Why I want an X Pro 1

Started May 2, 2012 | Discussions thread
CriticalI
Senior MemberPosts: 1,777
Like?
Re: Why I want an X Pro 1
In reply to woof woof, May 2, 2012

woof woof wrote:

CriticalI wrote:

woof woof wrote:

Ethel wrote:

I looked at Micro 4/3 and the Panasonic GX1 and the new Olly both look like viable options, however, it was th absence of fast lenses which put me off somewhat. The X-Pro 1 addresses that nicely, and hands back the creative control I felt I would have missed with slower zoom lenses.

MFT has the usual kit zooms and lacks a constant f2.8 but there are plenty of fast primes, in fact the lens choice is one of the advantages of the MFT over other mirrorless systems

Really? When you get into it most of the lenses are either very expensive or not very good (read cheap, slow zooms which need massive in-camera correction). I did NOT buy into MFT because I really didn't like any of the lenses....
Regards,
Steve

We're talking about different things but even so I'll try and answer your points...

MFT has some really good fast primes. Look with an open mind and you will find them. Some of them even carry a designer label name

MFT has some slow kit zoom type lenses and some wider and longer lenses that whilst not being f2.8's are pretty widely accepted as being good to very good.

Some are expensive... news flash, you pay for quality and if you don't want to pay for quality you can get the kit zoom and it's waaaay better than a kit zoom from the likes of Canon or Nikon, even if after the following...

In camera / in software correction? News flash, in camera or in software corrections and profiles are pretty standard these days and as you still get the option of processing your RAW's how you like I really don't see a problem. Maybe you never use camera and lens profiles? Many people do you know.

Maybe MFT isn't for you but maybe sweeping and incorect generalisations should be put on hold until you've considered what is actually available to buy today

Perhaps a less patronising response would be in order. I am very aware of the availability of a FEW very good fast primes, some eye-watering prices for the "designer" ones and some pretty large gaps in the line up.

And I have done a lot of research including trying the darn things out.

Since the OP was talking about zooms, I have to say that apart from the extremely expensive Panny wide-angle, most of them are no better than average and more than a few are pretty awful. And as for in-camera correction, you lose resolution when you correct for distortion and vignetting so I would rather have less. Yes, you can use some of the 4/3 SLR lenses, but they are much larger and more expensive.

So from my POV, if the availability of HIGH QUALITY glass is a feature, MFT is barely better in a practical sense than Fuji. MFT appeals to a broader user base with different budgets so many of the lenses are cheap and plastic and there is huge overlap between Oly and Panny.

So given that many lenses are duplicates, and that the number of "exceptional" lenses is very few, I see no real advantage at all in the so called superiority of MFT lens availability. Moreover the Fuji roadmap is much more cohesive in terms of coverage and all will be high quality, not consumer grade.

-- hide signature --

Regards,
Steve

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow