# X-T1 looks mighty interesting, what do you think?

Started Jan 28, 2014 | Discussions
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
 Like?
 Re: size/weight is what counts with m4/3 In reply to rovingtim, Jan 30, 2014

rovingtim wrote:

...

True equivalence does not exist;

Yeah it does. Equivalence answers this question: if I want the same image in terms of angle of view, depth of field, noise using the same shutter speed from two camera systems, what are the settings required?

By extension equivalence answers this question: are there any settings in one system impossible to duplicate in the other?

I'm not sure how to get all 4 (angle of view, depth of field, noise/ISO, shutter speed) simultaneously equivalent.

If I have on FF (I chose FF instead of APS-C because the conversion math is easier):

Focal length (angle of view): 24mm

Aperture (DOF): f5.6

ISO (noise): 400

Shutter speed: 1/250

Then here are all the different combination that can be done on mFT. There's only one combination that is equivalent for all 4 parameters, but then mFT is overexposed by 2 stops relative to FF.

Complain
 Like? 1
 Re: X-T1 looks mighty interesting, what do you think? In reply to perry rhodan, Jan 30, 2014

I'm currently using an EM5 and 12-40 and want to get a second body with the 40-150/2.8 (when it becomes available).  I'm very interested in the Fuji X-T1 for the potentially excellent CAF, high FPS w/tracking, and ~1 stop better high ISO.  Fortunately I can afford to be very patient, so I waiting to see what Olympus does with an EM5 replacement.

Complain
 Like?
 Re: size/weight is what counts with m4/3 In reply to ilsiu, Jan 30, 2014

ilsiu wrote:

rovingtim wrote:

...

True equivalence does not exist;

Yeah it does. Equivalence answers this question: if I want the same image in terms of angle of view, depth of field, noise using the same shutter speed from two camera systems, what are the settings required?

By extension equivalence answers this question: are there any settings in one system impossible to duplicate in the other?

I'm not sure how to get all 4 (angle of view, depth of field, noise/ISO, shutter speed) simultaneously equivalent.

If I have on FF (I chose FF instead of APS-C because the conversion math is easier):

Focal length (angle of view): 24mm

Aperture (DOF): f5.6

ISO (noise): 400

Shutter speed: 1/250

Then here are all the different combination that can be done on mFT. There's only one combination that is equivalent for all 4 parameters, but then mFT is overexposed by 2 stops relative to FF.

That's because to get the same DOF you'd get with FF you need to shoot 2 stops faster with MFT. f2.8 is the 'relative' aperture.

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

slimandy's gear list:slimandy's gear list
Sony RX100 II Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Fujifilm X-E1 +1 more
Complain
 Like?
 Re: X-T1 looks mighty interesting, what do you think? In reply to Alan Lai, Jan 30, 2014

Alan Lai wrote:

perry rhodan wrote:

What do you think of the new X-Fuji? Looks very tempting to me. Was getting ready to buy the EM1 kit, now still waiting for the final specs and test of this new X-trans miracle. Missing any TTLW-flash is not good, EVF and IQ and AF look superb.

And: no I'm not trying to troll here. Have some nice MFT's from Oly already.

Kind regards Perry

My thoughts:

1. A great still camera, but with useless video mode, aka 17 minutes time limit.

This wouldn't bother me and I doubt it would many users. Some, yes, but I would guess a minority.

2. Included hot shoe flash looks hideous.

And?

3. The X System doesn't have as complete lens as M43 System.

It is pretty good and getting better e.g. Zeiss just announced a 50mm macro. I think there's enough to keep me going.

4. Kit pricing is on the high side. I am not an extreme retro styling fan.

This I don't understand. On Amazon the EM1 kit is £1950. Calumet photo just offered me a pre-release deal on the XT-1 with 18-55mm lens for just £1399 with £99 of freebies thrown in.

Personally I love the retro styling and I like having dials rather than menus for all the basic functions.

