The Camera that is easy to love and hate: Fuji X-Pro1

ddbowdoin

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
I've seen a few threads on the mirrorless systems and felt the need to write a personal review of the Fuji X-Pro1. Now, I must admit that I no longer own this camera but used it pretty extensively over a week at Disney. Why I returned it you ask, well in all honesty it was a bit of cold feet after a somewhat impulsive buy. When this camera was announced it sent shockwaves through the photo world and honestly it was just a sexy piece of engineering and design. But like with all releases I was a little skeptical and certainly not willing to shell out the full asking price. I waited and eventually once the reviews poured out there was a real sense of polarization amongst bloggers and reviewers. Some raved, some boo'd and eventually BH started dropping the price. Eventually the body and lenses came down and they also threw in a 4% of purchase kick back as a cherry on top. At that price I jumped two feet in.

Build Quality: For a camera of this cost, NOT impressed. Like most Japanese cameras there's a real sense of "plasticky" when it comes to describing the camera. The backside is loaded with buttons (again, par for the course) and overall I would not feel comfortable "tossing" this around. Now, not that we should be careless with our cameras but accidents do happen and this will not survive a drop. The lenses on the other hand are built very well, a decent weight but not a brick. Internally not so sure, there's a lot of lens chatter when focusing which was disappointing for a high end camera.

Ergonomics: Certainly no issues here, I'm neither small handed nor large handed so I felt no issue with the grip. I keep all my cameras strapped so I'm not handholding over long periods of time. Most of the dials are where you need them when you want them. I love that the aperture is set manually on the lens, that's nice.

Performance: Now! The meat and potatoes of this review. Fuji listens to their consumers and they released 2, maybe 3, firmware updates that all seemingly addressed the poor AF performance of this camera. This is where my main concerns fell on the rig over the week I used it. I'm not going to report focus issues at 8:30PM with low light because any seasoned photographer knows MOST cameras hunt in these conditions. Rather, I found backfocusing and hunting galore in the middle of the day... THE MIDDLE OF THE DAY, in perfect light. No matter how clean a file is it doesn't matter if you're missing the shot.

Who This Camera Is For: This camera is for the slow, drawn out photographer... not a Disney camera what so ever. If you're hiking and looking to keep a pack light with a small tripod this is your camera. If you're working planned shots this camera would work for you. Why it doesn't cater to Disney? Disney is the land of spontaneity and a clear abundance of stimuli with colors, music, cheerful CM's etc etc etc. You want a camera around your neck that if something comes up in a spontaneous fashion before you that will be able to quickly lock on and nail the shot. This camera MAY do that from time to time but otherwise it hunted, missed focus, and by the time the AF corrected itself the fleeting moment was gone.

Files: Boy oh boy, here is where Fuji shines. This new X-Trans sensor is plain ridiculous. Again, when the shot is nailed. A beautiful feature is the auto ISO ceiling, I kept the camera on MAX ISO 800 and it worked very well in the ever changing lighting conditions of WDW. I'll post images below to let the files speak for themselves.

Armand in France, this was one of those impromptu moments that actually worked for me... he came up behind me and I quickly snagged the XPro, composed, and the focus nailed indoors. ISO 800 at 1/50th... really, really sharp on his face and super clean. No post here, no sharpening... only converted to BW.
9118224515_ec74674181_h.jpg


9129029044_3ce1d1c88b_b.jpg


9123796387_289d955c05_b.jpg


Pros:
1.) Very clean files when the camera performs the way it's supposed to.
2.) HIGH ISO performance, this is the type of camera that decimates the prospect of "going full frame" for the average consumer. Unless you're always shooting in low light, such as events, or printing HUGE then save your money.
3.) Appearance, they obviously know how to market cameras... it's beautiful compared to the same crap Nikon and Canon keep cranking out.

Cons:
1.) AF issues are terrible, even with firmware updates.
2.) This may not be a con, but if you're a photographer don't expect to be in any frames. This isn't the type of camera you can just hand to a friend and expect a sharp image. Toss CM's into that category as well.
3.) The EVF and OVF are strange, I could have gotten used to it eventually but if you're used to a traditional OVF or rangefinder this doesn't cut it.

