X-Pro, your thoughts...

[jsrockit]

It technologically vastly superior to the Leica M8 or M9 but remains very easy to use.

Isn't this an overstatement? Also, even if true, Leica has never been about cutting edge technology (well, perhaps the S2 and the fact that they made a full frame mechanical rangefinder digital)...at least not since the 50s. You buy a Leica because it is stripped down and pure, not because you expect cutting edge tech. The only place where the M9 fails is high ISO... THAT IS IT. High ISO is not the be all end all of Photography. Outside of high ISO, it is very much towards the top of the heap.

 

[jsrockit]

I am not going to buy a crop factor digital camera. If you are used to using fast lenses on film cameras, digital crop looks like a cartoon version of traditional photography.

Is this more from your preconceived notions or is it from actual use?

Yes, its sharp and clean up to ISO-you-name-it, awesome. I still fail to see what is so great about the Xpro vs any other crop digital camera. Wheres the point? If you care about pictures buy a low end Nikon with a 35/1.8 DX and start shooting. The pictures will be the same.

To some, the ergonomics and the OVF are very important. I'm of the opinion that the more comfortable you are with a camera, the better photos that you will make. That said, if you are immune to ergonomics and like DSLRs, than it is hard to make an argument against yours.

 

[celluloidprop]

In using the D7000 last weekend, I was shocked at how small even a good APS SLR viewfinder seemed after using the X100 and XP1 for a week. Not at all unusable, but surprising.

 

[splitimageview]

Indeed...that's *exactly* why I don't use a crop factor DSLR, and the full-frame ones are too big/heavy...

 

[Frontman]

I am not going to buy a crop factor digital camera. If you are used to using fast lenses on film cameras, digital crop looks like a cartoon version of traditional photography.

Yes, its sharp and clean up to ISO-you-name-it, awesome. I still fail to see what is so great about the Xpro vs any other crop digital camera. Wheres the point? If you care about pictures buy a low end Nikon with a 35/1.8 DX and start shooting. The pictures will be the same.

As I often shoot medium format and 4x5, I could argue that 35mm and full-frame digital cameras are "crop factor" cameras. When used with it's native lenses, the X-Pro is not a really a crop camera.

 

[david.elliott]

For this forum, I'm sure my usage of the x-pro 1 is out of the ordinary. I love it for macro work. Jpegs look quite good, but I am really eager for adobe raw support.

The evf works quite well for macro work. The camera as a whole does, really. A tilting screen would be nice, but whatever - I've never had a camera with one.

I treat it as primarily a great camera for macro work with secondary loveliness as a backup leica. 🙂

 

[splitimageview]

As I often shoot medium format and 4x5, I could argue that 35mm and full-frame digital cameras are "crop factor" cameras. When used with it's native lenses, the X-Pro is not a really a crop camera.

Indeed. It could be argued even 4x5 is ultimately cropped. But I don't find 4x5 images to be cartoons compared to 8x10. 🙂

 

[PhotoMat]

Yes, it is not a Leica, but it has the features that attracted me to a digital M -- simple, manual controls. After years of using a DSLR in my daily work, I have yearned for a digital platform that would emulate the features of my favorite film cameras -- the Mamiya 7 and the Leica M6TTL. I am really enjoying having an actual shutter speed dial and aperture ring as opposed to spinning a thumbwheel/command dial while looking at an LCD or viewfinder readout. The simplicity is refreshing. I didn't buy the X-P1 because I thought it would be a cheaper version of the M9. I bought it because it could do the same tasks as the M9, with the added benefit of some automation if desired. I see the ability to use M lenses as a bonus. While the jury is still out regarding this ability, (pending more experimentation in a more controlled methodology), I am initially pleased with some shots that I snapped this evening using my Summicron 50 on the Fuji, via a Kipon adapter:

 

[GaryLH]

+1

PhotoMat, I cannot agree more with what you have said here. I bought the x100 and xp1 for exactly the same reason. Using legacy lenses is a plus but at the end of the day I wanted to get back to some basics:
- aperture ring
- shutter speed dial
- exposure compensation dial
- ovf or evf no LCD

I don't take pictures that require fast af. The af on the Fuji cameras is good enough. If none of my legacy lens ever works on the xp1, I am ok with that. The Fuji lenses are more than good enough. In fact I consider the 35f1.4 the equal of my summicrom asph.

Gary

 

[Nelson Tan]

PhotoMat, that is an impressive display of the camera's capabilities! Thanks for sharing.

How would you describe the process of manual focusing a Leica M lens using the Kipon adaptor? Is it snappy and easy to focus via the EVF?

 

[BobYIL]

I personally have no experience with my Leica or Leicaflex lenses on the X-Pro. (Still waiting for the adapters. Kind of excited about a camera that can do bright line viewing for my "normal" lenses and TTL viewing with long ones.) Hope other folks can provide that info. In the meantime, I will see if I can get some opinions.

Here are some Leica asph. lenses on the XP1 as well as some Zeiss and V/C:

http://picabroad.com/2012/03/24/fuji-x-pro-1-grand-test-with-leica-m-mount-lenses/

(Remarkable that even the top Leica asphericals could not perform as good as the native Fuji lenses on this sensor..)

