Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Fuji X-Mount Cameras' started by OdzBodkinz, Feb 28, 2013.
Check the review...Gold award, no less!
Interesting. Same score as the X-Pro but a slightly higher award. Not that it matters, but I wonder if they re-considered the X-Pro with the newer firmware, newer lenses, etc, if they'd have bumped it up as well? Or maybe they gave the XE1 the higher award because it does basically the same stuff at a lower price? It seems like they re-reviewed, or revised the review, of the X100 after a bunch of firmware fixes had come down the pike.
Purely academic, of course, but it made me wonder slightly.
Hmmm. When they covered the X-Pro 1 update which improved the AF they said the review would be updated. They never seemed to get to it.
Interesting answer to your question over there:
Yeah, just saw that. The hazards of product naming...
I was just listening to the last podcast episode we did. I think Bob and Terry both predicted the X-E1 in that one, saying that Fuji was going to bring out a less expensive model with EVF only (without the hybrid viewfinder).
Yeah, I don't know if I managed to say it in a podcast, but I felt the same way, particularly once the zoom lenses appeared on their roadmap. And particularly the ultra wide and telephoto which would clearly only work with the EVF. The OVF is such a complex piece of work in the X-Pro that you figured it had to add a lot of cost to that camera and there'd be a market for one without it, particularly at a lower price. Really, as amazing as the OVF is in the X100, its a more amazing feat, and arguably a bit less successful in the X-Pro. Having to accommodate different focal lengths and even the kit zoom, the whole thing needed to be more complex, with different levels of magnification, which means that much more glass for the light to pass through. Which is part of why the OVF in the X-Pro isn't nearly as bright or clear as the one in the X100, which was a much simpler proposition with one fixed focal length (and then adaptable to the 28mm add-on). And also why they just ran out of room and/or adjustability and had to leave a diopter adjustment out of the X-Pro OVF and sent us all scurrying to Photo Village for diopter lenses. I personally LOVE the OVF and wouldn't buy an XE1 without it, but its definitely a bit of a beast in an interchangeable lens camera, it takes a bit of a learning curve even with the cleaner X100 version, and I can fully understand people who just wouldn't want to bother at any price. And those who might be interested, but would rather go with an EVF only at a lower price.
The thing I'm less sure is what this coming X-M or whatever they're calling it will be. Seems like even more minimal. Maybe the EPM2 of the Fuji world? But the concept of the XE1 seemed pretty obvious for a while, I think.
And now they're sort of debating amongst themselves too... I'm such a troublemaker!
I was one of the ones who would rather go without the hybrid viewfinder. For me a big part of the beauty of the Fujis lies in their simplicity of controls, and I don't want to have to make choices when it comes to view. I said this on the podcast and admit it makes me sound like a Luddite (I compared it to my wife asking for a phone that doesn't have a camera or people who ask for a camera that can't do video), but it's just the way I feel.
I'm guessing the X-M will lack an eye level viewfinder altogether.
I feel the same way. I prefer an OVF unless the EVF is going to give me live view exposure simulation, but more important is a camera that gets out if my way when I'm shooting which is what drew me to the Fuji controls in the first place. After handling both cameras I determined that the higher spec EVF was the way to go because I couldn't see myself switching back and forth between the OVF and EVF all the time depending on what lens was on the camera, how close my subject was, etc. I do prefer the size of the X Pro but I also liked saving some money to put toward another lens
I can understand that. Makes sense.
I find in actual use that I don't switch back and forth. I know what will be best for what I am shooting, so I rarely switch on the fly. When I do, it doesn't bother me at all. I suppose this is because I am used to it. It's just so fluid. I would estimate my OVF use at over 80%. I never consider which to use based on the lens - but then I don't use zooms. There is one little thing though - while I like the EVF and find it very useful, whenever I put the camera to my eye, or switch back to the OVF, I feel a little lift of happiness. That natural view, the ease with which I can focus, and the fluidity of the entire camera; it's all such fun to use.
Debates on DPR?! That's a huge step up from the usual rantings. I'd say you are a miracle worker
Not the inmates, the guys running the asylum. Two of the DPR staff writers. One finally conceded that they need to revisit the X-Pro review in light of improved raw support and, one presumes, other FW improvements.
I don't switch between the OVF and EVF often either, but when I need to for a close up or when I'm using the 14mm, it's such a quick flick of the lever that I don't even think about it. But I can inderstand not wanting to deal with it too.
I said all that about the OVF, but if the promotion would have included the X-Pro 1 bundled with the 35mm for $299 I probably would have gone that way. I'll be keenly watching to see what happens with the X-Pro 2 though.
Well I'm glad you stirred the pot!
"Indeed Fujifilm claims the X-E1 and X-Pro1 now offer AF speeds competitive with benchmark cameras such as the Olympus OM- E-M5."
They should be sued for issuing such nonsense... I shot the X-E extensively this week with the 35/1.4 (both running the latest FW) and they were painfully matching my rather pedestrian AF'ing NEX 7. The GX-1 I still have leaves both *in the dust* in ANY kind of light or situation... This trend of shameless lying and misinformation is getting really annoying from manufacturers and reviewers alike (the same has irritated me with people ooohing and aahing over the new Sony PDAF which, once actually measured, harldy brings any improvement over the previous module, and none in low light). Damn.
I think Fuji meant to say that the XE-1/X-Pro 1 have the same auto focus speed competitive with industry benchmarks such as the Olympus EM-5 as long as lenses being used do not have their caps removed.
I agree with you that Fuji AF is slower than MFT AF, but the Fuji kit zoom AFs much quicker than the 35/1.4.
The best thing is to let the market decide. In reality it doesn't matter how fast or accurate AF is when measured against other cameras. What matters is how it is when measured against the needs of the photographer. If the AF fails as a photographers tool, it will ultimately fail in the market.
What I find interesting is that Fuji seem to be doing OK with the X series, when it's clear the AF is slower than some competing products. Most reviews mention this. Yet people buy them and seem to be able to make photographs with them.
Claims aside, there is enough information out there to help people make reasonable choices.