XF-1 Owners ...

Started Jan 25, 2013 | Discussions
NickPix
Senior MemberPosts: 1,500
Like?
XF-1 Owners ...
Jan 25, 2013

So, XF-1 owners ...what do you think of it in real-world use ?

My F200EXR is mostly still working fine after nearly 4 years, but the hair-trigger on/off button, which seems ever more sensitive, and the occasional odd noises from lens, may result in replacing it soon. Better AWB would be useful, RAW capability also (although I've read it's a bit strange on the XF-1).

But this model seems the nearest obvious choice (sticking with Fujifilm for a P&S) ..without the bulk of X10/20.

For a lively forum, there's been relatively so little here from XF-1 users, but I'd be really interested in your views & experience.

Cheers,

Nick

-- hide signature --
Fujifilm FinePix F200EXR Fujifilm X10
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
KimberlyC
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,086Gear list
Like?
Re: XF-1 Owners ...
In reply to NickPix, Jan 25, 2013

Hey Nik

Hugo Poon has been posting many shots with this on Facebook and his other sites do a lookup he seems fairly pleased with the results

Cheers,

Kim

 KimberlyC's gear list:KimberlyC's gear list
Samsung EX2F Olympus PEN E-P2 Nikon D7000 Olympus PEN E-PL3 Samsung NX210 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RStyga
Regular MemberPosts: 238Gear list
Like?
Re: XF-1 Owners ...
In reply to KimberlyC, Jan 25, 2013

Unless something is done about its RAW IQ there's no real future for this compact. IT's JPEG is sub-par and currently its RAW is appalling. Let's hope...

 RStyga's gear list:RStyga's gear list
Ricoh GXR Mount A12 Canon EOS 6D Olympus PEN E-P5 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nspur
Senior MemberPosts: 1,027Gear list
Like?
Re: XF-1 Owners ...
In reply to NickPix, Jan 25, 2013

I have the XF1 as well  as the X10 and I bought the XF1 because it would fit into a shirt or trouser pocket (which the X10 won't) and I liked the manual zoom ring and the quality of OOC jpegs from the X10. Apart from its portability, to begin with I was a little disappointed with it versus the X10  but I'm now using it exclusively in 6 mp mode, auto ISO 3200, aperture priority, 400% DR, Astia film simulation, medium-hard sharpness and I tend to stop it down to f5.6. If you don't want the portability, there are still new X10s around at a terrific price.

-- hide signature --

Nick Spurrier

 nspur's gear list:nspur's gear list
Fujifilm X20 Pentax K-30 Fujifilm X-M1 Fujifilm X-E2 Sony Alpha 7
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
marike6
Senior MemberPosts: 5,070Gear list
Like?
Re: XF-1 Owners ...
In reply to RStyga, Jan 25, 2013

RStyga wrote:

Unless something is done about its RAW IQ there's no real future for this compact. IT's JPEG is sub-par and currently its RAW is appalling. Let's hope...

I don't know that the XF-1's JPEGs are subpar (I rarely shoot JPEG anyway) but I agree completely about the RAW conversion situation. As DPR has demonstrated in it's High End Compact Roundup, Lightroom (ACR) doesn't do a good job with converting RAWs to JPEG.

When the XF1 was released I was certain I would buy one as the design and form factor are quite nice.  But when I saw the poor results from RAW, I bagged the idea of purchasing it.  (I should point out that DPR also contends that the X10 has similar problems converting RAW files, but I've been able to get fairly satisfactory results with the X10 RAWs in Lightroom, and with in-camera conversion).

With the price of the XF1 down to $399, a full $100 less than launch price, it may still be a viable option.  But with exciting new compacts like the X20 and Pentax MX-1, I agree that the XF1 may not be the best option. This is a pity because it's such a beautiful camera.  Let's hope software vendors and Fuji get RAW straightened out.

Best, Markus

 marike6's gear list:marike6's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
NIK11
Senior MemberPosts: 2,732
Like?
Re: XF-1 Owners ...
In reply to NickPix, Jan 25, 2013

NickPix wrote:

So, XF-1 owners ...what do you think of it in real-world use ?

For a lively forum, there's been relatively so little here from XF-1 users, but I'd be really interested in your views & experience.

Likewise, I've been waiting to hear more from users. On paper the XF1 offers a very attractive little package. Of course most small cameras with 24/25mm lens have some compromise in sharpness and we all know that EXR delivers at least one nice trick to the detriment of absolute resolution.

The question in my mind is whether IQ from the XF1 is noticably worse in everyday shooting at low ISO compared to say the X10 (or S110 that DPRE favour). I suspect it is marginal either way at best, and only when studied at pixel level and/or higher ISO will differences become apparent.

One potential strong point that now interests me (with grandchildren) is the alleged fast A/F of the XF1 and its high continuous rate with A/F. It certainly makes the S110 look pedestrian.

Finally, XF1 refurbs are now available at a very resonable price which puts it back in the frame, for me anyway.

Nick

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
marike6
Senior MemberPosts: 5,070Gear list
Like?
Re: XF-1 Owners ...
In reply to NIK11, Jan 25, 2013

NIK11 wrote:

NickPix wrote:

So, XF-1 owners ...what do you think of it in real-world use ?

For a lively forum, there's been relatively so little here from XF-1 users, but I'd be really interested in your views & experience.

Likewise, I've been waiting to hear more from users. On paper the XF1 offers a very attractive little package. Of course most small cameras with 24/25mm lens have some compromise in sharpness and we all know that EXR delivers at least one nice trick to the detriment of absolute resolution.

EXR mode is a wonderful tool, especially for JPEG shooters who aren't interested in printing large but are interested in getting the very best in terms of DR from the camera.

The question in my mind is whether IQ from the XF1 is noticably worse in everyday shooting at low ISO compared to say the X10 (or S110 that DPRE favour). I suspect it is marginal either way at best, and only when studied at pixel level and/or higher ISO will differences become apparent.

I'd say provided you are shooting JPEG, or have one of the better RAW processing packages (Capture One or Silkypix are reported to work better than ACR with Fuji XF1/X10 files) I'd agree that the differences in resolution are slight. And for high ISO, the X10/XF1 have a distinct advantage over the S110 and other 1/1.7" sensor cameras. And to me, one of the main IQ advantages, the ace on the deck as it were, is the spectacular colors of the Fuji X10/XF1/X-S1 cameras.

One potential strong point that now interests me (with grandchildren) is the alleged fast A/F of the XF1 and its high continuous rate with A/F. It certainly makes the S110 look pedestrian.

Totally agree.

Finally, XF1 refurbs are now available at a very resonable price which puts it back in the frame, for me anyway.

Refurbs are available, and as I mentioned, Fuji has lowered the price (at least in the US) a full $100 so the current price of $399 for the XF1 is similar in price to some of the better 1/1.7" compacts like the Canon G15 or Nikon P7700.

Best of luck, Markus

 marike6's gear list:marike6's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RStyga
Regular MemberPosts: 238Gear list
Like?
Re: XF-1 Owners ...
In reply to marike6, Jan 26, 2013

In order to get (slightly better?) DR you need to drop to 6MP. Not sufficient. The amount if detail lost if you do that and due to the poor RAW and JPEG image resolution quality makes it a very difficult exercise to print larger than A4 and impossible if try to crop. They need to fix RAW conversion ASAP.

 RStyga's gear list:RStyga's gear list
Ricoh GXR Mount A12 Canon EOS 6D Olympus PEN E-P5 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
CAcreeks
Senior MemberPosts: 6,212
Like?
XF-1 lens not as good as X-10
In reply to marike6, Jan 26, 2013

It is easy to see in the I-R.com Comparometer that the X10 lens produces sharper results than the XF1 for a similar scene. You will have to pixel peep because the difference is not dramatic.

Whether the XF1 is any better than the current F series (F770EXR with GPS or F800EXR with WiFi) is an open question. Most review sites have lost interest in the F series. I can vouch for the lens being better at wide angle than the F550EXR lens.

On the plus side, the XF1 allows you to set processing options such as noise reduction and sharpness. But the F770 and F800 both produce Raw so you can control these during conversion.

marike6 wrote:

Refurbs are available, and as I mentioned, Fuji has lowered the price (at least in the US) a full $100 so the current price of $399 for the XF1 is similar in price to some of the better 1/1.7" compacts like the Canon G15 or Nikon P7700.

Good to know. The F770 is down to $199, in red.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
NIK11
Senior MemberPosts: 2,732
Like?
Re: XF-1 lens not as good as X-10
In reply to CAcreeks, Jan 27, 2013

CAcreeks wrote:

It is easy to see in the I-R.com Comparometer that the X10 lens produces sharper results than the XF1 for a similar scene. You will have to pixel peep because the difference is not dramatic.

And yet when you compare these 2 on the DPRE comparometer there's only a hair's breadth between them (at low ISO's). Also, on the I.R. site the S110 doesn't seem to perform anywhere near as well as it does on DPRE. Maybe oof or bad sample with I.R?

Some reviewers say the XF1 lens is sharp through the range with only mild corner softness, others suggest the lens just isn't up to scratch overall. One German lab site gives the XF1 very high marks(digitalkamera.de) whilst another (chip.de) marks it down below the compact average.

I have to say that with the inconsistency of respectable Review sites and DPRE's admission that RX100 samples should viewed with caution, due to depth of focus(focal plane) issues, I am very wary about making any final judgement on IQ from these studio samples.

So, like the OP I would welcome some more hands-on stuff from users.

Nick

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
NickPix
Senior MemberPosts: 1,500
Like?
Re: XF-1 lens not as good as X-10
In reply to NIK11, Jan 27, 2013

NIK11 wrote:

CAcreeks wrote:

It is easy to see in the I-R.com Comparometer that the X10 lens produces sharper results than the XF1 for a similar scene. You will have to pixel peep because the difference is not dramatic.

Some reviewers say the XF1 lens is sharp through the range with only mild corner softness, others suggest the lens just isn't up to scratch overall. One German lab site gives the XF1 very high marks(digitalkamera.de) whilst another (chip.de) marks it down below the compact average.

I have to say that with the inconsistency of respectable Review sites and DPRE's admission that RX100 samples should viewed with caution, due to depth of focus(focal plane) issues, I am very wary about making any final judgement on IQ from these studio samples.

So, like the OP I would welcome some more hands-on stuff from users.

Nick

Great to have the responses so far, thanks very much to those who've contributed up to now....some interesting points.

Although the XF-1 also seems to have in-camera RAW conversion, using the internal 'jpeg processing engine', it appears there may be more to be had from XF-1 RAW files if I had the patience to use the dreaded SilkyPix software. ACR & LR are apparently incapable of drawing decent results. So, that may be one consideration, if I could be bothered.

Thanks Nick (NIKII) for pointing out those two German sites. I'm also concluding that, like every other imaging-related device, there's a potentially wide variance in calibration and actual quality of manufacture. Big-name, 'tight-tolerance', high-priced products are also definitely not immune from this (thinking of my D3/24-70 experience).

And sometimes there's sheer kidology ...at the time, you couldn't find a duff review of the D3/24-70 combo, but it really wasn't much better than my D200/tamron 17-50 f2.8 combo that I returned to (for wedding work) ...even after D3body/lens recalibration.

Maybe the reviewers so far have had varying quality of XF-1s - especially with regard to lens manufacture - and perhaps some were pre-prod versions (that maybe they weren't even advised of).

What's strange is the general lack of image samples online (there are only 2 FF shots on their own site) ....was the XF-1 made to use some of the original X-10 sensors?! Sorry to chuck that out there, but it does make one wonder!

So it seems perhaps the only way of knowing is to buy one, and cross-fingers....oh well

Cheers,

Nick

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
peacefrog33756
Regular MemberPosts: 371
Like?
Re: XF-1 Owners ...
In reply to NickPix, Jan 27, 2013

I purchased the red version last week from B&H.  After using it for two days, I returned it.  Although the camera is nicely built, the lens opening/closing on my copy wasn't precise.  It seemingly snagged between the standby position and fully open necessitating fully closing it and then restarting the opening/turning-on process again.  Sometimes it worked; most times it didn't.  Also my copy, when it did open properly, seemingly made some grating noise that was irritating.

As far as IQ, the XF-1 jpegs were just OK to my eyes.  Centers were sharp enough but corners were lackluster and fuzzy especially between 1.8 and 2.2.  By 2.4, things got much better and the lens on my copy was very nice at around 5.6.  RAW files were overall much better than OOC jpegs, but I had to resort to Silkypix for conversion.  Noise began creeping in at just over ISO400, but controlled to about 1250 when things quickly went downhill overall.  CA wasn't an issue to my eyes.

Focus seemed fast enough for my use both in good and less than optimal conditions.  The menu system is fast enough, and the inclusion of the e-Fn button is quite helpful.

In the end, I just had some major issues with the lens mechanism system and have some reservations about its long term durability.  It just seemed too "plasticky" for me.  Repeated daily openings/closings will undoubtedly stress it.

The overall image quality is decent, but not nearly as good as an X10 I once owned; better than the LX-3 I used extensively, and about on par with my Canon S100.  IMHO, Fuji will have to bring down the price on these if they wish to sell.  I will not revisit the XF-1.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
NickPix
Senior MemberPosts: 1,500
Like?
peacefrog33756 ...Re: XF-1 Owners ...
In reply to peacefrog33756, Jan 27, 2013

peacefrog33756 wrote:

I purchased the red version last week from B&H. After using it for two days, I returned it. Although the camera is nicely built, the lens opening/closing on my copy wasn't precise. It seemingly snagged between the standby position and fully open necessitating fully closing it and then restarting the opening/turning-on process again. Sometimes it worked; most times it didn't. Also my copy, when it did open properly, seemingly made some grating noise that was irritating.

As far as IQ, the XF-1 jpegs were just OK to my eyes. Centers were sharp enough but corners were lackluster and fuzzy especially between 1.8 and 2.2. By 2.4, things got much better and the lens on my copy was very nice at around 5.6. RAW files were overall much better than OOC jpegs, but I had to resort to Silkypix for conversion. Noise began creeping in at just over ISO400, but controlled to about 1250 when things quickly went downhill overall. CA wasn't an issue to my eyes.

Focus seemed fast enough for my use both in good and less than optimal conditions. The menu system is fast enough, and the inclusion of the e-Fn button is quite helpful.

In the end, I just had some major issues with the lens mechanism system and have some reservations about its long term durability. It just seemed too "plasticky" for me. Repeated daily openings/closings will undoubtedly stress it.

The overall image quality is decent, but not nearly as good as an X10 I once owned; better than the LX-3 I used extensively, and about on par with my Canon S100. IMHO, Fuji will have to bring down the price on these if they wish to sell. I will not revisit the XF-1.

Thanks very much for your note - nice detail. I'm gonna give it a go - I ordered at what I reckon is a resonable price - before I saw your feedback, but there are a few pulls that for me make it worth a try :

Optical IS (rather than sensor-shift)

Reliable WB

25mm wide, manual zoom

RAW

Fuji colour rendition remains a fave

Interesting comments on your X10 ...one of which I tried, and didn't get on with ...also found it to be larger than I wanted. Like you, I've also used an LX3 extensively, so an improvement on that would be fine, especially in a smaller format with larger sensor. Had some great large prints from that, but the WB drove me nuts! My Canon S90 previously was also pretty good, but no 16:9, overblown colours, and would have liked wider fl starting point.

So, XF-1 soon - hopefully without lens/grinding or orb issues (!) ...I'll report back for others considering it.

Cheers,

Nick

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
peacefrog33756
Regular MemberPosts: 371
Like?
Re: peacefrog33756 ...Re: XF-1 Owners ...
In reply to NickPix, Jan 27, 2013

The camera, hopefully you'll get a good one, renders the typically beautiful Fuji colors and the WB is better than most.  I'm glad my less than enthusiastic comments did not sway you.  It is an enjoyable camera to use, very cool looking, and well made.  I hope you enjoy it.  As for me, the day I returned it, I pre-ordered an X20.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: XF-1 lens not as good as X-10
In reply to NickPix, Jan 27, 2013

NickPix wrote:

NIK11 wrote:

CAcreeks wrote:

It is easy to see in the I-R.com Comparometer that the X10 lens produces sharper results than the XF1 for a similar scene. You will have to pixel peep because the difference is not dramatic.

Some reviewers say the XF1 lens is sharp through the range with only mild corner softness, others suggest the lens just isn't up to scratch overall. One German lab site gives the XF1 very high marks(digitalkamera.de) whilst another (chip.de) marks it down below the compact average.

I have to say that with the inconsistency of respectable Review sites and DPRE's admission that RX100 samples should viewed with caution, due to depth of focus(focal plane) issues, I am very wary about making any final judgement on IQ from these studio samples.

So, like the OP I would welcome some more hands-on stuff from users.

Nick

Great to have the responses so far, thanks very much to those who've contributed up to now....some interesting points.

Although the XF-1 also seems to have in-camera RAW conversion, using the internal 'jpeg processing engine', it appears there may be more to be had from XF-1 RAW files if I had the patience to use the dreaded SilkyPix software. ACR & LR are apparently incapable of drawing decent results. So, that may be one consideration, if I could be bothered.

Thanks Nick (NIKII) for pointing out those two German sites. I'm also concluding that, like every other imaging-related device, there's a potentially wide variance in calibration and actual quality of manufacture. Big-name, 'tight-tolerance', high-priced products are also definitely not immune from this (thinking of my D3/24-70 experience).

And sometimes there's sheer kidology ...at the time, you couldn't find a duff review of the D3/24-70 combo, but it really wasn't much better than my D200/tamron 17-50 f2.8 combo that I returned to (for wedding work) ...even after D3body/lens recalibration.

Maybe the reviewers so far have had varying quality of XF-1s - especially with regard to lens manufacture - and perhaps some were pre-prod versions (that maybe they weren't even advised of).

What's strange is the general lack of image samples online (there are only 2 FF shots on their own site) ....was the XF-1 made to use some of the original X-10 sensors?! Sorry to chuck that out there, but it does make one wonder!

I have posted dozens of XF1 shots here in this forum.  Do a search and you will find them.

-- hide signature --

DISCLAIMER: The text written herein is meant to provide the opinions and/or suggestions of the author. No statement herein is meant to be considered law of the land, representative of any party or group, and or a quote from any party or group. Neither is any statement in the contained text meant to be taken as scripture, doctrine, or all encompassing of an entire populous or any groups or individuals therein.

 rattymouse's gear list:rattymouse's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F10 Zoom Fujifilm FinePix F20 Zoom Fujifilm FinePix F70EXR Fujifilm FinePix X100 Fujifilm X10 +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: XF-1 Owners ...
In reply to peacefrog33756, Jan 27, 2013

peacefrog33756 wrote:

I purchased the red version last week from B&H. After using it for two days, I returned it. Although the camera is nicely built, the lens opening/closing on my copy wasn't precise. It seemingly snagged between the standby position and fully open necessitating fully closing it and then restarting the opening/turning-on process again. Sometimes it worked; most times it didn't. Also my copy, when it did open properly, seemingly made some grating noise that was irritating.

Yes, the XF1 is a surprisingly loud compact camera.  Sounds very strange for sure.

As far as IQ, the XF-1 jpegs were just OK to my eyes. Centers were sharp enough but corners were lackluster and fuzzy especially between 1.8 and 2.2. By 2.4, things got much better and the lens on my copy was very nice at around 5.6. RAW files were overall much better than OOC jpegs, but I had to resort to Silkypix for conversion. Noise began creeping in at just over ISO400, but controlled to about 1250 when things quickly went downhill overall. CA wasn't an issue to my eyes.

Focus seemed fast enough for my use both in good and less than optimal conditions. The menu system is fast enough, and the inclusion of the e-Fn button is quite helpful.

In the end, I just had some major issues with the lens mechanism system and have some reservations about its long term durability. It just seemed too "plasticky" for me. Repeated daily openings/closings will undoubtedly stress it.

The lens feels cheap especially when compared to the X10.

The overall image quality is decent, but not nearly as good as an X10

Totally agree.

I once owned; better than the LX-3 I used extensively, and about on par with my Canon S100. IMHO, Fuji will have to bring down the price on these if they wish to sell. I will not revisit the XF-1.

-- hide signature --

DISCLAIMER: The text written herein is meant to provide the opinions and/or suggestions of the author. No statement herein is meant to be considered law of the land, representative of any party or group, and or a quote from any party or group. Neither is any statement in the contained text meant to be taken as scripture, doctrine, or all encompassing of an entire populous or any groups or individuals therein.

 rattymouse's gear list:rattymouse's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F10 Zoom Fujifilm FinePix F20 Zoom Fujifilm FinePix F70EXR Fujifilm FinePix X100 Fujifilm X10 +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads