Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Fujifilm X-Pro1 review

By dpreview staff on Jun 28, 2012 at 18:20 GMT

Just Posted: Fujifilm X-Pro1 review. The X-Pro1 is Fujifilm's first mirrorless interchangeable lens camera and it aims straight for the high-end camera enthusiast as the equally classically-styled X100 before it. However, far from simply being a 16MP X100 with interchangeable lenses, the X-Pro1 also features characteristically adventurous Fujifilm technology: a X-Trans CMOS sensor. This uses a non-standard color filter array which promises less susceptibility to moiré, avoiding the need for a low-pass filter - promising sharper images. Fujifilm has announced an impressive XF lens roadmap, so is it done justice by the first X-mount body?

Comments

Total comments: 271
12
peevee1
By peevee1 (Jul 18, 2012)

From the review:
"As the first mirrorless camera aimed specifically towards professional photographers, the X-Pro1 has no really direct competitors. Arguably the closest is the Sony NEX-7, and we've chosen the enthusiast-orientated Panasonic GX1 to represent the Micro Four Thirds system."

Why not OM-D E-M5? Unlike GX1, it has built-in viewfinder and much closer in price (although still significantly cheaper).

0 upvotes
richard stone
By richard stone (Jul 5, 2012)

Years ago, when I bought my Contax G2, there were innumerable posts about the superiority of the Leica by folks who had never used the G2 and didn't much like or trust auto-focus, and who truly believed that all things Leica were better than anything Contax.

My Fiji GA645 is a superb and fun MF camera, with an excellent lens.

It is completely misguided to even suggest that somehow Fuji doesn't know how to make excellent cameras and lenses, or that Fuji FILM doesn't know sharpness and colors, just as much as Leica, Hasselblad, Schneider, not to mention Canon and Nikon, etc.

The Fuji reminds me a lot of the Contax G2, in terms of size and shape and appearance, and innovation. The jpg images seem superb. I assume that after a while the RAW processing techniques will catch up to the sensor output.

For people who want to focus manually, it seems clear that the XPro is designed mainly to be used on AF. So if you are "Old School' maybe new isn't for you.

4 upvotes
Haydaristan
By Haydaristan (Jul 3, 2012)

HOWABOUTRAW, That's what you wanne believe.
Why does Hasselblad not use Zeis lenses anymore in the digital domain? It's all Fujinon so what you are saying is like Hasselblad made the wrong choice.A rolls royce with a wrong engine? I don't think so.
Are these colors not good? They could have been using Zeiss, Leica or maybe Schneider Kreuznach.
Fujinon is a leader in hospital equipment as well and makes very good lenses which are being used on pro cameras with soccer matches and about the Nissan Gt-r.
That Nissan and Renault work together doesn't mean that it is a modified Renault.It's a pure Nissan car, a further developed Skyline with a Nissan engine.
Jesus it's like me am working for Fujinon and Nissan. Wish I had a Gt-R.
Take care.

3 upvotes
Kaushik Parmar
By Kaushik Parmar (Jul 4, 2012)

Well said.

0 upvotes
FTW
By FTW (Jul 5, 2012)

If someone here criticizes anything the Fuji does in lenses, he is walking beside his shoes. If someone says that this Fuji camera is a must, that it is functional and optimal, he is also walking beside his shoes. With the price Fuji asks for the body alone, Fuji is walking beside their shoes too.

The body is for me worth 1200$. Add to this a 450$ lens and you have the price of just any good DSLR. Look the technology and picture quality of a D7000 or a A77, and compare. So, on the end, for that price you could get from Fuji just an amazing good picture quality, nothing more.

A D800 with a decent lens is not so far away from the X1 pricing. Compare what you get, what you could get and what you not get. Here the winner is probably what you not get. I am interested in the Fuji picture quality and would take in charge X1 disadvantages, but not at that price. I bought the S5 and am still happy with it, and also that body was overpriced, but it was to me worth the price I paid for it

0 upvotes
FTW
By FTW (Jul 5, 2012)

I do not enter in a discussion about the Leica sickness. That is a hopeless case anyway. Here one can take the old rule that says that every second a sucker is born, all you need is to find him on your way.

1 upvote
Haydaristan
By Haydaristan (Jul 3, 2012)

I know why people always have comments about Fuji because it's a Fuji yes and not a very expensive name like Leica.
It's like buying a Ferarri or Lamborghini costing hundreds of thousands of euros but a Nissan Gt-r costing 5 times less beats the hell out of them in every sense, acceleration or lap times but it's only a Nissan and a Ferarri sounds more impressive.
Come on we all know that Hasselblad's digital bodies and lenses are made by Fuji and some old analog Hasselblad cameras were Fujis with a Hasselblad name on it.
I have been using a lot of Fuji's and I must say love the the quality, the colors.
There is no camera on this planet which is perfect or near perfect so what.
It's not about impressing, it's about making nice pictures with character.It's the person behind the gear.Peace.
No further comments.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
7 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Jul 3, 2012)

Many Leica M lenses still beat Fuji lens for colour.

Look the Fuji X Pro 1 is a really interesting camera, but it's not akin to the Nissan (ironically Renault controlled) GTR.

The Fuji doesn't have the auto focus performance of a Nikon D3s, nor the super high ISO capacity of that Nikon, nor does the Fuji have good manual focus--so those are reasons the GTR comparison breaks down.

Many old Hasselblad medium format film cameras used Zeiss lenses--which many times also do better colour than Fuji lenses.

Then Fuji shoots itself in the foot by picking Silkypix to do the first raw extraction software for the X Pro1.

0 upvotes
Petka
By Petka (Jul 3, 2012)

So somebody has already done extensive color testing with the new Fuji lenses for X-Pro1 versus Leica M lenses? Could you give the ulr?

To my eyes X-Pro1 beats Nikon D3s at high ISO...

