PascallacsaP: Looks great, as we have come to know from Fuji. For me, however, AF speed is going to be the decisive factor.
There is a highly specialised weapon for this kind of thing:
Definately works for firefox, not sure about chrome.
itsastickup: For portraits it's not long enough and the aperture isn't big enough.
And it's not long enough for macro either, other than document copying.
I really don't get this lens.
"Enough of this nonsense about 50mm being "too short" for portraits. Someone making this claim is NOT a true portrait shooter!!! "
You're talking about environmental portraits, for which 50mm equiv is the sensible starting point, and then wider from there. And for which there are already such lenses.
But this is a longer lens than that and yet not close enough to 85mm equiv for head-n-torso shots without too much face distortion.
So as a 'portrait lens' rather than a more general purpose lens, it falls short.
For portraits it's not long enough and the aperture isn't big enough.
thx1138: 1/4000 and f/1.2/1.4 lenses should work well. Why not 1/8000 on such an advanced model at a high price point?
A decent ND filter that cancels sensor reflection is expensive. And with all those different filter sizes, very expensive.
itsastickup: Single SD slot. hmmmm.
Sure, if you only ever use the USB cable. Otherwise SD cards are as prone to static electricity as any other electronics, and with the typical slow failure.
It's really not that uncommon. Perhaps you are talking of your own (sample size of two) experience.
Anyway, we're talking of pro features here. Two slots is mandatory.
Single SD slot. hmmmm.
I really can't imagine that the lack of weather sealing significantly impacted their sales. But it will have considerably added to the price of this camera.
Considering the XE-2's lamentable plasticised jpeg skin textures at high ISO, the moving of the Q button (from somewhere reasonable to a ridiculous location, with tragic loss of the view button), the sharp cut in the shadows, the over-tightening of the EV dial; it's arguable that Fuji have been listening too much to their customers and reviewers.
Let's hope that the shadow setting now goes down to -3 (or more) to compensate for that shadow cut.
It remains to be seen whether this model clips the shadows (and reduces shadow depth) like the XE-2, and disastrously plasticised jpeg skin texture at high ISO. We need that DR, fuji. Stop messing about.
I passed over the XE2 for that reason, depsite the highly desirable phase AF.
..and apparently the cut on the shadows was due to a comment in the dpreview review. Thanks for nothing, dpreview.
Doesn't seem so high to me. Isn't it £400 cheaper than when the XP1 was released?
It's quite encouraging, on the price front, that it's so much less. It suggests to me that the blow-outs on the XE-1 and XP1 were not desperation but a genuine cost of manufacturing reduction.
groucher: "I keep one hand on the mouse or tablet stylus as much as possible, and use the other hand "
That says it all - you have to maintain an uncomfortable and awkward seated position because Adobe hasn't the nouse to write software that utilises the RH mouse control. Simple things such as just zooming in/out or setting clone point/cloning are a pain in Photo$hop. These can be done single handed in Corel - a particular advantage in cloning which needs precision.
Adobe needs a clip round the ear for producing expensive and antiquated software that can't even manage memory successfully. Try the Gimp, Corel and NX2 (the last for superior RAW processing if you're a Nikon user).
The Gimp and Corel are in no way real competition to Photoshop, simply on feature sets.
I've used both Gimp and Photoshop. The Gimp isn't even near Photoshop from 2005, let alone the latest.
Photoshop may have its flaws but it's nuts to suggest Gimp as an alternative.
AP shouldn't have made a public issue of this but merely reprimanded the photographer with a stern warning.
What I think must have happened is that he had some enemy who would have made an issue of it (or did make an issue of it) and AP were forced in to this.
itsastickup: What's wrong with these chumps.
They have loads of DR to play with and offer no highlight protection in jpegs.
Then evidently they wouldn't provide a jpeg option. In the meantime there are plenty of us who do, while also fully using the capabilities of the camera, and there's no reason not to provide decent highlight protection, like the 5+ stops of the Fuji X-system.
What's wrong with these chumps.
And the in-bad-faith 3rd party battery issue?
H1brid: These pictures are a pile of bull.Judging by these, we're still 20-30 years back.I understand that he's trying to paint a grim picture but still.Even an image search on Google will show you a more realistic view.We don't live in the stone age, he only took pictures in deserted/almost deserted rural areas.
There are still peasants in Moldova living traditional lives.
I doubt this is bull. Just a bit off-piste.
Geir Ove: Hello DPReview Staff,
When can we expect to see the X-E2 Review? I have to resort to other sites to find Reviews nowadays; this is not like it was in the Phil Askey days...
"But why can't you just set it to +1 and forget it?"
What I meant is that the XE-2 loses on the shadow range. It goes down to an equivalent of -1 on the XE1, instead of -2.
I always have my cam on -2 and would prefer it on -3, and that's the XP1 which is the same as the XE-1.
I was thinking of getting the XE2 until I came across these and other problems.
A step in the right direction. But until there's an f1 normal, it's no bokeh, no buy, mun.
The lack of OOF backgrounds is the only reason that I don't look at these small sensor cameras.
And sure, you can get a tiny bit of OOF background even with the 25mm, but what I seek at a minimum is what I get at 50/2 using my FF cameras (or 35/1.4 on APS-C). And there are plenty like me.
Pro optics in a consumer body?
Debankur Mukherjee: Why not have a 18-55 with internal focusing.....dont like the lens getting out so much while zooming...........
IF often has the disadvantage of reducing the focal length on closer objects, often significantly. At 55mm it may well not really do the equiv of 85mm.
jtan163: Thats not a D400!
People are getting abit confused here. A D400 would be a semi pro edition of the D7xx, with a robust body and fast AF.
That's sufficiently different that people are still asking for it.