Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Fujifilm X-Pro1 first impressions, including sample images

By dpreview staff on Apr 3, 2012 at 18:29 GMT

Just Posted: First impressions of the Fujifilm X-Pro1. We've been using a production standard X-Pro1 for a little while now, as we work on our review. We took this opportunity to write about our impressions of the camera, including a look at the lenses Fujifilm has developed and whether the Pro1 features the quirkiness of the elegant but initially troubled X100. What's it like to shoot with the X-Pro1 and are the images as attractive as the camera's design? Read on to find out.

There are 30 images in this review samples gallery. Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter / magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing (in conjunction with this review), we do so in good faith, please don't abuse it.

Unless otherwise noted images taken with no particular settings at full resolution. Because our review images are now hosted on the 'galleries' section of dpreview.com, you can enjoy all of the new galleries functionality when browsing these samples.

Fujifilm X-Pro1 Preview Samples - posted April 2nd 2012

Comments

Total comments: 211
12
nicolaiecostel
By nicolaiecostel (Apr 3, 2012)

Just took a look at the High ISO images, it looks better than my D700 by some margin and the sharpness in some pics is great. Too bad it's an amateurish-hipsterish kind of camera.

0 upvotes
Richt2000
By Richt2000 (Apr 3, 2012)

Is it? Because of the styling?
The X-pan was a hipster's camera? And the 6x7?

Comment edited 14 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
Tech Talk Tony
By Tech Talk Tony (Apr 4, 2012)

why would it be such a big deal if it had(doubtful) better IQ than an old'ish' camera? This camera could be a larger version of Canon's G1X; slow but good IQ.

0 upvotes
drakkar
By drakkar (Apr 4, 2012)

??? What? Why compares a Canon minor digicam vs the Fuji´s best digicam? what? Do you have a Fuji X-PRO 1? This Fuji beast its in another league!!!!

2 upvotes
bcalkins
By bcalkins (Apr 3, 2012)

Personally I really like these first impression articles, especially when they have 'real world' examples. The studio scene is OK for judging how it handles noise, or jpg versus RAW, but these sample shots really give me an idea of how it will perform in someones' hands with more than one lens, or how the lenses perform wide open, etc. While I have little to no interest in this particular camera, keep 'em coming...

Thanks

13 upvotes
Gesture
By Gesture (Apr 3, 2012)

Makes one wonder. Could this have been made in Leica M mount?

2 upvotes
chlamchowder
By chlamchowder (Apr 4, 2012)

But then...wouldn't you lose autofocus and aperture control from the camera (so no shutter priority or program mode)? Limited communication would also be a problem - using zooms could end up being really clunky.

Also, it seems like the short flange focal distance of Fuji's mount would easily allow a leica M to fuji adapter.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Apr 3, 2012)

Teriffic portrait of the young lady. First Barney making fantastic portrait images with the D800, and now you with the X-Pro1. Feast for the eyes two weeks in a row. Good job, wonderful looking camera.

3 upvotes
malevopfgm
By malevopfgm (Apr 3, 2012)

Wow !!!, it's just me or it outresolves the D800 detail ?, I've just compared the portrait samples from both and I can see the same detail, just check the reflection in the eyes.

1 upvote
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Apr 3, 2012)

I'm very fond of the X-Pro1 (in case you couldn't tell) but no, it most certainly does not out-resolve the D800. Whether you 'need' the additional resolution of the D800 is another question entirely ;-)

2 upvotes
nicolaiecostel
By nicolaiecostel (Apr 3, 2012)

How could it outresolve the D800 ? Does this camera have 36 megapixel ? I have pictures from the D200 looking like that because the portrait of the girls is made with a sharp lens stopped down and most importantly, flash. Flash makes everything sparkle with sharpness.

0 upvotes
Duncan Dimanche
By Duncan Dimanche (Apr 3, 2012)

I really don't get it... why is everybody raving about this camera... i'm looking at that photo (DSCF9381)with the girl walking. shot at ISO 800 an i see no details in the girl..... seriously just look at her shoe laces and you will understand what i mean... it would be good to see those RAW files because those "high" ISO shoot all have that washed out look (it kind of remind me of my Sony HX9 more or less)

Thanks for the review !! cheers !

1 upvote
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Apr 4, 2012)

Duncan,
Look again, it's a man ;-)

7 upvotes
max metz
By max metz (Apr 4, 2012)

There is a clarity advantage to the x-pro1, despite the greater d800 pixel count and resolving power, that seems to be the emerging Fuji x-series trademark - clarity.

0 upvotes
Robert Daniels
By Robert Daniels (Apr 3, 2012)

Whoaaaaa Nelly!!! I think Leica maybe in a little trouble to say the least. these images are good. Especially the low light. Leica will still kill them softly with their lenses...albeit expensive ones.

0 upvotes
dismalist
By dismalist (Apr 4, 2012)

I don't think Leica should be worried. The only reason to buy a M is to have a reliable manual focus, something that none of these mirrorless cameras have.

1 upvote
starwolfy
By starwolfy (Apr 4, 2012)

I'm always intrigued why anytime there is a new camera some people say 'Leica is in trouble'.
Still...a M9 is still one of the only 3 digital rangefinder in the world and still a M9 is the ONLY Full Frame digital rangefinder in the world.
If a Leica user was making his purchase decision based on a list of 'Specs' he would not buy a Leica M9.
Think again and try to understand that no everybody require the sames 'needs' when chosing a camera. This FUji could have 10FPS and clean Iso100 000 that it won't make it more attractive to me.

0 upvotes
max metz
By max metz (Apr 4, 2012)

The Leica digital M system is very special, though at $5,000.00 for a 35mm 1.4 its not within everyone's reach. The x-pro1 system is more within most photographers fiscal grasp and it brings some extra benefits as well - from the examples I have seen the new Fuji lenses perform very well, not surprising as Fuji also made lenses for Hasselblad.

The x-pro doesn't detract from the Leica's, it puts a similar camera system in more photographers hands, that's a good thing.

1 upvote
mandophoto
By mandophoto (Apr 3, 2012)

Impressive. At %100 I can count the slats on the park bench back in the middle of #9992. With a bit of added sharpening in PS, the detail gets even clearer. Cool.

2 upvotes
mcslsk
By mcslsk (Apr 3, 2012)

High ISO images are very impressive!

2 upvotes
Rubenski
By Rubenski (Apr 3, 2012)

The only picture I like is the one of the blond girl.......

....but not for it's IQ, which is a bit disappointing, especially in 'natural' colors like the greens and reds.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Conrad567
By Conrad567 (Apr 3, 2012)

pictures look at least as good as my 5D mark ii. Very nice color rendition.

4 upvotes
Vladik
By Vladik (Apr 3, 2012)

These samples look rather lifeless! I have Fuji FS100 it looks about the same, I gave that cam to my mom and she doesn't even like the picture quality! :)))) For 1600, you can get 5D2 used, it brings this cam to shame, no contest.

0 upvotes
Northgrove
By Northgrove (Apr 3, 2012)

If they look lifeless, keep in mind this and all cameras like it has plenty of options both to add contrast and saturation. This camera also has the velvia film simulation mode which will definitely make the photos "pop" more.

It's important to note that "dull" photos can be a sign of a high dynamic range captured, which is actually a sign of quality. With a greater dynamic range, the photo may look like its contrast is lower since it'll show less shadows and highlights. This is however always easy to boost in post. You'll have a harder time to compensate for a low dynamic range.

6 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Apr 3, 2012)

Vladik:

You extracted the raws in Silkypix then, I assume.

3 upvotes
ashwins
By ashwins (Apr 3, 2012)

Yes, I have had a similar experience with F100 EXR. To me the colors were "lifeless" (otherwise a great camera) and I ended up selling it after a couple of months.

Anyways, the high ISO performance of X-Pro1 is awesome for a APS-C camera!

0 upvotes
Vladik
By Vladik (Apr 4, 2012)

Guys don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing Fuji, I admire what they are trying to do here. I have not tried to process a raw file. Have you? Also, all I'm saying is that for 1600 you can get a different camera that I think has much more to offer. IMO this camera should not cost more than 1000 dollars! By putting such high price tag, Fuji is shooting themselves in the foot.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Apr 3, 2012)

They look "average" to me in terms of photo quality. Meaning about what I would expect from any brand's APS-C sensor in 2011-12.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Apr 3, 2012)

You extracted the raws in the latest Silkypix then, I assume.

Note, the near duplication and no question mark.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Apr 4, 2012)

You aren't making much sense.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Apr 5, 2012)

tkbslc:

I'm making plenty of sense as evinced by others who have clearly answered that question here at DPReview.

I stand by my "no question" mark comment too.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Gesture
By Gesture (Apr 3, 2012)

Good variety of samples, including plenty of people.

3 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Apr 3, 2012)

What an ugly camera. And way too expensive for what you get. I think $133 is a fair price. And why aren't there any sample pictures of hot blonde girls dancing in dark night clubs? I mean, without that particular shot how in the world can we tell how good this mid-20th century radio....I mean camera really is? It looks like the upper left corner is 1/8th stop darker than the bottom right corner. :) LOL Sorry, I couldn't help myself. Looks like a fascinating camera. I wonder if people will insist the AF speed of this camera match other $1,700 cameras.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 13 minutes after posting
9 upvotes
Faintandfuzzy
By Faintandfuzzy (Apr 3, 2012)

I agree...there's no helping you.

5 upvotes
openskyline
By openskyline (Apr 3, 2012)

no one insist the AF speed equal other $1700 cameras except for you.

4 upvotes
dellaaa
By dellaaa (Apr 3, 2012)

Very confused, why didn't DPReview take their standard cheezy studio shot?

Without side by side comparisons as in Image Resources, it is with out question impossible to asses the abilities of a piece of photographic equipment. I believe that's the rational behind standard test charts.

Nothing to learn about the image quality here.

Really, why wasn't the standard studio shot taken????

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Apr 3, 2012)

dellaaa:

Well that studio shot usually has the raw option, and as yet ACR doesn't open these Fuji raws, then this isn't a full review, it's a preview, so no studio setup.

Enough of an answer!

2 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Apr 3, 2012)

@dellaaa,
This is a 'first impressions' piece, a feature we began last year. The studio shot comparison you're looking for is always a part of our in-depth review (coming later). Sometimes we publish those images in advance of a review. We're waiting on raw support for the X-Pro1 to offer a meaningful comparison to the cameras in our database.
You can get a very strong sense of the camera's IQ by downloading the raw files of real-world shots we provided on page 5.

lAs a photographer, I'd take issue with your claim that you can only asses the quality of 'photographic equipment' in a side-by-side comparison. You just have to identify your needs and requirements first.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
9 upvotes
Russell Dawkins
By Russell Dawkins (Apr 4, 2012)

These images are technically good, but all lack something - in the same way I found the X100 images seriously lacking compared even to my Leica D-Lux 4, with all its noise and limited low light capability (and Panasonic genesis). I liked my Fuji f31fd, so it's not as if I have a bias against Fuji, but these images completely lack the magic I see in the Leica X1, for example. I don't get the impression of real sharpness or pleasing colour rendering.

0 upvotes
Sergo
By Sergo (Apr 4, 2012)

System camera Nikon1 best, fast and very beautiful dizain...

0 upvotes
Sergo
By Sergo (Apr 4, 2012)

16MP on APS-C sensor this is terrible, therefore it's not compact camer!

0 upvotes
mbot
By mbot (Apr 4, 2012)

I have never seen pictures this good from any camera in my life, if God made a camera this is it. However, i need all the mod cons and video features and filters in today's modern SLR's and all at a good price, so a Sony a57 will do me just fine.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 211
12