Besides we rather compare X-Pro1 to Leica M9, because it does not even pretend to compete with DLSRs, much less the top Pro-DSLRs. I would not even think of taking X-Pro1 to a soccer game or shooting wildlife. I have D4 & D800 for that. Different tools for different uses.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Jul 2, 2012)

This camera looks like design fail of early '90s. No thanks, I'll stick to something less ugly.

1 upvote
ggsphoto
By ggsphoto (Jul 2, 2012)

Please could someone remove this rediculous comment.

13 upvotes
Zebooka
By Zebooka (Jul 3, 2012)

Ugh. This is perfect design!
PS: All people have different opinions.

1 upvote
fotokeena
By fotokeena (Jul 3, 2012)

he wants something pretty to hang around his neck, regardless it works or not。

1 upvote
Vitruvius
By Vitruvius (Jul 4, 2012)

FYI, it’s not the camera that people are cringing at when you take their picture...

1 upvote
Plastek
By Plastek (Jul 4, 2012)

@fotokeena lol, as if cameras that look decent work wouldn't work?

0 upvotes
aris14
By aris14 (Jul 2, 2012)

This camera is a true Noise eliminator!
Astonishing!

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Jul 3, 2012)

The shutter's quite, unlike the Nikon D3s.

0 upvotes
Nperjesi
By Nperjesi (Jul 1, 2012)

I am a pro photographer in Copenhagen, Denmark with 25 years in the business, and worked with everything from largeformat to compact cameras.
I had the Fuji with all 3 lenses since april and like it a lot! It is what I have been waiting for in the last 10-12 years. I bring it with me on jobs together with my Canons, 1ds + 5dII, but I end up only using the Fuji ,the files just look so great. Tuesday I'm going to do a portrait of the minister of economics in Denmark, and I am quite sure it is the Fuji pictures I will shoot that are the ones being used. And since I am a commercial photographer and not a press photographer I grew up with Hasselblads, Sinar and Leicas, and so I am just fine with slower AF. And I just don't get all the critisism the camera is getting. It takes a while to get used to the Fuji, but once you are there is it just perfect for someone like me.

20 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Jul 1, 2012)

better than the M9 is in any case (see you DxOMark etc.)
why - why the unwarranted negative criticism

1 upvote
jfjal
By jfjal (Jul 1, 2012)

Dear Greg,

Against trolls like you, it is no use fighting - even if it might be fun. Rest in peace, I have more important business.

8 upvotes
Greg Gebhardt
By Greg Gebhardt (Jul 1, 2012)

No adjustable diopter on viewfinder was enough for me to return mine in less than24 hours. No excuse to have equipped the camera with what was supposed to be magic to not be adjustable right out of the box for everyone's eyesight.

Build quality has a LOT to be desired but then I tend to compare to my M9.

FAIL

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
jfjal
By jfjal (Jul 1, 2012)

If you are an owner of M9 (since you are comparing) - of course you know that neither m9 has adjustable diopter!

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
20 upvotes
Petka
By Petka (Jul 2, 2012)

This was a good one!!!!

While you are at it, compare the picture quality also with the studio shots provided. Leica M9 pictures, especially at higher ISOs (and M9 goes only to 2500!) look like they were taken with a Lomo compared to X-Pro1...

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
Sonnyphoto
By Sonnyphoto (Jul 2, 2012)

What the heck is a diopter? M9 produces amzing images but sucks the big one when it comes to ISO. I also love my X100 and if X-Pro is anything like it, I'm sure it's produces excellent results. But I can't believe that they didn't put in a better manual focusing system for their "pro" model--it just doesn't work and that's a show stopper for me...

0 upvotes
Eppoh66
By Eppoh66 (Jul 2, 2012)

I own the Xpro and the 18mm and the 35mm. I also bought an adaptor and use my Nikkor 50/1.8 and 85/2.0 lenses with it. It's, off course, manual focus. And it works just fine! I don't understand what's the problem everone seems to have with it. I prefocus first and fine-tune it with the enlarged image. No problem! So I wonder if anyone ever tried it out, or am I some kind of super-photographer..?

0 upvotes
whawha
By whawha (Jul 1, 2012)

Whilst I have no doubt about how excellent the XPro1's image quality is, I don't agree about DP's assessment of its built quality. I recently handled it and to me it felt insubstantial and lightweight in a bad way - and the exposure compensation dial in particular felt very wobbly.
That , and the fact that I was struggling to achieve focus in a shop well lit by daylight makes me lean towards the Olympus OM-D as a camera to carry around with me all day.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Eppoh66
By Eppoh66 (Jul 2, 2012)

I bet you're lying! You never touched an Xpro.

2 upvotes
Farmer in the Dell
By Farmer in the Dell (Jul 1, 2012)

I own this camera and all three lenses. My own experience has been similar to others who actually use this camera. My DSLR now gathers dust and my Canon L glass is up for sale. The AF/MF problems are completely overblown. I do have more out-of-focus images, but most are tack sharp and I am in love with the image quality. I am strictly an enthusiast, and this camera is helping me to become a better photographer. I absolutely love it!

9 upvotes
JakeB
By JakeB (Jul 1, 2012)

Your experience seems to be the norm -- most actual owners love it, armchair time-wasters complain about a camera they've never used.

