Previous news story    Next news story

A camera for all weather? Shooting with the Fujifilm X-T1 + Japan gallery

By dpreview staff on Feb 25, 2014 at 19:24 GMT
Buy on GearShopFrom $1,299.007 deals

We first laid our hands on the Fujifilm X-T1 about a month ago when it was announced. Now that we've had some time to shoot with it extensively, we've gathered our thoughts on using the latest X-Trans camera from Fuji. The X-T1 offers much of what the X-E2 does, including a 16 megapixel APS-C sensor with on-chip phase detection. More than that, it offers an SLR-style sculpted handgrip and weather-resistant sealing. Click the links below to find out what the X-T1 is like to use in the field.

We've also added 40 images to a gallery of real-world samples taken in Japan, during and after the recent CP+ show in Yokohama. Click the link below to go straight to the gallery.

340
I own it
542
I want it
53
I had it
Discuss in the forums
Our favorite products. Free 2 day shipping.
Support this site, buy from dpreview GearShop.
Fujifilm X-T1

Comments

Total comments: 512
123
Stephan Def
By Stephan Def (1 week ago)

Its certainly a nice little Camera. However for me the price point is too high.
Overall I think the lenses need to come down in price by 30%, the reasoning I have for this is because the Sigma 18-35 1.8 is at 700€ and that is a reference Lens to me. The Camera itself will come down in price anyway over time, but I do not see myself spending that kind of money for Lenses that other Vendors have priced more reasonably.

2 upvotes
iggy888
By iggy888 (1 week ago)

Hi everyone. This is my new top-of-the-list wish-to-have dream camera... with 18-55 f/2.8-4 lens. In Conclusion section, a great list of Pros and a "great" list of Cons (minor complaints, really). :thumbup:

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
km25
By km25 (1 week ago)

An 84% and gold, a lot of Fuji haters are not going to sleep well tonight. I own the X-T1, it is a fine camera with good manors the creates fine images. What more can you want? All cameras have limites and strengths. The X-T1 is well balanced in it MP, noise and size. It has an excellent lens made for it. I the thing I love the most, the movies aren't very good. I feel as if it has receive a fair review, other sights have given even a little more.
None of the camera draw backs are major. It may well be the best mirror less over all on the market.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 13 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
crashpc
By crashpc (1 week ago)

I´m not fuji hater, but I still (also) don´t understand that rating, and mostly IQ rating. There is great poo visible in some parts of test shots, which even half price cameras don´t have, and they called it excellent. Not impressed with this kind of review. For example left down diagonal lines bar. Very bad artifacts/moire. Somewhere else resolution, or noise reduction not just "on par" with other cams. I´d like to have perfect mirrorless instead of DSLR. I really would like to get rid of the mirror, but I don´t see any device good enaugh to convert me. Hope they will come soon with some, for acceptable price. This now is just bad joke (of course only my opinion and my photographic intentions, not for everybody...).

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
AlexRuiz
By AlexRuiz (1 week ago)

It is not a good day for the fuji haters. When you look at the whole package, IT IS the best mirrorless on the market today. Better IQ than M43 and superior lens selection vs Sony. And did I mention the awesome body design?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Steve_
By Steve_ (1 week ago)

@AlexRuiz

Even though I have a substantial investment in m43 gear I would sell it off and go Fuji if the IQ was really better. It's different, but to my eye no better on the whole.

I also could not live with that lock on the ISO dial. Finally somebody figures out ISO is important enough to have its own dial but they cripple it with the implementation. Only Pentax gets ISO control right - direct assignment to control dial just like (gasp!) aperture and shutter speed. Everyone else is afflicted by film-think to one degree or another.

5 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (1 week ago)

@AlexRuiz
I think the EM1 has the edge when it comes to controls and body design. Much easier to hold and controllable with one hand (two dials for shutter and aperture + ISO and white balance if a switch is released, very nice idea), larger buttons which are less recessed, touch lcd. I saw so many XT1s with extra grip attached which makes me wonder why on earth they didn't make it larger then?
Larger sensor equates for better ISO performance, but for medium print size the difference is not that huge (even compared to my FF you mostly don't see the difference).
If I were to only have one system, it probably would be the Fuji. Now m43 and FF work great together.

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
dmstraton
By dmstraton (1 week ago)

The ISO button isn't crippled. Yes it has a lock. To me, this is no different than holding down a modal button on my Canon and flipping a wheel. In fact, it's easier. And I change ISO much less than aperture and shutter speed, which is a cinch on this on this camera.

LR sucks for Fuji. It's too bad that dpreview uses it but I get the logic. You want insane pixel level detail? Try out a Fuji 23mm and PhotoNinja or Iridient. There is no watercolor or green mush with those converters.