Overall, I think we're headed in the right direction. I have to give Fuji credit for taking a risk and being different from the rest of the pack. I feel that in the future new models in the X line will address the performance issues. I'm not sold on any of the other fuji cameras that have slightly addressed the Af issue. This is a flagship model and I'd prefer to wait for the next generation.

If you're seriously considering a Mirrorless system then just sit back and wait for the next round of models to impress the market. The XPro2, not released yet or announced, will make waves. Fuji will take their time rather than rushing to market like they may have done with the XPro1.
 

fractal

Well-Known Member
Thanks for the review and great shot of Armand!

I agree with you about sitting and waiting. I really thought I would upgrade my NEX-7 to the new FF Sony's but decided to see what 2014 and 2015 bring. Change is happening so fast in the mirrorless world which is exciting but can also be expensive.

I was screwing around with a friend's Nikon DSLR and was impressed with the AF compared to my NEX. I just didn't like the size, bulk and look ( I just know I would not carry it around as much ). I think the next big leap for mirrorless is addressing the weakness you pointed out - Autofocus. It seems the A7 and A7r are getting better based on what I've read and the Olympus OM-D E-M1 ( they can't come up with a shorter name?) apparently has great AF but is a M 4/3 which I'm not interested in.

In the meantime, my Sony still offers me room to explore. My next step will likely be to get a adaptor and some older lenses.
 

ddbowdoin

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Thanks for the review and great shot of Armand!

I agree with you about sitting and waiting. I really thought I would upgrade my NEX-7 to the new FF Sony's but decided to see what 2014 and 2015 bring. Change is happening so fast in the mirrorless world which is exciting but can also be expensive.

I was screwing around with a friend's Nikon DSLR and was impressed with the AF compared to my NEX. I just didn't like the size, bulk and look ( I just know I would not carry it around as much ). I think the next big leap for mirrorless is addressing the weakness you pointed out - Autofocus. It seems the A7 and A7r are getting better based on what I've read and the Olympus OM-D E-M1 ( they can't come up with a shorter name?) apparently has great AF but is a M 4/3 which I'm not interested in.

In the meantime, my Sony still offers me room to explore. My next step will likely be to get a adaptor and some older lenses.

I think it's only natural to be excited at the release of a camera and then to start doubting the purchase. I've owned FF cameras and honestly, pro level glass on a cropped body is just as good. This is especially becoming more true as sensors advance and cropped sensors start to perform better in low light.

When AF performance reaches the speed of DSLR's then the game has fully changed. They just aren't there yet and MF is not an option on these cameras. It may be with peak focusing but the turning radius required on the lenses is pretty great so we aren't talking Leica focusing methods where the flick of a finger dials you in.
 

sporadic

Well-Known Member
When AF performance reaches the speed of DSLR's then the game has fully changed. They just aren't there yet and MF is not an option on these cameras. It may be with peak focusing but the turning radius required on the lenses is pretty great so we aren't talking Leica focusing methods where the flick of a finger dials you in.

Have you given any consideration to the X-E2? They claim focus improvements, but I haven't seen any real-world comments on it yet.
 

ddbowdoin

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Have you given any consideration to the X-E2? They claim focus improvements, but I haven't seen any real-world comments on it yet.

I've heard that as well... but I think I said this in the review that I would prefer to stick with the flagship model of a brand. The XE2 is nice, but it's a much smaller camera with EVF only and doesn't "feel like a camera" in the hands... if that makes any sense? The Xpro has great ergonomics that just work. It's hard to describe.
 

sporadic

Well-Known Member
Ah, yes... It seems I only skimmed over the final summary. Ergonomics makes perfect sense as well as I'm use to holding my 7D. I just can't tote that and my 17-55 2.8 around Disney again for an entire week (ruptured a disc two years ago and had C6-7 fused). Tried it last year and my neck was a wreck by the last day.. or maybe it was the the rides :) Anyways, I've been eyeballing the Fuji's to have a more compact / lightweight system solely for travel / Disney. Trying to convince myself I could live with a single prime and go the X100s route but I keep looking at the XE-2... The A7/A7r's are very sweet, but out of my price range for my purpose (secondary travel camera). My other option is to pickup another prime or two but the 7D body itself is pretty heavy.
 

