Previous news story    Next news story

Fujifilm X-E1 preview extended

By dpreview staff on Dec 11, 2012 at 11:10 GMT

Just Posted: an extensive update to our Fujifilm X-E1 preview. With a sensor and imaging pipeline that is identical to the X-Pro1's the X-E1 promises much of the X-Pro1's fun in a more compact and affordable package. We've been working with a production sample X-E1 for a couple of weeks and we've been working towards a full review, which we hope to publish early in the new year. In the meantime we've added seven pages to the preview, including our studio test shots and a sample gallery. Click through for a link to the expanded preview, including our 49-image real-world sample gallery.

Comments

Total comments: 113
random name
By random name (9 months ago)

what about the inability to bracket in more than 1 EV increments which makes it basically useless especially with HDR pictures requiring a minimum of 2 EV increments?

0 upvotes
Topworktop
By Topworktop (Dec 13, 2012)

The Fuji X-pro 1 was beyond my budget so I'm happy with this X-E1. I have the black one with the zoom lens and use it together with my GF1+20mm pancake. Most of the online reviews were read before I bought the Fuji and it strikes me that nobody mentioned the sharp edge of the plastic control wheel that you use to change settings.The sharp edge is noticed when you press this little grey wheel to activate the zoom function like you do in manual focus.

I found a very nice tip by another user to use manual focus with 3x zoom and focus lock on Fuji lenses. You first press 3x zoom and aim at the spot you want to put focus on, then push AE-L/AF-L and the lens will focus tack-sharp in manual focus mode. You can also adjust with minimal rotation of the lens barrel to another spot. Press shutter for one or multiple shots. The focus distance will not change. Wish that Fuji comes with a Firmware update where the Fn button can be used for the 3x zoom. That would make me forget the sharp edge.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Gothmoth
By Gothmoth (Dec 13, 2012)

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/29791-panasonic-to-sell-camera-business

0 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Dec 13, 2012)

???? I want a cell phone to take pictures

0 upvotes
grafli
By grafli (Dec 12, 2012)

I'm ipressed with the high ISO capabilities! This stuff wasn't possible even 2 Years ago. (It has better IQ than my EOS 7D)

4 upvotes
Erik van den Elsen
By Erik van den Elsen (Dec 13, 2012)

...well being better than the 7D isn't such an achievement (I own one myself)...

0 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Dec 12, 2012)

without a "window" on the front of the camera is ugly - the classic style is broken. . .

3 upvotes
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (Dec 13, 2012)

It looks blind!

1 upvote
Holger Drallmeyer
By Holger Drallmeyer (Dec 13, 2012)

But then, who cares. I only care about image and build quality. If I wanted fancy I'd get a M8 Hermes.

5 upvotes
Erik van den Elsen
By Erik van den Elsen (Dec 13, 2012)

ok, then DON't buy it! I buy a camera for the pictures it delivers...

2 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Dec 13, 2012)

at least such an optical viewfinder like the X10 would have been enough . . .

1 upvote
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Dec 18, 2012)

It has that Klaatu look. How about if it had a phony cosmetic viewfinder/rangefinder arrangement? Like a decal?

(My eyes are not glazing over.)

0 upvotes
Paul Farace
By Paul Farace (Dec 29, 2012)

I'm with rusticus... I have the X100 and love the hybrid viewfinder... and it has shown me how an EVF CAN sometimes be good (like in macro mode when it eliminates paralax)... but I still want an OPTICAL VIEWFINDER BABY!!! Even a cheap one that slides on to the hotshoe and is matched to the lens.

0 upvotes
Cavalu
By Cavalu (Dec 12, 2012)

will be interested to see how dpreview will address in full review the flash behavior of XE1 built in mini flash:
Correction is limited to +/- 2/3 EV.
Using it as fill in flash in normal/ambient shadow conditions it works decent to have results hardly detectable as being flashed. But in low light conditions with higher Iso I get results looking always almost over exposured, showing too much flash light and destroyed atmosphere. Low speeds settings, correct manual aperture settings and rear curtain sync does not help. Flash looks always too strong. Would need flash power correction to -2 EV to achieve desired results looking non flashed. This way I used to operate with Nikon gear as D7000.
Hopefully Fujifilm will/can improve this by software update.
The High Iso potential of this camera demands are very controllable fill in flash capability under low light. This is what I am missing.
Also external Fujifilm Flash XE 20 offers only +/- 1 EV correction.