3 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Jul 1, 2012)

Slow AF and "dysfunctional" MF does not inspire. How are people focusing this camera? Fuji should have forgone the gimmick hybrid VF and implemented a reliable rangefinder instead. Seems like Leica is still the only one who "gets it". :-/

5 upvotes
ggsphoto
By ggsphoto (Jul 2, 2012)

I own the pro1 and sold my d300. The focus issue is very interseting indeed in that I love the focus on the pro1.
if you switch to macro mode the focussing is a little slower but out of macro the focussing is just fine. Yes, in very low light it can hunt so I switch to manual which works very well. I am used to poor manual focus on the d300 so on the pro1 I usually hit the a-el button to fix a focus and if it isn't bang on (which it usually is 8/10) then I zoom in with the cmd dian and focus manually with the focus ring,
The focussin on this camer is bang on sharp. As per many people I think this camer is getting some poor reivews. I can tell you after nearly 40 years of taking photos this camer is a total dream. Leica sells on its name mostly and quallity and yes, I like the M9 its so different to use and I'd like one, but I would always use my pro1 for image quality.
If you're like me and just love taking photos I just can't recomend this camera enough.

1 upvote
rollmansf
By rollmansf (Jun 30, 2012)

I've been shooting one w the 18mm lens for the last month, and I absolutely love it. I shoot mainly street, at night and or in other dark situations. The image quality is superb and it's a joy to shoot with. My other camera is 5D MK II, which is totally gathering dust as I type...

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
manakiin
By manakiin (Jun 30, 2012)

Fuji, build me a digital X-Pan!!!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
wlachan
By wlachan (Jun 30, 2012)

SILVER for an expensive camera with so many major shortcomings?

4 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Jul 2, 2012)

Mirrorless hype does it's work.
Wait 2-3 years - people will get back to normal and won't see everything castrated as superb from a principle.

I guess we live in one of few eras of photography when removing features becomes a feature.

2 upvotes
ggsphoto
By ggsphoto (Jul 2, 2012)

This camera has some shortcomings - I agree. But you need to give wieght to those shorcomings in the grand scheme of things this camera's IQ, usability, size and speed of use is just astonishing...

0 upvotes
GeorgeD200
By GeorgeD200 (Jun 30, 2012)

What I really want to know (and I'm sure I'm not the only one) is how well this camera works with Leica legacy glass. I don't have $8,000 to spend, so forget the M9. I also don't have the money for current Leica lenses. What I do have is a half-dozen Leica lenses from the 50s and 60s. I'd spring for one of these if I thought it would do a good job with them, but I can't seem to find anyone that has tried it. Does anyone have any links or resources for me?
I'm also pretty lukewarm on the M8 or Epson RD-1. I don't care for Sony -- let's leave it at that, and m4/3 is out. Is this camera the ticket, or should I wait for the full-frame, interchangable lens, sub $2000 camera that Leica is never going to make?

0 upvotes
chooflaki
By chooflaki (Jun 30, 2012)

There may be some useful info on this site.

http://www.scoop.it/t/fuji-x-pro1

0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Jul 1, 2012)

Ricoh GXR?

0 upvotes
diogenisd
By diogenisd (Jul 1, 2012)

You have the lenses and you don't go out and buy even an M8??
You can get the original and you are hunting for substitutes?
You can even buy a used M9 instead

0 upvotes
Vieijra
By Vieijra (Jul 1, 2012)

I concur with 'diogenisd' (nice name...): buy an M8.2 (€ 1500) and live happily everafter!

0 upvotes
Dave729
By Dave729 (Jun 30, 2012)

Looking around on the various camera blogs on the web, it seems all the talk about the X-pro1 is comparing it to the Leica M9. But, I noticed in the image comparisons pages of this review that the image reviews defaulted to other cameras. I selected the M9 in the image comparisons, and I'll have to say that throughout the ISO range, the X-Pro1 images look better in almost all cases, in both jpg and raw.

I don't have either one, so Im not biased one way or the other -- just thought it was interesting that the M9 image comparison wasn't a default choice...

2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Jul 7, 2012)

Well, what is NOT better than Leica M9 these days?

0 upvotes
Davidgilmour
By Davidgilmour (Jun 30, 2012)

About $850 too expensive. There would be a market at half price.

3 upvotes
nawknai
By nawknai (Jun 30, 2012)

Just as there is at full price.

4 upvotes
budi0251
By budi0251 (Jun 30, 2012)

My oh my dear Fuji, I register promptly to DPReview just because of reading this review. Been using HS20 for sometimes & love it, but I do really envy a true DSLR.

Now, the next best thing is,
PLEASEEEEEE...... somebody take this Fujifilm X-Pro1 sensor/electronics and shove it into some proper DSLR body with good lens support. ie Nikon or Canon, but I'd prefer Nikon cause they've actually being merged in the past.
(Anyone remember Fuji S1/S2/S3/S5 Pro Series?)

One killer DSLR with PDAF, dream like sensor, great lens support, great body and accessories (I like full sized DSLR, i got big hand).
What else you'd want (well maybe a reasonable price)?

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Jul 1, 2012)

Fuji lens, aren't good enough? Or is that numerous enough? Fuji seems to be doing a better job with new native lenses for the X Pro1 than Sony does for the Nex cameras.

1 upvote
JakeB
By JakeB (Jun 30, 2012)

One way to make these talkbacks more useful is to remove/bar comments from anyone who doesn't own/have extensive experience with the equipment under review.

The majority of these comments seem to come from people with no experience of actually working with the camera or they've handled one for a few minutes in the store.

What possible insight do such posters have to impart, since they're merely repeating others' opinions?

Thanks to actual owners who are sharing their experiences.

9 upvotes
PJInTheUSA
By PJInTheUSA (Jul 2, 2012)

Agree. And some, if not most, obviously haven't read the review either!

0 upvotes
uniball
By uniball (Jul 2, 2012)

Just don't frequent DPR, its the nature of this forum. There are a lot of potential owners with good reasons to post.

0 upvotes
ggsphoto
By ggsphoto (Jul 2, 2012)

I agree with you JakeB, I could never put down the oly om-d em-5, it looks like a great camera. I just haven't used it , but I do own an pro1 and love it, this is the reason why I cannot say its better than the om-d ! All I can (and keep saying) is this is pretty much the ultimate camera. any one in doubt should go look at the public flickr x-pro1 stream.

0 upvotes
Zvonimir Tosic
By Zvonimir Tosic (Jun 30, 2012)

Many users don't complain about good parts of the XPro1. What is bugging this product is a bunch of obvious design flaws.
Awful manual focus, which is further complicated with lenses that have no depth of field scale, same as X100. So in manual mode camera is very much useless, because one must constantly peek through the viewfinder and rotate the ring like a madman.
Only way to overcome such a blatant design flaw is to rely on AF all the time, and that's where X-Pro1 doesn't shine. Fuji will try to improve AF, yes, but this will still be flawed design of the whole package.
And which is a pity, because good manual focus and cleverly designed lenses would have solved LOTS of problems and improve the overall experience. The package would be a bit more expensive, I presume, and there we realise at what a terrible expense Fuji tried to cut the cost.
A very poor decision, which is a shame. And that decision did come from management, not from engineers, that's so obvious.

3 upvotes
jfjal
By jfjal (Jun 30, 2012)

You wrote: "A very poor decision, which is a shame."

Why don´t you listen to all the positive user-reports instead of interpreting and augmenting things you read.

What is the use - this is obviously not a camera for you.

0 upvotes
chooflaki
By chooflaki (Jul 1, 2012)

Pressing AE-L/AF/L button plus command button for zoom will then only require very minimal turning of focus ring if any to achieve desired focus. Very easy to use. Something people who don't own this camera can't understand.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Petka
By Petka (Jul 1, 2012)

People are demanding fully mechanical and even RF manual focusing system (heavy and expensive) AND complaining about slow AF at the same time. How about studying some mechanical design to understand that it is not possible to have those both in the same lens or camera body. Unless the camera has the focus motor and battery sourced form a power drill.

1 upvote
ggsphoto
By ggsphoto (Jul 2, 2012)

Have you actually used the pro1 ? The manual focus is great. IMHO. Please go play with it.

1 upvote
hexxthalion
By hexxthalion (Jul 3, 2012)

"Awful manual focus, which is further complicated with lenses that have no depth of field scale, same as X100."

dude, seriously, do you have either X100 or X-Pro1?

you have DoF preview and distance scale indicator in OVF/EVF - what are you talking about???? I've been shooting my X100 over a year and every single owner knows how to use it. How to use zone focusing thanks to built in DoF and distance scale indicator (with red mark of the point of focus) and how to use AE-L/AF-L button in MF mode which behaves like AF-ON on dSLRs. Go get one, play with it and then come back ;)

1 upvote
Neimo
By Neimo (Jun 30, 2012)

FUJI, here is how to make the manual focus dial enjoyable for this camera, the X10, and probably the other X cameras:

How fast or slow the dial is spun should determine if the focus distance moves a large amount, or just a bit. A fast spin of the dial should move the focus from 2cm to 2m. Another fast spin takes it to infinity. A medium spin should move the focus from 2cm to 50cm. A slow spin makes sure the focus covers every discrete distance position.

In practice, there should not just be fast, medium, and slow speeds. Whatever the speed of the spin is should determine how much more or much less quickly the focus moves.

0 upvotes
chooflaki
By chooflaki (Jul 1, 2012)

No need to turn the focus ring forever. Press AE-L//AF-L button when using manual focus, zoom in with command dial press and fine tune only.

Very easy.

1 upvote
ggsphoto
By ggsphoto (Jul 2, 2012)

Chooflaki! Somebody whose actually used MF Like myself!

0 upvotes
Neimo
By Neimo (Jul 13, 2012)

Thanks chooflaki. I read the manual cover to cover but missed that. It makes a big difference.

0 upvotes
massimogori
By massimogori (Jun 30, 2012)

We are in front of a camera that has

- amazing IQ
- top hi iso performance
- extreme sharpness
- extreme flexibility

Add to this that a full fledged set (X-pro 1 + three lenses) weighs less than 1 kg and costs less than any mainstream full frame DSLR body, yet providing (at least) the same picture quality.

Chapeau, Fuji! Please do not listen to all these guys who like playing with buttons and lights: let's them enjoy electronic gadgets, while we keep our focus on real pictures.

In any case, these people, are not willing to accept that Fuji entered the realm of leicas, Alpas and MF cameras, nor they will ever realize that leicas, alpas and MF, all of them, have WAY more technical limitations and require WAY more technical skills and patience than the X-PRO 1

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 42 seconds after posting
9 upvotes
Zvonimir Tosic
By Zvonimir Tosic (Jun 30, 2012)

C'mon, no one complains about these good parts of the XPro1. What is bugging this product is a bunch of design flaws.
Awful manual focus, which is further complicated with lenses that have no depth of field scale. So in manual mode camera is very much useless, because one must constantly peek through the viewfinder and rotate the ring like a madman.
Only way to overcome such a blatant design flaw is to rely on AF all the time, and that's where X-Pro1 doesn't shine.
Fuji will try to improve AF, but this will still be flawed design of the whole package.
And which is a pity, because good manual focus and cleverly designed lenses would have solved LOTS of problems and improve the overall experience. The package would be a bit more expensive, I presume, and there we realise at what a terrible expense Fuji tried to cut the cost.
A very poor decision, which is shame. And that dumb decision did come from management, not from designers, that's so obvious.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Jul 1, 2012)

Zvonimir Tosic:

Of course one could get an adapter for say a Nikon mount Zeiss manual focus lens and use those Zeiss lenses with their depth of field gauges.

PS: This Nikon to Fuji adapter is already being sold.

0 upvotes
kadardr
By kadardr (Jun 30, 2012)

Very nice camera indeed. I beg for a cheaper version with EVF and focus peaking.

0 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Jun 30, 2012)

X100- Strike one.
X10- Strike two.
XPro-1- Strike three- yeeer out!

