won't likely be my first choice for this genre of photography.

 

[RealXenuis]

Good lord this has mushroomed. My original comment about the AF was specific to low light music shooting compared to other cameras I've used in similar situations. I'm not new to concert shooting and I know the techniques for working a camera to advantage in these venues. I certainly did not expect this one to be miraculous. No camera is, in that situation. I was merely making an observation that the xpro1 seemed to be particularly challenging here. I think the xpro is a great camera but it has its weak points like any model does and for me, this is it. That doesn't mean I don't think there will be ways to improve on my technique with this camera. It does mean that it won't likely be my first choice for this genre of photography.

And that's perfectly reasonable, you have very valid points, and you seem to know how to work a camera in low light! However, not everyone is being as level-headed. I think the reaction is to the more extreme remarks. At least that's my take

 

[Keith]

I bought a new Toyota hybrid last week ... it's a new release model.

I noticed on Thursday that the transmission shifts straight from low, bypassing the interemdiate speeds, into high. When I queried this behaviour they told me they'll send a tech around to make an adustment on tuesday week that should fix the problem.

Yesterday the brakes started playing up .... emitting a loud squeal when pulling up at low speed. I was informed the tech will be around in early may to fit alternate brake pads for me, apparently it's not a safety issue.

When I queried these problems with Toyota directly they became a little defensive. "Sheesh mate it's a new model ... there's a few bugs and we'll sort out the problems for you as we find solutions ... chill out for chrissakes!"

:angel: :angel: :angel:

 

[macjim]

Good lord this has mushroomed. My original comment about the AF was specific to low light music shooting compared to other cameras I've used in similar situations. I'm not new to concert shooting and I know the techniques for working a camera to advantage in these venues. I certainly did not expect this one to be miraculous. No camera is, in that situation. I was merely making an observation that the xpro1 seemed to be particularly challenging here. I think the xpro is a great camera but it has its weak points like any model does and for me, this is it. That doesn't mean I don't think there will be ways to improve on my technique with this camera. It does mean that it won't likely be my first choice for this genre of photography.

Yeah, that's what happens. I've had the same happen to me with other forums where a simple question or comment is, over the length of the feed, twisted and changed, and ends up completely different, or it gets high jacked by nonsensical nonsense. Just watch the responses toy reply!

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

 

[dreilly]

Jsrockit,

The debacle is the long list of bugs that DPREVIEW published in their review of the X100. How common is that? I've never seen such a long list of bugs in any review of any camera I've ever considered buying. Actually I rarely see mention of any bug at all. I call that a debacle, and that review kept me away until the camera got sorted out. And I'm certainly not the only one. And I think that the camera should have had a bit more beta testing before release. Is anyone really arguing that it shouldn't have?

You've had a great experience right out of the box with the X100. I might have as well had I bought one. But we can't all buy a camera to have the authority to know which camera we should be buy. Good on anyone who can. So we listen to people who can speak from authority. I read reviews, like DPreview, compare them, read forums, all with the grains of salt each source requires. I make a decision based on that. Anyone who read the reports from the first release of the X100 would be perfectly justified in pausing.

So here are again with a new camera, and once again I don't have money to buy the camera so I can strut all my first hand experience. So I await reviews, read the forums. And when I read that people are finding the AF sluggish in lower light, then I know it's not the camera for me. I've never said it was a bad camera, but I have said that I think that Fuji should still have kept it in the stable until it was ready for the public...that they are talking about firmware fixes so soon is hard for me to swallow with a sticker price of over $2000.

You can say there was no debacle with the X100. You can say the AF is fine. Fuji's firmware updates say that even they don't agree with you.