Petka: I did some quick testing against 5DII with 50mm f:1.4 on Canon and 35mm f:1.4 in X Pro1. Both at 200 ISO f:8, camera JPEGs. XPro1 looks cleaner, also a slight edge on sharpness, but the difference is not big.
At full open f:1.4 the Canon falls totally down, bad color fringing even in the middle of the frame, really soft sides and vignettes a lot. Fuji is crisp and clear and evenly lit. Difference was huge. Of course this is a lens problem for Canon, not sensor/processor. For the Fuji I had to check the EXIF to make sure I really had the f:1.4 frame, not the f:8 one, they looked the same!
XPro1 actually does produce pictures in the same class as 5DII and 5DIII, D700 and even D800, broadly speaking (not real scientific test, and did not try the faster ISOs). Considering the size of the sensor, the pixel count and the price this is excellent! There might really be something in the new sensor construction and no AA filter.
how about dynamic range? My X-100 - I think same sensor as X-Pro - likes to blow out the whites
Alex N: Could have been great, but they went and used a small sensor and killed it.
I have an x-100, which is really good except no range/DOF indication on the lens and poor battery life in ON mode. But I can live with that.
The only reason I would pay $1600 to switch to a bigger and heavier body would be to use my M mount 35/1.2 lens again. But the small sensor makes it meaningless.
Just what were they thinking? Why no full frame? I'd have gladly paid a $1000 more, and neither Canon nor Nikon have a problem making FF bodies in that price range.
@ Mark D
1) If you don't have good lens from your film days, then you probably won't care that much. For those who do, however, the crop factor totally kills it. I'm using 35mm. That means I don't need a 50mm that the APS-C will make of my 35, and I don't have a 25 that would work as a 35mm. And given there's already the lighter and smaller and quieter X-100, what's then the point?
2) everything else equal, bigger sensor gives you better picture. It mostly concerns the dynamic range - you'll find that the APS-C on Fuji tends to bow up the whites. With bigger sensor you can always provide wider DR with the same technology. And for the street and available light, DR is important.
Overall, yes, the X-Pro will find its users, I'm sure. It's a good camera and I like the direction Fuji is taking with these. But if they made it FF they'd have made all the people out there with M lens happy - and they didn't.
mashimisha: I have been using the X100 for some time now. The image quality is great and the viewfinder is a pleasure to use when there is adequate light. Unfortunately, the manual focus is completely useless and the auto-focus is FAR too slow for serious candid photography. Unless these issues can be dealt with, it will never be a professional instrument.
Too bad Fuji engineers have been unable to incorporate an actual range finder into the hybrid. This focus by wire idea is crap. It is slow, non-intuitive, and prevents the user from enjoying the big bright viewer.
I beg to disagree.
I use my X100 in manual focus most of the time. With this sensor and 35mm lens, focusing by DoF - which they show in the viewfinder - works perfectly up to f4. And their high ISO performance is fairly good, so I don't need to open up too often.
What I want is for the lens to have the range/DoF marked on it, as they normally do in interchangeable lens systems. But otherwise, the manual focus on X100 has been good to me
DeMaatin: Well, Fuji, here's another fine mess you've gotten me into !
But besides, I'm having a hard time to figure out why this new camera must exceed all the dimensions of the (fully framed !) Leica M9 ?With all those fancy new EVIL cameras around, the new X-1 Pro looks like a blackbird amid the sparrows.
"I'm currently in a process of upgrading from APS-C to FF" - how do you mean?
I've been looking for a FF digital camera to take an M lens for years now, without any success.
Almost believed X-Pro would be it, but no.
Paul Farace: Small point to most but important to me... the camera needs a Fujifilm logo on the front of the body! Otherwise it looks plain and unfinished, as do all their cameras of this ilk, except maybe the X-100. And I don't buy that crap about moving stealthily through the mean streets shooting LIFE magazine covers without the criminals knowing you have a camera.
Their stylist should be slapped with a wet towel!
I think you'll find that most people who buys this camera have the exact opposite opinion. The less logos the better, and Fuji seem to understand this
Gilberto62: Hi, in Italy the X-pro1 arrive in the coming weeks. I am a professional and work with Nikon D700 but I'm also looking for a camera as my old Leica. I've tried the Leica M8, but works badly with little light and the M9 is too expensive.Would indeed ask those who already uses the X-pro1 an opinion: the autofocus is quite fast and accurate? Can I work in RAW? I do photojournalism: can I think of a job done everything with x-pro1?
sorry: I shoot whith 24mm only... so 27mm is good for me.
it's APS-C sensor, so your existing lens will be cropped. Which is the killer for me
What you're saying is basically that it's a good camera. I agree. I have the X-100, and that's good, and I expect X-Pro to be no worse. APS-C in X-100 is enough, no problems here.
What I'm saying, it could have been great instead of merely good.
The point is, there's already the X-100, which is cheaper, smaller, lighter, and the shutter is virtually silent. No focal plane shutter will ever be close. So in all aspects except for the interchangeable lens, X-100 is better for the street.
And for everything else but the street, there are the FF Canons and Nikons, which are better because they are SLRs.
The point of X-Pro could have been that of Bessa, only digital - get people who had film Leicas, but won't go out there carrying $8000 in the form of the M9. It's not about saving, it's about going places wearing $8K on your person, it doesn't work.
And if I can't use the M lens I already have, then X-100 trumps X-Pro.
This is why I'm so disappointed.
thejohnnerparty: Anybody care to comment on the manual focus by wire?
my approach to manual focus is, if you have the time to focus, you have the time to use the auto. X-100 auto focus is pretty good even in low light, I'd expect X-pro to be no worse.
The reason to use manual focus is for the street, when you sometimes have a split second to make the shot. With manual, you pre-set it based on your lens and DoF, and focus your picture by using your legs rather than by touching the lens. This way it doesn't really matter all that much if it's by wire.
The only disappointment with x-100 was that it doesn't have focus/DoF indication on the lens itself, you have to look in the viewfinder. X-pro seems to be the same.
Could have been great, but they went and used a small sensor and killed it.