X-pro1 or X-E2(s) to replace M4 and sony A7.

Puggie said:
The 16-80 looks very nice. I'm borrowing the 18-135 off a friend for the weekend, that should give me a good idea of what range I really want and then I'll go from there. The 35mm f1.4 seems to be the definitive X series prime from everything i've read. At some point I suspect I will own one, hopefully the zoom will give me an idea for which to start with, the compact 23 or the faster 35.
Click to expand...

I sold my 35/1.4 and use the 35/2.

The 35/2 is smaller, lighter and has more effective AF and fly-by-wire manual focusing.

The 35/1.4 rendering is a bit different and some prefer it. The extra stop is nice especially if your work involves subject isolation via shallow DOF.
 
Puggie said:
...
AF is a bit slow, a smaller faster prime should sort this ...
Click to expand...

I don't think so. In my experience the AF motor technology determines AF performance with the newer bodies.
Puggie said:
...The optical VF rocks for me, the EVF is still respectable next to my sony, and is handy in poor light. But I much prefer the OVF witthe little magnified focus confirm in the bottom right corner.
Click to expand...

Same (although I do never used a SONY).

I'm happy to hear this camera is working out for you,
 
Interesting thread (and hello everyone, my first post here), I've been primarily a M4 film user for the last couple of years, not owned digital stuff for probably 5-6 years now and wanted to add something digital for lower light whilst retaining the ability to use my M lenses.

Not being able to justify a digital M (M9 looks dated and the M10 is just too expensive) I started looking first at used SL prices, then the CL. In the end not knowing how it will all work out and not wanting to throw £2k on a crop camera (CL) I got myself a used X-E2s for 1/10 of that plus the M adapter. So that will be arriving tomorrow, let's see how it works out.
 
i hope i don't sound impertinent, but i think consolidating familiar, well-performing gear into unfamiliar gear by selling the former before buying the latter is a risky idea unless there is a truly compelling, urgent reason (like imminent eviction). If what you have works well for you and what you shoot, gear questions ought to be just maintenance-related.

Better I think to simplify what you have. Since processing film is burdensome for you, I would say sell that gear and consolidate into the A7. You will achieve both objectives, freeing up cash and downsizing your set up. Shoot for awhile and see whether that "rangefinder experience" itch goes away.
 
MCTuomey said:
i hope i don't sound impertinent, but i think consolidating familiar, well-performing gear into unfamiliar gear by selling the former before buying the latter is a risky idea unless there is a truly compelling, urgent reason (like imminent eviction). If what you have works well for you and what you shoot, gear questions ought to be just maintenance-related.

Better I think to simplify what you have. Since processing film is burdensome for you, I would say sell that gear and consolidate into the A7. You will achieve both objectives, freeing up cash and downsizing your set up. Shoot for awhile and see whether that "rangefinder experience" itch goes away.
Click to expand...

I think you have a very valid point indeed, and I agree. From my perspective the M4 and A7 were not 'well performing, the M4 didn't develop the film its self and the A7 always felt clunky, its saving grace was the sensor. From a pure handling and pleasure to use point of view I actually preferred my previous Ricoh GRX with the zoom and leica mount sensors, truly pocketable or taking M-mount glass.

I like the rang finder format, I keep coming back to it (M3, then Canon Vt, then contax G1 and G2, then the M4) there were many digital cameras inbetween, but i kept coming back to the rangefinders, so I felt the x-pro was a safe bet. I also bought the wife an x-10 as a handy point and shoot which is great and borrowed an X-100 before making the move.

Still not bought any fuji glass for it. Need to move some other lenses on shortly fancying the 35f2, 18-135 and possibly 10-24 funds permitting.
 
Puggie said:
... possibly 10-24 funds permitting.
Click to expand...

The 10-24/4 is a very nice lens. The performance at lower focal lengths(10-12 mm) is especially good. However, above 20 mm the performance is only adequate. Flare and ghosting suppression is excellent.

Since 2008 I owned three different Nikon and a Tokina ultra-wide zoom lenses. The Fujinon beat all of these easily.
 
I've been using the voigtlander 15mm 4.5 a bit recently and like it, but the zoom would give me more flexibility.

10-24 covers wide
18-135 covers everyday shooting and travel with one lens
35 f2 covers compact camera to keep things light

And my head currently says 'that should do!'
 
So I bought a 35mm f1.4, rather than the f2. Main reason being it was the right price st the right time. Its a lovely lens and I'm very much enjoying it.

I'm still considering the 10-24 but thinking maybe one of the 50-200mm zooms, or even the xc lens around that range.

Has anyone any experience with the Canon Ef adapters with autofucus? I still have an 85mm f1.8 Canon and a 200 2.8 I could use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom