For serious travel photography, would you rather use an xe-1/xpro1 or a canon or nikon full frame?

read this (4 pages) :

http://www.martin-doppelbauer.de/foto/fujixe1/index.html

What does that mean? If serious means shooting-for-National-Geographic, then I'd be bringing two weather-sealed DSLRs and a bunch of lenses. If serious means I'm-an-artist-and-better-than-that-fat-guy-wearing-shorts-and-white-sneakers, then the XE-1/X-Pro1 works out fine.

Pros: way lighter and smaller than a full frame (I know - I carried a 5D and four primes before the X-Pro1). Less expensive and intimidating (though camera-curious people will pay more attention to you because it looks "retro"). Image quality almost as good-ish (depends on your pickiness) as the current full frame DSLRs (though I can say it has better dynamic range, resolution, and noise control than my 5D "classic").

Cons: AF a significant step down. For the photography I do (see web page, if you want to know what that means), it's a non-issue. If you demand razor-think DOF, then you will be displeased. If you print very large or take perverse joy in looking at 100% views of 20-megapixel-plus photos, then you'll be displeased. No AF telephoto available (this would make a bad Africa safari setup).

Only you know whether the pros outweigh the cons. My full opinion can be found in a blog post I wrote a month or so ago: http://www.dmcgaughey.com/2012/12/24/fuji-x-pro1-great-or-greatest-travel-camera/

--
http://www.dmcgaughey.com
http://frameandfire.tumblr.com/

For travel the fuji's hands down. Size and weight tend to deter while small, light and convenient makes the effort a non-effort. 
The game has changed since we now have high quality,  high ISO, small cameras that do not attract attention everywhere we go. My first test of my XE1 was walking around New York City for Six hours with camera around my neck and never felt it, i couldn't say that with my nikon. For tripod work or shot trips it doesn't nmatter either way. A 35mm and 50mm 1.4 takes care of shallow DOF concerns. 

Thanks that was very helpful!

Tough decision between the two. The issues with lightroom are disturbing tho....

I will be curious to see this, even though the cameras are so different you will get mostly "depends on what you want, small or large, JPEG or RAW" type answers...

-TBri

Hmm...how about an XE-1 with a D800 sensor and, magically, lenses the same size as the current Fuji lineup?

Really though, as much as I'd love to have the best possible IQ for my travel shots, size and weight will forever trump the rest for me (as long as IQ is still merely "very good"). My two first big travel years came just before the affordable DSLR wave, and I'll be left forever wishing that I'd had a Canon 20D with me instead of my lowly Powershot S50. But two things about that: 1. even that little camera didn't come with me all the time due either to theft fears or simple bulk, and 2. There are lovely 8x10 prints made of some of those shots hanging on walls all over the place now (in my family and friends circles, I mean) and they look great.

Having trudged around Europe with a 40D and two lenses, then later with a 5D2 and three lenses, I can safely say that I'll never haul an SLR kit with me when traveling again unless I'm on some kind of paid assignment. Which I won't be. So yeah, an X-E1 with the fantastic 18-55 and 35mm lenses would come before a D800 for travel any day of the week. Or, in my current case, an X100 in one jacket (or nerdy cargo shorts) pocket and a NEX-7 with Sigma 19+30mm lenses (for when I need high resolution) in the other. And honestly, if I were going on safari, I'd probably pick up one of the newer fast-focusing m4/3 bodies and one of their telezooms. Obviously won't come near a 5D3 with a 300/2.8L IS, but it'll be about 1/4 the size and 1/10 the price.

Thank you that was very helpful.

An alternative could be the Olympos OMD 5 which well weather sealed, faster AF although not olympic and a lot of available glass with tele lenses, plus sensor stabilised plus cheaper plus lighter

Cons : AF still slower than a DSLR croppinf ability limited high ISO not as good

As always, the choice is a compromise bteween antagonistic needs....

--
Good judgment comes from experience
Experience comes from bad judgment

Yeah don't count it out. Weather sealing can be a huge deal when you're traveling and the OMD is a great camera in its own right. Unfortunately not a lot of the m4/3 lenses  are weather-sealed, but I imagine more will be coming as time goes on. The 12mm and 45mm primes are awesome, though. Where the X system really rules at the moment is with that 18-55 zoom...not a single other mirrorless standard zoom comes close to it. So if you're a zoom kind of guy, that's an enormous vote for the Fuji.

For portrait/documentary type photography, the Fuji wins. If you've ever tried to take a travel portrait with a DSLR and a large lens, then watched your subject recoil in horror at the big bazooka being stuck in their face, you'll know what I mean. The advantage of a small, less-intimidating system can't be over-stated...I am still amazed at the difference in reaction I get.

On the other hand, the AF is still pretty slow and AFC is pretty useless, so if you need to take anything moving, you really need to work on your technique and use zone focus or pre-focus.

As others have stated, the raw conversion issue will only really show up in detailed landscape pics, so if this is your priority, the DSLR wins.

I moved to the X-Pro 10 months ago (I mainly do people/travel stuff) and have never regretted it - the image quality from the wonderful lenses, high iso performance and size/weight are great...plus a certain Fuji "look" which I can't explain(!) but which even non-photographers who view my pictures comment on.

I just got my 18-55mm last week and I agree that's an excellent all round zoom lens much better than the heavy 2.8 24-70mm Sigma on my 5D2, with an excellent OIS in a compact size

I plan to buy the 10-244 and the 55-200mm when they are launched

For the moment I fit my Canon 70-200mm on the XP1 with or without the kenko 1.4x extender

excellent results but manual AF, but still a 420mm equiv...

--
Good judgment comes from experience
Experience comes from bad judgment

This is a perfect summary!

Bought my X-E1 with the intention of taking it traveling.  I've taken my DSLR traveling a few times and I think I'm ready for something simpler and lighter.  I would not call what I am doing "serious travel photography" though.

X-E1 delivers adequate image quality for me in a small package with great JPGs out of the camera.

--
Tom Schum

Thanks, that's exactly how I feel about big cameras!

I ditched my big DSLR system because I wanted something lighter to travel with.

To each their own though, the XF line is not nearly as good at some things compared to a full frame Canon/Nikon DSLR.

--
http://asylum-photo.com

What lenses do you use that are weather sealed? If you can't have that as well it tends to deflate the benefits considerably.

If it was for personal travel photography, the X-Pro 1 and lenses, if for a paid client I would take my Canon dslr with the Fuji as a backup.

Alan

--
Alan Smallbone
Orange county, CA

The (current) lack of a 200mm+ equivalent would frustrate me on a trip. I'm a big fan of telephoto compressed perspective, and would sorely miss it...

There's also the Pentax DSLR range if you want small(er) and weathersealed.

Depending on the culture, an articulated rear display makes shooting from the hip and capturing candids much easier.