Fujifilm shows-off zoom lens on X-Pro1 and denies XF lenses allow full frame

Fujifilm has been showing off the way its X-Pro1's hybrid viewfinder will behave when used with zoom lenses - which we demonstrate in a video. It has also moved to quell suggestions that its XF lenses are ready for a full-frame X-mount camera. 'It would not work - XF lenses could not be used with a full-frame sensor,' said Hiroshi Kawahara, operations manager of Fujifilm's product planning division. He also drew our attention to the way X-Pro1 users will be able to use the hybrid viewfinder with zoom lenses - a feature that will be added in a forthcoming firmware update.

Initially it was unclear whether the X-Pro1 would be able to use its hybrid viewfinder with a zoom, or whether it would be restricted to using its electronic viewfinder mode. The good news is that it's not only is it possible, but its implementation is rather elegant.

Zooming the lens causes the viewfinder frame lines to smoothly contract, to represent the new field of view. The clever feature comes when you get to longer focal lengths. As with other long lenses, to avoid the framelines taking up a tiny section of the finder, holding the VF mode selection lever for 2 seconds engages the viewfinder's magnifying lens - giving a larger view of the subject and framing.

As you zoom out, once your view becomes wider than the magnified viewfinder allows, warning arrows appear at the corners of the finder to stress that you aren't seeing the whole frame. Holding the VF mode lever again reverts to the unmagnified view.

This video, shot on the Fujifilm stand at Photokina, shows the viewfinder as the lens is zoomed. At the full extent of the zoom, the magnified view is engaged. The lens is then zoomed-out again, showing the out-of-bound warning arrows at the corner of the finder.

Fujifilm says the firmware to enable this feature will be included on an SD card when a customer buys the 18-55mm zoom.

Comments

Total comments: 127
RedwodGuy
By RedwodGuy (Sep 28, 2012)

Someone said the X-Pro 1 was a repackaged Rebel. If it is, it is a successful job of turning a hum-drum dSLR into an exciting to use RF that produces ridiculously superb IQ, and the whole kit with three lenses, hoods and extra batteries can be carried in a simple feather LIGHT bag. Hooray for the "repackagers" then! They really are brilliant!

2 upvotes
OlegBC
By OlegBC (Sep 28, 2012)

Who could compare it to rebel? It's a completely different camera: crop factor is difference, rangefinder-like, color filter etc...

0 upvotes
CFynn
By CFynn (Sep 30, 2012)

@RedwodGuy

A repackaged Rebel? You must be confusing the Canon EOS M with the X-Pro 1.

0 upvotes
Boxbrownie
By Boxbrownie (Sep 26, 2012)

Without wishing to wade through every post here, am I the only one who thinks it is a bit odd that when zooming out the veiwfinder frame line magnification cannot revert to the standard magnification and show the true coverage without having to hold the button for two seconds? Or is this a feature that is implemented as an option but not reviewed?

0 upvotes
OlegBC
By OlegBC (Sep 28, 2012)

Good observation, but I don't think it's all that weird since additional magnification in OVF is achieved though a mechanical lens moving in and out when you hold the button. I wouldn't want it to jump in and out while I am zooming you know...

0 upvotes
Mbaris
By Mbaris (Sep 24, 2012)

Although xpro1 is really a magnificent camera, something with a soul, i have to admit focusing is a mess. Manual focus is slow and unintiutive, autofocus is slow and unreliable, it requires much convincing to make it take a shot really. Still, it is so much fun to use it.

Does the new zoom lens have a faster autofocus motor?

If I had a wish from Fuji for this platform, it would not be a full frame sensor (the sensor is really magnificent already, compared to my 5Dm2) or a zoom lens

It would be a lens with "USM" "FTM" equivalent features I really admire in practicality in my canon L lenses.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Sep 24, 2012)

I believe manual focus has been improved with f/w 2 (though you need to upgrade the lens firmware too), though I've not tried it extensively.

The zoom lens has twin stepper motors (akin to what Canon calls STM). This is the current best-practice for a lens focused by contrast detection AF (USM motors don't suit this behaviour), and our early impressions are that it's pretty quick.

0 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (Sep 24, 2012)

The reason why the 35 and 60mm are slow is they are moving heavier elements for the optical superiority. If faster focus was the goal, the optical performance would have been degraded.

Fuji X 35mm is the BEST autofocus 35mm lens ever made.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Sam Carriere
By Sam Carriere (Sep 25, 2012)

Upgrade to firmware 2 and the focusing issues are pretty well resolved.

0 upvotes
thedips
By thedips (Sep 25, 2012)

Like the x100 I'm glad to see fuji continuing to try and correct its faults! What amazing support in relatively timely manner

1 upvote
Mbaris
By Mbaris (Sep 26, 2012)

Thanks r butler, I've upgraded the firmware, and it almost feels like a new camera now. Much improved. I especially like the non linear focus ring behavior, it really helps.

A question, does the new lens still uses the focus-by-wire approach, or is there a (semi-)mechanical coupling to the focus ring? Latter would be really great, if technically possible.

I'm really happy with the 35mm, I think it is the size constraint in conjunction with the heavy elements that makes this glass a bit slow to focus, otherwise I have faster focusing lenses with heavier elements, but they are much bigger. I think the compromise is really acceptable for the quality and size of this lens. What I'm saying is it could've been a non issue, if the focus was mechanically coupled to the ring (like a Leica lens or canon l lens). I'm sure there is a very good technical reason for this, but one can dream, no?

0 upvotes
OlegBC
By OlegBC (Sep 28, 2012)

I think it's all by wire. Actually I am surprised to hear that there are focusing motors in lens since x-pro1 focuses based on contrast...

0 upvotes
km25
By km25 (Sep 24, 2012)

APS-C is size sensor for porable and lite wt. cameras. Just cann't chase full frame. It is all relative. The 3/4 came out first. peole still swear by these cameras. The work well and produce an IQ that is in relation to the type of camera. I feel as if Fuji knew that APS-C was a good starting point for these cameras. No, I cannot see Fuji going full frame. Most of the people shooting with 3/4 and APS-C mirrorless camera understand size, wt. handing and versatility are just as importen as the last drop of IQ. And not to mention cost.

1 upvote
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (Sep 24, 2012)

It's funny how everyone gets so excited about what is essentially a repackaged Canon Rebel or Nikon DX. This is some nice marketing from Fuji's side to first release an insanely overpriced X-Pro1 to create a myth, and then cut the price to normal levels. The only thing this camera does differently from a Nikon DX is a nice retro look.

And yes, APS-C can be great. Nikon knew it when they put out their first and second generation DSLRs, and Fuji knows it now. Making a full frame version of this thing is just a recipe for disaster: expensive, bulky lenses, soft corners... and for what? 1 stop of DoF?

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Sep 24, 2012)

I don't remember a Nikon DX camera with a hybrid non-ttl optical / ttl electronic viewfinder, that's a pretty unique feature.

8 upvotes
Sam Carriere
By Sam Carriere (Sep 25, 2012)

Dear Mike
The X-PRO1 is a repackaged Rebel????
Have you ever seen either?

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Sep 25, 2012)

That's pretty funny. Does a Rebel contain the innovative X-Trans sensor that is producing IQ as good as the best APS-C cameras ever?

1 upvote
OlegBC
By OlegBC (Sep 28, 2012)

I agree, full frame cameras are a completely different beast from x-pro1, if fuji decided to go there it'll be a new line of cameras all together.

X-pro1 has seriously very little in common with any cannon or nikon. You know, being a range finder like, completely different color filter, focus, etc... Seriously, just go to a photography store and play with one.

0 upvotes
Muus
By Muus (Sep 24, 2012)

i see no mentioning of any kind of lens hood for the 18-55mm zoom at all. unavoidably a lens hood would block more of the OVF image than the lens itself does, but i still think a little, nifty lens hood (with length wise 'see through' sides like the one on the X-100) would be nice. especially at the tele end, where there is more reason to restrict the bundle of light reaching the lens to the light that actually reaches the sensor and less blockage of the OVF within the framelines.

2 upvotes
milwman
By milwman (Sep 24, 2012)

I sure hope it comes with one, Likely they didn't have one to show yet?

1 upvote
Dizze
By Dizze (Sep 25, 2012)

Nope, I heard on the fair that it' optional...

Wait and see...

0 upvotes
TitusXIII
By TitusXIII (Sep 26, 2012)

The lens has a 58mm filter thread and there's an abundance of screw-on hoods to be had for as little as 4 dollars.
A lens hood is required more on a wide angle lens, due to potential flare, than on a long, telephoto lens.
Just a basic photography fact.
And a quick google search would surely make one look less ignorant.

0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Sep 24, 2012)

Well as a Canon user I would like to say congrats to Fuji for making cameras for people who remember or appreciate aperture rings and shutter dials. Fuji "gets it".

6 upvotes
Sam Carriere
By Sam Carriere (Sep 24, 2012)

It's rather amazing how people who absolutely hate Fujifilm and their products nevertheless seem to pour over every tidbit about the company and then feel compelled to comment about equipment they very likely have never seen and almost certainly don't own. Get a life people. Or better yet, get an X-PRO1 and then maybe what you have to say won't sound quite as ignorant and uninformed as it does.

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
11 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Sep 24, 2012)

Absolutely unnecessary if your EVF is working as it should (as even in A57).

0 upvotes
OlegBC
By OlegBC (Sep 28, 2012)

EVF will always introduce an ever so slight delay. When you're trying to shoot a somewhat dynamic scene, OVF is really the only option.

0 upvotes
MJJSevilla
By MJJSevilla (Sep 23, 2012)

I´ve never understood all the pointless negativity. Rangefinder style viewing with framelines offers certain advantages over TTL viewing - seeing more of the context can help with composition, seeing whats about to come into the frame can help with certain types of scenes, some people like seeing the world directly rather than projected or on an LCD or whatever. Rangefinder viewing also has drawbacks and finally someone has thought outside of the box and given us a camera which allows you to use two different viewfinder technologies, best of both worlds, and what do people do? Instead of being happy to have more choice and competition, something benefitting ALL consumers, they moan. They moan about a camera they´ve never used, have no intention of using, and don´t really understand how to use, because the idea of someone else using a different camera to them is somehow intolerable. The very idea that some people want different things is like some sort of existential threat.

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting
16 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (Sep 23, 2012)

Those people are busy to protect their DSLR Investment.

2 upvotes
Ernest M Aquilio
By Ernest M Aquilio (Sep 24, 2012)

Very well said.

2 upvotes
Gesture
By Gesture (Sep 24, 2012)

First real innovation in viewing since Contax G. RF you embrace the world. SLR you capture it. RF also traditionally had advantages of compactness and quietness. Need macro or long lens, then go SLR.

0 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Sep 23, 2012)

Well, I think XPro-2 will show opera with mechanical figures in their OVF.
BTW, what the point of this crap?

1 upvote
miniTO
By miniTO (Sep 23, 2012)

thankfully you don't get it...

7 upvotes
G Davidson
By G Davidson (Sep 23, 2012)

Come on Fuji, how about the full-frame version! It would be incredible to use on legacy lenses and I'm sure with the lack of a mirror Fuji would make some spectacular designs. Nikon denied their plans for many years, too....

0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Sep 24, 2012)

Full Frame Fuji is not going to happen for many many generations. These X-mount lenses won't do it, so you can forget about it. The only hope now is Sony or Canon.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (Sep 24, 2012)

What's the point? You gain 1 stop of DoF and you lose even more corner sharpness and you lose the compactness of the lenses.

0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Sep 24, 2012)

Mike, X-mount lenses are sized for APS-C, so corner softness concerns are the same. With FF you also gain at least a stop of speed. And I still believe bigger pixels are better.

Check out the classic film compacts like the Contax T3, Konica Hexar AF, or Ricoh GRD to see how small a FF camera can be.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
CFynn
By CFynn (Sep 30, 2012)

@G Davidson

Fuji want to sell you their own (excellent) lenses to use on their cameras and are probably not very interested in selling camera bodies to use with your "legacy glass".

0 upvotes
LaFonte
By LaFonte (Sep 22, 2012)

show us somesamples of the lens finaly!

0 upvotes
silps
By silps (Sep 22, 2012)

I like how as you zoom and the frame lines get smaller you can still see the whole view in context which I believe will help composition. Something that isn't often mentioned in today's world of techy specs. We seem to forget the art of photography and think our cameras are the deciding factor on a good image.

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
6 upvotes
unlearny
By unlearny (Sep 22, 2012)

Nice viewfinder, but I seem to remember all 35mm p&s zooms having a more elegant system for magnifying the framelines... The viewfinder department doesn't seem to know about optics.

1 upvote
samhain
By samhain (Sep 23, 2012)

"the viewfinder department doesn't seem to know about optics"
Im sorry what? What? The have the best viewfinder available of any camera available and the optics are on par with Leica glass.
But I'm sure YOU could teach them a thing or 2, huh?

9 upvotes
gabriel67
By gabriel67 (Sep 23, 2012)

You do it better..?

0 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (Sep 24, 2012)

@samhain: on a par with Leica glass? Are you sure? It seems that all these Fuji X lenses are very soft in the corners...

0 upvotes
alfaflash
By alfaflash (Sep 22, 2012)

Sorry, but this is pathetic. I have tried almost all the mirrorless cameras, and none have been able to replicate the reality of shooting with a DSLR. Every one of them has the same issue - great sensor, lousy focusing. Unless you are into shooting from the hip and understand zone focusing (which is almost impossible with the new cameras), save your money and your frustration, and get a decent FF DSLR.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
codeNsnap
By codeNsnap (Sep 22, 2012)

Well 4 days ago you have mentioned how you get great results with the Nex-7 here-
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/9/17/Leica-M-full-frame-24MP-CMOS-rangefinder-with-focus-peaking-live-view-and-1080p-movies

11 upvotes
Peter KT Lim
By Peter KT Lim (Sep 22, 2012)

What he trying to say is Sony Mirror less is the best...I got a feeling one day Fuji will launch FF Rangefinder, the little red dot will have to reduce the price !

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
andreaThode
By andreaThode (Sep 22, 2012)

I'm sorry to say that but you must be one lousy photog, if you always need to rely on fast AF. I've achieved great images with my GX1/20 combo which I'm shure I wouldn't have, with my D800/35. it's not always about resolution and fast AF. Think about it.

10 upvotes
PeakAction
By PeakAction (Sep 22, 2012)

Whaaat? I've used the Lumix GF1, the Fuji X100 and the X-Pro 1, and all three of them had great autofocus. Sure, it isn't as fast as my D3 bodies, but it's perfectly acceptable. They CERTAINLY don't warrant relying on zone focusing to make them work.

1 upvote
57even
By 57even (Sep 22, 2012)

Sorry, but I have used several DSLR models and the reality is that the accuracy of most CDAF systems is considerably better than most SLRs I owned, even the top end models. Nor is it necessarily any slower than a number of regular DSLRs, especially with prime lenses.

If you are going to compare with a D4 then this is a somewhat unfair and pointless comparison. Very few SLRs can compete either.

3 upvotes
samhain
By samhain (Sep 23, 2012)

That's because they're not DSLR's.

0 upvotes
gabriel67
By gabriel67 (Sep 23, 2012)

Are you really thinking your post ?
The whole point of a mirrorless is not behaving or thinking as a DSLR!
I've been working with Leica M6 and a X-pan during many years and I totally changed my approach and language ( and of course the way I worked ) when I had a vf camera in my hands!
your post is pointless and sorry if I tell you that I believe that " those cameras are not for everybody"...

0 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (Sep 22, 2012)

This is super.

3 upvotes
MPA1
By MPA1 (Sep 21, 2012)

Looking forward to some IQ tests and examples!

1 upvote
Imagefoundry
By Imagefoundry (Sep 21, 2012)

seeing how people here are requesting FF Xpro2, I feel like I need to stand up and be counted:

please do NOT introduce a new full-frame system.

it will dilute the brand recognition that Fuji achieved with X-pro / X-e1 series, push up prices, slow down R&D and introduction of further XF-mount lenses and X-trans sensor derivatives, etc. etc. Not to mention all the disenfranchised Xpro1/Xe1 owners.

In my humble opinion APS-C is in a sweet spot (ie. quality/performance/price) right now and is likely to stay there for many years to come. I understand the lure of brand extension but historically it hadn't worked all that well for most companies that tried.

5 upvotes
spontaneousservices
By spontaneousservices (Sep 21, 2012)

The sweet spot of APS-C for has more to do with lens size and focal length (the 'crop factor'). Camera manufacturers will continue to make bodies smaller and sensors cheaper but they'll always have to contend woth the laws of physics when designing lenses. So in the end the choice between APS-C and FF will be the choice between portability and DOF.

0 upvotes
57even
By 57even (Sep 21, 2012)

All lenses have DOF. That sentence is meaningless.

Do you you want more or less? If so, why?

I could not care less about an X FF mount. I bought one because I was sick of hauling my D700 around and I realised I was losing nothing in IQ terms. Have I missed any DOF? Nope, seems I have DOF on my Xpro1 as well. Amazing.

12 upvotes
itsastickup
By itsastickup (Sep 22, 2012)

I think he meant bokeh/OOF not DOF. DOF makes no sense in the context. FF does have more OOF, but really the x-pro 35/1.4 is pretty decent for the amount of OOF at 1.4 and unlike most 50/1.4's it has seriously good performance at f1.4, both in terms of sharpness and bokeh smoothness. Personally I simply LOVE 50/1.2 bokeh. All the same 35/1.4 is good enough for me.

0 upvotes
PatMann
By PatMann (Sep 22, 2012)

DOF made perfect sense to me - in relation to FF it's still got relatively low DOF potential with large apertures compared to smaller sensors while permitting small cameras that are still large enough to fit securely in the hand, and have enough body surface for a good number of direct controls with normal-sized hands, and keep lenses reasonably compact and the whole system lightweight within the normal focal length range, out to about 135mm f/4 - 200mm equivalent. That certainly sounds like the sweet spot for me.

0 upvotes
spontaneousservices
By spontaneousservices (Sep 23, 2012)

Sheesh. Of course I meant CONTROL OVER DOF - being able to create a very blurred background, a very thin plane in focus. "Bokeh" if you llike.

1 upvote
plasnu
By plasnu (Sep 23, 2012)

If you're happy with APSc, you would be more happy with FF in terms of the size. You carry 18mm and 35mm, and you can shoot 18, 24, 35, 50 with those 2 lenses. Could be cost effective, too.

0 upvotes
spontaneousservices
By spontaneousservices (Sep 23, 2012)

@57even: all cameras have portability too. That didn't strike you as meaningless because it couldn't help you show off your truly STAGGERING knowledge of all things photographical and your somehow closely related urge to find people to put down.

0 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (Sep 24, 2012)

You are absolutely right, Imagefoundry.

@plasnu: it could be cost effective, but it is not at the moment. Lenses last a lifetime. At the rate that bodies get obsolete these days, they last maybe 2 years. I'd rather invest $2000 in lenses than in a body, FF or not. The truth is APS-C can deliver great cameras at low cost right now, and FF cannot. The great thing is you can buy lenses that are compatible with both, and if one day a cost-effective FF camera rears its head, it's an easy switch.

0 upvotes
zlatko
By zlatko (Sep 21, 2012)

Thanks for the video. I agree, that is a very elegant implementation. Very well done by Fuji.

4 upvotes
Bearsdenoboe
By Bearsdenoboe (Sep 21, 2012)

"‘So, if we introduce a full-size mount we would have to limit the amount [of compatible lenses].'"
So be it. Please Fuji, do introduce a FF XP2, and we will happily enjoy making do with fewer, but superb, lenses. A 35mm FF prime , 60 macro, 80mm, 21mm, 10-24, 55 ?-200 would suit very nicely, thank you! It seems obvious that so many people are waiting for this, and would instantly give up thoughts of Leica. And – please Sort Out the colour smearing problem with Lightroom etc., that stops serious RAW users now from purchasing. This is a Must!

4 upvotes
sproketholes
By sproketholes (Sep 21, 2012)

I think thats Lightroom's problem. Try Raw Photo Processor (RPP- the ugliest and most stonage GUI ive seen in a decade but the renders are vastly superior.

1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Sep 21, 2012)

Why is everyone so obsessed with getting a FF CSC? What would you gain using a full frame sensor over an APS sensor? Slightly bettter high-iso and DR for larger lenses and a vastly inflated price?

5 upvotes
57even
By 57even (Sep 21, 2012)

Boasting rights?

1 upvote
headofdestiny
By headofdestiny (Sep 22, 2012)

sproketholes, the problem with RPP at the moment is that, although the smearing is less, you get more aliasing and artifacts. Pick your poison.

0 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Sep 23, 2012)

In other words, you want Fuji with bayer filter and thus high ISO performance at the level of NEX-es?

0 upvotes
Bearsdenoboe
By Bearsdenoboe (Sep 21, 2012)

A pity that maybe 1/6th of the viewfinder is taken up by this zoom lens.
To return to the FF question, has nobody to date tried the obvious test of holding a Fuji lens (say the superb 35mm) in the throat of a Leica M9, and checking what image circe it actually gives? For anyone rich enough to own both it would be so simple... Then the rest of us could stop wondering and, perhaps, hoping. Please, somebody, do it, and let us know!

2 upvotes
whtchocla7e
By whtchocla7e (Sep 21, 2012)

There's no reason to use an M9 for such test.

Simply hold the lens [the flange distance] away from a piece of paper and see how large of a circle it makes when light shines through it. Maybe draw some rectangles on paper first for reference.

3 upvotes
codeNsnap
By codeNsnap (Sep 21, 2012)

I was always thought Fujifilm might put out better mirrorless cameras than Nikon/Canon/Sony etc mainly because they don't have a DSLR range that their mirrorless cameras might end up competing against.

I am really happy to see the direction in which they are headed and am thinking of making a plunge for the XE-1. Nex with its APS-C seems close but not sure if Sony will ever take Nex as seriously as Fujifilm seems to be taking their X series.

I'm thinking of using it mainly in the 12mm-50mm range. So I'm really looking forward for comparison of the upcoming X series 12-24mm f/4 and Nex 10mm-18mm f/4. I think it will complement my DSLR when it has the 70-200mm or 300mm on my not having me to change lenses and by being a portable and capable second camera. It the Sony 10-18mm is way better than the Fuji (which I doubt) I will go with the Nex.

7 upvotes
supeyugin1
By supeyugin1 (Sep 21, 2012)

There is another manufacturer of mirrorless cameras which is called Samsung. I think, it gives Fuji a break so far. Both in prices and quality lenses.

0 upvotes
codeNsnap
By codeNsnap (Sep 21, 2012)

But I just feel that Fuji has more history going for it..I might be wrong but my gut tells me that Fuji's lenses are and will be better than Samsung's...besides if you see the recent developments in the X line up, Fuji definitely has the edge..although I do realize that Samsung have identified an opportunity in the mirrorless arena and seem to be focusing in this direction now..they also have an APS-C sensor..

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
supeyugin1
By supeyugin1 (Sep 21, 2012)

From what I've seen Samsung lenses perform better than Fuji, and they are more compact and significantly cheaper. I do like Fuji approach in bodies and lenses though, but Samsung looks better to me regarding the price and quality. Fuji is notorious for their quality issues (X10, X100, etc).

0 upvotes
Rooru S
By Rooru S (Sep 21, 2012)

Looks like a First person shooter game hehe But interesting the approach Fuji decided to use with the viewfinder.

0 upvotes
Tony Bonanno
By Tony Bonanno (Sep 21, 2012)

Meant to say optical "viewfinder", not rangefinder in my post below..

0 upvotes
Tony Bonanno
By Tony Bonanno (Sep 21, 2012)

I think some enterprising soul should develop an inexpensive zoom optical rangefinder to fit into the hot shoe.. like we had in the old days. Sure seems like a much less complicated and straightforward option for those who would prefer the street-shooting speed of those old viewfinders. It would be a nice option for the X-E1. I'd buy one for my pre-order X-E1 without hesitation.

0 upvotes
SheikYerbouti
By SheikYerbouti (Sep 21, 2012)

A zoom lens on a rangefinder type of camera seems to be going against everything that rangefinders were originally designed for. But, as Fuji have demonstrated with their X-Pro1 and X-E1 cameras, it can be done quite elegantly. Still, I'm wondering how useful and how intuitive a zoom will be on these cameras? To me a zoom makes much more sense on an SLR because its through-the-lens view is more suitable for framing and composing an image with a zoom. I think rangefinder photographers are better off with 2, 3 or 4 excellent prime lenses in the bag ...

... which gives me an idea: Wouldn't it be nice if at some point in the future Fuji introduced a high quality, compact, K-5-style SLR that made use of their amazing X-Trans sensor? Maybe Photokina 2014 would be the right time to announce such a camera?

0 upvotes
ageha
By ageha (Sep 21, 2012)

No point for Fujifilm to enter the DSLR market again.

5 upvotes
mcam
By mcam (Sep 21, 2012)

X-E1's EVF is already through-the-lens view.

2 upvotes
Aeturnum
By Aeturnum (Sep 21, 2012)

I think the main "problem" with a zoom on a true rangefinder is that you can't update the framelines with the zoom. A zoom at 50mm would work just as well as a prime at 50mm.

0 upvotes
davidbindle
By davidbindle (Sep 21, 2012)

But don't forget that "rangefinder-like" optical viewfinder can also be an EVF which enables 100% viewing in the eyepiece - so a zoom lens can still function well on that camera - if one doesn't like the quircks of the moving framelines/zoomed eyepiece lens.

0 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (Sep 22, 2012)

DSLR is a dated technology.

3 upvotes
Daniel from Bavaria
By Daniel from Bavaria (Sep 22, 2012)

+1: Absolutely

0 upvotes
ppastoris
By ppastoris (Sep 24, 2012)

plasnu, and still is the best in terms of camera responsiveness. :)

0 upvotes
Kinematic Digit
By Kinematic Digit (Sep 21, 2012)

I want this feature with focus (Just like on a Rangefinder).... why can't they do that with the Parallax correction? It would be so much easier to see that when doing manual focus rather than hit the half press and see it move and recompose. I'd rather see it move as I focus and I will recompose as I focus, not when I hit the shutter.

That's my feature request of the day.

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 21, 2012)

Looks like Fujifilm has a state of the art, albeit vintage early 1950s technology here half a century later. What a huge hit this will be!

The "zooming" is great, provided you have a 20/20 vision or better. Using a smallish binocular or monocular front of the hybrid viewfinder might also be rather helpful to see what you are actually framing on when you zoom in.

And who would not just love the fact that when trying to frame the shot, what you will see on the right-bottom portion of your frame is your very own zoom lens hard at work. Good anti-theft feature built right in as well -- you would immediately notice if the lens was NOT on the camera.

4 upvotes
SheikYerbouti
By SheikYerbouti (Sep 21, 2012)

> Good anti-theft feature built right in as well ...

... hilarious! :-)

3 upvotes
junyo
By junyo (Sep 21, 2012)

If only the camera gave you some other way to frame the shot.

0 upvotes
zos xavius
By zos xavius (Sep 22, 2012)

Oh man! If only someone would develop a way to look through the lens and see how the lens saw the world. It would be soooo huge!

3 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 23, 2012)

"If only someone would develop a way to look through the lens and see how the lens saw the world. It would be soooo huge!"

No, it probably cannot be done. Maybe a hundred years from now? :-)

0 upvotes
km25
By km25 (Sep 21, 2012)

I hope I got the camera rifgt, XE-1 and the new zoom with IS. One great over all camera for someone who wants a high end point and shoot. At about $1300.00, it is so very close to the 24MP Sony. Anyone looking to spend way under $2k is going to be very happy. This new zoom lens looks great.

0 upvotes
Gesture
By Gesture (Sep 21, 2012)

Bravo to Fuji for working to advance optical viewing systems. Where was Leica this past 50 years?

5 upvotes
Gully Foyle
By Gully Foyle (Sep 21, 2012)

" It has also moved to quell suggestions that its XF lenses are ready for a full-frame X-mount camera. 'It would not work - XF lenses could not be used with a full-frame sensor'. "

If I'm reading this correctly, it means that current XF lenses cannot be used on FF. It doesn't say that the X mount cannot accommodate an FF sensor. Like the E mount, new lenses should be developed for an FF sensor.

This does still leave open an option for an FF X mount camera.
Am I correct? Or I see things rather too optimistically? :)

1 upvote
rjx
By rjx (Sep 21, 2012)

This was posted yesterday (20th)
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/539153/fuji-investigates-full-frame-system-camera-sensor

"Kawahara confirmed that the covering circle of Fuji's current X-series lenses is large enough to accommodate full frame.

But he accepted that some current, wider, focal-length lenses would not be fully compatible with full-frame and that this risks alienating existing users.

Asked if full-frame would be possible in an X-Pro1-style body, with the same lens mount, he replied: ‘No, it is different lens by lens. The long zoom lens fits but a wide lens cannot.

‘So, if we introduce a full-size mount we would have to limit the amount [of compatible lenses].'"

0 upvotes
supeyugin1
By supeyugin1 (Sep 21, 2012)

How do you know that Sony E-mount lenses are compatible with FF? I highly doubt that.

0 upvotes
57even
By 57even (Sep 22, 2012)

I highly doubt it too seeing that the VG 900 video camera automatically goes to crop mode for any NEX lens.

Very hard to get corner performance on a FF sensor with the tiny registration distance used on mirrorless CSCs (ref Leica and the issues they had, and remember they have a much larger registration distance).

With an adaptor (increases the RD) and Alpha lenses, the VG 900 will use the full frame, but how it performs with wide angle lenses will be interesting to see.

0 upvotes
Toccata47
By Toccata47 (Sep 21, 2012)

Pretty impressive display. Way to go Fuji!

4 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (Sep 21, 2012)

I bet this whole hybrid ovf/evf concept lasts one more generation; after that, there would be little point in doing it as evf will be good enough. They are using a Sony evf in the xe1, btw.

3 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 21, 2012)

"The clever feature comes when you get to longer focal lengths. As with other long lenses, to avoid the framelines taking up a tiny section of the finder, holding the VF mode selection lever for 2 seconds engages the viewfinder's magnifying lens - giving a larger view of the subject and framing. As you zoom out, once your view becomes wider than the magnified viewfinder allows, warning arrows appear at the corners of the finder to stress that you aren't seeing the whole frame. Holding the VF mode lever again reverts to the unmagnified view."

I guess I can see see how someone might describe this convoluted sequence of what-to-do-when-zooming as rather 'clever,' but frankly, I would have described it a tad differently, I suppose.

1 upvote
Kai Griffin
By Kai Griffin (Sep 23, 2012)

Jogger, I think you're missing the point of the ovf (but most people unfamiliar with them do, so you're not alone). The reason why many photogs prefer an ovf is that it allows you to see *outside* the actual frame while you're composing. If you're waiting for something/someone to move into shot, you can see it/them before they're in it, which makes a big difference to those of us used to working this way. That's not to say just a straight EVF (or SLR) is inferior; it's just nice to have an OVF option if you're used to & prefer seeing outside the frame.

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
miniTO
By miniTO (Sep 23, 2012)

As long as an EVF only covers 100% of the view this type of optical viewfinder will be around. Seeing outside of the image frame is a very powerful compositional tool. One that I am willing to pay the additional cost for as its a vital part of my workflow.

2 upvotes
ProfHankD
By ProfHankD (Sep 21, 2012)

As long as you're willing to bend over backwards to support an optical finder, would it have been that much harder to have a zoom finder? Don't do that....

I think my NEX-7's EVF is better in nearly every way, but there is a potentially significant advantage in using long lenses with an optical finder: you can see things outside the lens view angle. That makes it MUCH easier to find your subject when working with a long lens. Thus, I think I'd rather see the optical finder stay wide and simply switch to a 100% EVF mode when I've got the subject in frame... perhaps a setting to switch to 100% EVF with a half press of the shutter?

9 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Sep 21, 2012)

A good notice. I usually fight with 200mm+, loose the object and have to zoom out to find it and oom in again. Switching between OVF and EVF as you mentioned would be helpful.