Fuji, tighten up your design decisions and you stand a real chance, otherwise you'll just be known for having brilliant ideas with bad overall implementation. If you keep disappointing serious shooters you won't be able to save your reputation when it goes sour. Get it in gear now

C

7 upvotes
mr moonlight
By mr moonlight (Jun 30, 2012)

It seems though that Fuji is doing pretty well with these cameras and pleasing a lot of serious photographers, especially those who have come from a film background. From the looks of it, it's mostly the amateurs and those who started with a DSLR that are disappointed. My experience has been with two brilliant ideas with excellent implementation. Of course we have to also keep in mind that these are both first generation cameras that are in an entirely new class. Design flaws and improvements are to be expected. Look how many 35mm SLR's we went through over the last 60 years before coming to the current crop of DSLR's.

1 upvote
ldog
By ldog (Jun 29, 2012)

Fuji Please Please fix the few bugs that separate this camera from high end hobby to truly pro. I own and truly love this camera but it is like the Mona Lisa with bad breath. The image quality is the equal of my M9-P (yes, really) BUT the handling quirks make it suck for dynamic pro situations. The slow AF and useless MF is well documented and my solution is to shoot with Leica lenses and use manual focus. Fast, Pro, Lovely. HOWEVER THE INEXCUSABLE flaw for a "pro" camera is that the EVF (a must use for 3rd party MF lenses) does not "refresh" or let go of the current exposure fast enough to stay "in the moment". Also you get no image preview on the LCD as you must shut off the image preview when shooting with the EVF. If the image preview was selectable independently for the EFV and LCD this would be golden. A few fixes would make it professionally useful and this camera would become iconic. Fuji, just give a bunch of these to wedding photographers and listen to them. C'mon Fuji!!

2 upvotes
Neimo
By Neimo (Jun 30, 2012)

The manual focus is painful because a firmware fix is so simple. The control dial needs to respond differently depending on how quickly it is spun. A fast spin of the dial should move the focus from 2cm to 2m. Another fast spin takes it to infinity. A medium spin should move the focus from 2cm to 50cm. A slow spin makes sure the focus covers every discrete distance position.

In practice, there should not just be fast, medium, and slow speeds. Whatever the speed of the spin should determine how much more or much less quickly the focus moves.

0 upvotes
Thoughts
By Thoughts (Jun 29, 2012)

27 pages review of a camera. Thank you DPR.

2 upvotes
mjl699
By mjl699 (Jun 29, 2012)

Congrats to DPR for a very good, very balanced review. Despite its flaws, this camera is my all-time favorite. IQ to die for. Otherwise agree with shutterdragon, below.

0 upvotes
Ken Aisin
By Ken Aisin (Jun 29, 2012)

It would be great news if Fujifilm builds the same sensor in 4/3 format, and sells it to Olympus to put into the next OM-D camera.

0 upvotes
Superka
By Superka (Jun 29, 2012)

no way! 4/3 will disappear soon. Full frame - is what we are waiting for, or panoramic 17x42mm. Why not?

5 upvotes
Mikael Risedal
By Mikael Risedal (Jun 30, 2012)

It is a sony sensor 16Mp, same sensor as in d7000 with Fujis own color filters

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Jul 1, 2012)

Mikael Risedal:

Nope, this X-Pro1 sensor is Fuji made and unique to this camera.

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
AbeNader
By AbeNader (Jun 29, 2012)

Look at the tests at photozone.de ..only the Fuji 35mm and tele lenses works ok....
Also cyberphoto.se put a 28 Leica lens on X-Pro1 with poor results. The edges were just smudge. Only sharp in the center. Sony NEX has the same problem...
They failed in the sensor design..
Check yourselves all the tests at photozone. Both fuji and Nex..
Wake up people!

I was looking forward to invest in Fujis new system....but not anymore. :-(

Comment edited 21 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Aeturnum
By Aeturnum (Jun 29, 2012)

Though it's too bad that the XPro doesn't render pleasing results on wide Leica lenses, it seems silly to dismiss a product as a failure based on its inability to effectively utilize a 3rd parties' lens.

Leica makes great lenses for Leica cameras, but you can't transfer 100% of that performance to a completely different sensor design.

1 upvote
Ariston
By Ariston (Jun 29, 2012)

what you are saying is not really a sensor design flaw but rather lens IQ resolving power and compatibility. you cannot blame a camera if it wasn't made for Leica exclusively. besides, what adapter did they use for the X-mount? the M to X mount adapter isn't even available yet.

2 upvotes
jfjal
By jfjal (Jun 30, 2012)

You are distorting the results from Photozone (which run some very thorough tests). The 35mm and tele mas much more than "OK", in fact the tele got "highly recommended". The 35 also mm got high marks. The 18 mm was judged somewhat less stellar, but still got good reviews - also more than OK .

Did you really read the tests?

Why this need to distort facts - on the verge of dishonesty, are you out of real arguments?

4 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Jul 2, 2012)

Photozone de does some serious and rather critical testing. So when he concludes that a lens is pretty good, that means it is outstanding. This is very different from many other sites and quite useful, I think.

2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Jul 7, 2012)

"28 Leica lens on X-Pro1 with poor results. The edges were just smudge. Only sharp in the center. Sony NEX has the same problem..."

That means the lens is not telecentric, i.e. not good for digital sensors. It is a lens problem, not camera problem. Leica works around (as opposed to "fixes") this deficiency of their lenses by putting microlens array in front of their sensor, which means it is not optimal for any lens with different angle of light, specifically going to work well with modern digital-optimized telecentric lenses.

0 upvotes
AbeNader
By AbeNader (Jul 12, 2012)

Adding: I have a critical view because its an expensive camera which cant give sharp images at the corners with wide lenses.
Check the tests on Nikon DX lenses and compare the results with the Fujis 18mm..

