X-T1 and Fuji Full Frame later or A7r now?

E

eleskin

Well-known
Local time
7:10 PM
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
1,080
We all know it is coming from Fuji, only a matter of time before they give us full frame that can handle existing APS-C lenses and full frame lenses. 2015 looks like the year this may happen but maybe we will be surprised this year. Here is my situation: The camera I am using now is the X Pro-1, this is what I replaced my M8 with and am happy with the results. I purchased the X Pro as an alternative to the M240 in that the image quality was similar to the M9 but with much better high ISO and a great classic rangefinder layout. I was in no mood to blow 7K on a Leica. I paid $4,700 for my M8 and even today I think that price should really be where the M240 should be priced. Now, although I have the Fuji 35mm f1.4 and the 18-55 zoom, I do mount my Leica M lenses on the camera, especially my Noctilux. I looked at the A7r and I was impressed, but the new Fuji XX-T1 looks like a much better thought out camera even though it has a smaller sensor. Price wise, the Fuji is $1000 cheaper! My thoughts are maybe it would be better to buy the new Fuji X-T1 to complement my X Pro as a system (good to have a backup), and use that until we see what Fuji has for us regarding full frame later. I have the feeling people are beta testing with this new Sony. A friend of mine has an A7r and his shutter failed after 1000 shots!!! My M8 has 90,000! My X-Pro has 20,000, no problems so far. The A7 series is the first camera and may need refinement, where as the X-T1 seems to be a refinement of all the X cameras put together with the added reliability! A much better EVF as well! So maybe it is better to buy the Fuji, and that extra $1000 saved by not buying the Sony can go towards the Full Frame camera Fuji is likely to produce in the near future. A full frame version of the X-T1 and X-Pro1 would be AMAZING!
 
eleskin said:
We all know it is coming from Fuji, only a matter of time before they give us full frame that can handle existing APS-C lenses and full frame lenses.
.....
Click to expand...

Is your assumption about the suitability of existing Fujinon XF lenses being acceptable for 24x36 mm sensor based on fact?

I would really like to see the data that describes how well existing XF lenses perform with a 24x36 mm sensor.
 
willie_901 said:
Is your assumption about the suitability of existing Fujinon XF lenses being acceptable for 24x36 mm sensor based on fact?

I would really like to see the data that describes how well existing XF lenses perform with a 24x36 mm sensor.
Click to expand...

Maybe he just meant that the future hypothetical FF body could accept crop lenses with a cropped perspective.

Anyway, he should speak for himself.

My answer to the OP is that since you've asked the question, that means you can wait. And if you can wait, there is everything to suggest that with so many changes affecting the market, waiting is a good idea.

But I don't see what fundamentally is wrong with the Fuji APS-C lineup? It actually looks pretty darned awesome, no? The lenses will always be smaller and lighter than FF systems. And there have been indications that the organic sensor technology will be a real breakthrough for smaller sensor sizes (sorry, don't remember the link).
 
if you plan on using M lenses on a digital body then i would look into the A7, plays nicer than the A7R for legacy lenses.

i was in the same conundrum as you, A7 vs X-T1 to compliment my M9
i was amazed at the manual focus capability of the A7 EVF but i keep hearing lots of horror stories regarding Sony's costumer service.
i played with the XE2 manual focus and if thats an indication of the XT1 and possibly even better capability then I would rather go Fuji.
Plus with an APS-C sensor i could benefit for a slightly longer reach with the 90mm
 
From what I have been reading in the forums..if u are a wide angle shooter, it sounds like a mixed bag with either Sony of the a7s. For more compatibility w/ a wider range of legacy lenses, it sounds like the a7 is better than the a7r. At least one our forum members has switch to the a7 from the a7r because of issues w/ some of the lenses he uses. Ymmv here...

I was really tempted by the Sony.. But after I saw what the xt1 had, I decided to wait to c what the xp2 will end up. Where I am headed is wait for early 2015 and c how the rumors about xp2 start shaping up. I am hoping that it will come out w/ their new organic sensor. I actually don't care if it is apsc or ff.

In the Fuji interview recently, it does sound like ff will eventually be released..but not until the apsc lineup (roadmap) is complete which would push this out to 2015 I think.

So long as the problem is found during manufacture warrantee period it looks like they are ok ( no where near Fuji service). After that period (MAC warrantee) service seems very questionable.

For me, ff is not really needed. It is kind of a nice to have or gear head related thing since I really have no need to use my rf wide angles from vc 15 to Leica 24f2.8 at their ff fov any longer. Over the years, I already have these covered by apsc native lenses. Plus I tend to shoot more from 26 fov (17-70 Sigma in apsc) upward these days then below.. I do tend to use crop 21 fov for panoramic shots though.