5. Will wait for actual user reviews and a few firmware updates to see where Fujifilm is going to do with the body and lens.

Agreed, but early reviews look very positive.

I love the EM-5 but I am open-minded if a better alternative comes along and for me I think it may have. You seem to be trying to find fault but none of your concerns bother me at all.

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

slimandy's gear list:slimandy's gear list
Sony RX100 II Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Fujifilm X-E1 +1 more
Complain
 Like?
 Kudos to Fuji! (I am not switching though) In reply to perry rhodan, Jan 30, 2014

Looks like a great camera.

Lab D's gear list:Lab D's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Nikon D600 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4
Complain
 Like?
 Re: X-T1 looks mighty interesting, what do you think? In reply to slimandy, Jan 31, 2014

slimandy wrote:

Alan Lai wrote:

perry rhodan wrote:

What do you think of the new X-Fuji? Looks very tempting to me. Was getting ready to buy the EM1 kit, now still waiting for the final specs and test of this new X-trans miracle. Missing any TTLW-flash is not good, EVF and IQ and AF look superb.

And: no I'm not trying to troll here. Have some nice MFT's from Oly already.

Kind regards Perry

My thoughts:

1. A great still camera, but with useless video mode, aka 17 minutes time limit.

This wouldn't bother me and I doubt it would many users. Some, yes, but I would guess a minority.

2. Included hot shoe flash looks hideous.

And?

3. The X System doesn't have as complete lens as M43 System.

It is pretty good and getting better e.g. Zeiss just announced a 50mm macro. I think there's enough to keep me going.

4. Kit pricing is on the high side. I am not an extreme retro styling fan.

This I don't understand. On Amazon the EM1 kit is £1950. Calumet photo just offered me a pre-release deal on the XT-1 with 18-55mm lens for just £1399 with £99 of freebies thrown in.

Personally I love the retro styling and I like having dials rather than menus for all the basic functions.

5. Will wait for actual user reviews and a few firmware updates to see where Fujifilm is going to do with the body and lens.

Agreed, but early reviews look very positive.

I love the EM-5 but I am open-minded if a better alternative comes along and for me I think it may have. You seem to be trying to find fault but none of your concerns bother me at all.

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

Good so you can buy it, test it, and upload some photos!

Alan Lai's gear list:Alan Lai's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-150mm F4-5.6 ASPH Mega OIS
Complain
 Like?
 Re: X-T1 looks mighty interesting, what do you think? In reply to Alan Lai, Jan 31, 2014

Alan Lai wrote:

slimandy wrote:

Alan Lai wrote:

perry rhodan wrote:

What do you think of the new X-Fuji? Looks very tempting to me. Was getting ready to buy the EM1 kit, now still waiting for the final specs and test of this new X-trans miracle. Missing any TTLW-flash is not good, EVF and IQ and AF look superb.

And: no I'm not trying to troll here. Have some nice MFT's from Oly already.

Kind regards Perry

My thoughts:

1. A great still camera, but with useless video mode, aka 17 minutes time limit.

This wouldn't bother me and I doubt it would many users. Some, yes, but I would guess a minority.

2. Included hot shoe flash looks hideous.

And?

3. The X System doesn't have as complete lens as M43 System.

It is pretty good and getting better e.g. Zeiss just announced a 50mm macro. I think there's enough to keep me going.

4. Kit pricing is on the high side. I am not an extreme retro styling fan.

This I don't understand. On Amazon the EM1 kit is £1950. Calumet photo just offered me a pre-release deal on the XT-1 with 18-55mm lens for just £1399 with £99 of freebies thrown in.

Personally I love the retro styling and I like having dials rather than menus for all the basic functions.

5. Will wait for actual user reviews and a few firmware updates to see where Fujifilm is going to do with the body and lens.

Agreed, but early reviews look very positive.

I love the EM-5 but I am open-minded if a better alternative comes along and for me I think it may have. You seem to be trying to find fault but none of your concerns bother me at all.

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

Good so you can buy it, test it, and upload some photos!

I probably will but I won't be the first. I'll wait for reviews. I have enough gear to keep me going in the meantime even if I sell some of it off. I'll be suprised if I don't buy it though.

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

slimandy's gear list:slimandy's gear list
Sony RX100 II Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Fujifilm X-E1 +1 more
Complain
 Like?
 Re: size/weight is what counts with m4/3 In reply to slimandy, Jan 31, 2014

slimandy wrote:

That's because to get the same DOF you'd get with FF you need to shoot 2 stops faster with MFT. f2.8 is the 'relative' aperture.

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

Right, I understand that (it's also stated in the comments section that 2.8 on mFT has equivalent DOF as 5.6 on FF).  My question (that I neglected to ask) is how to satisfy the claim that true equivalence can be achieved?

Complain
 Like?
 Re: size/weight is what counts with m4/3 In reply to ilsiu, Jan 31, 2014

ilsiu wrote:

slimandy wrote:

That's because to get the same DOF you'd get with FF you need to shoot 2 stops faster with MFT. f2.8 is the 'relative' aperture.

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

Right, I understand that (it's also stated in the comments section that 2.8 on mFT has equivalent DOF as 5.6 on FF). My question (that I neglected to ask) is how to satisfy the claim that true equivalence can be achieved?

It can't. There will always be minor differences when you change format.

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

slimandy's gear list:slimandy's gear list
Sony RX100 II Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Fujifilm X-E1 +1 more
Complain
 Like?
 Same here In reply to SirSeth, Jan 31, 2014

What's not to like? A terrific sensor, and high quality, if not particularly numerous, lens selection.

It's not for me, also due to my affection for HG and SHG ZD, but it does underline the fact that this new and exciting camera style is moving forward - with or without the current market leaders.

Complain
 Like?
 Re: X-T1 looks mighty interesting, what do you think? In reply to Pixnat2, Jan 31, 2014

Pixnat2 wrote:

Shirozina wrote:

perry rhodan wrote:

What do you think of the new X-Fuji? Looks very tempting to me. Was getting ready to buy the EM1 kit, now still waiting for the final specs and test of this new X-trans miracle. Missing any TTLW-flash is not good, EVF and IQ and AF look superb.

And: no I'm not trying to troll here. Have some nice MFT's from Oly already.

Kind regards Perry

Game over for M43 I think esp if it doesn't have shutter shock problems. Proper retro camera with dials a plenty to play with and looks like it means business. Game over Olympus and Panasonic, game over...........

To each is own : for me, those faux controls dials are unpractical and have no sense.

They were necessary in mecanically controlled cameras, but were abandonned long ago for better ergonomics.

The are just reborn because of "Retro Hype" and cool factor.

-- hide signature --

The controls are what attract me

-- hide signature --

Complain
 Like?
 Re: X-T1 looks mighty interesting, what do you think? In reply to Pixnat2, Jan 31, 2014

Pixnat2 wrote:

Aethon wrote:

Pixnat2 wrote:

To each is own : for me, those faux controls dials are unpractical and have no sense.

They were necessary in mecanically controlled cameras, but were abandonned long ago for better ergonomics.

The are just reborn because of "Retro Hype" and cool factor.

There's nothing "faux" about the control dials - they work!

I hope they do work! "Faux" is used in the sense that they mimic mechanical cameras controls from the past.

You do realize that the Fuji offers the dedicated dials in addition to customized wheels and buttons, right? That seems far more ergonomic and intuitive to me.

I do realize that those dedicated control dials were abandonned in the 80's, when electronics appeared in cameras. Designers found a much faster and comfrotable way to adjust all important settings at eye level with only one or two dials. That was a real progress in camera ergonomics.

Now, most manufacturers try to romantize some of their camera giving them a real retro look. Some, like Panasonic and Olympus, are doing it right in keeping the best of both world : a retro look with modern controls. Others, like Nikon and Fujii, are going too far IMHO : a retro look with retro controls.

I make a bet with you : those retro controls will not become a mainstream trend.

Otherwise, it would mean cameras designers have done wrong for more than 30 years!

-- hide signature --

Those retro control make finding and selecting options quick and easy, not buried and cumbersome to use. Â I have used many modern designed cameras without them and prefer those retro dials. Â Why search or have to remember a buried function when it can be front of you.

-- hide signature --

Complain
 Like? 1
 Re: So many dials, what for? In reply to ThePalindrome, Jan 31, 2014

ThePalindrome wrote:

I don't understand the reason for the three top dials on this camera. It has a front and rear dial and aperture on the lens. This let's the user change all the variables already. What the reason for shutter and ISO dials on top, where it is much harder to reach them?

Agreed. For me there is no reason to put redundant knobs on the top when they have the front and rear wheels.  They can put a top LCD screen instead. m43 with large EVF is the future but Oly and Pany have to lower their prices first.

I shoot with Pentax now but would have adopted EM5 in early 2013 if not for its not so ideal tracking focus ability and high price in then.

-- hide signature --

Regards,
Ken

kenwklau's gear list:kenwklau's gear list
Pentax K-30 Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited Pentax smc DA 55-300mm F4.0-5.8 ED Pentax smc DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6ED AL [IF] DC WR Pentax smc DA 50mm F1.8
Complain
 Like?
 Re: Mirrorless Cred In reply to SirSeth, Jan 31, 2014

SirSeth wrote:

This new Fuji is of the same ilk as the E-M1. More similarities than differences. Hold both in your hands and get the one that pleases you and fits the lenses you want. Be happy you can afford and enjoy a cutting edge camera, but know that in 12 months something else just as sexy will come out to fawn over.

They are both pretty expensive, but the dev. cycle is fast, so I'm looking forward to their replacements to drive down prices. And for me, the E-M1 fits my 4/3rds lenses.

Cheers,

Seth

-- hide signature --

What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?
--
wallygoots.smugmug.com
wallygoots.blogspot.com

ditto.  Imagine when the EM1 with 12-40 drop below \$1,200.

-- hide signature --

Regards,
Ken

kenwklau's gear list:kenwklau's gear list
Pentax K-30 Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited Pentax smc DA 55-300mm F4.0-5.8 ED Pentax smc DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6ED AL [IF] DC WR Pentax smc DA 50mm F1.8
Complain
 Like?
 Re: Mirrorless Cred In reply to kenwklau, Jan 31, 2014

kenwklau wrote:

SirSeth wrote:

This new Fuji is of the same ilk as the E-M1. More similarities than differences. Hold both in your hands and get the one that pleases you and fits the lenses you want. Be happy you can afford and enjoy a cutting edge camera, but know that in 12 months something else just as sexy will come out to fawn over.

They are both pretty expensive, but the dev. cycle is fast, so I'm looking forward to their replacements to drive down prices. And for me, the E-M1 fits my 4/3rds lenses.

ditto. Imagine when the EM1 with 12-40 drop below \$1,200.

Expect to wait at least 3 years.  The 2 year old E-M5 has only dropped by \$500 from its original \$1000 price.  For the kind of price you describe to happen, the E-M1 body will have to go from \$1400 to \$500.

Sierra Dave's gear list:Sierra Dave's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-PM2 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 +5 more
Complain
 Like?
 Re: size/weight is what counts with m4/3 In reply to rovingtim, Jan 31, 2014

rovingtim wrote:

Sergey Borachev wrote:

slimandy wrote:

Sergey Borachev wrote:

Here, I have inserted the image for you, but I disagree with what you are trying to show with your size comparison image. The size comparison is not right. The Olympus lens is a weatherproof 24-80mm lens with constant f/2.8 max aperture. The Fuji lens is just 28-83mm f/2.8-4, a huge difference.

Actually the Olympus is a 12~40mm f2.8 and the Fuji is an 18~55mm f2.8~4.

If you want to compare equivalents the Olympus is a 24~80mm f5.6 and the Fuji is 27~83mm f4~5.6

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

OK, I forgot to put in "equivalent" in what I said.

You made focal length equivalent but left the apertures the same. That made the Oly lens look better than it is.

The Oly lens is wider. The Fuji lens is brighter.

One could also add performance in the equation. Is it compared with equal vignetting (i.e. total light gathering), resolution and corner sharpness?

Complain
 Like?
 Re: size/weight is what counts with m4/3 In reply to ilsiu, Jan 31, 2014

ilsiu wrote:

slimandy wrote:

That's because to get the same DOF you'd get with FF you need to shoot 2 stops faster with MFT. f2.8 is the 'relative' aperture.

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

Right, I understand that (it's also stated in the comments section that 2.8 on mFT has equivalent DOF as 5.6 on FF). My question (that I neglected to ask) is how to satisfy the claim that true equivalence can be achieved?

I'm not sure what 'true' equivalence is. However, when two cameras are set the same in terms of equivalence it means:

The Dof is the same

The angle of view is the same

The noise is the same (assuming similar levels of sensor technology).

All other differences (such as 4/3 instead of 3/2, colour differences, DR differences) are not consider matters of 'equivalence'.

Complain
 Like?
 Re: size/weight is what counts with m4/3 In reply to Thomas_A, Jan 31, 2014

Thomas_A wrote:

rovingtim wrote:

Sergey Borachev wrote:

slimandy wrote:

Sergey Borachev wrote:

Here, I have inserted the image for you, but I disagree with what you are trying to show with your size comparison image. The size comparison is not right. The Olympus lens is a weatherproof 24-80mm lens with constant f/2.8 max aperture. The Fuji lens is just 28-83mm f/2.8-4, a huge difference.

Actually the Olympus is a 12~40mm f2.8 and the Fuji is an 18~55mm f2.8~4.

If you want to compare equivalents the Olympus is a 24~80mm f5.6 and the Fuji is 27~83mm f4~5.6

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

OK, I forgot to put in "equivalent" in what I said.

You made focal length equivalent but left the apertures the same. That made the Oly lens look better than it is.

The Oly lens is wider. The Fuji lens is brighter.

One could also add performance in the equation. Is it compared with equal vignetting (i.e. total light gathering), resolution and corner sharpness?

Agree.

My understanding is that this version of the Fuji lens is excellent. So is the Oly lens. I don't know which one outperforms the other.

Complain
 Like?
 Re: size/weight is what counts with m4/3 In reply to rovingtim, Jan 31, 2014

rovingtim wrote:

Thomas_A wrote:

rovingtim wrote:

Sergey Borachev wrote:

slimandy wrote:

Sergey Borachev wrote:

Here, I have inserted the image for you, but I disagree with what you are trying to show with your size comparison image. The size comparison is not right. The Olympus lens is a weatherproof 24-80mm lens with constant f/2.8 max aperture. The Fuji lens is just 28-83mm f/2.8-4, a huge difference.

Actually the Olympus is a 12~40mm f2.8 and the Fuji is an 18~55mm f2.8~4.

If you want to compare equivalents the Olympus is a 24~80mm f5.6 and the Fuji is 27~83mm f4~5.6

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

OK, I forgot to put in "equivalent" in what I said.

You made focal length equivalent but left the apertures the same. That made the Oly lens look better than it is.

The Oly lens is wider. The Fuji lens is brighter.

One could also add performance in the equation. Is it compared with equal vignetting (i.e. total light gathering), resolution and corner sharpness?

Agree.

My understanding is that this version of the Fuji lens is excellent. So is the Oly lens. I don't know which one outperforms the other.

Fuji make very good lenses. I think it is just a general comment when comparing systems of different sensor sizes.

Complain