0 upvotes
jfjal
By jfjal (Jun 29, 2012)

After the negative ranting of those who have not used the camera, criticising for the simple joy of criticism, seems to be (almost) over, it is nice to hear real, positive user experience from real users.

2 upvotes
putomax
By putomax (Jun 29, 2012)

pag 22, 2nd paragraph

The X100 offers HD video capture [...]
did you mean X-Pro1?

you're welcome :)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
openskyline
By openskyline (Jun 29, 2012)

Fuji always gives best skin tone photos . That's enough !

0 upvotes
shutterdragon
By shutterdragon (Jun 29, 2012)

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!

3 upvotes
plainwhite
By plainwhite (Jun 29, 2012)

I'm coming from a Nikon D700 with AF-S lenses and I can say that I am very happy with my X-Pro 1. Being a photographer that shoots almost exclusively on fully MANUAL and who is intentional on most every shot taken, I can't say that in my experience that the AF or any of the other "issues" have been a problem.

It is a joy to use and has left my other D700 and D7000 to collect dust for the most part. In fact, this summer I'll be going to Australia and plan only on taking the X-Pro 1.

3 upvotes
Neimo
By Neimo (Jun 30, 2012)

Would you find it easier to manually focus between close-up and distance shots if the dial responded differently depending on how quickly it spun? For example a fast spin of the dial moved the focus from 2cm to 2m. Another fast spin to reach infinity. A medium spin moved the focus from 2cm to 50cm. A slow spin to make sure the focus covers every discrete distance position.

0 upvotes
Edmond Leung
By Edmond Leung (Jun 29, 2012)

The X-Pro1 has no built-in diopter adjustment !! Unbelievable !!
A serious defeat!

4 upvotes
Austin101
By Austin101 (Jun 29, 2012)

like it's fuji's fault that your have bad eyesight

2 upvotes
FlashInThePan
By FlashInThePan (Jun 30, 2012)

Neither is it his fault... anyway a add on diopter lens would work perfecty, it takes just a few seconds to screw the thing on.

2 upvotes
Superka
By Superka (Jun 29, 2012)

I recently got Fujifilm TX-1, which I consider to be one of the best camera ever produced! I just in love with it. I wish Fuji make something like this! But this camera is a FAIL, conceptually first of all. I'm very sorry with this, because I love Fuji for their film, Large format lenses, Fuji GX 617 and TX-1!
If this camera was a rangefinder with fast autofocus, like Contax G1 and G2, it would be perfect!

1 upvote
Petka
By Petka (Jun 29, 2012)

Contax G1 and G2 fast? Not that I remember...

2 upvotes
Klay
By Klay (Jun 29, 2012)

My G1 auto-focus was slow and very picky. It needed a vertical line or contrast to focus. Horizontal lines, such as the horizon, just wouldn't work.

Actually, maybe the X-Pro1 with it's autofocus issues is similar to the Contax G1 in spirit.

0 upvotes
HetFotoAtelier
By HetFotoAtelier (Jun 29, 2012)

After 5 month's using the X-pro1 on the streets , with 2 weeks Tokyo and 2 weeks Paris , my opinion is that this camera is the best I ever bought! besides my Nikon gear in my studio. Thanks for the review, the image quality is superb indeed and the manner of working with this camera is different for everyone ;-) YOU HAVE TO LEARN, WORKING WITH THE FUJI X-pro1 ! he's soooo fun to work with :-)
Thanks,
Peter Rothengatter
The Netherlands

5 upvotes
Sad Joe
By Sad Joe (Jun 29, 2012)

An opportunity missed or at least not quite fulfilled as we all might have wanted. Shooting moving subjects with a rangefinder is always tricky but having poor AF really isn't on given that the tech has been around since the early 1980's in one version or another. Much as I like the Fuji I don't think I'd rush out and buy one even if I had money burning a hole - it's sadly not quite enough. I played with one several weeks ago - it simply doesn't feel as special or as nice as it looks suggest.
I'm almost tempted to suggest that Fuji go away, redesign it (get rid of all the silly bugs etc) and reintroduce it at twice the price - then at least more Leica owners could justify buying one as a 'back up'.

0 upvotes
jfjal
By jfjal (Jun 29, 2012)

If you read a number of the many existing user reports (i mean practical use, not only playing a little like you) you get the verdict that AF is not "poor", it is just not as quick as some others. That is OK with me, I rarely shoot moving subjects, and it is more than compensated by its general handling and quality of its pictures. Also if you read the review on DPR - poor AF is not the verdict.
Just another case of "courses for horses".

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
lensberg
By lensberg (Jun 29, 2012)

Its funny... but i remember reading Ken Rockwell's D800 review not too long ago... and in that particular review he included a high ISO image comparison between a number of current APS-C & FF camera's... two of which were the Fujifilm X-Pro1 and the Nikon D7000 ... and lo and behold the D7000 samples actually manage to look cleaner and retain better colour throughout the spectrum...

Now exactly how he managed to achieve that result is anybody's guess... Whether he manipulates the sample images with biased intentions or is his testing methodology just drastically different...?! Because from the DPR review one thing is abundantly clear... the X-Pro1 is definitely the best APS-C camera available for pure IQ... getting the better of a number of FF models in the process...

1 upvote
babola
By babola (Jun 30, 2012)

It's not funny. D7000 really comes with high image IQ and depending on type of photo and shooting technique it may well be ahead of X-Pro1 - why would that come as a a surprise at all?

1 upvote
SeeRoy
By SeeRoy (Jun 29, 2012)

The cons don't include the fact that the vf has no diopter adjustment? DPR thinks this isn't important??? On a camera whose vf is one of it's principal USPs? At this price?