 

[rbelyell]

omg bill, those results are horrid! like much of llfe, utility in photography is subjective. i understand and certainly respect those who view the xp1 as a 'system' camera in which they want to invest. as a lover of legacy and manual focus lenses, as an owner of some expensive (for me) pieces of such glass, i dont. for me, there were two coequally imporlamt revoultionary benefits of mirrorless cameras: the potential for dslr image quality in an extremely compact form factor and the ability to mount (and by implication, shoot to their maximum ability) pretty much any lens ever made. to me that meant i could now enjoy the benefits of digital with lenses i loved on film.

certainly, being an x100 owner and lover, i have no doubt as to the incredible IQ that can be obtained by the xp1 'system'. but at least for me, ive invested my emotions, time and money in a lens system, and any new camera i consider must be able to properly utilize 'my' system.
tony

 

[jsrockit]

Sure am glad I didn't buy an adapter for M lenses. I'd rather use M lenses on a camera made for M lenses. The Fuji X lenses are very nice.

 

[Dante_Stella]

Not that remarkable when you consider that the Fuji is designed for lenses that direct light in perpendicular to the imager and all of the other lenses were designed for film. Leicas have offset microlenses for a reason.

If you hooked up lenses longer than 50mm, I think you would see something totally different.

We also don't know if the Fuji is correcting edge aberrations automatically with its own lenses. Leicas, for example, correct vignetting and color shifts before th RAW file is written.

That said, as a system, the X-Pro1 and its 35 seem to be very comparable to an M8 with the 35/1.4 ASPH. I think you would really want native wides for this camera.

Dante

Here are some Leica asph. lenses on the XP1 as well as some Zeiss and V/C:

http://picabroad.com/2012/03/24/fuji-x-pro-1-grand-test-with-leica-m-mount-lenses/

(Remarkable that even the top Leica asphericals could not perform as good as the native Fuji lenses on this sensor..)

 

[BobYIL]

Not that remarkable when you consider that the Fuji is designed for lenses that direct light in perpendicular to the imager and all of the other lenses were designed for film. Leicas have offset microlenses for a reason.

If you hooked up lenses longer than 50mm, I think you would see something totally different.

We also don't know if the Fuji is correcting edge aberrations automatically with its own lenses. Leicas, for example, correct vignetting and color shifts before th RAW file is written.

That said, as a system, the X-Pro1 and its 35 seem to be very comparable to an M8 with the 35/1.4 ASPH. I think you would really want native wides for this camera.

Dante

The problems are this side of the 50mm FL; Fuji 35, 23 and 18mm lenses employ rather unconventional designs (as if reverse-retrofocal) with huge rear element diameters to cover the illumination circle rather “directly”; probably to eliminate the need of offset microlenses in addition to the OLPF already measuring 2.5mm thickness (too thick!). These hint that only their native lenses could perform on this sensor optimally and the retrofocals. A deliberate decision IMHO, to be able to sell their own lenses at the first rate to amortize their investment before the introduction of consequtive models (and they are smart enough to know that we would not be pleased to use large retrofocus wide-angles on this body 😉 )

As for the native correction programs, these can “correct” distortion, vignetting, even color shift toward corners however against corner smearing –i.e. loss of resolution data- I think only offset microlenses could be a solution or unconventional designs as on the Fujifilm lenses. This is also where the Nex-7 fails..

 

[rbelyell]

The problems are this side of the 50mm FL; Fuji 35, 23 and 18mm lenses employ rather unconventional designs (as if reverse-retrofocal) with huge rear element diameters to cover the illumination circle rather “directly”; probably to eliminate the need of offset microlenses in addition to the OLPF already measuring 2.5mm thickness (too thick!). These hint that only their native lenses could perform on this sensor optimally and the retrofocals. A deliberate decision IMHO, to be able to sell their own lenses at the first rate to amortize their investment before the introduction of consequtive models (and they are smart enough to know that we would not be pleased to use large retrofocus wide-angles on this body 😉 )

As for the native correction programs, these can “correct” distortion, vignetting, even color shift toward corners however against corner smearing –i.e. loss of resolution data- I think only offset microlenses could be a solution or unconventional designs as on the Fujifilm lenses. This is also where the Nex-7 fails..

yup, ive read this elsewhere. no such problem on m4/3 or gxr or nex 5n. unfortunately for fuji fans who want to shoot legacy glass, we need to be looking there and not at the xp1.
tony

 

[photografity]

Yesterday, I went in a local shop that had a X-Pro1.
I bought my Kipon adapter to try on the 50 summicron & the 28mm MS triplet, the files were awesome !!

 

[jsrockit]

I think digital cameras are getting there, but the X-Pro 1 isn't there yet, at least for what I want a camera for. Some of the technology in it is pretty impressive and makes you wonder why no one has done it before, i.e. the sensor array.

Are you saying this with regard to the X-Pro1 with M lenses or in general?

If the latter, how is it not there yet?

 

[jsrockit]

Yesterday, I went in a local shop that had a X-Pro1.
I bought my Kipon adapter to try on the 28mm MS triplet, the files were awesome !!

Care to share any examples... I would love to see this lens on the camera.

 

[Dante_Stella]

As to preliminary notes, here you are. Please report any typos to the office.

Dante