Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Fujifilm X-E1 hands-on preview

By dpreview staff on Sep 6, 2012 at 05:00 GMT

Just Posted: Our hands-on Fujifilm X-E1 preview. We've had a chance to get to grips with Fujifilm's latest X-mount mirrorless interchangeable lens camera and have prepared a preview looking at its key features and technologies. The X-E1 is Fujifilm's second mirrorless interchangeable lens camera and the first to rely solely on an electronic viewfinder for operation - we look at how the camera handles this, while we get a handle on how it sits alongside its peers.

Comments

Total comments: 278
12
indianajo
By indianajo (Oct 29, 2012)

Just a question to al of you, do i do a silly thing changing my canon 5d mark I with 24 105 l to a fujifilm x e 1 since I am more into the street photography?

0 upvotes
widitas
By widitas (Nov 12, 2012)

Definitely not, you will be surprised when looking the result! You don't need to worry with high ISO; it is very clear in high ISO. White balance is excellent and this camera has a built-in flash. Use 35mm f/1.4 lens.

0 upvotes
andrew turner
By andrew turner (Sep 10, 2012)

I don't mind an EVF - my first digital camera, a Dimage 7, had one (arguable far inferior compared to what's out there now) but I liked it.

Which leads me to my question - can I preview IR through it?

The Dimage 7i added an IR filter which killed this functionality. I'd hope that I'd be able to preview IR in something like this.

Anyone know?

thanks,
Andrew

0 upvotes
milwman
By milwman (Sep 26, 2012)

Most cameras have a IR blocking filter

0 upvotes
Astaindasy
By Astaindasy (Sep 10, 2012)

Well. It seems that all of my friends give it an attention. It's a beautiful camera. Only problem is price. I hope it sells in good price.

0 upvotes
milwman
By milwman (Sep 10, 2012)

$999.00 US 1400. with zoom Thats getting the zoom 18-55 for $300.00 off whats not to like??

0 upvotes
widitas
By widitas (Nov 12, 2012)

It is cheap in Indonesia, USD 1,300 with 35mm f/1.4 lens.

0 upvotes
PortlandOR
By PortlandOR (Sep 8, 2012)

I was curious about the EVF so went to the local photo store and demo'd the Sony NEX 7 which allegedly has the same EVF specs as the X-E1. It was definitely higher res than the X-Pro EVF but there's still no way I could use it. Feels very disconnected from the scene, and unnatural. That makes the X-E1 a non-starter for me unfortunately. Everything else in the specs looks sweet, however. I prefer the OVF on the X Pro but the frameline inaccuracies bother me quite a bit (anyone find a good workaround here?).

BTW, AF lag on the X Pro didn't bother me as much as the shutter lag. Hopefully the firmware update will correct this, but it wasn't directly addressed in the PR. We'll see.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Sep 8, 2012)

"It was definitely higher res than the X-Pro EVF but there's still no way I could use it. Feels very disconnected from the scene, and unnatural."

It's all in your mind. It's not necessarily better or worse, it's just different. And it's the "different" that turns some people off. It's not what they are used to. I remember people initially had the same aversion to working with digital images when moving from film. The images looked and felt "different" from film, so some people said "There's no way I could us it." Now, I feel some people are applying that same "different" feeling to OVF vs EVF.

6 upvotes
57even
By 57even (Sep 9, 2012)

T3, for once I completely agree with you.

0 upvotes
mcshan
By mcshan (Sep 9, 2012)

Yawn.

0 upvotes
PortlandOR
By PortlandOR (Sep 9, 2012)

I don't know, I just "see" the scene better non-EVF. Do you shoot with EVF and like it?

0 upvotes
Mirfak
By Mirfak (Sep 9, 2012)

On the other hand, given that the image you capture is far more important than what you see through an OVF, the EVF generally provides a more accurate view of the image that you're about to take.

0 upvotes
milwman
By milwman (Sep 10, 2012)

You just like seeing 125% not to seeing 100%? I need zooms as I can't move forward or back I will like it as I will have longer lens's on it. I often shot a bit wider for cropping later.

0 upvotes
widitas
By widitas (Nov 12, 2012)

I prefer using the LCD. Don't you ever taking picture by looking at LCD? It's big! X-E1 is my second mirrorless camera after Sony Nex5N.

0 upvotes
markmark206
By markmark206 (Sep 8, 2012)

I am super-excited about this. I have been hoping for a good, reasonably priced and sized rangefinder-style camera with good (ideally, "retro") controls ever since I saw Panasonic DMC-L1 (I am somewhat surprised this didn't come from the m43 family... but whatever. ;)

Preordered the kit, can't wait.

3 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (Sep 7, 2012)

Am I the only one who wants to buy X-E1 + 35mm?

Lens kit with 35mm for $1399 would be great.

3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Sep 8, 2012)

No, I'd also rather have the 35 1.4 initially. A nifty-fifty just fits better with this type of camera, and the 35 is an excellent performer.

That said, the zoom is interesting, especially for the wide end.

1 upvote
nicolaslosangeles
By nicolaslosangeles (Sep 10, 2012)

Don't forget : it would have to be a 23mm lens if you want the 35mm equivalent in full frame (the X-E1 has a cropped sensor). I saw somewhere that they are coming in early 2013. I'm excited as well.

0 upvotes
Michael P. Meyer
By Michael P. Meyer (Sep 7, 2012)

How would the X-Pro1 OVF handle the zoom lens? Would the magnification switch as well as the frame lines resize as one zooms in and out?

That's one case where an EVF might be preferable.