If I were in your position, take the long view. Wait for next gen xp2 or a7/r (look toward late 2015). In the meantime, go w/ xe2 or xt1 if u really feel need to upgrade from what u got.

Gary
 
If I'm not mistaken the current X mount cannot fit a 135 sensor and still have focus connectors. Fuji needs a new mount altogether, and current XF lenses won't be able to work in crop mode (which is what Sony does with E-mount lenses on the A7/A7r)

I'm sure a X200 or X300 with FF and a fixed lens will be available in the future, but then why not just buy an RX-1 on the cheap side now? I've seen offers from Japan in the $1700-$1900 range.

As for the A7r, there are issues with M wide angles. Stick to adapting Canon or Minolta lenses, and you'll be just fine. If you specifically work with Leica WAs or LTM, I suggest you take a look at the A7 - it's also more forgiving in terms of handheld shooting and legacy lenses.
 
I was keen on the A7r when it first arrived. But it has a slow frame rate and a VERY loud shutter. Fuji and Sigma have also taught me to stain away from traditional Bayer sensors.
 
Most of the most amazing digital photos we have ever seen were shot on a Bayer sensor. While there are some great alternatives, they do also have downsides and are far from perfect.

Personally, I do not feel like a beta tester with either my A7 or A7R. They are both far more finished than the Xpro-1 or X100. But they are not perfect and of course the next model will be better.

A story of a shutter failing at 1000 frames could be applied to an M9, M240, Canon 1DX or any camera. It doesn't mean anything with a sample size of 'one'. I wouldn't worry here. Besides, this is what warranties are for.

I would ask the simple question: do you really need a higher IQ than the 16 MP Xtrans can offer? If the answer is no, I would stay with Fuji and not even think about Sony as there are new lenses to buy, things to figure out and a lot of disruption (and for what?).

If you really think there are benefits for you (and I do think the IQ is noticeably better with the A7 compared to the Fujis, never mind the A7R) you can at least say that the Sony cams are available now. The FF Fuji may never come, or may take ages to arrive, then there are new lenses to cover FF. It all seems a long way off to me.

I bought into the Sony FE system because altho thin now, I think it has been so successful it will be heavily invested in by Sony. I've bought in so I can use it now and build on it for the future.

PS I've blogged on the A7 and A7R if you are interested.
 
If your main purpose is to find a body for your m lenses, then A7 is no doubt the better choice. I for one hate how crop bodies make my 35 a 50. I mean, you have a M8 and a Xpro, both crop bodies, I don't see why you should add another one.

Fuji likes to talk, but I don't think they are gonna follow through on the whole full frame thing, not any time soon at least. Get an A7 now, and enjoy it for a couple years while you wait for the Fuji.

(Don't get the A7r, the A7 is much better for legacy lenses)
 
Turtle said:
I bought into the Sony FE system because altho thin now, I think it has been so successful it will be heavily invested in by Sony. I've bought in so I can use it now and build on it for the future.
Click to expand...

People always say Sony fails at delivering lenses, but if you look at the a-mount track record, they've basically been on schedule, and has delivered more than the 5 lens/year target originally promised when the A900 came out. Of course the E-mount lineup has been a bit disappointing, but I can understand Sony trying to reach the masses before catering to a more professional market.

We have no reason not to believe in Sony's promise this time, and look forward to the ~15 e-mount lenses that'll be around by this time in 2016. They may not be the lenses you want, but most likely very fine optics.

Turtle said:
A story of a shutter failing at 1000 frames could be applied to an M9, M240, Canon 1DX or any camera. It doesn't mean anything with a sample size of 'one'. I wouldn't worry here. Besides, this is what warranties are for.
Click to expand...

My NEX-7's shutter had speed problems by 45,000. Granted, I treated the camera like I would a 1d...sent it to Sony, and now it has 20,000 more snaps without any issues.
 
I wonder why everybody desperately wants to have a "fullframe" sensor.
Modern APS-sensors are brilliant.

But OK, it's a personal preference, I guess.

I have just sold my digital "fullframe". Now, my "fullframe" is film. ;)

In other words, don't decide based on if you can get fullframe only, also consider the rest around it (handling, lenses etc.)
 
Kent said:
I wonder why everybody desperately wants to have a "fullframe" sensor.
Modern APS-sensors are brilliant.

But OK, it's a personal preference, I guess.

I have just sold my digital "fullframe". Now, my "fullframe" is film. ;)

In other words, don't decide based on if you can get fullframe only, also consider the rest around it (handling, lenses etc.)
Click to expand...

I wonder too.

