Nothing wrong with being well positioned in the "shirt pocket" segment. Remember this is likely to deliver decent image quality as well. One problem for me would be that the maximum aperture gets small very fast as the zoom increases. Another is that the manual zoom of the XF1 was a real buying feature for me. If a more sophisticated brother to this XQ1 with really good lens (better apertures at higher zoom), manual zoom, lens-mounted control ring (which I would use for aperture) and mode dial + shutter speed dial was available (maybe and exposure comp thumb dial on the back too?), I would snap it up for use by my daughter and I. I would use it as an easy carry to anything and make the best of the manual controls and my daughter would be able to use the mode dial and manual zoom to make a move away from PAS photography. To achieve all this might mean limiting the lens to 24-70, no bad thing in itself. Still, I am not Fuji's marketing team - just one person with my own requirements.
Lenses for these Sonys will be [nearly as] large as Canon or Nikon FF lenses of the same aperture. Canon and Nikon make smallish DSLR bodies. To match these all they have to do is make a smaller FF semi-pro body. APS-C and M4/3 remain a compelling alternative. Why? Because 16MP and 24MP is not all that different in everyday use, because smaller pixels don't mean that much except in low light nobody could shoot in without a flash 5 years ago anyway, and because size does matter. These Sony's are FF cameras. Perhaps very good ones. Their competitors are high-end Canon and Nikons.
Thank you Fuji for releasing this firmware and improving the focus speed and providing ISO 6400 amongst other things, making the X-Pro a very well-handling camera. Looking forward to further updates to introduce one or two new controls and to using the new lenses, especially the 14mm and the 23mm.
photoholiko: What does it do that the NEX-5N can't for $700 less?
I would guess the image quality will be outstanding, coming as it will from an X-Trans sensor (no Moire filter) and Fuji's great lenses.
Tape5: It is great to see companies crawling over each other for the consumer money. Canon probably planning a MEGApixel, Sony is kicking nice and hard, Faveon is rapidly evolving, Lenses are getting better on P&S and P&S are pushing low end DSLRs, Leica is blowing its own nerdy horn, medium formats are getting cheaper, camera phones are getting better, Social and other apps are coming in, Instagram etc etc.
It is so much fun not to buy anything at all these days. By the time you pull your credit card out, you can bet a better camera has come out already.
Innovation and competition tend to bring product and price improvements, while companies can come and go. Personally I think there are a lot of great companies out there making great cameras, and I hope they are able to continue. There has been a lot of innovation in the last 10 years and I think that has made photography and video more accessible to more people, which is a good thing.
Congrats to DPR for a very good, very balanced review. Despite its flaws, this camera is my all-time favorite. IQ to die for. Otherwise agree with shutterdragon, below.
Nuno Souto: Once again, a supposedly manual-friendly camera designed by idiots who haven't got a clue how to handle manual operation. What a waste!If only camera makers would LISTEN to customers instead of marketing surveys...And has ANYONE checked if this thing has dioptre correction inbuilt? What, everyone has perfect eyesight?
Focus speed is not as quick as the very best contrast detect autofocus systems, but for most purposes good. And focus accuracy is very good. You get a lot of high quality photos as a result.
Neil Palmer: As a pro wedding photographer this sounds the ideal camera for documentary work. Just worried about the slower AF particularly in low light
For portrait photography, even in low light, this is a great camera. I am getting very good results in restaurants, during the day, without flash, shooting ISO 800-1600 f/1.4 without flash. The focus is slower than class leading cameras, but more accurate than some too. Photos come out tack sharp.
I have an X-Pro1 and a Pan GX1 and while the photo quality of the X-Pro1 is much better (amazing that I can say that as the GX1's photos are very very good indeed) one area where the GX1 really shines above the X-Pro1 is focussing. Focus speed is much better, focus mode selection is better, and focus area selection (with the touch sensitive screen) is better too.
I have a baby, and at short range (<1m) you have no chance of shooting anything in focus with the X-Pro1 when he moves back and forth. It just takes to long to get a "lock". With the GX1 it isn't easy, but you have a chance. Let's hope the X-Pro1 can be improved to some extent with firmware upgrades.
So for me it's about what you want. If you want something small(ish) with great photo quality and good handling, and you prepared to put up with focus speeds which are not leading edge these days, and you have the money, the X-Pro1 could be the camera for you. You won't be dissappointed if it's photo quality you want.
guyfawkes: This is a camera that my heart dearly wanted. And let's admit, looks can matter in our decision making. However, in the UK, the body only price is the equivalent of $2200, and the best I have seen with the f1.4/35mm is around $2700.
But I am very disappointed in what has been highlighted as its idiosyncratic behaviour and less than stellar performance in areas that will matter to me: sluggish time between taking images, 2.5 seconds a pop really is too slow, and it seems the ability to mount third party lenses is let down by difficulty in manually focusing them, as no focus confirmation is provided. Without being able to check it out personally, the claimed slow focus ability in both daylight and reduced lighting scenarios would be a big disadvantage.
Hopefully, all may not be lost as Fuji may be able to address all these issues and, one never knows, pricing may come down to more acceptable levels in the UK. Then I may be tempted.
I have a X-Pro1 and 2.5s between shots in normal use is not something I have experienced. In continuous shooting at 6 fps once the buffer is full, which happens after about 2s, there is a LONG delay before you can shoot again.
DeMaatin: Hm.The imagery ain't bad at all, but the few landscape pics didn't exactly knock my socks off thus far.My 5D classic does a better job, with strong AA filter, and my brother's D700 exceeds as well.The equation "APS-C + unusual color mosaic - AA filter == FF or better" doesn't work to my eyes, and I have close examined many of the full-sized samples.Maybe it was just the photographer, or processing?Anyway, those picture samples are leaving something to be desired, at least to me. Even my T2i did better during my last vacation!Don't know. Is it my eyes?
Images from the X-Pro1 at 100% show no blur for portions of the shot that are stationary and in focus. This can be seen on the samples here. Look at the 5DIII samples at 100% and some blur CAN be seen at 100%.
I have an X-Pro1 and it is very very good. Most oustanding feature: image quality. Simply superb. I have another 16MP camera where the anti-aliasing filter is retained, and at 100% crop its very clear that the Fuji retains a lot more detail. At more sensible image sizes the Fuji's output just comes across as subtly intagibly better.
There is the odd --minor-- issue with performance. One is the buffer fills up very fast with high speed continuous shooting. You only get about two seconds worth at 6FPS. Another is that when using manual A and T with auto ISO, the camera overexposes quite a lot. Perhaps I am doing something wrong?
Like cesaregal below, I love this camera. I have waited a long time to be able to get a camera that produces results comparable or better than slide film. This is it. Good job Fujifilm.