0 upvotes
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (Dec 12, 2012)

Why is the X-Pro1 more expensive than the X-E1?
X-Pro1 has awful AF, and a gimmicky OVF

1 upvote
zinedi
By zinedi (Dec 12, 2012)

It is exactly that marvellous hybrid OVF - with distance scale, level line, over 100% view, .. which is absolutely unique and reminiscent of range-finder classic, that stands out this camera over the others.

2 upvotes
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (Dec 12, 2012)

I've played with it, it's definitely high-tech....
but then theres the problem of parallax! and the EVF mode is like 256 color....reminiscent of computer screens of the 90s...haha

1 upvote
zinedi
By zinedi (Dec 12, 2012)

The parallax correction is indicated there too. But of course it is not as precise for close-ups, but for this the EVF is there easy switchable - yes EVF is worse than the state of the art - but OVF has only Fuji.

0 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Dec 12, 2012)

>Es ist genau diese wunderbare Hybrid OVF - mit Abstand Maßstab, Ad, über 100%-Ansicht, .. das ist absolut einzigartig und erinnert an Entfernungsmesser classic, das sich diese Kamera über die anderen.<
yes - and that is why I still have the X100 -
still my no. 1 of FUJI

0 upvotes
TWHTom
By TWHTom (Dec 12, 2012)

Autofocus is the same on X-Pro1 and X-E1 when you use the same lens and firmware. X-Pro1 offers optical viewfinder and higher resolution LCD - whether cost is justified depends on your needs - for some it's worth it.

0 upvotes
massimogori
By massimogori (Dec 13, 2012)

@TWTTom: confirmed, it is definitely worth! The OVF involves you in the action and allows you to foresee the time for the right composition ( There are more things in heaven and earth, Qweryasdf, than are seen by your sensor: a wider coverage in the viewfinder may help)

0 upvotes
hexxthalion
By hexxthalion (Dec 17, 2012)

@ qwertyasdf and what did you expect from a VF which doesn't see through the lens other than parallax issue????? really, comments like this make no sense

Comment edited 15 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
soro11
By soro11 (Dec 12, 2012)

I had a Canon 5DmarkII, but it was too heavy to carry all the stuff around.Now I have the Fuji X-E1 with the 18-55mm.
It is superb, great pictures taken on iso 3200;1/30
I hope you come soon with a real review on this camera.
In the meantime you can look at the preview from Ken Rockwell http://www.kenrockwell.com/fuji/x-e1.htm

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
SergeyMS
By SergeyMS (Dec 12, 2012)

Excellent camera. I use it with Leica lenses 1.4 35mm. I like it very much. Colors are different from Leica M9, but also quite good. Ergonomic is super. Nex7 makes prefect picture, but ergonomic is weak. MD-5 has relatively big noise level. I think that pictures in Dpreview compare tool for MD-5 is not correct, in reality noise level is much bigger. I need in raw developing software for Fuji for Mac. Lightroom develops Fuji's raw files very badly.

1 upvote
helmut weber
By helmut weber (Dec 12, 2012)

The more i read comments the more i see ignorant people about technique!! Sorry for my english!

5 upvotes
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Dec 12, 2012)

Heh. Kein Sch--ß!

0 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (Dec 12, 2012)

"The XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R OIS LM offers a fairly-standard 28-80mm equivalent zoom range, but with an unusually fast maximum aperture."

Really? Unusual? Are DPR not aware that Canon, Nikon, Tamron, Tokina, and Sigma ALL have this zoom with at CONSTANT f/2.8 aperture?

2 upvotes
helmut weber
By helmut weber (Dec 12, 2012)

Not unusual!! Nikon Canon ecc... with 2.8 aperture are huge, heavy and made for reflex cameras!!! Don't you know!! !8-55 for small sensor so small does not exist with 2.8. aperture! Dpreview is right!!

9 upvotes
zinedi
By zinedi (Dec 12, 2012)

But they are true optical - opticaly corrected lenses, which is big difference from heavily software corrected lenses.

0 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (Dec 12, 2012)

Did DPR say that the lens was unusually light? No, they said it has an unusually fast maximum aperture.

ALL the lenses I mentioned are DX lenses, not full frame. They were made for the SAME size sensor in the X-E1.

DPR is flat out wrong helmut.

Comment edited 46 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
stevez
By stevez (Dec 12, 2012)

I believe what they meant is that the lens is "unusually fast" for a kit lens supplied with a MILC. Perhaps you didn't get the implication.

15 upvotes
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Dec 12, 2012)

Let's take it to a judge. Oh, Judy, Juuuuuuudy!

Later...

Judy gives it to Steve.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (Dec 12, 2012)

"In return its rear screen is slightly downgraded in terms of both size and resolution, to a still-respectable 2.8" 460k dot LCD - according to Fujifilm this is necessary to keep the camera's size down."

Really? Then why is the NEX 7 smaller with a larger screen with MORE resolution? More idiotic marketing from FUJIFILM.

0 upvotes
Petka
By Petka (Dec 12, 2012)

Maybe Fuji considers the X-Pro1 button layout more important than LCD size in X-E1. At least I do, using X-E1 as a spare body with X-Pro1.

3 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (Dec 13, 2012)

Irrelevant. Fujifilm marketing is making crap up.

0 upvotes
evoprox
By evoprox (Dec 13, 2012)

Fuji learned a great deal from Leica, including this one. You can put crap LCDs on 7000 dollar cameras, people buy them anyway.

0 upvotes
JanIIISobieski
By JanIIISobieski (Dec 16, 2012)

It's mot portable DVD player its photographic camera... in my opinion its better to have slightly smaller screen in advantage of more space for buttons and for your thumb-this is only one thing that I really don't like about E-M5(in my opinion the best all-around EVIL camera) design screen is to f. huge taking space that could be use for bigger buttons or more thumb rest area. nex-7 screen have different aspect ratio, so no totally available space is similar with that of x-e1.

About resolution...this days you can produce HD 720p of that size so that's FUJI fail statement:)
X-E1 screen is good enough, but good colors, I can compere it only to my old nex-5 920k screen and really maybe Fuji screen its not stat of art but its up to current standards.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
citrontokyo
By citrontokyo (Dec 12, 2012)

I'm beginning to think these extended previews are just so that the kids at DPReview have more time to play with the toys...hmmm. Envious I am.

3 upvotes
massimogori
By massimogori (Dec 12, 2012)

While using two canon dslr, I started thinking about the raw processing, noise removing, sharpening, color balancing, retouching... What a boring process. And how far from the simple kodachrome or velvia slide approach!

I understand that pros may need all that, but for a traveller like I am, the Fuji approach can give you back all the pleasure and immediacy. Without compromising on quality.

The results from my x-pro 1 look fantastic, in spite of the inexperienced photographer I am. I expect the shots taken with the xe-1 to be on the same league

5 upvotes
Kokeen4231
By Kokeen4231 (Dec 12, 2012)

They are in the same league :p. Except for a cutdown of features that do not affect your features, the xe1 is almost identical.

0 upvotes
Gediminas 8
By Gediminas 8 (Dec 12, 2012)

"I understand that pros may need all that, but for a traveller like I am, the Fuji approach can give you back all the pleasure and immediacy. Without compromising on quality."

Exactly!

0 upvotes
zinedi
By zinedi (Dec 12, 2012)

"The results from my x-pro 1 look fantastic, in spite of the inexperienced photographer I am."

And now try to imagine how boring, flat, mediocre and poor those results will look to you, when you become experienced photographer - then you inevitably will be interested in some good raw based workflow. Good luck in gathering experience.

0 upvotes
massimogori
By massimogori (Dec 12, 2012)

Zinedi, either you know me better than I do or you did not read that I happily trashed my raw workflow thanks to my Fuji. :-D

3 upvotes
zinedi
By zinedi (Dec 12, 2012)

Yes, that's easy to trash Fuji raw workflow when it is so bad/unexisting as it is. But not every and each photographer (whatever experienced) does with velvia and .jpg only.