KeithVH

Well-Known Member
Thank you for this. I've been thinking about one but am glad I didn't pull the trigger. I wonder if the AF issues are inherent in the design and not a code issue? Besides, I'm convinced my fav lense in the parks is in the 10-22 range (FF or cropped) and I don't see anything that wide available yet.

Secondly, does Fuji make this sensor? Or is it somebody else's that may appear in another brand? Just curious.
 

fractal

Well-Known Member
Thank you for this. I've been thinking about one but am glad I didn't pull the trigger. I wonder if the AF issues are inherent in the design and not a code issue? Besides, I'm convinced my fav lense in the parks is in the 10-22 range (FF or cropped) and I don't see anything that wide available yet.

Secondly, does Fuji make this sensor? Or is it somebody else's that may appear in another brand? Just curious.


With mirrorless cameras, the AF is done on the sensor (contrast or phase detection) vs. using the mirror. It's getting better but the best phase detection AF on a sensor is still not equal to say a mid-high end DSLR.
 

EpcoTim

Well-Known Member
Who This Camera Is For: This camera is for the slow, drawn out photographer... not a Disney camera what so ever. If you're hiking and looking to keep a pack light with a small tripod this is your camera. If you're working planned shots this camera would work for you. Why it doesn't cater to Disney? Disney is the land of spontaneity and a clear abundance of stimuli with colors, music, cheerful CM's etc etc etc. You want a camera around your neck that if something comes up in a spontaneous fashion before you that will be able to quickly lock on and nail the shot. This camera MAY do that from time to time but otherwise it hunted, missed focus, and by the time the AF corrected itself the fleeting moment was gone.

I'm going to pretty much disagree with everything written above, saying this camera is for "slow drawn out photographers" is just plain wrong. In no way do you need "planned shots" for this camera to work. All you need for this camera to work is a basic understanding of it and a basic understanding of street photography and the willingness and ability to learn something new. This isn't a Nikon rocket and it should never be thought of that way, this is a street camera in the most Classic sense.

This may not be a "Disney camera" for you, but for others it's near perfect. This isn't a camera for a casual entry level DSLR user or someone who leaves their camera in "auto" all the time. This is a camera for someone who wants a serious connection to the camera and their photography. This can be a camera for, as you say "slow, drawn out photographers" but it can also be a quick and nimble beauty in the hands of someone who gets it.

Between this and the new Sony A7 manufactures are, for the first time in years, making cameras with some sort of heart and soul. It's about time as far as I'm concerned.
 
Last edited:

ddbowdoin

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
I'm going to pretty much disagree with everything written above, saying this camera is for "slow drawn out photographers" is just plain wrong. In no way do you need "planned shots" for this camera to work. All you need for this camera to work is a basic understanding of it and a basic understanding of street photography and the willingness and ability to learn something new. This isn't a Nikon rocket and it should never be thought of that way, this is a street camera in the most Classic sense.

This may not be a "Disney camera" for you, but for others it's near perfect. This isn't a camera for a casual entry level DSLR user or someone who leaves their camera in "auto" all the time. This is a camera for someone who wants a serious connection to the camera and their photography. This can be a camera for, as you say "slow, drawn out photographers" but it can also be a quick and nimble beauty in the hands of someone who gets it.

Between this and the new Sony A7 manufactures are, for the first time in years, making cameras with some sort of heart and soul. It's about time as far as I'm concerned.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that you may not have read my other posts on this forum or have an understanding of my background and experience with photography.

The lenses of the XPro1 (the XF mount) DO NOT have zone focus markings. THEREFORE, you cannot zone focus the freaking thing. It's AF is miserable slow and inaccurate. It's system has a hard time with high contrast scenes, so would I describe Disney as a low contrast environment........ NO.
W8C1283-edited.jpg


This may not be a "Disney camera" for you, but for others it's near perfect. This isn't a camera for a casual entry level DSLR user or someone who leaves their camera in "auto" all the time. This is a camera for someone who wants a serious connection to the camera and their photography.(THAT'S WHY I OWN A LEICA) This can be a camera for, as you say "slow, drawn out photographers" but it can also be a quick and nimble beauty in the hands of someone who gets it.

I shoot 35mm (Leica M6), 120 (Mamiya RB, 330F), 4x5 (Wista 45), 8x10 Field View... all manual focus. Since I already have "that connection" to my work I wanted something that would perform carelessly. What did I get? An overpriced Fuji that is slower than my Leica... albeit film vs digital. 1500 dollars for a rig (on sale) that simply doesn't have a reliable focus system is pretty bad man. Guess what... the DF doesn't focus for sh*t either, three of my "professional" friends have already returned these. Smaller cameras equate to compromise in the digital world and already, reports on the A7 are showing focus issues as well. Focus is everything in 2013, we already know what sensors can do and Sony makes most of them anyway regardless of manufacturer.

I know how to "work" a camera and this rig, like many other experienced photographers sent this to the chopping block quickly after purchasing.


 

ddbowdoin

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Thank you for this. I've been thinking about one but am glad I didn't pull the trigger. I wonder if the AF issues are inherent in the design and not a code issue? Besides, I'm convinced my fav lense in the parks is in the 10-22 range (FF or cropped) and I don't see anything that wide available yet.

Secondly, does Fuji make this sensor? Or is it somebody else's that may appear in another brand? Just curious.

I'm telling you, I wanted to love it so bad... I've been down on digitally for a long time and the prospect of a smaller camera that just worked became the object of my obsession.
 

EpcoTim

Well-Known Member
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that you may not have read my other posts on this forum or have an understanding of my background and experience with photography.

Yeah, that wasn't really a concern of mine. I was just voicing opinion over a post of yours, not really interested in your life history or anything.

The lenses of the XPro1 (the XF mount) DO NOT have zone focus markings. THEREFORE, you cannot zone focus the freaking thing. It's AF is miserable slow and inaccurate. It's system has a hard time with high contrast scenes, so would I describe Disney as a low contrast environment........ NO.

Thats funny.
fuji23mm.jpg


IMG_20131230_193531.jpg


This may not be a "Disney camera" for you, but for others it's near perfect. This isn't a camera for a casual entry level DSLR user or someone who leaves their camera in "auto" all the time. This is a camera for someone who wants a serious connection to the camera and their photography.(THAT'S WHY I OWN A LEICA) This can be a camera for, as you say "slow, drawn out photographers" but it can also be a quick and nimble beauty in the hands of someone who gets it.

I shoot 35mm (Leica M6), 120 (Mamiya RB, 330F), 4x5 (Wista 45), 8x10 Field View... all manual focus. Since I already have "that connection" to my work I wanted something that would perform carelessly. What did I get? An overpriced Fuji that is slower than my Leica... albeit film vs digital. 1500 dollars for a rig (on sale) that simply doesn't have a reliable focus system is pretty bad man. Guess what... the DF doesn't focus for sh*t either, three of my "professional" friends have already returned these. Smaller cameras equate to compromise in the digital world and already, reports on the A7 are showing focus issues as well. Focus is everything in 2013, we already know what sensors can do and Sony makes most of them anyway regardless of manufacturer.

I know how to "work" a camera and this rig, like many other experienced photographers sent this to the chopping block quickly after purchasing.

I'm glad you have nice equipment and some cool stuff at that, but listing equipment as a means to prove a point is futile. Its the proverbial ing contest. Theres no requirement to buy equipment, anyone can do it given they have the cash or credit to do so. But, seeing your list of gear would make me think that you would either, A) know that mirrorless af wasn't up to snuff yet or B) that you would know how much work learning a new system can be. High contrast, low contrast, this thing does pretty decent when used properly, as far as I'm concerned anyway.