The example I tried, wearing glasses (hint to Fuji), had an in-focus optical and out-of-focus evf on the standard eyepiece. Given that no dealers bother to stock alternatives I can't judge what would happen with a different value inserted. Oh yes, wearing glasses meant I couldn't see the full vf image either.

Hopeless.

3 upvotes
dansclic
By dansclic (Jun 29, 2012)

I have tested that new camera and as I am wearing glasses, I could not use either the optical viewfinder or the electronic one. The optical is totally unprecise, the electronic one gives you a blurred image you cannot correct.
It is a shame that dpreview did not mention another problem : the image is freezing when the point has been done. This definiteley outperforms the Fuhji xpro 1 as a competitor to Leica which remains the only real telemeter performance camera, which the fuji xpro 1 will never be at this stage. We all know the Fuji is no telemeter camera ok but even if it is a camera that delivers good resolution, everyone has to admit that the problems of af precision (my test camera has been unable to make the point at short distance with a f1,4 lens in a shop with normal light), diopter adjustment, freezing image, aso. By far, I would buy the oly EM5 : maybe less resolution BUT : weather sealed, quick AF, a lot of excellent lenses, easy to use, small and ... much cheaper !

0 upvotes
mr moonlight
By mr moonlight (Jun 29, 2012)

If a camera store is stocking the Xpro-1, they should also be stocking the diopters. Diopters are pretty standard equipment for quite a number of cameras and Fuji uses the standard size. Of course with the popularity of the camera, it seems that diopters are selling out. Of course you can always buy online.

0 upvotes
Felts
By Felts (Jun 29, 2012)

DPReview Score for OMD = 80%

General comments are "well done Olympus for amazing cam"

DPReview Score for X-Pro1 = 79%

General comments are "how can Fuji release a beta cam with terrible AF"

General impression? That must be a VERY important percent to a lot of people.

My impression, its a good time if you are looking to buy a mirrorless cam!

BTW, I own the camera and it is AMAZING, with AF issues totally overblown. Its a split second to focus, just not near instant like the OMD/EP3. I've never found this to be a problem, especially because my images have the pop usually only associated with FF cameras!

3 upvotes
FTW
By FTW (Jun 29, 2012)

the result you get is an average calculated on all the advantages and disadvantages of a camera. While Fuji seems to DP-Review have the best picture, the other things around like AF are lacking behind. In an other camera, the rest is better and picture quality might be a little less good. One has to look, when one buys a camera what parameters are important to you. If you go for maximum IQ and need less AF quality, specially when you shoot with adapters and other brands lenses, AF is secondary stuff. I had the X1 in test, and I compared to the NEX-7. The NEX performs less good in high ISO range, but that is all parameters i do not need. I like manual work, and here the NEX was faster and easier to use than the X1 and on the end had, to my opinion, the better picture and resolution. So, i went for the NEX, and, on the end, I did not appreciate the price to quality and feature comfort of the Fuji x1. It was too expensive and I like to get what I pay for, the X1 does not give me that.

2 upvotes
Felts
By Felts (Jun 29, 2012)

It's 'Horses for Courses"...

For me, I shoot a lot in low light and IQ is very high on my priorities, so the XP1 fits like a well tailored glove.

For someone else, its quirks could be unacceptable.

As I said before, it's great we've got the choice!

1 upvote
mr moonlight
By mr moonlight (Jun 29, 2012)

FTW, are you talking about the X1? or the Xpro1?

0 upvotes
Richt2000
By Richt2000 (Jun 29, 2012)

Apart from the handling, i cant see why anyone woukd choose this camera over an Nex7 now that there is the excellent 19/2.8, 24/1.8, 30/2.8 and 50/1.8 primes available. Or a OMD with 12/2, 25/1.4 and 45/1.8 if you prefer fast AF over resolution. Looking at the RAWs of the Xpan1, the Nex7 shows much more detail at low ISo and at hi Iso, obviously more noise but less smearing...

I really want to like this camera, but I feel Fuji have 2 years more work to do before I would be interested... Unfotunately for this money My head wont let my heart run off with the Xpro1...

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
jfjal
By jfjal (Jun 29, 2012)

I have never regretted buying the camera. Fantastic camera with fantastic handling. I love the OVF and the controls.

Seems that a lot of people here hate the camera w.o. having tried it - why? The focussing problems are wildly overstated as a number of reviews and user reports confirns. True, it is not a speed demon, but it is not as slow and imprecise as many here claim. It is fast enough.

The camera is so good that in most cases I leave my Nikon D700 at home, and consider selling it.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Ariston
By Ariston (Jun 29, 2012)

probably because you haven't actually tried the Xpro-1. if you only saw what the Xpro-1 is capable of, the NEX-7 would be embarrassed.

0 upvotes
mr moonlight
By mr moonlight (Jun 29, 2012)

Why would you choose the Xpro-1 over the NEX-7 or an OMD? Because the X-pro1 has an optical viewfinder and manual controls. The NEX-7 and OMD don't. Simple as that. Personally I don't even think the NEX-7 or the OMD are in the same class of camera so it doesn't make sense to compare.

1 upvote
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Jun 30, 2012)

> if you only saw what the Xpro-1 is capable of
You should separate how camera works and how lens works. To say, Steve Huff said he prefers NEX-7 + Summilux 35 ASPH FLE over Fuji. That's my experience too (I'm using NEX-5N).
Still, NEX-7 has higher resolution and richer colors over fuji at base ISO.

0 upvotes
Ariston
By Ariston (Jun 30, 2012)

that's a matter of personal preference emacs. but it doesn't mean that the NEX5n or 7 is better. higher resolution is a + and -. the MP can only as go as what the lens is capable of. the 16MP on the Xpro1 can simply outresolve that of what the 24mp can deliver.

color preference is a variance. Fuji color is different from Sony color. so this is a matter of preference.

personally, the Xpro1 is 2 stops ahead of the NEX5n and 3 stops ahead of the NEX7.

