yzhenkai: For this price, why not get a Nikon D7200?
What MonsieurAlpha said. There is no such thing as the perfect camera for every situation. You choose based on your application and what makes sense to you...
Love it, thank you, Fuji! The only thing you left out is the ability to develop RAW into TIFF in-camera. Why JPEG only?
I'm glad see that Nikon is back! Nikon used to make a lot of specialized products, such as Medical Nikkor, Noct Nikkor, whatever Nikkor, etc., for small markets with specialized needs. If you think this lens is expensive, then you're obviously not the intended consumer for this product. For those who actually require this lens, I know you are happy that Nikon even makes this lens. Any small production, specialized products would be relatively expensive.
shutterdragon: I paid $1,700 for a brand new Noct f1.2 about 20 years ago when it was still in production. Been very happy with the results and I'm glad I made the decision to buy this lens since nothing else comes close to what Noct is designed to excel at. $1,700 was as much as my monthly salary at the time, by the way. If this new 58mm can perform as well as Noct, it's a great buy actually.
I have never used it on a DX body so I can't comment based on experience, but the Noct Nikkor does have light fall off toward the edges when used wide open. For this reason, you may get better results with a DX body, although I consider light fall off to be a character.
For concerts and events, I personally would not invest in a used Noct Nikkor since just about the only advantage of Noct over the regular 50mm f1.2 is the lack of coma flare. Coma flare is most visible when shooting point light sources that are small, e.g. city lights from distance, stars, etc. If you're close to the stage, coma flare would probably not be a problem.
I paid $1,700 for a brand new Noct f1.2 about 20 years ago when it was still in production. Been very happy with the results and I'm glad I made the decision to buy this lens since nothing else comes close to what Noct is designed to excel at. $1,700 was as much as my monthly salary at the time, by the way. If this new 58mm can perform as well as Noct, it's a great buy actually.
I tried and the output result is mixed. While I like the color rendering on Aperture better than Lighroom, the detail suffers from color noise and other artifacts when viewed at the pixel level.
Adobe took many months to get it right, so I hope Apple keeps improving the algorithm. I think I'll hold on to Lightroom a little longer.
I'm sure this feature is being developed in response to some needs, but it better not malfunction.
What's the practical benefit of this B&W sensor if you're viewing the images on a color monitor with RGB dots? Isn't that kind of pointless?
Leica should go as far as making a super high res monochrome monitor to go with this camera.
Awesome news for those who use LR and X-Trans based cameras! But when is Adobe going to support the XF lenses?
Better optics and AF - after 12 years and twice as expensive these are nothing to brag about. But the biggest issue I have with this lens is that the zoom ring is actually farther away from the mount than the focus ring, which is inconsistent with other Nikkor lenses that I own. This will mess me up. When I'm shooting, I want my gears to be invisible. Having to remember to grab the right ring is distracting. Consistent UI is important!
padoods: wouldve preferred a 35mm equivalent lens
Ditto. Would have been a nice street shooter if it had a 35mm eqv. lens. The silver model does remind of the Contax TVS series which I loved, btw.
shutterdragon: Welcome improvements! I still want Fuji to support in-camera TIFF.
Yes, I love how Fuji does colors. It's unfortunate that "Fuji color" is only limited to JPEG; where I live fog is very common and as everyone probably already know JPEGs result in a lot of banding when shooting fogs.
Welcome improvements! I still want Fuji to support in-camera TIFF.
Curious if it has XF lens profiles.
shutterdragon: Hmm, I'm not too impressed, unfortunately. If Fujifilm would only support in-camera TIFF....
The reason why I want TIFF is simple - I want Fuji color uncompressed. Even if X-Trans RAW is fully supported by the third party, I still want TIFF because I can't always better that Fuji blue and Fuji green when I develop RAW files. A dream scenario would be to have options for Provia/Velvia/Astia/Pro-Neg color options when developing RAW, but I guess that's too much to ask :)
Hmm, I'm not too impressed, unfortunately. If Fujifilm would only support in-camera TIFF....
Jaryl: Why nothing for Fuji X-Pro 1? Is it later or never?
I have 500,000+ images on Aperture, but if Apple doesn't support the X-Trans by the end of the year I will ditch Aperture and go Lightroom.
I love how Provia/Astia colors look, but there's currently no way to apply these color profiles during RAW processing. Too bad I can get these colors only on JPEG - I was really, really hoping Fujifilm would add a TIFF option. Maybe for v3.0?
I bought the X-Pro1 with the 3 initial lenses a month ago. The whole system is still lighter than the Nikon D3S body alone, which is still my main system for serious landscape and portrait photography.
I had always dreamt of a Contax G2 Digital, and the X-Pro1 is dream come true for me. The X-Pro1 closely resembles the G2 in many respects, and if you liked the G2, you will like the X-Pro1. The AF speed is totally adequate and precise, and I feel that many negative comments around its AF performance are understandable but overblown. Again, if you find the AF performance of the G2 to be adequate, you will feel the same for the X-Pro1.
Regarding its IQ, I've fell in love with its fantastic JPEG outputs - it's the first camera that I don't mind shooting in JPEG. The image parameters are highly customizable too, which is great. I shoot in Astia mode with shadow doen turned down a notch.
I do agree that the X-Pro1 is not yet a mature product, but I'm sure Fujifilm will continue to evolve it. I'm already looking forward to the X-Pro2 and the new lenses they have on their roadmap!