2 upvotes
massimogori
By massimogori (Dec 12, 2012)

Actually, I trashed Canon's workflow... Please read. Please read.

1 upvote
Gediminas 8
By Gediminas 8 (Dec 12, 2012)

zinedi,

Why do you feel the need to preach what other people should be using when they are perfectly happy with what they have? Will you not sleep at night if someone enjoys their jpeg's and does not use RAW at all?

0 upvotes
zinedi
By zinedi (Dec 12, 2012)

@Gediminas 8: Not at all, everything is all right with my sleep. But when someone has the right to tell the others that he doesn't need RAW I feel my need to express my very need of RAW workflow. It would be very bad (from my point of view) if manufacturers would not support RAW workflow - jpg lovers have nothing to lose.

0 upvotes
Gediminas 8
By Gediminas 8 (Dec 12, 2012)

Well, I did not see anyone telling you in a patronising tone that when you become an experienced photographer you will realise you don't need RAW:)

Anyway, having the option of RAW is always good, no dispute. It's just that sometimes it's good not to bother with it.

0 upvotes
zinedi
By zinedi (Dec 12, 2012)

Holy flame of ardour for jpg was cooled down by a bit patronising tone - OK? And inexperience playing card was taken out by you - I turned it back - it's your gamble.

0 upvotes
massimogori
By massimogori (Dec 13, 2012)

zinedi, before raw, before jpg, try a little bit of more civilized and open approach. Your photographic subject will not rush away from you and you will take better photos.

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
lxcellent
By lxcellent (Dec 11, 2012)

If you are interested, I reviewed this camera over the weekend and posted my review here:

http://lxcellent.blogspot.com/2012/12/test-drive-of-fujifilm-x-e1.html

Given the drop in price of the X-Pro1, you also might want to read my review of that camera here:

http://lxcellent.blogspot.com/2012/12/normal-0-false-false-false-en-us-ja-x.html

5 upvotes
onlooker
By onlooker (Dec 12, 2012)

Interesting, but have you considered using regular fonts? An all-caps article is really hard to read. I quit after a while.

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
lxcellent
By lxcellent (Dec 12, 2012)

Just changed it. Sorry 'bout that, bud.

2 upvotes
Foxjet
By Foxjet (Dec 12, 2012)

Excellent reviews, thanks for the links.

0 upvotes
AlfieBB
By AlfieBB (Dec 13, 2012)

Best review I've read on the EX-1. Still torn between this one and the Olympus OM-5. Anyone have thoughts on that?

1 upvote
vroger1
By vroger1 (Dec 11, 2012)

If you are speaking about "Panasonic"- their lenses are magnificent. Idon't just mean their Leica branded lenses. They as always are superb. The Lumix lenses themselves are beyond belief. Their 45-200 (90-400 efl) is too sharp for the average portrait. What the FZ200 has, however, is that constant f 2.8 aperture. I feel now that I can sit at a coffeehouse, and image people at other tables in available light, without too much noise at 1600 ISO from a distance, and avoid their movement blur which drives ma crazy. The average zoom, which closes down at longer focal lengths - always made this difficult.

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Dec 11, 2012)

Panasonic lens are sharp, yes. But unfortunately they are heavily software corrected in camera and it does have a price.

And for that amount of SW correction, they are heavily overpriced. You are actually paying for cheap, distorted and full of CA lens with software correction. Grats to that. They are only sharp. Which on other hand is almost everything else too.

New Sony "pancake" zoom for NEX is same, they just fixed via SW even bigger distortion, without fix it doesnt even cover APS-C sensor.

I like digital age, but I really dont like this aspect.

5 upvotes
random78
By random78 (Dec 12, 2012)

I don't quite agree to this notion. Whatever is the price of the SW correction, it is reflected in the final result. If the final result from a SW corrected lens is better than the final result from the optically corrected lens then it is a better lens in my opinion.

6 upvotes
limlh
By limlh (Dec 12, 2012)

Software correction is a good thing, but the lens should not be over-priced, like Panasonic 7-14 mm.

3 upvotes
Gediminas 8
By Gediminas 8 (Dec 12, 2012)

vroger1,
Nice that you love your Panasonic products as your continued posts here show, but haven't you ever thought that there might be more appropriate places to preach Panasonic's advanced point-and-shoot cameras (or bridge cameras if you prefer) than under an article on a Fujifilm mirrorless camera?

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
1 upvote
wayfarers
By wayfarers (Dec 12, 2012)

I fully agree with Mescalamba. What optics missed or distorted the electronic correction can not retrieve, because... it is not there. The electronic correction is simply using algorithms to extrapolate and to "guess" missing details. While usually it does not really matter that much, the bottom line is: there is no substitution for a correctly designed high quality glass.

1 upvote
JackM
By JackM (Dec 12, 2012)

Too bad Panasonic colors aren't very good.

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Dec 12, 2012)

random78

Well, problem is that optically corrected lens would be better than SW corrected. Maybe it would be more expensive, but thing is "SW" correction is "free". Everyone can do it. Just flick CA/fringe in LightRoom and enable distortion correction. Done.

Btw. thats why Leica designed lens for m4/3 are quite a bit bigger and expensive.

I have nothing with "tiny bit" of SW correction. But both Panasonic and Sony are way over that "tiny bit". For example Samsung does this too, but its exactly that tolerable amount. Ofc Samsung does number of other things wrong, so this doesnt help them that much..

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Dec 12, 2012)

JackM

Panasonic colors are ok. You just need to avoid LightRoom or create custom color profiles for it. I thought same, then I tried Capture One. Colors depend on ICC profiles which are unique to each RAW converting SW. If you shoot studio shot and had Sony NEX-5N, Nikon D5100, Panasonic GX-1 and made correct ICC profiles for all of them, you wouldnt be able to tell difference, unless you have supergood eye for color.

0 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (Dec 11, 2012)

Glad to see that you are giving this worthy manufacturer more mindshare. :)

6 upvotes
vroger1
By vroger1 (Dec 11, 2012)

Sorry- in the last post- my fingers got dyslexic. The every day camera was the Canon G1X- the GX1 comes later in the post. VRR

0 upvotes
vroger1
By vroger1 (Dec 11, 2012)

My always with me camera for a long time was the GX1- but I needed something with greater lens flexibility. Towards that end I am now carrying (only for the time being to test it) the FZ200. It's a little on the ungainly side but the results have been satisfyingly sharp. When I travel I carry a Lumix GX1- for everyday.

0 upvotes
zdys
By zdys (Dec 11, 2012)

Just ordered a Leica M adapter - the low cost version. Will test some Zeiss and Leica lenses on it. Elmarit 28mm seems to be a good choice for this machine, what do you think? It should be the always with me camera/ lens combination.

0 upvotes
Clint Dunn
By Clint Dunn (Dec 11, 2012)

Buyer beware! I own a Zeiss 25mm Biogon that I tried on my XPro1 with the M adapter...and the results are awful. Basically the outer third of the image is smeared with little detail.
The same Lens on my Leica M8 was TACK sharp right into the corners, even at f2.8

6 upvotes
Clint Dunn
By Clint Dunn (Dec 11, 2012)

Forgot to mention, I also have a 50mm Summicron that works quite nicely on the Fuji, so it seems to be the wide angle lenses with issues.

6 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Dec 12, 2012)

Fuji doesn't have the microlenses to handle Leica's lens designs for wide angles. It won't happen with Fujifilm wides or with Leica lenses that aren't wide angle.

2 upvotes
carlosdelbianco
By carlosdelbianco (Dec 12, 2012)

I've heard many times Biogons don't go well with some digital cameras, specially older Sony models. Never tested though.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
JohanP
By JohanP (Dec 11, 2012)

I traded my D7000 with a bunch of lenses for a X-E1, 18-55, 35/1.4. I am really happy with it. Better IQ, light, have it with me every time I leave home, 35/1.4 is amazing. But, it isn't a SLR. Don't expect CAF and it isn't as fast as a SLR. But I am not in a hurry when photographing. Very happy with it. I find myself just playing around with the shutter time dial... or aperture ring... old school and I like it.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
IrishhAndy
By IrishhAndy (Dec 11, 2012)

Yes I found it to lack detail even with NR to -2. It has weird colour noise and the shadows are blue. I had to send two back for horizontal purple bands at the bottom of images.

If I do get another one I shall wait for a price drop. It is cheaply built compared to my OM_D and yje lenses are a bit flimsy for the price.

You would have thought Fuji would have sorted out the firmware and ergonomics after a year of beta testing by the X Pto users but no.

2 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Dec 11, 2012)

Ehm, about what you are talking, RAW or JPEG? If you expect JPEG to have IQ of RAW, then you are expecting bit too much. Tho JPEG from X-Pro 1 and X-E 1 is still way better than most cams can ever do.

Oh and if you are ACR or LR for RAW developing, you are doing it wrong. :)

5 upvotes
IrishhAndy
By IrishhAndy (Dec 11, 2012)

No ! Fuji are doing it wrong. How can raws be worse than the already poor jpegs? If you think the jpegs are good you must have shot Nikon or Canon.

If you want proper jpegs on a proper sensor get an OM-D.

3 upvotes
Gediminas 8
By Gediminas 8 (Dec 11, 2012)

Irishhandy,

You certainly do not sound like an objective reviewer - more like someone badly hurt by Fuji. I know you've been unlucky with two X-E1s, but statements like "the lenses are a bit flimsy for the price" and "Fuji are doing it wrong. How can raws be worse than the already poor jpegs? If you think the jpegs are good you must have shot Nikon or Canon" sound like something from a trolling textbook, going diametrally against every other review out there.

And talking about ergonomics: how do you "sort it out after a year"? By a firmware update perhaps? I personally found the _OM-D_ unbearable from this standpoint.

4 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Dec 11, 2012)

If you think this gallery of OOC JPEGs is poor, then please point me to direction of better JPEGs. Frankly except my old KM-7D I havent seen much better ones. Certainly not from big names.

Fuji did it right. Im not sure how you can tie Adobe to Fuji. I hope you understand that Adobe is 3rd party converter. And in case of Fuji it was always bit iffy. I guess they have something against them, cause I dont have another explanation.

2 upvotes
Pixel Judge
By Pixel Judge (Dec 11, 2012)

This might be the best set of 'real world photos' from DPReview. Each one was thoughtfully shoot.
Look forward to your full review.

3 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (Dec 12, 2012)

Chicago will do that to you. Amazing city.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Dec 11, 2012)

Geez, it's got to be at least a stop better for chroma noise than all the other APS-C and m4/3 cameras in both JPEG and RAW. Impressive!

1 upvote
sandy b
By sandy b (Dec 11, 2012)

NR in raw. It loses detail too. i want to control raw myself.

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Dec 11, 2012)

You sure it uses NR in RAW?

2 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (Dec 11, 2012)

Another conspiracy theory.

4 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Dec 11, 2012)

Not really conspiracy theory, it does smooth out bit of chroma noise in RAW. But nothing important really, if you process RAW right (today it means only two RAW developers - RPP for MAC or Photivo for Win machine), then you will see that NR isnt issue.

Demoisacing algorithms are problem, so sticking to JPEG is usually better and easier. That said, both RPP and Photivo can give you pretty sweet files to work with too.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1171984/0#11174187

Here is "how to", Im not saying its easy, but it does work to some degree and it does work way better than anything else so far. It just complicated, so be prepared to face it and fight it. Results are quite worth it.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
ProfHankD
By ProfHankD (Dec 11, 2012)

Just math, actually. See page 11 of the review for the sensor CFA pattern. It has 8/36 instead of 9/36 sensels each for red and blue, which means 5% less color information than standard Bayer CFAs. It also has 5% more green (roughly, luminance). That might not sound like a bit difference, but it's huge. Interpolating color along luminance-defined boundaries gives the effects everyone is noting.

2 upvotes
sandy b
By sandy b (Dec 11, 2012)

tk, the review clearly says it has it. Don't get me wrong, the jpgs are out of this world good. I just want straight up raws to work with. If this thing could focus like a dslr, they could sell a million of them. really.

1 upvote
ProfHankD
By ProfHankD (Dec 11, 2012)

Looks good... but this is a NEX-6 competitor, not NEX-7.

Oh yeah, no NEX-6 review yet. ;-) Ok, compare with the NEX-5N -- looks like Fuji has less raw color noise, but much softer detail... both probably due to the interpolation algorithm for the Fuji sensor. Put another way, Fuji has less raw color data so there's more luminance-directed smoothing going on, which obviously can work. Fuji does a nice job of preserving the "Fuji look" in their handling of colors in general.

Overall, this is still a little pricey compared to a NEX-6, but it is nice to see another company getting a more competitive entry in the mirrorless APS-C field. Pitty they don't all have the same or compatible lens mounts....

2 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (Dec 11, 2012)

Very little to complain about the images from this camera. High ISO colors are a little muted, other than that, this camera does a great job.

0 upvotes
Seagull67
By Seagull67 (Dec 11, 2012)

Bought several weeks ago on the strength of hugely liking my results with the X100. Delighted with this camera too. Great in the hand, easy to carry with you always. Superb pictures. Autofocus still a wee bit sluggish sometimes but it's not really a problem as it's not a camera for taking snapshots. I only shoot jpegs, the colour is always pleasingly natural and accurate. Great product in terms of function & aesthetics.

2 upvotes
tiberiousgracchus
By tiberiousgracchus (Dec 11, 2012)

Related to the subject at hand. The images look wonderful. I just have gotten so used to the Evf/Ovf on the X100 I really think the X-Pro 1 is more attractive, perhaps slightly larger but a necessity all the same for me.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
M Irwin
By M Irwin (Dec 11, 2012)

I have to say that those high-ISOs are stellar. I love Fuji's rendering choices, allowing for some grain and shying away from over-smearing that others would call "clean". I'd call the Sony and Olympus images cartoonish with Pentax second best to Fuji.

6 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (Dec 11, 2012)

Why RAW mages are so blurry?

0 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (Dec 11, 2012)

This camera uses a different color array pattern on the sensor. The RAW converters need updating to handle the conversion properly. This was covered in the preview.

3 upvotes
IrishhAndy
By IrishhAndy (Dec 11, 2012)

Jpegs also lack detail and suffer from colour bleeding, lack of detail and excessive noise reduction.

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Dec 11, 2012)

Yea and still those JPEGs look way better than anything else, even on print. :) These days is custom to exaggerate every issue camera has so someone could whine.

Kodak SLR on you, then you could whine. :D

5 upvotes
Hubertus Bigend
By Hubertus Bigend (Dec 11, 2012)

Is it just me, or is my impression correct that since Amazon's acqusition of dpreview even the most popular cameras take longer and longer to get reviewed and more and more reviews only come in trickles? If I still was the "early adopter" of camera tech I kind of used to be for some time, dpreview could not exert much influence on my decisions anymore these days.

18 upvotes
Luc de Schepper
By Luc de Schepper (Dec 11, 2012)

No, it's not just you. I think Dpreview has become that slow in reviewing new cameras and lenses that the site has lost it's interest for a lot of people. See also the whining interest in the forums. If they don't change this policy Dpreview will be an - extint - dinosaur soon. Enthousiastic bloggers like Ming Thein, Robin Wong etc. will take over because they are able (and willing!) to act fast. Manafacturers are already aware of this and give their new stuff to these bloggers to review.

20 upvotes
neo_nights
By neo_nights (Dec 11, 2012)

Seriously, guys? It's been YEARS since Amazon's acquisition and you are STILL complaining about it? Why don't you complain about film's death instead? :)

Comment edited 14 seconds after posting
16 upvotes
EricWN
By EricWN (Dec 11, 2012)

@neo_nights: Please read before typing. Nobody complained about the acquisition at all.

7 upvotes
antifocus
By antifocus (Dec 11, 2012)

Yeah, but I still think dpreview's camera review is one of the best in the business, so it is understandable why it always takes so long.....

1 upvote
DeanAllan
By DeanAllan (Dec 11, 2012)

Uhm..... what has film's death(or apparent slow demise) got to do with slow reviews?