0 upvotes
Michael P. Meyer
By Michael P. Meyer (Sep 7, 2012)

Here's the description of magnification switch:
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_pro1/features/page_03.html

The framelines for the 18-55 zoom would be quite small at 55mm at the lower magnification, and are still only half the view at higher magnification.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Sep 7, 2012)

Magnum photographer Gueorgui Pinkhassov in a new ad for the X-E1 talks about the look of images from this camera. "Although resolution is quite high, I like how it not too sharp".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RfwNCtd4vA

The E-X1 samples also don't seem over-processed, digitally sharpened but like the X-Pro1 have an elegant, more natural, film-like rendering.

It's a very effective series of ads that instantly sold me on this new camera. I wouldn't mind a bundle the 35 1.4, instead of the zoom, but whose complaining. Really impressive looking new camera.

3 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (Sep 7, 2012)

I agree with Gueorgui.

High resolution without typical digital harshness is the X-PRO1's most important advantage for me.

3 upvotes
Dr GP
By Dr GP (Sep 7, 2012)

Seems to me this is a more functional version of the X1Pro? Smaller, faster focus? (OVF is useless in anycase because it seems to amplify focus issues).

Any benefit of X1 Pro over XE1?

1 upvote
Tonio Loewald
By Tonio Loewald (Sep 7, 2012)

Hybrid OVF if you like that. Otherwise — no.

0 upvotes
Uaru
By Uaru (Sep 7, 2012)

One benefit, I already have X-Pro - selling it now and get XE1 is pointless;-)

The point is, I already took some wonderful photos with X-Pro - and XE1 is yet not on the market...

Comment edited 50 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (Sep 7, 2012)

The benefit of X-PRO1 is OVF and higher resolution LCD. EVF of XPro1 is quite useless due to its very slow refresh rate.

0 upvotes
Boxbrownie
By Boxbrownie (Sep 11, 2012)

Benefit of the XE-1 is the EVF.............

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
locke_fc
By locke_fc (Sep 7, 2012)

I'm sure others have picked on this but "the camera can now enter playback to check focus and composition within about 2 seconds".
TWO seconds? Seriously?

2 upvotes
pixel_peeper
By pixel_peeper (Sep 7, 2012)

There's no bite to any of the pictures I have seen from the XPro-1, with the same random-array sensor as the X-E1s. They all look as if they've been shot at f22. I put it down to the sensor, which appears to give significantly inferior resolution to equivalent Bayer-array cameras.

0 upvotes
Petka
By Petka (Sep 7, 2012)

Shooting some tests I found my X-Pro1 to be at least as sharp as Canon 5D2, which has more megapixels. Lenses were 35mm 1.4 for the Fuji and 50mm macro for Canon (normal Canon 50mm is junk compared to Fuji 35mm).

1 upvote
Joe Bowers
By Joe Bowers (Sep 7, 2012)

I'm really not sure which pictures you've been seeing. The X-Pro1 is sharper and cleaner than any APS-C, and competes with high end full frame cameras in terms of resolution. This isn't just my opinion, check out the Dx0mark scores or any objective image quality tests.

7 upvotes
threeOh
By threeOh (Sep 7, 2012)

Some people are fearful of change. Even when it does not, or does not need to, affect them.

1 upvote
EricWN
By EricWN (Sep 7, 2012)

Maybe in all the pixel peeping geekness you have forgotten how a really good picture looks?

5 upvotes
pixel_peeper
By pixel_peeper (Sep 7, 2012)

If you all think the latest Fuji sensor is sharp, have a look at the last picture on this page.
http://www.sigma-dp.com/DP2Merrill/samplephoto.html
The Fuji idea was a flash in the pan.

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (Sep 7, 2012)

"check out the Dx0mark scores or any objective image quality tests."

what DxOmark tests? They did not test X-Pro1.

0 upvotes
Dr GP
By Dr GP (Sep 7, 2012)

I have x1 pro. FOr many pics, what you say is true. But when focus is tack sharp, something amazing happens. So the issue I think is the autofocus. The sensor is capable for solid performance. The focus system is not.

0 upvotes
Tonio Loewald
By Tonio Loewald (Sep 7, 2012)

@Joe Bowers -- Canon users don't believe in dxomark scores ;-)

In any event, I've yet to see dxomark scores for the X-Pro1.

Comment edited 60 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Sep 7, 2012)

I was considering the DP2 Merrill until I saw those samples. Over sharpened and crunchy. The portrait of the two women is not at all flattering. In contrast, the X-Pro1 is more subtle in rendering fine detail. It doesn't beat you over the head with it like some cameras.

See for yourself
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_e1/sample_images/

0 upvotes
Dougbm_2
By Dougbm_2 (Sep 7, 2012)

Pixel_peeper is right about the DP2 Merril. Unbelievable sharpness (check Steve Huffs review). But it is a limited use camera - very slow, no viewfinder, no good above ISO 400 etc The Fuji will be way more versatile. Anyway a good photo is not necessarily a sharp photo. Much more to it than that.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
richard stone
By richard stone (Sep 7, 2012)

There are few if any cameras that can do better than the DP2M, in both sharpness and color, and the Fuji cannot, at base ISO and possibly up to ISO400. From what I have seen ISOs above 400 are functional, but not excellent. The DP2M images are astounding., but sharpening has to be done gently. The DP2M is simply not as versatile as the new Fuji. The lens on the DP2M is also excellent. I am in the market for a new single camera, and it is an interesting time.

0 upvotes
brendon1000
By brendon1000 (Sep 8, 2012)

Both cameras seem to be very sharp. The difference is that the Fuji XE-1 has better specs than the DP2, (should) have far fewer quirks and is cheaper to boot with a faster lens.

I would frankly be happy if my current DSLR gave me such crisp results but I hardly print big so I don't really mind getting less sharp results especially since I have far more AF lens choices on a DSLR.

0 upvotes
Realfi
By Realfi (Sep 7, 2012)

I think this looks like a cracker. Any talk of an X10 replacement? I'd love an X10 with a good full coverage EVF rather than the pretty poor, lens in the view impeded OVF.

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
bloatedbody
By bloatedbody (Sep 7, 2012)

AF illuminator kinda close to the handle.

1 upvote
attomole
By attomole (Sep 7, 2012)

looks like a great little camera, can't think of a "why didn't they put an X, or Y on it"

0 upvotes
Gesture
By Gesture (Sep 7, 2012)

Can non-Fuji lenses be used on these cameras?? Thanks.

0 upvotes
57even
By 57even (Sep 7, 2012)

Yes, Fuji make adapters for Leica M, and Kipon make adapters for EF, Nikon AF-s, Nikon AF-D, Sony and a raft of others. All manual focus of course.

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
milwman
By milwman (Sep 7, 2012)

Yes, they make an adaptor for Leica M and Novaflex makes them for everything else out there almost.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Petka
By Petka (Sep 7, 2012)

I have a Novoflex adapter for M39 Leica lenses (Voigtlander in my case), works perfectly, but of course only fully manual.

0 upvotes
jon404
By jon404 (Sep 7, 2012)

As a Fuji- ignorant XZ-1 owner, could someone please tell me if Fuji makes a good sharp 'normal' prime lens for this camera... like from 35mm to 50mm equiv., f/2 or brighter? A lens that, whatever its cost, would satisfy the most critical of you as the 'right stuff' for landscape photography?

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Sep 7, 2012)

If a normal lens is what you like for landscapes, there's this one:

http://www.dpreview.com/products/fujifilm/lenses/fujifilmxf35mm

Which is rather good.

3 upvotes
Petka
By Petka (Sep 7, 2012)

That new 35mm f:1.4 Fuji has be tested to be one of the best and sharpest new lenses in recent years... When I took the first test shots against a Canon 50mm 1.4 I had to check the EXIF data several times because I could not believe I had been shooting wide open with both lenses, Canon frames were like they were shot through a fog, and Fuji images unbelievably sharp all across the frame.

2 upvotes
EricWN
By EricWN (Sep 7, 2012)

Are you also ignorant of search engines and of the manufacturer's website? ;)

0 upvotes
PeakAction
By PeakAction (Sep 7, 2012)

I've used the 35/1.4 on an X-Pro 1 and it's a stunner. Awesome glass.

1 upvote
Dabbler
By Dabbler (Sep 11, 2012)

I think the 35mm on an APS-C sensor might be a bit long for landscapes.. I would opt for the 14mm f2.8 due this fall.

Comment edited 52 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Pixel Judge
By Pixel Judge (Sep 7, 2012)

Aaaah... Yes!
Right dials at right place. And now with a flash! and F2.8-4 kit zoom!
I simply can't ask for more.
I'm ready to trade in my Oly EP3.

0 upvotes
jhinkey
By jhinkey (Sep 7, 2012)

Finally a mirrorless camera that is of interest to me:
- Large sensor (DX is fine) w/o too many pixels
- Built-in high resolution EVF
- Built-in flash
- Nice set of control buttons
- Excellent performing lenses

The NEX 7 is close, but oh some of those lenses just don't look too hot.

I'm excited about the 14/2.8 - I hope it's a really good performer wide open and excellent stopped down.

Now Fuji needs to keep producing useful and high quality primes and zooms and they will be in the lead position for high end mirrorless systems.

I'm saving my money now . . .

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Sep 6, 2012)

The sample images on Fujifilm's website do look good. Don't know if this camera will match the DR of my DSLRs but man, the files are exceptionally clean.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Sep 6, 2012)

There's no reason to think it wouldn't. Fujifilm is saying the IQ should be the same as the X-Pro1.

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Sep 6, 2012)

I'm just not up on the X-Pro1 DR capabilities. I have a D800 and a K-30, which both get around 13-14 EV DR. This makes working with raw files in LR a pleasure. I had the X100 and remember the IQ was outstanding, but I've never worked with any X-Pro1 files. Thanks.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Sep 6, 2012)

The D800 is a different matter, but I wouldn't expect a radical difference between the K-30's 16MP APS-C CMOS sensor and the X-E1/X-Pro1's 16MP APS-C CMOS sensor.

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Sep 6, 2012)

Thanks Richard. Fuji is really stepping up, and have gotten my attention.

0 upvotes
michelobultra
By michelobultra (Sep 7, 2012)

I had high hopes for this camera. But based on the most terrible display of photos that Fuji has posted on their website to promote this camera will only turn people away.

Seriously Fuji?? Seriously?? Either this is a terible camera or the guy that took these pictures doesn't have a clue what he's doing. They are an abomination. My three year old grand daughter can take better pictures than that. Fuji, if you want to promote and sell this camera, these are NOT the pictures to do it with.

What were you thinking??? So, based on these sample pictures, I can only conclude that this camera is not very desirable with terrible image quality. Certainly the image quality is not in the same league as the X10, X100 and Pro X1.

Let's just hope it's the photographer and not the camera. Fuji, get rid of those terrible snapshots you have posted. My blind grandmother can take better pictures that that. Wake up Fuji, this is your reputation.

1 upvote
cassano
By cassano (Sep 7, 2012)

"Certainly the image quality is not in the same league as the X10, X100 and Pro X1."

i have no idea what you are talking about....

0 upvotes
Dabbler
By Dabbler (Sep 11, 2012)

Looking at the samples I have to concur, not good images to show off the lens and sensor capabilities. The images of humans are too soft to my liking, should have focused on their eyes. The tonal quality of this sensor is superb, a Fujifilm hallmark which has me tempted, I have one on pre-order, but I'm not entirely sold... I may already have too many cameras. Will my X10 see daylight if I have the EX-1?

0 upvotes
waxwaine
By waxwaine (Sep 6, 2012)

Looks solid but not so confortable.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Sep 6, 2012)

Believe it or not, photographers have been comfortably using these rangefinder-style body types for decades. Look up "Leica M rangefinder". Also keep in mind that Fuji also offers the HG-XE1 accessory hand grip for those who demand a thicker grip to grab onto. Also, there are people who do like a thicker, chunkier body. This isn't really a lightweight one-handed point-n-shoot type camera. This is more for people who prefer to hold their camera in the "classic" way: eye to the viewfinder, with left hand underneath the body and lens.

2 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (Sep 6, 2012)

Well, the X-Pro1 *was* a little too chunky to be truly comfortable in my opinion. "Rangefinder style" works great ergonomically up to a certain size, after which you are just left holding a brick. The X-E1 on the other had seems to be just about right.

0 upvotes
WellyNZ
By WellyNZ (Sep 6, 2012)

I shoot with the Fuji X-Pro1 and, while I don't believe I have unusually large hands, the camera fits perfectly in my hands and is very well balanced. My previous digital camera was a Nikon D700 and my last handheld camera before the X-Pro1 was a Mamiya 645 AFD so I guess I'm used to (and prefer) larger cameras. But I honestly don't find the X-Pro1 chunky or brick-like in the slightest.. it's a perfect size for me. But each to their own, of course!

1 upvote
Gesture
By Gesture (Sep 7, 2012)

A camera that one can palm is quite nice.

0 upvotes
pcblade
By pcblade (Sep 6, 2012)

much nicer than the X-Pro 1 ! feel sorry for the people having bought it. I will now hesitate between it and the Sony Nex5r...or the Nex6 :-)

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Sep 6, 2012)

How can it be nicer without an optical viewfinder? Many people prefer a nice, bright OVF that doesn't get grainy and doesn't lag in low-light.

4 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Sep 6, 2012)

@marike6 - I think you're over-exaggerating. A decent EVF really doesn't look or perform that badly in low light. I have an Oly VF3 for my m4/3 camera, which is far inferior than the X-E1's OLED EVF, and I have no problems with graininess or lag, even when shooting in low light. I can still see the image quite clearly, and I've yet to experience any lag that has prevented me from capturing my images. (Of course, I'm not shooting high speed action photography in low light, and I doubt most other people are either with these cameras.)

Given that an OVF makes the X-Pro1 so much more expensive and larger than the X-E1, with not much advantage gained, I don't think most people will ever miss not having a hybrid OVF on the X-E1. In other words, the hybrid OVF is not *that much* nicer ($700 nicer?!) over just having a good EVF like on the X-E1. Sure, the "large, complex and expensive hybrid finder" (dpreview's description) is certainly a great technical feat. But worth the price?

6 upvotes
FTW
By FTW (Sep 6, 2012)

the NEX 5 can have an external viewfinder that is same as the one from NEX-7. The viewfinder on NEX-6 and on this new Fuji camera are exactly the same than on the NEX-7 too. Sony sells the viewfinder to Fuji, no more, no less. So, any of Sony's cameras can have a viewfinder, Idon't see then the sense of criticizing the OVF here.

0 upvotes
WellyNZ
By WellyNZ (Sep 6, 2012)

How is it "nicer" than the X-Pro1?

No optical view finder, the LCD is smaller, battery life will be shorter.

What's nicer about it? It's cheaper, that's it.

2 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Sep 7, 2012)

@WellyNZ - it's "nicer" than the X-Pro1 because it's 100g lighter, it's more compact, it has a built-in flash, and it's a whopping $700 less expensive! And the main "compromise" is that you don't have the hybrid viewfinder that many people will never miss anyway. Weight savings, sizes savings, money savings, and the addition of a flash are all (cumulatively and/or individually) "nicer" things to have, IMO. Oh, and it also comes in silver!

Plus, aesthetically, I think the lack of the OVF window in the front, as well as the elimination of the viewfinder switching lever (the faux self-timer lever) makes the front of the camera look cleaner and less cluttered. The camera isn't trying so hard to be a faux retro rangefinder camera like the X-Pro1 is.

3 upvotes
gromero
By gromero (Sep 6, 2012)

Looks good, but I bet it will be £799.

0 upvotes
easyeddy
By easyeddy (Sep 7, 2012)

I bet it won't...

0 upvotes
LaFonte
By LaFonte (Sep 6, 2012)

the zoom with the xpro 1 would come with weight and handling size to the dslr category I tried to escape....

0 upvotes
NJHr
By NJHr (Sep 6, 2012)

How many dslr bodies weigh 350g or dslr systems have f2.8 zooms only 65.0mmX70.4mm in size?

2 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Sep 6, 2012)

If the X-Pro1 is a bit larger and heavier than you prefer, go for the X-E1. But even the X-Pro1 with zoom lens is going to be more compact and lighter than any comparable DSLR and lens. Mirrorless systems can be made smaller because they have much shorter lens registration distances, smaller lens mounts, and their lenses can be made smaller because they aren't using retrofocus lens designs.

The XF18-55mm/2.8-4.0 OIS is still going to be as small, or smaller, than the average 18-55/3.5-5.6 kit lens for a DSLR even though it offers a faster aperture range (2/3 stop faster at the wide end, one full stop faster at the long end).

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Sep 6, 2012)

I love FUJI - own the X100 and X10,
but I do not need X-E1: no viewfinder!?

0 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Sep 6, 2012)

2.36 million dot "Organic LED (OLED) electronic viewfinder

3 upvotes
FTW
By FTW (Sep 6, 2012)

You better get an appointment at the optical store and buy new glasses, or you have a reading problem. Could also be that you write nonsense without ever having read any part ofd the article.
The X-E1 has the sames integrated OLED Viewfinder that Sony's NEX-7 has.