0 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (1 week ago)

I will keep the X-T1, don't get me wrong, but there is something a bit, "meh" about it for me. The X-Pro1 was more fun to shoot with. The fact the official case needs to be remove in order to get the SD card out is bizarre too (I wouldn't have mentioned that had it not been bundled with the camera).

In some ways maybe this is a backhanded compliment. I feel the same about the E-M1 vs the E-M5.

2 upvotes
Olymore
By Olymore (1 week ago)

I think some cameras have 'character' and their imperfections and foibles add to that.
Though I love the improvements that Oly made to the E-M1 I still get more of a buzz when I pick up the E-M5

0 upvotes
Gaggle
By Gaggle (1 week ago)

Anyone notice that the red paint tube, lower right, under low-light studio test scene, looks NOTHING like red? (do I smell a burned-orange?)
I don't think I saw this huge color error mentioned anywhere in the review.

1 upvote
Peter62
By Peter62 (1 week ago)

Quote: " The camera's DR modes also help you make the most of the sensor's impressive dynamic range."

The X-T1's dynamic range is FAR from being impressive! In fact, DR is VERY poor, compared to Nikon D7100 or almost any other comparable camera!

10 upvotes
laughingor
By laughingor (1 week ago)

Quote: "The X-T1's dynamic range is FAR from being impressive! In fact, DR is VERY poor"

Really? DR is VERY poor? i think you mean "very very" poor. and do you hurt?

1 upvote
dlbeck
By dlbeck (1 week ago)

The review says the Flash Guide is 8 m at iso 100 in the (Specs section); strangely, DP also says it is 8 m at iso 200 in the Introduction section. Fuji's website says the flash Guide is indeed 8 m at iso 100 (as in Specs page), but the Guide is 11 m at iso 200 (which is the default). So, the review is wrong on the "Intro" page and correct, yet incomplete, on the "Specs" page. Probably just a typo, but this is a wonderful little flash, so give it its due. I keep it on my camera all the time because it is so small, yet powerful.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
LightBug
By LightBug (1 week ago)

What F-stop was the continuous auto-focus tracking test done under?

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (1 week ago)

They were shot in shutter priority at 1/500sec and ISO 200, using the 55-200mm zoom at 55mm. This resulted in an aperture of F5.6.

Early in the sequence, the camera doesn't have to refocus very much between shots, if at all, But if you look at the later frames in the sequence, you can see pretty easily how the camera is refocusing between shots, even in the very reduced size of the rollover. Look at how the background becomes progressively more blurred as the camera focuses the lens closer.

2 upvotes
Debankur Mukherjee
By Debankur Mukherjee (1 week ago)

Fuji High ISO has very less noise but the raw files are not that sharp.......its a bit soft.......

7 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (3 days ago)

That is one of the central ideas of the X-Trans layout: ability to better eliminate the chroma noise. Sadly, details are washed in the process too. But the colors are preserved much better with much less guessing than in Bayer layout. To me personally (disclaimer: I'm no Fuji X owner) the trade off is very good: to me at high ISOscolor fidelity is more important than the fine details.

Anyhow. Fine details would always suffer on the X-Trans, compared to the Bayer, since former uses 3x3 pixel groups while later 2x2. Yet it is quite debatable by how much the details "suffer", since both of the sensors are not true-color ones a-la Foveon: fine details (and fine color variations too) are inevitably lost to demosaicing.

0 upvotes
badi
By badi (1 week ago)

I see a lot of people thinking about "i would love fuji to move to full frame too"...

Actually, first, i think it will not going to happen (at least not any time soon) not for fuji, not for olympus/panasonic. They developed great systems of lenses for this format especially to compensate for the small sensor.
And second i would prefer not to, because this way they will conentrate on quality rather than splitting the features between the FF and APSC semi-systems.

For example the fuji's 23/1.4 35/1.4 56/1.2: This set of primes will produce images that compete with any DSLR FF with good lenses, going FF this companies will actually have to provide something better than the equivalent of this primes and that will go for higher price & huge bulk.
Another example here: Canon's 85/1.2 is 2.2x times the price and 2.5x times the weight compared to fuji's 56/1.2.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (1 week ago)

Most of those people who want Fuji to make a Full Frame camera don't own a Fuji camera themselves already.

They still live by the dream that Full Frame is the future. Given in by the marketing culprit that come out the same mouth, and of the same companies that said the more megapixels a sensor could bare the better.

They forget that FF makes the camera and lenses as heavy as their current DSLR systems. Therewith loosing one of the biggest advantage of the Fuji x-series.