1 upvote
MrFlash
By MrFlash (Sep 21, 2012)

I can't stand the idea of being required to compose all of my shots on a little TV screen. I like having the EVF as an option, it is a useful tool, but I will never give up having an optical viewfinder, either a rangefinder-type or SLR. If some folks want to go EVIL, that's fine. But I'm not going with them.

3 upvotes
hellocrowley
By hellocrowley (Sep 21, 2012)

Here's how you can see "outside the frame": stand back a few feet. Shoot and crop later.

0 upvotes
miniTO
By miniTO (Sep 23, 2012)

I think you totally missed the point of this kind of view finder.

Its not designed to work well with long lenses...

0 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (Sep 23, 2012)

I like your idea. Automatic OVF EVF switch.

0 upvotes
J GGG
By J GGG (Sep 21, 2012)

I just can't wait...
I just love my X1 Pro and the 3 lenses + X100...
It is tecnically sound and so "photographic", it's not just a bunch of pixels, but real photo...my Canon 5 MkIII is getting rusty and mouldy...!

8 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Sep 21, 2012)

Gear collector? ;-)

6 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 21, 2012)

Perhaps you need to buy D800, D800E, Alpha 99, K-5 II, GH3, etc. and let us know how you are doing with all those, too.

2 upvotes
ageha
By ageha (Sep 21, 2012)

What do you understand under "photographic"?

0 upvotes
Petka
By Petka (Sep 28, 2012)

After spending 2 weeks in Israel and Jordan with X-Pro1 I understand what it means when a camera is "photographic"...

0 upvotes
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (Sep 21, 2012)

Hmm, don't know how I feel about no FF X-mount ever. I cannot afford a FF X as X-E1 is basically my budget limit and I want more fast lenses but at the same time FF X would be one hell of a camera and an object of desire. I am sure the IQ would be amazing as well.

EDIT: very nice to know Fuji is going to commit to the system. I heard some X100 owners are still talking about firmwares.

Comment edited 53 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Daniel from Bavaria
By Daniel from Bavaria (Sep 21, 2012)

That's fine. If the optical qualitiy is what I expect I will buy the zoom for sure.

Cheers,
Daniel

0 upvotes
JasperD
By JasperD (Sep 21, 2012)

Ah, thanks for that info and avoiding me a heart attack seeing a FF X-Pro??? in the next 6 or 7 months...

BTW, good to know Fuji is already talking about the next FW update... In my dreams, it even has exposure compensation in ´Manual mode´ set to AutoISO!

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Sep 21, 2012)

Why would you need exposure compensation in M? EV comp is for auto exposure modes, and M mode has built in EV compensation - 3 of them.

3 upvotes
balios
By balios (Sep 21, 2012)

Some prefer to specify the aperture and shutter and let the camera choose the ISO. An example where this is useful is in low light, where you shoot wide open and at the minimum useable shutter speed, then let the ISO adjust for changing conditions. If you're doing this then you need exposure compensation to tell the camera how it should choose the ISO.

So this is basically aperture+shutter priority mode.

3 upvotes
General Aladeen
By General Aladeen (Sep 21, 2012)

"So this is basically aperture+shutter priority mode"

I agree. To me a "Manual exposure" mode with an auto ISO is not a full manual.

1 upvote
JasperD
By JasperD (Sep 22, 2012)

It´s only Manual because the camera´s SW says so. You don´t pick it from some dial or so, but just activate it by setting Aperture (for DOF) and Shutter (motion blur or not) paramers to some fixed values, and choose to leave the third one, ISO, on Auto... Which is what I do almost every day. However, then, Exposure Compensation will not work and fair enough, when your eyes told you this picture would need -2, you discover on review that the image is overexposed. You can do something about that after the facts (if subject is still available), but it would be so much more convenient - besides a lot faster - if working as expected.

0 upvotes
Peak25500
By Peak25500 (Sep 21, 2012)

What about the 10-24 zoom? Is the optical viewfinder wide enough to display the field of view @ 10mm?

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (Sep 21, 2012)

No. The widest the OVF covers is about 14mm, which is why this focal length was chosen for the wideangle prime.

3 upvotes
Peak25500
By Peak25500 (Sep 21, 2012)

Ok, thanks Andy. So users will have to use EVF for the 10-24 as well as the 55-200?

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (Sep 21, 2012)

Yes, if you want accurate framing with the 10-24mm you'll need to use the EVF. This is a fundamental limitation of ths type of viewfinder (but it's still a more-elegant solution than having to use a wideangle accessory finder on a rangefinder).

3 upvotes
Peak25500
By Peak25500 (Sep 21, 2012)

Right! Thanks :-)

0 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Sep 21, 2012)

Looks OK for me. I would not mind even if the zoom lens worked only with EVF. It´s nice to see the guys from Fuji instantly solve upcoming problems.

2 upvotes
Total comments: 127