vFunct: Only talented people can use this camera.
Untalented people have to use Sony or Canon or Olympus.
Also, it is a mark of amateurs to use cute baby mirror less cameras.
Aww how cute - a newb photographer with a mirror less camera!
Maybe one day the mirror less camera photographer will grow up and use a Reflex system like the big boys do.
Yay! We're rooting for you, cute little mirror less camera kiddos!
I've used cameras ranging from large format to nikon d2x to hasselblad xpan rangefinder and now I use a fuji x pro1. Why? Because I know a decent amount about photography and based on that I decided it was bext for me. You dont like mirror less? Great, but save us the kindergarten stuff
RRJackson: There's good and bad here.
The weight is a big deal. My old Olympus OM-2n weighed 18 oz. My D700 weighs 35 oz. This new Nikon weighs 25 oz. So actually closer to the OM-2n than the D700.
The grip doesn't look all that comfortable. I made do without for decades shooting with an OM-2n, but when I go back to those cameras now I miss having a comfortable grip.
The lack of interchangeable focusing screens is puzzling in a camera like this.
The locking controls are nice. Reminds me of my F5.
The price is higher than expected, but still lower than my D700 was when it was released.
Overall it seems like an excellent effort, but hopefully just the start of a move towards smaller, lighter, more practical cameras with the functionality of the film cameras Nikon was so good at building. Maybe bring back the match-needle metering of the FM3A. There's nothing better than the swing of a needle to visually tell you where your exposure is going.
Im 35 and fit and I spent a lot of the summer in Iceland, hiking, carrying equipment around, camping, climbing mountains and crossing difficult terrain. And guess what? Weight matters. Heavy backpacks hurt sooner. Lets use our imaginations and assume people have different needs. Most of my low light stuff is tripod based long exposures at base ISO but im not going to say high ISO is useless, for example
Clueless Wanderer: ..The body position and everything about the shot seem to not be staged and genuine.BUT. The guy is pretty damn clean to say he has just risen out of a trench held down by gun fire. Not even a spot of dirt on his knees or shirt. Hmm...
In Andalucia in September the weather is pretty dry, so no mud, and the soil tends to be chalky and often light coloured. It´s powdery so it comes off easily. I´ve spent a lot of time hillwalking and the like round here and sure a lot of the time I´ve ended up with dirt on my trousers BUT I´m not sure I´d look dirty enough in a photo for it to show obviously. Like Christian said, it´s not the same conditions as the Somme round here. Maybe in the winter rainy period it would be different but this was September, still the tail end of the long, dry mediterranean summer.
ogl: Relax, guys! DPREVIEW is not independent reviewer for many years already. They just help to sell camera of their owners. It's business and nothing else.Dpreview is sold to Amazon on 2007.
"He who pays the piper calls the tune".
Or I just made my decision based on the kind of camera I like to use - previously I had a Hasselblad X Pan and a Bessa R2 and I like to use a camera with the option of an OVF with framelines and manual controls and I don´t give a rats backside about video or AF speed since they have little relevance to how I shoot. Is it so difficult to accept to some people that other people have different priorities to them? I hope the photos you take with your Ricoh show more imagination than your arguments here.....
WilliamJ: Too bad this little gem does not include an IBIS. It would be a killer as a lot of lenses already avaible could then become usable. Is IBIS incompatible with the X-Trans CMOS sensor ? Could be...
or IBIS is just patented technology and they haven´t found a way round it? The roadmap zooms all feature OIS. Most companies don´t use IBIS. It would be nice to have, though personally my own experiences have been mixed. (admittedly not with using better examples like that of the latest Oly)
ManuelVilardeMacedo: I use OM lenses on my Olympus E-P1; thus I've become tolerant to some amount of softness in photographs. After seeing the Raw studio scene comparison, however, I found the sofness in the Fuji images completely unacceptable. Many have shared their perplexity for this lack of sharpness in a camera with such an innovative sensor, and now it's my turn to wonder.Add to that the difficulty in demosaicing Fuji's Raw files, which means no third-party image edition software programme has achieved completely satisfactory results yet with Fuji's Raws (though Adobe has come closer this time), and what you have, at the end of the day, is an overpriced body that is supposed to be complemented with very expensive lenses.It is really a shame, because I love this camera. It is absolutely gorgeous and appeals to people like me, who lived the rangefinder glory days. I really hope Fujifilm solves these issues, because a camera this beautiful deserves success.
Neither the review nor the camera are flawed. DPR produce comparison images at default settings. Adobe use very low default sharpening settings with Fuji RAWs. Therefore any images using those default settings will look blurry. This is DPRs standard methodology. Not a flaw. Silkypix and Capture One and indeed Adobe once people can be bothered moving the sliders all produce Fuji files with excellent detail and resolution. This is discussed by DPr themselves at great length and in many places on the net. What´s more likely? a vast conspiracy by Fuji, fanboys and expert reviewers to praise across the board the detail and IQ of Fuji cameras or what I´ve described above? But then who needs the experience of real users and reviewers eh? you know best. And no I´m not a fanboy, it just annoys me when people spout and repeat things that are demonstrably, empirically false. Same with creationists and climate change deniers.
That´s one possibility. Another is that people who have actually used a camera for long enough to make an in depth review might have a different opinion than people who haven´t used it. Let´s use Occam´s razor here and decide which one is more likely. Why would Fuji have more influence with Amazon than Canon or Nikon or Olympus?
Mike99999: To me the Fuji X-series is a case of the emperors new clothes. They basically take a Nikon D3100 or a Canon t2i, put it inside a shinier body, and sell it as if it's the greatest new thing. It is a pretty standard APS-C camera.
First of all the images look mushy at ISO 200. It doesn't look nearly as good as a D7000 or OM-D.
Second are the lenses. Everyone is hyping these lenses, as good as Leica, etc... Why? These Fuji lenses are really overrated. The corner softness is so bad I often think these are re-branded Sigma lenses.
If compactness is an issue, Olympus is convincing me better. If compactness is not an issue, Nikon and Canon get you more for less money. It just doesn't look as shiny.
Except the lenses and IQ are actually pretty good. I know because I´ve used an X Pro for several months. I´ve also used cameras by Minolta, Hasselblad, Nikon and Olympus. I´m not a fan boy. In fact I find fan boy-ism psycholigcally baffling. But the lenses are pretty good for the price though the 17mm is a bit of a weak link compared to to the 14mm, 35mm and 60mm (zoom I haven´t used). Perhaps you´d like to say specifically which Sigma lens designs they are based on giving evidence for your reasons? Or are perhaps we are just yanking everyone´s chain and wasting time because someone doesn´t have anything better to do? It´s amazing how people have to justify their own life choices by refusing to accept anyone can choose something different. Must be an existential thing. Anyway, since it´s a nice day here in Seville and my work is closed for the Andalucia day holiday I´m going to take my X Pro and take some photos. Rather than comment meaninglessly on cameras I´ve never used.
I´ve never understood all the pointless negativity. Rangefinder style viewing with framelines offers certain advantages over TTL viewing - seeing more of the context can help with composition, seeing whats about to come into the frame can help with certain types of scenes, some people like seeing the world directly rather than projected or on an LCD or whatever. Rangefinder viewing also has drawbacks and finally someone has thought outside of the box and given us a camera which allows you to use two different viewfinder technologies, best of both worlds, and what do people do? Instead of being happy to have more choice and competition, something benefitting ALL consumers, they moan. They moan about a camera they´ve never used, have no intention of using, and don´t really understand how to use, because the idea of someone else using a different camera to them is somehow intolerable. The very idea that some people want different things is like some sort of existential threat.