We will just have to wait for the organic sensor that they are currently developing and APS-C will do just fine for years ahead.

Comment edited 41 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
km25
By km25 (1 week ago)

You are soooo right. In mirror less cameras, APS-C works out to be the best over all. Back in 1960's, 35mm was the small spy camera format that took off.....Nikon F days.

1 upvote
laughingor
By laughingor (1 week ago)

One day I talk to the Taxi driver, in his 50+. And he told me that Full Frame is nothing, he feel not big enough. He is playing the old camera with medium format. well, fair enough for his age.
I would personally satisfy with APS-C or m4/3.

0 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (1 week ago)

Good quality FF primes often aren't expensive. Consider a Nikon 28mm,50mm, 85mm/1.8g or Sigma 35mm/1.4 (in a larger package when regarding the body, but for me not an issue at all); price/perf. hard to beat. Fuji is nice, but expensive (I paid 1300 Euros for a D610, 390 for the 85mm (one of the best lenses IMO), 150 for the 50mm, far less than for equivalent Fuji lenses). I'm still waiting for appropriate demosaicing in Lightroom (I'm not so fond of Photo Ninja). If they implemented spectral demosaicing of quasi-random CFAs you get similar peak S/N ratios as the best algorithms for Bayer sensors. This way artefacts like foliage smearing and CAs can be reduced (I admire that Fuji has engineers who read scientific papers from time to time. The potential in random CFAs can be fully exploited only when appropriate demosaicing algorithms are used. Done properly, artefacts and noise levels are not smaller than for Bayer sensors, but appear as chrominance noise, i.e. more visually pleasing.)

1 upvote
Combatmedic870
By Combatmedic870 (1 week ago)

Wow.....84% in semi pro DSLR group! NOW THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT! MIRRORLESS IS FINALLY GETTING THERE!!

4 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (1 week ago)

Why do Fuji RAW's at high ISO look like other camera's JPEGs? What I mean is that although their RAW's look clean, they look NR washed, for lack of a better term. The grain is massaged away. If I look at the RAW's and switch on other camera's JPEGs at 1600 or higher, in the studio scenes, I see more commonality.

9 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (1 week ago)

Demosaicing. Read the articles on demosaicing random CFAs. If not done correct, artefacts include smearing of details. If done correct, details compared to Bayer sensors are similar, but artefacts appear mostly as chrominance noise (less luminance noise). Scientific papers point to the fact, however, that every sensor has its faults and merits. Depending on the CFA you may have lesser problems with CAs, but more so with fine details, so every design is a tradeoff.

1 upvote
Dr_Jon
By Dr_Jon (1 week ago)

It appears ACR still isn't that good with Fuji sensors, so not really a good comparison...
http://chromasoft.blogspot.it/2013/03/lightroom-44rc-and-capture-one-versus-x.html
(He's talking about Adobe's second attempt, which is still the one they use. He also writes Raw conversion software for a living.)
Better to use SilkyPix Pro6 or CaptureOne it seems.

0 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (1 week ago)

"Why do Fuji RAW's at high ISO look like other camera's JPEGs?"

1. You can't look at RAWs. You always look at JPEGs. RAW image is just a dump of numbers, as read from sensor.

2. There is a standard, baseline demosaicing algorithm for Bayer sensors. What you see as RAW is actually a JPEG, produced in ACR as close as possible to the baseline demosaicing algorithm.

3. There is NO baseline demosaicing algorithm for X-Trans sensor. The standard (presumably developed by Fuji) demosaicing algorithm includes NR and other bells and whistles within. Thus RAW view for X-Trans is only marginally different from JPEG view.

4. Since there is a baseline demosaicing for Bayer, you can compare the RAWs between different cameras. But they are incomparable to RAWs from X-Trans sensors, since they use different demosaicing, which already includes PP.

1 upvote
davids8560
By davids8560 (1 week ago)

So many exciting innovations from what some might label lesser stars, yet the two most prominent camps retain the most widespread allegiance.

0 upvotes
calking
By calking (1 week ago)

Has a lot to do with cost. Consumers can buy DSLRs with a kit lens for a fraction of the cost of high-end mirrorless, and be thrilled with the results. They represent the bulk of the market outside of cell phone shooters.

4 upvotes
armandino
By armandino (1 week ago)

these low end DSLR are also part of an ecosystem that this fuji can only dream of.

0 upvotes
Olymore
By Olymore (1 week ago)

It's also harder to change when you're already invested in a system. It's why they use proprietary lens mounts.
Though I agree about the 'ecosystem' for the majority of mainstream photographers they are (or soon will be) catered for adequately by Fuji and even more so by m43

0 upvotes
J2Gphoto
By J2Gphoto (1 week ago)

"A high-end camera is nothing without optics to match, and while the X-system is little more than 2 years old, the lens line-up is starting to look distinctly mature."