0 upvotes
Tape5
By Tape5 (Sep 6, 2012)

It is great to see companies crawling over each other for the consumer money. Canon probably planning a MEGApixel, Sony is kicking nice and hard, Faveon is rapidly evolving, Lenses are getting better on P&S and P&S are pushing low end DSLRs, Leica is blowing its own nerdy horn, medium formats are getting cheaper, camera phones are getting better, Social and other apps are coming in, Instagram etc etc.

It is so much fun not to buy anything at all these days. By the time you pull your credit card out, you can bet a better camera has come out already.

9 upvotes
Nate21
By Nate21 (Sep 6, 2012)

I total agree with your statement.

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 6, 2012)

Some of the companies you are mentioning, as well as some of the other ones, are probably not going to be making it at the end. With this much cut-throat competition, there are apt to be casualties.

0 upvotes
mjl699
By mjl699 (Sep 6, 2012)

Innovation and competition tend to bring product and price improvements, while companies can come and go. Personally I think there are a lot of great companies out there making great cameras, and I hope they are able to continue. There has been a lot of innovation in the last 10 years and I think that has made photography and video more accessible to more people, which is a good thing.

0 upvotes
57even
By 57even (Sep 7, 2012)

Look on the positive side - whatever you buy will make great images. Right now you can choose just about anything in a given price range and know that it will do more or less as good a job as anything else for the money. Go out, shoot, relax.

1 upvote
Michael_13
By Michael_13 (Sep 7, 2012)

Huh?
"It is so much fun not to buy anything at all these days. "
The opposite is true, in my opinion. Choice and quality are greater than ever. By NOT buying, you miss all the good fun of a capable product.
Of course this does not mean that you should change your equipment every 12 months.

0 upvotes
dummygj
By dummygj (Sep 6, 2012)

Camera still lacks face detection. Because I would miss it, I shall not buy it!

0 upvotes
WellyNZ
By WellyNZ (Sep 6, 2012)

Amazing.

Photographers have been successfully taking photographs of people for over 150 years and now you're saying you won't buy a camera because it won't detect faces for you?

I'm really not sure what to think about that. Do people actually like to take photographs anymore or do they prefer the camera does everything for you?

4 upvotes
jon404
By jon404 (Sep 7, 2012)

Take landscape pix.

1 upvote
Boxbrownie
By Boxbrownie (Sep 7, 2012)

I guess the clue is in your name :)

If you really need face detection, then this certainly is not the camera for you anyway.

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (Sep 6, 2012)

"However it's still only marginally larger than either the 60mm F2.4 R Macro, or Sony's E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS for NEX."

Yes, it is only 1 cm longer when collapsed. But much heavier. Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R is 330g, Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS is 214 g. Not marginal difference.

0 upvotes
Ben Ramsey
By Ben Ramsey (Sep 6, 2012)

It is also half a stop faster on the short end and a stop faster on the long end. That seems more than a fair trade for just over a hundred grams.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Sep 6, 2012)

Sure, and I personally like the Fuji's zoom more than Sony's. Yet the comparison already mentioned that it is faster, but was not completely true about the size/weight sacrifice. More than 50% is not "marginal".

0 upvotes
FTW
By FTW (Sep 6, 2012)

Why do we not se what it can do and see if it matches we want and then see if the price fits and say, "we buy or we don't". No need to justify this by comparing all it doesn't has from what we would like to have. By that argument we never buy anything. Buy a NEX-7, it has it all, and even more than one needs. For the price Fuji sells it, it could have a few more feature and this, many people agree with. At 950$ for the kit it was correctly priced anyway. I have made photos for more than 45 years before I found a face detection in any digital camera, and, still do not see any utility for that. I frame, and shoot, all this extra Kikikaka does not gets mt attention. What made me turn over to NEX-7 was the manual focusing assistance that makes it fast to use in manual focusing with hybrid lenses.

0 upvotes
Dabbler
By Dabbler (Sep 11, 2012)

I have the NEX-7 and save for the 24mm Zeiss the current E lenses are mediocre. I would love to get my hands on those fast sharp Fuji lenses even if they weigh a bit more.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Sep 6, 2012)

"The XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R OIS LM offers a fairly-standard 28-80mm equivalent zoom range"

Fuji says it is 27-84 eq.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Imagefoundry
By Imagefoundry (Sep 6, 2012)

I think Fuji have done a remarkable job positioning this camera. All the compromises are quite sensible and don't take away from X-Pro1 core strengths. Good job!
Now just have to wait for the new firmware for my Xpro1.

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
7 upvotes
CAcreeks
By CAcreeks (Sep 6, 2012)

Is the 18-55/2.8-4.0 relatively small (for its range and speed) because it is non-retrofocus?

3 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Sep 6, 2012)

That's a big part.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Sep 6, 2012)

Yeah, it was smart of them to keep the flange distance so short than standard zoom starts just over it.

0 upvotes
photoholiko
By photoholiko (Sep 6, 2012)

What does it do that the NEX-5N can't for $700 less?

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Combatmedic870
By Combatmedic870 (Sep 6, 2012)

? It has an EVF....

5 upvotes
Carbon111
By Carbon111 (Sep 6, 2012)

The NEX-5N is $300???

7 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Sep 6, 2012)

Use AF lenses that are worth buying?

9 upvotes
Felts
By Felts (Sep 6, 2012)

Have smaller, better lenses, better IQ, better JPEGs, better direct handling, better, better, better...

10 upvotes
simon65
By simon65 (Sep 6, 2012)

Better all round build quality, a more thoughtful design, a faster kit zoom lens, and of course a more logical user interface.

12 upvotes
rsf3127
By rsf3127 (Sep 6, 2012)

Mein gott!!! I have just perceived that there are lots of Fuji insiders who post here!
They have already used the new Fuji and can testimony in favour of its astoundingly good build quality, handling, Image output, etc.

Suddenly, I feel I am incredibly uninformed...

2 upvotes
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (Sep 6, 2012)

Mein gott!! LOL, I have to agree, but one mistake Fuji made is using Sony OLED EVF, Why??? the one thing I did like from fuji was the OVF in the X100.
Don't get me wrong I like Sony sensors but hate the EVF in the NEX and SLT cameras.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
King Penguin
By King Penguin (Sep 6, 2012)

I don't own one, but just having a cam that you operate the aperture via the lens and the shutter speed via a dial on top makes this, for me, a much nicer prospect than the Nex range, plus some great primes as well. And it looks much nicer too, to me anyway

If you want gizmos and gadgets, get the Nex, if your interested in taking pics, get this!

2 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Sep 6, 2012)

NEX 5N doesn't have a built-in EVF, doesn't have a standard hotshoe, doesn't have a built-in flash, doesn't have as many physical controls, and doesn't have as strong a lens system.

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Sep 6, 2012)

While I usually don't care for reviews from people who have never even been in the same room with the camera, if this has identical image quality to the X-Pro1, it seems resonable to assume the images will look the same as those from the X-Pro1.

1 upvote
mjl699
By mjl699 (Sep 6, 2012)

I would guess the image quality will be outstanding, coming as it will from an X-Trans sensor (no Moire filter) and Fuji's great lenses.

0 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Sep 6, 2012)

Nice looking thing.

3 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 6, 2012)

Boy, oh boy, is she ever ugly.

0 upvotes
gigabloke
By gigabloke (Sep 6, 2012)

Boy, oh boy, is she ever beautiful!

18 upvotes
EricWN
By EricWN (Sep 7, 2012)

Oh boy, how pretty is IT after looking at anything from Sony or Nikon in that area.

0 upvotes
Edmond Leung
By Edmond Leung (Sep 6, 2012)

The camera size is too big.
Looks nothing special when compared with NEX7.
Good but not outstanding.

2 upvotes
Dennis
By Dennis (Sep 6, 2012)

Well, you have one good sensor versus another, two bodies with good (but very different) controls, both with high res EVFs.

And then, you have the lenses ...

6 upvotes
Edmond Leung
By Edmond Leung (Sep 6, 2012)

But fundamentally no big difference between the two cameras.

1 upvote
JesperMP
By JesperMP (Sep 6, 2012)

X-E1's body is the size of X100 sans the lens. Not big at all.

Apart from that, X-E1s controls are fundamentally different to NEX7s controls. Dedicated vs. modal. Both are good, but they are different.

2 upvotes
VJVIS
By VJVIS (Sep 6, 2012)

Nowadays the body does not really matter in terms of image quality. It would be very very difficult to see any difference in image quality among these mirrorless bodies (Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, Olympus) unless you shoot very high ISOs all the time. It comes down to which control layout / ergonomics you are more comfortable with. What does determine which system someone should go for is the lens selection. Micro four thirds wins here hands down, but Fuji has done an amazing job of releasing some fantastic lenses in such a short time (although the Fuji system is a bit more expensive than the micro four thirds). I don't know why Sony still keeps coming out with awesome bodies, but mediocre and large lenses.

Comment edited 54 seconds after posting
6 upvotes
Vlad S
By Vlad S (Sep 6, 2012)

I don't think it's too big. With smaller bodies a lot of people complain that the controls are too close together. As far as comparison with NEX7 goes, this is a different control paradigm, much more old school. It's not about which one is better, it's about who prefers what.

2 upvotes
hiplnsdrftr
By hiplnsdrftr (Sep 6, 2012)

I really, really planned on buying the Vex-7... until I handled one.
And then there was the lack of any compact black lens.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Sep 6, 2012)

"Looks nothing special when compared with NEX7."

Really? Here's something special about the X-E1: it takes Fuji's excellent selection of high quality lenses. I lot of people may like the NEX 7's body, but they hate the NEX's lens selection.

0 upvotes
WellyNZ
By WellyNZ (Sep 7, 2012)

The camera is too big? What are you? A midget?

0 upvotes
Dabbler
By Dabbler (Sep 11, 2012)

I think the tonal quality of the Fuji sensors is fundamentally different than Sony. The Fuji lenses easily best the mediocre Sony E series. NEX-7 has terrific usability/features but the IQ is just not the same. I've seen threads from wedding photographers shooting with the XPro1 while their Canon FF dSLR stays in the bag. I don't see that from NEX-7 shooters.

0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Sep 6, 2012)

23mm f/2 pancake please!

1 upvote
Greg Henry
By Greg Henry (Sep 6, 2012)

Nice look, but once you factor in a lens (any lens) you're still getting pretty far up there in price.

1 upvote
AllOtherNamesTaken
By AllOtherNamesTaken (Sep 6, 2012)

No phase detect AF, basically limits usage to static subjects....next please! Great camera otherwise. Nikon has had very good PDAF in their mirrorless for a year, and the new Sony NEX has it. Even the Canon EOS-M has it, albeit a very poor version. No reason why Fuji couldn't have incorporated it somehow.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 47 seconds after posting
1 upvote
sensibill
By sensibill (Sep 6, 2012)

It's amazing how photographers ever took photos of anything but 'static subjects' without PDAF... *eye roll*

14 upvotes
CarVac
By CarVac (Sep 6, 2012)

Do realize the split ring focusing aids were effectively PDAF.

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Sep 6, 2012)

I doubt it was a design goal to be able to shoot sports with a rangefinder-style camera. I don't see many Leicas at the local track meet, either.

9 upvotes
Xentinus
By Xentinus (Sep 6, 2012)

Old lenses were desinged to focus manually,old viewfinders were desinged to focus manually easier.But today we have half AF half manual focus systems...
So we customers have rights to expect PDAF

2 upvotes
JesperMP
By JesperMP (Sep 6, 2012)

So by that you disqualify all current Samsung, Ricoh, Olympus, Panasonic, Leica M and X, as well as all Fujifilm cameras.
Yes, must be easy to make since even the giant Canon cant get it to work.
Can se no reason at all. No sir, none at all.

1 upvote
bcalkins
By bcalkins (Sep 6, 2012)

I'm with sensibill - when I had a dSLR I rarely needed to use continuous AF, even when shooting my kids moving. There is a lot you can do, like pre-focusing or getting parallel to the action to minimize the relative speed. There is a big difference between photos of moving subjects, and sports photography... It isn't like PDAF is a perfect technology, either!

3 upvotes
AllOtherNamesTaken
By AllOtherNamesTaken (Sep 6, 2012)

PDAF isn't just for sports....surely you must know that. It makes photographing anything that moves much easier. Why not just throw it in there? The people who want to use it will, and the ones who don't, won't. Because there were no amazing AF systems "back in the day" is a terrible argument. I doubt any of those people are still using manual focus film cameras, and I wonder why? Technology is a wonderful thing.

Nikon and probably now Sony have put very good PDAF in their mirrorless cameras. It is only an advantage to have that as an option - you can always use CDAF if you prefer. #1 criticism of mirrorless cameras right now is their AF, which is why they are starting to introduce PDAF.

Anyways, it's just my opinion. Why not expand your customer base with a simple addition of a feature?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
bcalkins
By bcalkins (Sep 6, 2012)

The point is not that PDAF isn't a desirable feature, but that the lack of it does not mean you are limited to static subjects... I agree that it would make the camera more appealing, but it surely has a cost and time to market impact and goes beyond the 'simple addition' of a feature. If they included it we'd be complaining about the price :)

1 upvote
G Davidson
By G Davidson (Sep 7, 2012)

It's a fair point, as lack of this limits the camera. Fuji has already incorporated a form of this on a compact, so they'll probably have it on the next iteration, or after. I'm interested in using this camera beside my DSLR's, but that's one issue to fix before it could *fully* replace them.

Don't get me wrong, this looks like a beautiful camera with gorgeous lenses, way more so than the competition, but in a buyer's market, it makes sense to list pros and cons before comitting. Limited AF, one way or another, seems to remain it's weakest point.

0 upvotes
Carlos Henrique
By Carlos Henrique (Sep 6, 2012)

I think it's good for photographers that Fuji is trying to do good stuff. It will certainly increase competition in the market. The main drawback seems to be the focus system that may let someone (like myself) thinking twice before going into something like the X system. I hope they can improve their focus system so that we can get really great X cameras (the lenses seems already be very good).

1 upvote
roblarosa
By roblarosa (Sep 6, 2012)

I'll say one thing for Fujifilm; They sure do make pretty cameras.

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting
18 upvotes
Petrogel
By Petrogel (Sep 6, 2012)

Excellent retro look !!!!! WITH EVF
I agree with amicus70 the black and silver edition of the camera looks like Leica Digilux 3
Expecting to see the in depth preview of the camera

0 upvotes
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Sep 7, 2012)

Hope Apple does not notice

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (Sep 6, 2012)

For some reason, a cheap, plastic zoom lens seem out of place on this camera.

Comment edited 11 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (Sep 6, 2012)

Lucky then, perhaps, that the 18-55mm F2.8-4 OIS is neither cheap nor plastic.

30 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Sep 6, 2012)

So you've held this zoom lens in your hand, have you?

0 upvotes
Petka
By Petka (Sep 7, 2012)

Yes it does, probably because you need an adaptor to put a cheap plastic zoom lens on it. Fuji does not make one.

0 upvotes
JesperMP
By JesperMP (Sep 6, 2012)

I would like to see the 35mm F1.4 as the "kit lens". Having to buy it separately at 600 USD is a bit steep for my pocket, even if is worth the price for what you get.
X-E1 + 35mm F1.4 for say 1400 would be a killer combination.
Think about that it has to compete against NEX6 and the announced 35mm F1.8 OSS lens.

4 upvotes
masterofdeception
By masterofdeception (Sep 6, 2012)

UK buyers, stand by to be ripped off...

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
southpaw74
By southpaw74 (Sep 6, 2012)

So any news on cost here in the uk?

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (Sep 6, 2012)

No, Fujifilm UK has not announced UK pricing.

0 upvotes
Glen Barrington
By Glen Barrington (Sep 6, 2012)

The X series started out so 'right' but it has steadily gone in the wrong direction. They are turning it into an Oly Pen. If I wanted a Pen, I would have bought one.

I want more QUALITY, not another 'me too' camera.

3 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Sep 6, 2012)

Do you have a PEN with 2,4M EVF? Or with a sensor that can match FF? ;-)

9 upvotes
Essai
By Essai (Sep 6, 2012)

match FF ? Rofl

6 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (Sep 6, 2012)

Not a wrong direction.

X series now have multiple directions.

4 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Sep 6, 2012)

@Essai: those are not my words. Read some reviews, many praised outcome of this sensor with specific technology and compared it to FF.

3 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Sep 6, 2012)

@ludex
My test is simple: take raws from dprevew studio tool than process them in lightroom. I'm sorry, but fuji raws looks like crap and nowhere near FF. Damn, they look like crap when compared to any APS-C ;)

0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Sep 6, 2012)

Could not disagree more, Glen Barrington. Name another mirrorless under $7000 with a shutter speed dial, EC dial, and a proper aperture ring on the lenses. You can't. These things are what real photographers crave.

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Sep 6, 2012)

How does this camera detract from the original X-Pro1, especially as all the firmware enhancements to the X-E1 are also being applied to the X-Pro1?

@Emacs23 Did you actually read the review where it specifically says that Lightroom's support for the Fuji X sensor is currently very poor? Until that's fixed use the jpegs instead

0 upvotes
Dennis
By Dennis (Sep 6, 2012)

So the "wrong direction" is ditching the funky hybrid OVF that only offers 3 FOV options and doesn't show you what's in focus in order to offer an otherwise similar body at a lower price ? What would you have cut to drop the price from $1700 to $1000 in an entry level body ? (I tried one and found the non-TTL VF to be odd and kind of pointless and would be happy to have a cheaper, smaller, simpler body). Don't get me wrong - I like optical VFs and enjoy my DSLR ... I also like rangefinder focusing (I have a couple old compact rangefinders). But I'll take a TTL EVF over a "window" (I can always take my eye from the VF to see what the scene really looks like).

2 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Sep 6, 2012)

What a bonehead thing to say. How have they diminished the quality? And tell us which Pen camera has a built-in EVF?

0 upvotes
WellyNZ
By WellyNZ (Sep 7, 2012)

@Andy Crowe,

As evident from the comments on this website, no one actually reads anything.

2 upvotes
hexxthalion
By hexxthalion (Sep 7, 2012)

@WellyNZ

I'd go even further to say that no one actually owns camera they're bitching about and only handful of them take any photos ;)

0 upvotes
Michael_13
By Michael_13 (Sep 7, 2012)

Dear Glen,
maybe you simply have a weird perception of 'quality'?

0 upvotes
Ian Leach
By Ian Leach (Sep 6, 2012)

OK I’m being really really picky but; does anyone else not like the indentation running along the front top of body. It makes it look like the camera has been dropped on the lens and the body was pushed in. It’s one of those design flourishes that serve no purpose and the camera would look better without it. My background is in design so that may explain why I care about these little points. Apart from that this camera looks great.

2 upvotes
ManuelVilardeMacedo
By ManuelVilardeMacedo (Sep 6, 2012)

Actually I think it prevents the camera from looking plain, but that's just me.

2 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 6, 2012)

This here has gotta be the plainest looking camera ever cooked-up. As Plane Jane as any camera body can be. Why did Fuji had to make it so homey?

0 upvotes
alfredo_tomato
By alfredo_tomato (Sep 6, 2012)

That indentation breaks up the vertical, just like the concave on the side of the Alpha Romeo Spyder.

0 upvotes
MarkInSF
By MarkInSF (Sep 7, 2012)

It's the first thing I noticed, and I agree it's unattractive and looks like an accident. I think they were trying to give a boxy camera some character and failed.

I'm no fan of retro design and thought recent Fujis were boxy and homely. I love the specs on this, more than I expected to, so could overlook the dent, if I had to.

I want Fuji to succeed because they consistently bring out unusual cameras, not copies. Wish they did a little more polishing before they released them so they didn't need major fixes to the firmware (or replaced sensors.)

0 upvotes
alfredo_tomato
By alfredo_tomato (Sep 7, 2012)

Boxy is OK with me. If it is easy to carry and use, I don't care how it looks.

I've had boxy and ugly, but I still loved my Brownie Six-20

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
RezaTravilla
By RezaTravilla (Sep 6, 2012)

ugly face camera. But i hope the AF will be better

1 upvote
amicus70
By amicus70 (Sep 6, 2012)

The design is familiar... it's nearly the Leica Digilux 3 or Panasonic DMC-L1. Not very creative.

3 upvotes
intruder61
By intruder61 (Sep 6, 2012)

apparently, it records images.

4 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Sep 6, 2012)

Sure, because those two were the first ever to put a viewfinder in the corner, dials on the right and lens in the center.

7 upvotes
threeOh
By threeOh (Sep 6, 2012)

Good point. I want the lens on the back for self-shots. Perhaps the shutter underneath.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Sep 6, 2012)

I know what you mean. They should have hired a creative designer to fashion a camera for them. I hear Marc Newson is looking for a new gig.

0 upvotes
Keto
By Keto (Sep 6, 2012)

The design is nearly identical to their own older medium format rangefinders.

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (Sep 7, 2012)

And DSLR designs aren't familiar too? LOL.

1 upvote
gl2k
By gl2k (Sep 6, 2012)

Noise level of Pro version is exceptional !!!
If this camera has the same level of noise it belongs to the best cams.
Plays in the same league as D4. I'm really impressed.

0 upvotes
dengx
By dengx (Sep 6, 2012)

The sensor and the software are pretty much the same.

0 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (Sep 6, 2012)

Thanks to a lot of in camera RAW noise reduction. I must say it is probably the best in camera NR I have seen. Still looses some detail but an acceptable amount.

5 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Sep 6, 2012)

D4 huh, i'm sure you can find something even further from any kind of resemblance to the Fuji X-Trans series with a little effort. Come on man, that the best you can do. ;)

There's more to a camera than high-iso you know.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
Petka
By Petka (Sep 6, 2012)

Picture quality certainly is on par with D4 or even better (have to run some tests...), they both are great. In other ways they are not comparable at all. My D4 is a pro action tool, X-Pro1 is an "art camera"... Totally different, but both are very good at what they are good at.

2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Sep 6, 2012)

"Plays in the same league as D4"

Now, now...

1 upvote
Damo83
By Damo83 (Sep 6, 2012)

Nice, but I'd like an OVF, no need for flash or mic input, I.... well I guess I should just get an X-Pro 1. :)

3 upvotes
Total comments: 278
12