Lens characteristics such as transmission factor and maximum aperture can cancel the disadvantages of reduced sensor area. This is how come I do not need a 24 X 36 mm sensor from Fujifilm.

I use an older DSLR with a 24 X 26 mm sensor for work. At this point in time the larger sensor is not a significant advantage. The Fujinon lenses I use with the X-Pro 1 deliver better results than the DSLR with its OEM lenses. But with one exception, the DSLR lenses (F 1.8, 2.8 and 4) are not the fastest available. More sensor area with high-performance lenses provides more flexibility. Usually the cost and weight increases as well.

More importantly people enjoy repurposing their film-camera lens collections. In this case an affordable camera that is pleasant to use with old or MF lenses is desirable.

I took a different path and sold those lenses. Because the Fujinon XF primes meet my needs, I have no interest in repurposing lenses. I don't develop emotional attachments to tools unless there is a significant back story (my grandfathers Argus Brick or the SLR that was the first Christmas present from my wife).
 
All things being equal, FF gives better high ISO and it is easier to achieve shallow depth of field. Most Fuji lenses, as wonderful as they are, are shorter focal lengths (due to the smaller format) but the same speed as FF lenses. This gives more DOF. Only the new 56mm f1.2 addresses this and then only equates to an 85 1.8. The reverse benefit is true of course. More DOF from cropped sensor lens combos is sometimes v useful!

FF is not for everyone all the time, but it does have some advantages. The X series is maturing nicely and evidently highly desirable for its own merits, so I can see the appeal of both systems. I chose Sony, but that's because I make large prints and want every ounce of detail I can squeeze out of highly portable cameras.
 
Turtle said:
All things being equal, FF gives better high ISO and it is easier to achieve shallow depth of field. Most Fuji lenses, as wonderful as they are, are shorter focal lengths (due to the smaller format) but the same speed as FF lenses. This gives more DOF. Only the new 56mm f1.2 addresses this and then only equates to an 85 1.8. The reverse benefit is true of course. More DOF from cropped sensor lens combos is sometimes v useful!

FF is not for everyone all the time, but it does have some advantages. The X series is maturing nicely and evidently highly desirable for its own merits, so I can see the appeal of both systems. I chose Sony, but that's because I make large prints and want every ounce of detail I can squeeze out of highly portable cameras.
Click to expand...

Shallow DoF: How "shallow" is still sensible? Even with the Fuji 1.4/35 I get DoF shallow enough for my taste. And if I really need more - or better less ;) - I can mount my Nikkor 1.2/55 to my X-E1.
High ISO: An APS-sensor is generally only one generation behind. My X-E1 produces much better high ISO images than my 5D.

Fullframe is sensible for some photographers, true. But the present hype about it is just that - and for many unnecessary equipment. ;)
 
I still keep a 5Dii for some situations were I want full frame (or film of course).
The smaller lighter lenses of the Fuji APS X-system are very welcome thank you.

Over the past weekend I fondled the Sigma 1.4/35mm for possible purchase for my Eos system.... too big..no go!
It was a strong reminder of how much larger so called FF lenses need to be.
I think as this Fuji system becomes more refined and system lens stable more populated...FF will become less important and possibly even less desirable.

That said I know the OP has his Noctilux50mm and Noktonf1.2/35 in mind.
I can sympathize. I too have a similar lens(s) and would like a FF digital platform. But even if I had it the novelty would likely wear off quickly.

Is it worth it to buy into a system just to use a couple of non native lenses... so far my answer has been no.
I'll take the Fuji and smaller native lenses.
 
Fuji has said, again and again, that they are not interested in a full frame X-series camera. Here's a quote from an interview at CP+:

"At the moment we’re focusing on the APS-C format but in the longer term, after we’ve completed our lens lineup… I can’t deny the possibility. "

To me, this answer clearly indicates that a full frame camera would have a dubious relationship with the X-series cameras (as it would come "after [fuji has] completed [their] lens lineup"). Fuji makes great products, but I suggest you buy into the system based on what it is today, not on what it might be someday.
 
aeturnum said:
Fuji has said, again and again, that they are not interested in a full frame X-series camera. Here's a quote from an interview at CP+:

"At the moment we’re focusing on the APS-C format but in the longer term, after we’ve completed our lens lineup… I can’t deny the possibility. "

To me, this answer clearly indicates that a full frame camera would have a dubious relationship with the X-series cameras (as it would come "after [fuji has] completed [their] lens lineup"). Fuji makes great products, but I suggest you buy into the system based on what it is today, not on what it might be someday.
Click to expand...

To me it sounds like Fuji is saying... you can feel comfortable buying our APS-C cameras because we are not abandoning them anytime soon based on our roadmap. However, full frame is certainly a possibility in the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom