Tom_A

Currently I have the XE-1 with only the 35mm lens. This 14mm lens seems like a very interesting second lens. Then when the 56mm f1.4 comes out I will have a trio of lenses that covers 95% of all my personal needs.

Never, ever combine cat faces with people faces.

JohnnyP, I will copy here a reply I wrote above in this thread as it also applies in my opinion:

We're not talking about journalistic photography here, but about creative expressions. In my opinion, as long as the final image is good, who cares if it is realistic or the truth? Also, it doesn't really matter how much effort or which equipment was involved. The end result is what is important.
Back in my film days I often used orange and red filters on my b&w films to add drama (indeed, these don't replace parts of the image, but change them drastically nevertheless).
I do agree that this sample isn't the best one. The original sky was quite ok. But in the end, when I look at a picture I don't really care if it was the real sky, as long as I like the picture.
What I often do in PS is remove an irritating detail, like a traffic sign, or a distracting poster on a wall. I don't feel the need to make excuses for that.
As a entry level tutorial this article was quite ok I thought.

MarkInSF, we're not talking about journalistic photography here, but about creative expressions. In my opinion, as long as the final image is good, who cares if it is realistic or the truth? Also, it doesn't really matter how much effort or which equipment was involved. The end result is what is important.
Back in my film days I often used orange and red filters on my b&w films to add drama (indeed, these don't replace parts of the image, but change them drastically nevertheless).
I do agree that this sample isn't the best one. The original sky was quite ok. But in the end, when I look at a picture I don't really care if it was the real sky, as long as I like the picture.
What I often do in PS is remove an irritating detail, like a traffic sign, or a distracting poster on a wall. I don't feel the need to make excuses for that.
As a entry level tutorial this article was quite ok I thought.

Hi, I opened the first image that you linked and zoomed towards the ball.
I can't seen any banding issues / stripes.
I wonder if there is an issue with your graphics card ?

"Every camera has pluses and minuses, but these minuses aren't minor issures. These are very serious and major flaws. And it seems Dpreview overlooked them because the camera was "thoroughly enjoyably" to use."

Look, I use the camera since October, and I think that the review is rather correct.
For a photographer like me who doesn't really care about video that specific disadvantage doesn't matter. I haven't even once tried to film with it, that is how little I care about it.
But the image quality with the 35mm is seriously good.
Regarding AF, I would honestly say that the speed will be sufficiently quick for most uses. It is true that it is its weakest side and the camera is not ideal for sports photography or if you have hyperkinetic kids jumping around. But it is good enough for many uses!
Unlike many other cameras, this one is actually very natural and classic in use (for an old school photographer like me), and the output quality is truly remarkable.

I have the camera since October, with the 35mm lens. I pretty much agree with most of the observations.
In my experience, the image quality is indeed very good, and jpg is indeed so convincing that I only bother with raw when the light is difficult. Usually my camera is set to Velvia, and I use aperture priority with spotmetering, very classic usage in fact. The end result barely needs further touching up, and I save so much time.
The quality is so good that i don t need FF. Rhe 35 mm has nice enough bokeh already.

I am not very interested in video so that deficiency doesn t bother me.

2 wishes for an xe2:
A lock on the exposure conpensation dial. It is currently too easy to accidently turn.
A tiltable screen, making Rolleiflex-style belly height pictures more comfortable to accomplish.

I recommend to first see how the tests come out. Very often Nikon is quite a bit better than Sigma in that respect.

I've seen and held the Samyang. I have no opinion on its optical quality. But it sure is a beast compared to the Fuji. the fuji lens and body retains that pleasant compact overall size, with the advantage of autofocus and highly likely top image quality. I do know that I would often leave the big Samyang at home, while I would often bring the fuji lens along. In short, the Samyang does not really fit within the compact lightweight concept of the fuji system. I will pass it by.

I have the XE-1 bought as a limited launch kit with the 35mm 1.4 lens.
This is such a nice combination, giving very convincing bokeh and perfect sharpness and colours, that I was a bit disappointed when trying the 18-55 in a japanese shop. Yes the quality seems to be good, but the speed and bokeh is lost.
I may eventually still buy the 18-55 as a good single lens for holidays.
But for now, I think I'll just stay with the 35mm and walk a bit more instead of zooming :-) There is something to be said for minimalism !
I am curious about the 23mm, it has the perfect angle of view for walking around like a classic full frame 35mm lens. However if I read the DOF charts well then at medium distances this 23mm f1.4 lens has a similar DOF as a classic 35mm lens at f2.8.

A friend of mine has the X1, similar lens but much slower AF. Even so the pictures he took were very very nice, and I am picky. A very good compact travel camera, if you could live with the slow AF. So the X2 should have fixed that. Yes it is expensive, but that doesn't mean there is no value.
Meanwhile I have the Fuji XE-1 with 35mm lens. Granted the angle of view is not the same. Even so, i may see him this weekend and it will be interesting to do a few comparison shots. My Fuji has so far amazed me in the image quality department, iI expect it to be better than his X1 at high ISO, however I am curious about any difference at lower iso.

ACtually I found hat Pentax K design quite refreshing and it felt nicely logical in the hand.

From reading the summary, I have the impression that subjectively, the camera scores higher than 75% .
It looks like an interesting premium compact camera. I still love my LX5 and will skip this upgrade, yet it is an obvious recommendation for many people !
Operationally, I find it nicer to use than the famous RX100. I examined both at a shop and the usability of the LX7 was higher.

What I found an interesting bit is his claim that the 1 series are number one in Europe, in the mirrorless segment. Are there independent numbers to back this claim? Also, what would be the share in the rest of the world?
I must say that th V1 impressed me when I examined it.

Very good interview, except the interviewer could, in my opinion, have asked a few questions about the popularity of mirrorless cameras in the lower price range, and how does the N1 perform there. Etc.

I expect that that is indeed his salary, considering all his bitter posts about anything above $500.

Indeed Mr. Wang, Francis is criticising something he doesn't fully grasp. In such situations it is better to keep silent, and try to learn.

However Having photographed with M series before, and experimented with the X100 and X1Pro, I would say that when having a decent AF, a "real" rangefinder is not necessary. What is still nice about the Fujis is the "direct" view on the scene where you can see a subject coming "into the frame", which is one of the nicer experiences of a RF.
I also wonder if, with a resolution of 24MP, the mechanical rangefinder will be precise enough. If you need to use the magnification to get the best sharpness where you want it, then a hybrid EVF like the Fuji would be better than the pure RF. I am curious how the tests will be in this respect.

Photoman, don't you worry about Francis's comments. In nearly all threads he complains about any price that is more than say $500.

If you think about it, the Leica X2 has already that Apple-like sophisticated simplicity. It could have been an Ive design.

So why was your system suddenly less useful when they came out with the colour variants?