The site's name is dpreview, it does reviews on digital photography. People come to the site for the reviews. If it does not have the latest or is not forthcoming with the reviews on digital photography, it sort of defeat the purpose of having a gear review site in the first place doesn't it?
Dpreview is expanding more into other aspect of photography other than just gear reviews, I find that commendable and I do like it but I still stand by my earlier point.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
10 upvotes
Luc de Schepper
By Luc de Schepper (Dec 11, 2012)

@antifocus; yes, the reviews are thorough and ok. They just lose their relevance because of the delays. And so is Dpreview as a site to which people turn for their info. Smart businesses understand the need for keeping up with progress or even better lead the way. Companies like Kodak didn't, look where they stand now (talking about flim's death ...)

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Dec 11, 2012)

After all these years, I've virtually given up on DPR. It's a hand-wringing shame. Not only do the reviews come by trickles, but some of them are even being done by another reviewer. Now I'll have to be slogging thru Reviews.CNET, Digilloyd, Imaging Resource, Digital Camera Review, Steve's Digicams, Photography Blog, 1001 Noisy Cameras, ByThom, SansMirror, Digital Camera Info, Cameralabs, DCResource, The Digital Picture, Pixel-Peeper, DXOmark, Lenstip, SLRgear, DPInterface, Steve Huff, Engadget, Techradar, Pocket Lint, Ken Rockwell, Luminous Landscape, Photozone.de, and a few others. I'd rather not have to do that.

1 upvote
neo_nights
By neo_nights (Dec 11, 2012)

@EricWN - Ok. I should've made myself clearer: I know the OP didn't complain about the acquisition per se. What he complained (and has been beaten to death over and over and over again, and it is sill going) is that "after DPREVIEW's been bought by Amazon, the reviews are getting slower and blah blah blah".

@DeanAllan - Film's death doesn't have anything to do. I was just being sarcastic. Since people still complain about an OLD thing (relating Amazon to anything bad that happens to DPReview), people should go back even further and complain about Film x Digital again.

Thing is: reviews here have always being slower than other sites. The difference is that years ago there weren't anywhere near SO MANY camera releases as there are now. So that's why things seem slower. Simply there are too many cameras to review.
Only if they had a team of 50+ people....

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
Roman Korcek
By Roman Korcek (Dec 11, 2012)

It's just you. Previously, there have been say two reviews per month ona average. Now we have a new article every other day, and a review once every 14 days on average.

2 upvotes
MrPetkus
By MrPetkus (Dec 11, 2012)

I'd really like to see a review of the Canon 6D. BTW, what ever happened to the Nikon D4 and Canon 1DX? I thought perhaps these bodies were too high-end for DPR but I noticed the D3 was tested ages ago.

Edit: Comments that DPR are useless now, however, is unfair. I still find their reviews to be among the best in the industry.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Simon Joinson
By Simon Joinson (Dec 11, 2012)

We still don't have a 6D we can review, but we're expecting one this week (and will push hard to get something out before christmas)

2 upvotes
waitungh
By waitungh (Dec 11, 2012)

Yes, I goto DigitalRev TV for reviews of new camera gear now ^_^ keke!

2 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Dec 11, 2012)

I think DPreview is waiting and hoping for easy to use RAW support, cause they dont want to give bad grades to X-E1.

Its very easy to destroy something in review, but its pretty hard to do really good and objective review.

Yea and remember than DPreview is usually giving you very thorough and complex reviews. This site is benchmark to "how reviews should be done". And so far I didnt see any other matching it.

2 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Dec 11, 2012)

@ Hubertus (if anyone is even still reading this) we're reviewing at full capacity, but the team is going to be getting bigger very soon.

Reviews take a long time, and they always will, but one of the reasons we're releasing updated previews, like this one, is to give you as much review content as possible as we work through them.

3 upvotes
elvedhel
By elvedhel (Dec 11, 2012)

already have the X-E1 with 18-55, and with one of the shots taken with it just won and recieved a Fuji XP170 from fujifilm cmpetition. X-E1, sublime to use and amazing colour renditions. now just need adobe to sort out ACR to fully support RAF and then its job done

6 upvotes
Rocker44
By Rocker44 (Dec 11, 2012)

Was just looking at old Fuji 35mm compacts, the X-E1 and X-Pro both remind me of the Fujifilm Klasse W.

Funny how things come around again.

Right... I'm off to read the review properly.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 113