I like the NEX7, but I won't deny that that the Xpro1 is just better.

0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Jul 2, 2012)

Nex 7 also has manual controls mr moonlight. And is highly customizable. And offers perfect viewfinder with 3rd party lenses. And is far more compatible with any 3rd party lenses then Fuji ever will be. And records quality movies unlike Fuji. And Has far nicer colors then Fuji. And actually DOES have autofocus unlike Fuji where you have MF assist more then anything else. And got notably more details then Fuji at low ISOs (for a price of lower details at high ISOs).

There's a load of reasons why X Pro1 is uninteresting overpriced body comparing to NEX7.

2 upvotes
Austin101
By Austin101 (Jun 29, 2012)

Overly-conservative DOF scale useless for zone focusing

I zone focus with the 18mm lens while shooting SP all of the time and it works just fine, you just need to spend some time using it to understand how it works.

I really don't think that you have grounds to say that it's useless

1 upvote
dotyman
By dotyman (Jun 29, 2012)

You mean you need to spend some time calculating your DOF? Yup, the scale is pretty much useless.

1 upvote
Austin101
By Austin101 (Jun 29, 2012)

it works just fine unless you're inept

3 upvotes
arscii
By arscii (Jun 29, 2012)

Can't really understand why a company of Fujifilm's pedigree would release a flagship line with some features very obviously still at the prototype stage.

Can't wait for the MkIII. It should be a well oiled machine by then.

1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Jun 29, 2012)

Why are so many cameras with premium hardware (not just this but others included) let down by poor software, while manufacturers like Canon and Panasonic pump out consumer cameras with perfect software?

Would it really have killed Fuji to hire a few more programmers and got a photography expert to oversee firmware development?

1 upvote
ogl
By ogl (Jun 29, 2012)

wasted money IMO. very weak body in terms of controls, menus and speed. but expensive. good IQ - it's all what this camera could offer. but we can find good IQ in a lot of another cameras.

2 upvotes
Ariston
By Ariston (Jun 29, 2012)

good IQ is an understatement. I'd say you reserve you judgement til you actually certain of the IQ.

0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Jul 2, 2012)

camera isn't just an IQ. Actually - regardless of what you choose - in 2 years it'll be sub-standard, while whole the rest will remain the same. So as far as for example NEX 7 or OM-D will still offer great usable body with excellent 3rd party compatibility and loads of fun features - Fuji will become worthless.
So, who's the winner in long term? Certainly not Fuji.

1 upvote
hexxthalion
By hexxthalion (Jul 3, 2012)

"very weak body in terms of controls"

really??? you have direct control of all exposure related settings you need under your fingers:

shutter speed dial
aperture ring on the lens
exposure compensation dial
ISO via button

You know how your camera is set without the need to turn it on, what else do you need? I take photographs, everything related to that is on the body, where it should be

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
Ariston
By Ariston (Jun 29, 2012)

I believe everyone can agree that the biggest hurdle of this camera is AF. I hope Fuji improves on this because this is the only thing that makes the camera far from perfect. other than that, this is the best APS-C mirrorless camera I have seen so far with great overall IQ. the successor I hope would address that issue. I feel this camera would still appeal some specific users, but would ultimately sell well for $1,200.

0 upvotes
PJInTheUSA
By PJInTheUSA (Jun 29, 2012)

I don't agree with that at all. I don't that this review reflects that AF is poor, just not as quick as the quickest. AF issues on this camera are completely overblown. I have both the OMD and XPRO1 and although the OMD extremely quick, the difference makes to practical difference to me while shooting.

0 upvotes
Ariston
By Ariston (Jun 29, 2012)

I was not referring to AF speed but AF focus lock success rate. the issue I had with the camera is that it struggled with focusing. now this might be solved by firmware update, but for now, the Xpro-1 is a suspect for an immediate purchase and use. as far as AF speed, why wouldn't it be beneficial for Fuji to improve it's AF speed? it's a major selling point whether you like it or not. it's a convenience.

0 upvotes
mr moonlight
By mr moonlight (Jun 29, 2012)

AF focus lock success is fine. It's speed that's the only real hurdle. The only time I have issues getting the AF to lock is in really dimly lit situations without a lot of contrast where I'm pushing ISO 6400 + f1.4 + 1/60. Otherwise, it's fine. At that point you have an AF assist light.

0 upvotes
Ariston
By Ariston (Jun 29, 2012)

thanks. I'm not sure why the camera I tried had numerous locking difficulty. but surely I didn't use it in a dimly lit area. the area was well lit and have the AF assist light on as insurance. and yes, the areas I shot had more than enough contrast to lock on to. that was my issue. I could live with the AF speed though, but an big improvement on AF speed would surely be a huge advantage.

0 upvotes
Petka
By Petka (Jun 29, 2012)

If I can have a Leica "copy" with a word class f:1.4 lens for $2500, which has better picture and high ISO quality than Leica M9 costing around $12000 with similar lens, I am not complaining all that much. I bet I get more keepers with "slow" AF than with Leica MF, too.

This is not a DSLR replacement at all, but a quite fantastic serious toy for old school folks like me. Yes, it could be better in some details, but even now it is a joy to use for certain type of photography.

(I have been using one for 2 months now)

4 upvotes
FTW
By FTW (Jun 29, 2012)

Do you buy a camera to ow a Leica copy at low price ?

0 upvotes
Petka
By Petka (Jun 29, 2012)

Why not, if the IQ is considerably better than in with the "original". At 1/5 of the price.

1 upvote
mr moonlight
By mr moonlight (Jun 29, 2012)

I wouldn't go so far as to call it a Leica copy. It sort of has some of the looks of a Leica and definitely appeals to those who are into Rangefinders, but once you get into the camera, it's a whole world of difference away.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 271
12