Thats my only point. Im not looking to start an argument here, just that I had a completely different experience with the Fuji stuff than you did. And so have many others. My 9 professional photography friends all love it. Different strokes, different folks, and all that. I will admit its not an easy system to love, but one that can perform.
 
Last edited:

ddbowdoin

Well-Known Member
Original Poster

I owned the 35 1.4, which is a great lens but why would Fuji make distance markings on one lens but not another model?

D3S_8079-0600.jpg



I simply gave my background and the tools I use because you came across with the old "oh, it didn't work for you because you don't know what you're doing"... maybe works on soccer moms, but not me.
 

EpcoTim

Well-Known Member
I never said you didn't know what you were doing, but your review doesn't make much sense at times. This has nothing to do with how many kids you have or what type of minivan you drive at all, its about a camera.

You seem to like and use zone focusing. But then you go and buy a lens that doesn't have zone markings. Then you complain that the lens doesn't have zone markings, even though you should have known that before you bought it. Then you complain that Fuji doesn't offer zone focusing on its lenses, but they do, you just chose not to buy one of the lenses with them. Fuji seems to have put zone markings on the focal lengths most used by street and life photographers, the people most likely to use zone focusing. If you need and want zone focusing so bad, you should have bought one of the lenses that came with it, not bought one without then complained about it on the internet after the fact. If you wanted a 35mm so bad, why not learn to use the electronic focusing helpers or understand its admittedly oddball-at-first focusing methods?

You said that the camera was best for planned shots and slow, drawn out photographers, which it's not. A Rollei TLR, a DearDorff, your Wista are planned shot, drawn out photography cameras. This thing may not focus like a D4 but it doesn't need too. Its not aimed at the sports, wildlife or birding genres. You want a lightweight, fast focusing system get a used D7000 or Canon SL1 or whatever its called. SLR AF is still tops, as it should be. And contrary to what you said, Disney is full of high, low, medium and no contrast photo opportunities. If you're looking to exploit the latest AF then Disney is the place to do it, but it helps if you do it with a camera that was designed with blazing AF in the first place. The AF on this thing is far from perfect or extraordinary, but when looked at within the context of this cameras philosophy, it fits just fine. Thats not saying that it wouldn't be nice if it were better, but it can't be expected to perform like an SLR cause its not one nor was it ever meant to be. I know you had issues with the AF, most people did I think--it has quite the learning curve but even with the multiple firmware updates this thing was never going to out-focus a decent SLR.

Thats all I was really getting at. Your review was insightful and honest and got right to the heart of things, which is good. I just had to wonder if you were really evaluating this thing from the right vantage point.
 
Last edited:

ddbowdoin

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
The X1 pro is quite nice, better handling than the Leica M9, In spirit it's a M3 which really was a shooters camera.

Personally, I think digital Leica is a giant waste of $$$. I like knowing there is permanence with a mechanical piece of engineering that shoots film. I think if you picked up an M9 and an MP and came back in 25 years, the M9's electronics would have checked out a long time prior.
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
Personally, I think digital Leica is a giant waste of $$$. I like knowing there is permanence with a mechanical piece of engineering that shoots film. I think if you picked up an M9 and an MP and came back in 25 years, the M9's electronics would have checked out a long time prior.

Agree, I have an old M3 which works quite well, I like film but these days I primarily use it in 6x6 and larger formats,

But there are times you want a digital rangefinder camera with real interchangeable lenses and the M9 is basically Leitz mechanics with Panasonic Lumix electronics and I'm not impressed with the image quality which is far below what the optics can provide. I'd buy a Leica RF body IF they put a decent sensor into it but so far they have not.

So far the X-1 generates far better images than the Leica system.

I don't worry so much about bodies as I do lenses, Bodies come and go however your lens collection you generally keep forever.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom