JacquesBalthazar: It will be interesting to compare real life images from XT1 + this 90mm against something like the Nikon Df + Zeiss 135mm f2. Both are 16MP, so comparison can be pretty straightforward.
Construction/design point to potentially a very high performer, very solid, also mostly metal, but with great AF and weather resistance. Even closer focus than Zeiss.
The Zeiss 135 is a stellar perfomer as we know, but a bit fiddly to deploy due to MF and weight.
At almost half weight and half cost, this Fuji is truly appetising! Hope it delivers to that level of expectation!
@halfwaythere : yes, you are right, APS DSLR bring similar weight advantages to XT1 & c°. However, compare XT1 with D5500 and similar on fit, finish, ergonomics, depth from back to flange, etc, and you will recognise they are playing on different fields. Compare the build, finish and ergonomics of any of the G f1.8 primes with their Fuji counterparts, and again you'll recognise we are looking at very different beasts. I feel that the build quality/look & feel of the high end Fuji primes are in broadly the same league as the Zeiss or the old Nikkor AI, and miles ahead of the equivalent Gs. I will compare the XT1+90mm against my Df+135CZ with very high hopes! ;-)
TN Args: ..... (sucks teeth).... Canon 85mm f/1.8 weighs 425g (not 550g) and costs $350 (not $950).... and is a darned fine lens....
" it won't be giving you the same depth of field control" : I really do not get this. At same aperture, the 90mm on APS will give more DoF than 135mm on FF for same field of view. Which means you gain an advantage of a few mm additional sharpness at portrait distance with the 90mm @f2. With similar low light abilities. I cannot think of any situation where I'd want LESS DoF at portrait distance wide open.
It will be interesting to compare real life images from XT1 + this 90mm against something like the Nikon Df + Zeiss 135mm f2. Both are 16MP, so comparison can be pretty straightforward.
Tempting. Curious about tests of course. The 25mm in particular: optical design uses less elements than the 25mm f2 ZF2/ZE, focuses closer and is much lighter. If same or better performance, that would send yet another signal to the DSLR vs mirrorless FF debate. The 85 is not that much lighter than the 85mm f1.4 ZF2 despite the latter's old school build. The OLED idea is ingenious. The overall design is nicely contemporary. These and the Loxia make the Sony a7 range very tempting. But I still do not like the design of that Sony camera range: bland, semi-retro cues, annoying user interface, etc. Probably not for me yet, but keeping an eye on them. That system is now moving fast, and in the right direction.
JacquesBalthazar: That Sony FE range sure has some very attractive features, and most of the recent lenses are clearly best in class. Well done to all involved! That said, I do wish the Sony body designs and user interfaces were not what they are. I just do not like them. Would love that range to have the Fuji xt1 design for example. One day maybe. Part of the pleasure of photography is the interaction with the tools. I think they are getting the lens designs right, the body features are great, but the body design.....
@Zorak That is a big risk indeed! ;-)
That Sony FE range sure has some very attractive features, and most of the recent lenses are clearly best in class. Well done to all involved! That said, I do wish the Sony body designs and user interfaces were not what they are. I just do not like them. Would love that range to have the Fuji xt1 design for example. One day maybe. Part of the pleasure of photography is the interaction with the tools. I think they are getting the lens designs right, the body features are great, but the body design.....
You make some fair points and ask some good questions. Just one correction: you forgot the 18.5mm f1.8 lens (equiv around 55mm FX), which is a gem in itself. For the rest, it is a matter of opinion indeed. For very many applications the 1" sensor size makes perfect sense. The Nikon 1 users are usually very enthusiastic about the reactivity and speed of the system, the video features and the quality of the stills output. I know I love the V1 and keep going back to it after having failed to enjoy the more trendy but sluggish mirrorless offers (Nex 7, Fuji xe1). The sarcastic comments that pop up every time the Nikon 1 is mentioned do no good to anyone and are usually completely off the mark. Nikon has produced a great system, with many highlights, and quite a few odd gaps, baffling user interface details and bizarre marketing choices. I will buy the V3, if the 18MP output is as good as the V1's 10MP. And the new long zoom. And the 32mm f1.2. And keep my DSLR outfit.
Beautiful machine! This is indeed a really impressive technological showcase of a tool.
JacquesBalthazar: The element that was cloned out was an important piece of information. It was telling the viewer that there were more than one reporter at that precise location. That brings insight and questions about the "PR" logistics around the photographed incident : how did the reporters get there? Who brought them there? Why? Did the gun carrying person in the picture know he was moving in front of reporters? Did he place himself in that way at that location because he knew the press was there?
By cloning out the camera, the photographer wanted to avoid such questions being raised by the viewer. He wanted to suggest exclusive intimacy between him, the fighter and the war surrounding the scene. That is not a minor act, and Mr Contreras knows that full well. AP did the right thing.
On the other hand, If I was running a news agency, I would probably hire the talented Mr Contreras now, as he has certainly realised the risks of doctoring such images and wil never be tempted again.
@LeitzKameraAktion: you are right. It did not cross my mind that the videocam might have been his own, simply lying there. Another proof that a picture does not necessarily tell the whole story, cloning or no cloning.... Does not change the fundamental issue though.
The element that was cloned out was an important piece of information. It was telling the viewer that there were more than one reporter at that precise location. That brings insight and questions about the "PR" logistics around the photographed incident : how did the reporters get there? Who brought them there? Why? Did the gun carrying person in the picture know he was moving in front of reporters? Did he place himself in that way at that location because he knew the press was there?
marike6: Locking exposure dials a la the Nikon Df? Any amount of money that DPR loves this camera and the dials from day one. :-)
Part of what makes the X cameras at least interesting is the rangefinder design, the whole poor man's Leica thing.
What is the point copying a DSLR body styling? It's has no bright Pentaprism so why the pseudo pentaprism housing?
This is a head scratcher move from Fujifilm that is for sure. No FF, just an X camera dressed up as a DSLR. Has anybody asked why?
"Locking exposure dials a la the Nikon Df?": unfortunately no lock on that dial it seems. On XE1/X100, EC dial is way too sensitive to unintentional manipulation (rubbing against clothing while carrying or just by holding camera in hand). Kept ruining opportunities. With Df, EC only happens when you want it to. The dial locks are features I truly love with the Df. For the rest, this new X sure looks nice. With the new 58mm f1.2 and Fuji's xtrans processing, this will be a killer portrait machine !
It is a specialty lens. While 58mm is close to the 50mm "standard", the small reduction in angle of view and additional compression make it a very suitable indoor "action" portrait focal length. I see uses for this for low light photography in bars, at parties, weddings, etc. Sure the 50mm can do it as well but it is not exactly the same. The 60mm macro can do it from f2.8. The 85mm requires more distance, more room to back off. The 85mm makes it harder to get 2 people together in focus.
It is also a seductive specialty lens in its design, prioritising for a set of goals beyond "sharpness". The obsession for ultimate sharpness, outside of scientific applications and some landscape styles, is mainly self gratifying pixel peeping fun. Some of us prefer "mood" or "atmosphere" to "lines per millimetre".
I'd understand the hate if this lens replaced the standard 50mm f1.4, but it does not. As a specialty lens, the price might be right for the target users.
Wow! This is a gorgeous picture indeed!
AF is indeed not the strongest Df feature. I have been using mine for more than 2 weeks now, and, while I genuinely love the overall experience, I do find the Df's AF a bit less sure footed than the D800's. Specifically in very low light situations where this camera otherwise excels. In those situations, it hunts a bit more and sometimes does not lock on subjects that I feel the D800 would. Typical example is focusing on model eye at portrait distance in dark bar or dark street. That comes marginally easier with the D800. As per light sensitivity data for the AF module in spec sheet.
For the rest, I do find it very good at manual focusing. Not sure if there is any black magic going on in the viewfinder or if it just a placebo effect, but it works for me with MF lenses, including with the f1.2 50mm. Success rate around 90% wide open when careful.
A great companion for nostalgic old farts like me, or for the younger folks who crave for a more "analogue" interaction with the world.
CFynn: Wonder how this compares to the Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f/1.4?That lens is the same focal length and speed, but available at less than one third the price. Has nice bokeh too.
Nokton 58..... I am curious as well. That one is a jewel....
Fair review. I am one the crazy/lucky guys who ended up with both A and GR. always dreamt of an APS GR, but when the A came out I thought that was it, and had no idea the Ricoh was round the corner. So I have learned to use and love the A before splurging for the GR. in retrospect I was all wrong of course, and having both feels silly. All this to say is that, after time with both, I unexpectedly prefer the A. Despite the better ergonomics and UI of the Ricoh. Not sure why I do. It has to do with build and finish I think. The A is very well put together in all aspects. The materials used feel better, and the dials and buttons have great tactile feedback. Better for me than GR. and I just love the output and IQ. Finally, I like the "made in Japan" bit. It is noteworthy in today's age and a good thing for many fundamental reasons....
(Comment deleted by author)
JacquesBalthazar: One question from me, for the reviewer: what are the real life consequences of GR's 12-bit RAW processing vs the A's 14-bit ? I would have assumed there would be an impact on DR and maybe also on colour gradation. Or not?
@marike6: thanks for the reference. 1 EV DR difference can be meaningful, and something nice to have when one tries to salvage a pic marred by exposure error or excessive contrast. I am very impressed by the IQ I get with the A, shooting raw. I am pretty sure that in 90% of cases (or more), the GR will provide just as much quality. Cool cameras..... Wonder how the GR's 21mm adaptor performs....
One question from me, for the reviewer: what are the real life consequences of GR's 12-bit RAW processing vs the A's 14-bit ? I would have assumed there would be an impact on DR and maybe also on colour gradation. Or not?
JohnyP: Another useless preview. In the last 30 days there have been 2 camera reviews! Most cameras are either announced or previewed. Those previewed ones are likely to end up just like Nikon D4 - previewed and forgotten.
@R Butler: what would be the downside in publishing a schedule of coming reviews? It is not like you would be disclosing strategic insight to your "competitors". Such a schedule would help potential buyers better time their own purchases. Those of them who trust your methodology and share your views anyway. The indirect advantage of publishing that schedule would be to force you guys to feel the healthy heat of a public deadline... ;-)