Personally the lens line up and the price of their lenses are what are steering me toward going with the E-M1. Also does anyone else think the white balance is way off on the E-M1 sample images? I've used the E-M1 and have never seen whites look so yellow.

3 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (1 week ago)

Using AWB with incandescent sources? There is only so much AWB can do. You'd have to look at the EXIF data.

1 upvote
badi
By badi (1 week ago)

Actually the lens for fuji are kind of great. Really great. Their only problem is the price, however for similar quality you pay the same amount of money also in the 4/3 camp, while fuji benefits from a better DOF control.
In sony and 4/3 mount you can find cheap lenses as well... like those from sigma art, which look cool (specially for sony).

2 upvotes
calking
By calking (1 week ago)

The fuji lenses and the lineup as a whole is terrific. The ones who complain about it the most don't actually know what the total lineup is, and/or don't use the system.

If you want Olympus go Olympus, but it isn't for a lack of lenses in the fuji line.

7 upvotes
wchutt
By wchutt (1 week ago)

The Fujinon prime lenses' performance-to-price ratio is one of the reasonss I decided to abandoned Nikon FX for Fujifilm X.

When my second XT-1 body arrives, my remaining Nikon body and lens will go out the door. I just started to use the Fujinon 10-20/4 and it outperforms my Nikkor 16-35/4 G lens.

0 upvotes
J2Gphoto
By J2Gphoto (1 week ago)

Yes the lens line up IS the reason I'd buy the Olympus. What many forget is that you have 2 lines of lenses now that work on the E-M1, and work well I might add. Fuji has nothing in the way of telephoto ( and I love shooting nature) with the E-M1 I not only ave the 75-300 which I'd guess is better with more reach than the Fuji telephoto. I also have the 50-200 SWD weather sealed 4/3 lens. The Zuiko 25 and 45mm are 1/2 the price as the Fuji comp's. 1/3 if you buy used and I'd bet every bit as good. I have looked at the Fuji line, the entire line and it does not have what I would want or for how much I'd like to have to spend.

1 upvote
Steve_
By Steve_ (1 week ago)

@RichRMA
"Using AWB with incandescent sources? There is only so much AWB can do."

You've obviously not used an Olympus. Theirs is the only AWB that really works. And in typical Olympus fashion, it is configurable. You can choose between yellowish cast under incandescent light (like virtually all other cameras) or choose to have the color rendered accurately under all conditions.

This was pointed out in the review, where the E-M1's performance in the latter mode was characterized and very accurate.

1 upvote
vadims
By vadims (1 week ago)

Why there is no ISO range on the specs page (2)?

I even searched for "iso" on the page; the only place where it's mentioned is flash guide number (i.e. that it's for ISO100).

0 upvotes
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (1 week ago)

Native ISO range 200-6400

Comment edited 12 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (1 week ago)

Sorry, that was a quirk of our specs database. It should be visible now.

0 upvotes
andywhoa
By andywhoa (1 week ago)

So DPR is where all the people who never grew up go to present their opinions? Most of the comments here are embarrassing. Would you act this way in front of your parents?

12 upvotes
pdelux
By pdelux (1 week ago)

Where do you think they learned such behaviour?

5 upvotes
King Penguin
By King Penguin (1 week ago)

He's right a lot of the comments on here are 'I hate' or 'I love' or 'well in that case you smell'........

Just like two 8 year olds comparing the specs of their favourite cars such as 'the Lamborghini does 212mph but the Ferrari only does 211mph, so there'

Children with simple minds......I mean everybody knows the Porsche does 213mph, na na nee na na........

3 upvotes
AlexRuiz
By AlexRuiz (1 week ago)

You are so right. The comments here are pathetic. I wonder what the average age is on here. It's good entertainment and a good laugh though, after work.

I have come to the conclusion that most people around here are nothing more than petty gadget-lovers. What I mean by that is that most discussions are pointless brand wars. I don't see too many value discussions on photography. It's all about brands and minutia.

0 upvotes
Mike_Hessey
By Mike_Hessey (1 week ago)

Yes, I feel like that about most of the comments here - they more often than not seem opinionated and unbalanced. No modern camera is perfect, and probably no modern camera is rubbish either. Horses for courses and riders.

0 upvotes
MaxiMax
By MaxiMax (1 week ago)

Congratulations to Fuji on the body design! Although the tech specs for this camera are not the best, the mechanical controls are something that a serious photographer always wanted in a good camera - ready and available. Fortunately, many other camera manufacturers have also started to move more towards physical dials and buttons instead of filling the cameras with those dreadful menus and sub-menus controls.

1 upvote
AceP
By AceP (1 week ago)

Unfortunately not implemented well. According to the review, the buttons are small and provide poor tactile feedback. To set a shutter speed you may need to turn BOTH the main dial (whole stops) and a front dial (1/3 stops). Since I don't generally shoot aperture priority, that's a non starter for me. A single shutter dial that would allow me to scroll to the correct shutter speed in one motion would be preferred.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (1 week ago)

The EVF updating IMO, seems very slow on panning. It produces a real juddering effect at pan speed, though I noticed very little colour skewing. I don't see that juddering with the Sony and Olympus EVF's, especially when the Olympus is set on 120Hz. Is the EVF refresh rate adjustable on the X-T1?

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (1 week ago)

You have clearly not been using it.!
Really never had in your hands.

The EVF inside the X-T1 is actually so fast and bright that you don't have the feel that you are looking at an electronic screen instead of the actual picture.

Best EVF currently available.

0 upvotes
Dr_Jon
By Dr_Jon (1 week ago)

Tony Northrup did an interesting comparison on EVF lag which included the XT1 in his A6000 review:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXi2n1Nt_08&feature=em-subs_digest
It's very impressive (the XT1).

1 upvote
beavertown
By beavertown (1 week ago)

Similar price of the V3?

0 upvotes
montygm
By montygm (1 week ago)

Beautiful looking camera. All the right buttons as in the "good old film camera days" . Would be a joy to use. Love the retro look of many of these new cameras coming out such as the Sony A7's and Oly's. Wish Fuji made a full frame version of this as well. The recessed main button sound like a bit of a design problem though but until you try it out on a shoot it would be hard to tell how much of an impact this would be. Video quality doesn't sound too impressive but is not something I would use that much. I think this would be the type of camera that most purists would prefer using for photography rather than film. Fuji seems to be impressing many with their cameras of late. Can't wait to try one out when it becomes available here.

4 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (1 week ago)

I've only handled it in the store, but I immediately tagged the small, shallow buttons as a potential problem. Also some of the buttons - movie record - were placed in what seemed like difficult-to-reach places.

That said, most small cameras on the market today are cramped, with too many buttons that are too small and/or too closely spaced to use comfortably. YMMV

2 upvotes
JPMontez
By JPMontez (1 week ago)

I want one...

4 upvotes
brycesteiner
By brycesteiner (1 week ago)

I'm surprised this professional camera, which looks nice, would lack in these areas:

1. max shutter only 1/4000
2. poor video
3. USB 2
4. 1/180 flash sync

For being the top of the line camera many of the features are 2012. Still looks like a great camera though and could be a big hit.

3 upvotes
km25
By km25 (1 week ago)

Max 1/4000, you have to use ND filters, so. This not a camera for high speed action also. Poor video, by a nice piont and shoot or us your iPhone. USB2, who even uses USB. 1/180 sec flash sync, that is the only real problem the camera has. The difference from a D800 is only 1/70 of a second faster, blazing.This a still camera for light weight carry and maximum IQ for that mode.

0 upvotes
lonelyspeck
By lonelyspeck (1 week ago)

I thought I would miss 1/8000th of a second max shutter speed too but in real world practice, you can shoot at f/1.4, ISO 800 and DR400 in full sunlight at only 1/4000th and still retain almost all highlight detail. The dynamic range of the resulting RAW files are so high that an extra stop of shutter is actually not necessary in practice. f/1.4, ISO 200 and 1/4000th is just fine in bright sunlight for the X-T1.

0 upvotes
Kurt_K
By Kurt_K (1 week ago)

I keep reading about how great IQ is on this and other Fuji bodies, but I'm just not seeing it in the samples I've looked at. To my eyes it appears that Fuji is applying too much NR to its raw files, which I think is the reason for the watercolor look some people have already complained about. And given the fact that there isn't a DXO-style test for x-trans sensor performance, I think it's going to be hard for anyone to prove that Fuji isn't cooking their raws. I personally don't own any of the new trendy cameras, so it's not like I have a dog in this fight. I'm just calling it as I see it.

16 upvotes
calking
By calking (1 week ago)

Maybe you guys ought to rent one and actually shoot with it instead of gawking at online samples and making scientific analysis based on that.

4 upvotes
badi
By badi (1 week ago)

There are two issues here (yes, i have and use a X-Trans sensor - the X-E1, but the raw image is about the same quality).

1. Fuji does apply some internal noise reducing thing, and this is very obvious when you compare raws - especially at higher iso's on the Fuji's raw there is ABSOLUTELY NO color noise, which seems rather impossible to me. This also produces a rather soft image at base iso compared to others (like canikon/sony ASPCs).

2. The watercolor effect is due to some wrong sharpening applied to the fine details areas (foliage, hairs) in raw converters.
If you take a raw (with a lot of foliage) and in ACR/Lightroom you apply strong sharpening, with a radius > 1, you've got it. If you apply zero sharpening in ACR and then sharpen the image in PS (preferably in LAB color space, only to the luminance channel) you get some amazing sharpness with no watercolor.

2 upvotes
walgarch
By walgarch (1 week ago)

I'm a Pentax user and I'm completely appalled by how some Pentaxians are acting. It's as if some people need something to complain about otherwise they're not happy.

I for one congratulate how well Fujifilm is doing. I believe in their philosophy as strongly as I do in Pentax's. But honestly, there are some users who are really killing my experience here on DPR.

Thank you for the review Andy!

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
31 upvotes
Zvonimir Tosic
By Zvonimir Tosic (1 week ago)

If you are appalled by a criticism that asks for explanation of acts, why are you not appalled by your own criticism through derision and refusal to offer any sensible explanation?

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
walgarch
By walgarch (1 week ago)

I understand that by complaining about the complainers, I am too participating in the problem. I've kept my mouth shut for so long because of that. But when it's starting to affect my enjoyment of DPR, I'm sorry, but I need to say something. What I feel worst about is that I'm now derailing the X-T1 review thread.

I'm sorry, but I wont be engaging in anymore discussion here so I don't compound the problem.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
10 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (1 week ago)

Amen, walgarch

1 upvote
utomo99
By utomo99 (1 week ago)

Fuji need to improve the quality of the video. By firmware update.
And get better score.

0 upvotes
Zvonimir Tosic
By Zvonimir Tosic (1 week ago)

Wow, totally surprised: X-T1 review comes out in about 2 months. And with no long lashing and reminding needed because of the once made, but hardly to be fulfilled promise.
It seems DPR can do anything if they really like it, and makes them enough dough.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
11 upvotes
Zvonimir Tosic
By Zvonimir Tosic (1 week ago)

Percentages may be subjective score indeed, but the timeframe says there was little objectivity in the attitude. It’s disconcerting. However, DPR loves retro cameras, that is not a big secret. And they can find a handy excuse for anything when they need one.

7 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (1 week ago)

@Zvonmir Tosic - Simon and I have explained several times now about the decisions about priorities that we have to make. We do this in an attempt to provide content that will be of interest to the greatest number of readers, given finite resources.

This is not the place to re-hash those discussions.

However, it shouldn't come as a surprise that a camera launched in a relatively quiet period (and that generated a lot of reader interest) can be reviewed sooner than a camera launched during the busiest couple of weeks of the year.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
15 upvotes
Zvonimir Tosic
By Zvonimir Tosic (1 week ago)

We shall ask Pentax for better timing next time then.

4 upvotes
calking
By calking (1 week ago)

I say the complainers have either neglected to read the MYRIAD reviews already done by dozens upon dozens of other users and want to thrash DPR for not doing something on their timetable are welcome to start their OWN photo equipment review websites.

1 upvote
armandino
By armandino (1 week ago)

I still do not understand how is it possible that in a site of this relevance there is not image comparison from the 1DX. There cannot be any excuse to this, especially considering there the D4 and D4s are present.

1 upvote
Olymore
By Olymore (1 week ago)

Perhaps Canon never supplied one for review ?

0 upvotes
JDOnrust
By JDOnrust (1 week ago)

Does somebody know if the X-T1 can make full size photo's with the interval timer?

0 upvotes
DDWD10
By DDWD10 (1 week ago)

Yes, it can do this for full-sized photos. It cannot, however, combine them into a movie in-camera.

3 upvotes
JDOnrust
By JDOnrust (1 week ago)

Thanks! This is great news for me. Now I have no reason anymore not to buy the camera. :-)

1 upvote
caver3d
By caver3d (1 week ago)

JDOnrust - just get the camera and stop torturing yourself!

0 upvotes
JDOnrust
By JDOnrust (1 week ago)

Hahaha, yes I will

0 upvotes
stuartgolden
By stuartgolden (1 week ago)

My favorite camera ever. Wanted the X-Pro1 to be it - it was not. Then the others came (and went.) This one is so close to perfect for me it's indeed a keeper. Now back to collecting great (amazing) fuji glass again. I wish they all had the 35mm price - but darn is that 23mm HOT to shoot with. It's my new love-lens!

0 upvotes
JeanPierre Thibaudeau
By JeanPierre Thibaudeau (1 week ago)

Nice overall but about 120% over saturation in colours and contrast.

Would have to tweak the settings to get something more natural and realistic.

Also, the white balance is off in some pictures, too much blue.

Although in the same category than the EM1, the colours don't even come close.

I'll pass.

5 upvotes
mbrobich
By mbrobich (1 week ago)

Maybe they played with the default settings and goofed them up...

0 upvotes
calking
By calking (1 week ago)

It's really not for the point-and-shoot photographer JeanPierre. Sorry.

1 upvote
naththo
By naththo (1 week ago)

It was due to shadow got clipped in too early in that camera default setting making things more saturated and contrasty. There are lots of setting you can change to make it more tame like review said that in one of page.

0 upvotes
miksi
By miksi (1 week ago)

Why this category?

1 upvote
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (1 week ago)

Because it just belongs there.
Try it and you'll understand why so many professionals are starting to use the x-series camera's.

Ignore the marketing cull from Canikon that the only future is in FF. Mirrorless Fuji's are only half the weight of a pro DSLR still the same IQ.

Comment edited 42 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
miksi
By miksi (1 week ago)

Shouldn't it be in the mirrorless category like E-M1 and others?

0 upvotes
Beat Traveller
By Beat Traveller (1 week ago)

Thanks for the review. Suspect I will never pony up the money for this camera... but I can dream :D

1 upvote
Ramius
By Ramius (1 week ago)

Camera body same as Sony A7, but not full format = Fail.

4 upvotes
viking79
By viking79 (1 week ago)

Sony has only a few native lenses. Fail. I would buy based on which system fits your needs better. The Fuji X has a very complete and capable set of lenses. Today. I have A7R and it is a great camera, but I mostly use Canon FDn lenses with it.

20 upvotes
Beat Traveller
By Beat Traveller (1 week ago)

Full format... is that larger than large format?

7 upvotes
s11loop
By s11loop (1 week ago)

Sony A7 full frame small body with gigantic lens that makes u look like a kid wearing your grandpa pants = Fail.

16 upvotes
b craw
By b craw (1 week ago)

Boo. The size of this camera is a well executed balance of reasonable compactness and ergonomic ease. Why this default mentality to full frame? Full frame serves the needs of certain photography; as does medium format; as does large format; and, yes, as does APS-C and m4/3 and 1" and on and on.

4 upvotes
Timbukto
By Timbukto (1 week ago)

Tiny body and tiny lens that makes u look like a kid wearing no pants = Fail.

I have no beef here, just wanted to participate in the = Fail game.

3 upvotes
Dave Luttmann
By Dave Luttmann (1 week ago)

People who think full frame makes them part of some special club and a better photographer = Fail

9 upvotes
kewlguy
By kewlguy (1 week ago)

Full frame but only few lenses and one of them is an overpriced zoom that cannot produce sharp corners. Fail.

5 upvotes
dynaxx
By dynaxx (1 week ago)

My heart goes out to those insecure photographers who let how they look, with camera in hand, affect their choice of equipment.

Once you reach maturity, you will realise that "coolness" was transient while having a store of great photographs is for life and beyond.

1 upvote
Franco8
By Franco8 (1 week ago)

Hi Ramius If you claim that Sony produces a full format, then what do you call medium format Twice As Full or maybe large format Four Times As Full.
I dont recall ever having a glass of beer that is twice as full.

2 upvotes
naththo
By naththo (1 week ago)

What do you think you are doing? Are you crazy to argue at each other for nothing? This makes this forum looks like a circus.

Fact is Fuji is NOT going to rush to make full frame mirrorless camera since there are thousands of photography around already own X system here with lots of lens design for APS-C sensor size. Fuji is fully aware of that. They are not stupid. If they make full frame, then they have to make lens to make it work with full frame thats the problem. Having it full frame and shortage of lens are a bad move making people irritating.

0 upvotes
Olymore
By Olymore (1 week ago)

Why would you make a FF camera for the 7% of ILC purchasers, most of whom are unlikely to leave Canikon due to size of their systems, when you can sell to the other 93% and don't need to develop two systems in parallel.
Commercially it wouldn't make sense.
As Sony will eventually realise.

Comment edited 55 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
SaltLakeGuy
By SaltLakeGuy (1 week ago)

At a time when you virtually can't buy a "Bad" camera the X-T1 brings some interesting character to the table. Like so many things intrinsic to particular brands, the Fuji's sensor does in fact imbue a unique character to it's files. You either fall in love with it (as I have) or you dismiss it for some other beloved feature set of another manufacturer. As a complete package the X-T1 does a fine job of being a effective photographic tool whether you're a seasoned professional or a budding serious enthusiast. It's strengths are undeniable. It's quirks are there as they are with virtually ANY manufacturer. Once past those however one is certainly capable of finding the X-T1 a very highly satisfying camera system.

15 upvotes
calking
By calking (1 week ago)

This post wins for being the most mature and insightful, period.

1 upvote
sceptical1
By sceptical1 (1 week ago)

Exactly, and I don't have one, but the review and the cadre of followers makes it obvious you can get great results, regardless of your level. At a different point I would have considered this, but too heavily invested in other systems.....

0 upvotes
Lan
By Lan (1 week ago)

Is it just me that misreads the name of the Toshiba memory card as Excretia? Talk about a crappy name ;)

0 upvotes
KennyXYZ
By KennyXYZ (1 week ago)

Yeah, weird name. Almost bought a SanDisk 32gb, 45mb read/write card for 60 bucks when I saw what I thought was some off brand SDXC card made in Timbuktu that had a green and black lable with the name "Exceria." For the same 60 bucks I can get 64gb with 95mb read and 60mb write. Upon closer inspection, it turns out that Toshiba was the manufacturer. LOL. "Exceria" works great in my XE-2.

0 upvotes
Smokymtnhiker
By Smokymtnhiker (1 week ago)

67% of the resolution, no in body IS, no OVF, no 200K rated shutter and it gets a better score than the K3.

Wow.

9 upvotes
Timbukto
By Timbukto (1 week ago)

The Fuji has the no rabid fans perk gives the camera a 10% to critical to-hit AF bonus against BIFs.

7 upvotes
viking79
By viking79 (1 week ago)

Maybe you should try one?

4 upvotes
Matz03
By Matz03 (1 week ago)

why is an OVF a benefit again?? IS within Lenses is some of the best around. K3 is a fine little camera though, would be my choice if I was into the flipity flopper inside

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
Beat Traveller
By Beat Traveller (1 week ago)

And that's why scores are relative to camera type and class...

2 upvotes
b craw
By b craw (1 week ago)

Matz03: DSLFF, digital single lens flippity flopper.;)

0 upvotes
xrokx
By xrokx (1 week ago)

@Timbukto... fallout is so rad.

0 upvotes
logan ross
By logan ross (1 week ago)

Hi,
Great Review. Is it possible for you to elaborate on two things:
1) when adjusting for Raw conversion NR and overstated ISO, how does the X-t1 standup to competitors such as the Sony, D7100, and k3?

2) You mentioned that the X-T1 was "strong competition" for the three aforementioned cameras? Can you elaborate, particularly with respect to image quality?

Thank you

2 upvotes
Luego
By Luego (1 week ago)

It seems Fuji has given video operation some priority, by placing the video button where the Fn button used to be.

The EC dial is made stiffer, thus it requires thumb and index finger to turn and one therefore activates video unintentionally...:-(

Hopefully Fuji will allow us to program the video button or disable its function all together in future firmware update.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
caver3d
By caver3d (1 week ago)

Same overall score as the Olympus E-M1. Really can't go wrong with either camera. And then there is the Panasonic GH3/4. Mirrorless is coming of age and finally putting the heat on dSLRs.

3 upvotes
calking
By calking (1 week ago)

BINGO

0 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (1 week ago)

As always, Fujifilm never fails to impress with their serious entries in the enthusiast/prosumer camera market. Great camera! Great review! I predict that Fujifilm and Sony will gobble up the lion's share of the compact system camera market much the same as Canon and Nikon rule the DSLR market. It'll be the "Hunger Games" for the rest of the players. And, at least 2 of the hungriest players are simply going to starve to death. :)

2 upvotes
PedroMZ
By PedroMZ (1 week ago)

I would not discount Olympus.They have some first class zoom lenses the 9-18(very good and very affordable) the 16-120 and the brilliant and fast 50-200 . Also hints of an Oly FF in the wind . Sony lenses are a mixed bag and not cheap. Mind you Sony owns a part of Olympus anyway so who knows.

0 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (1 week ago)

Pedro, I agree that Oly has some first class lenses. Unfortunately, they also have several first class lawsuits sucking up all of their camera profits. No company can stay in business that way. Just ask Minolta.

2 upvotes
b craw
By b craw (1 week ago)

I would also not bet against Samsung. The NX system is already good and beginning to turn some heads, perhaps with the potential, in time, to transcend the "Samsung is just a phone manufacturer" perception. Not saying it will happen, but it is conceivable that it might, particularly given Samsung's potential to shift capital from one market to the other. Ricoh and Sony and others might also have this capability but their financial outlooks are slightly less rosy. But I am by no means an economist.

0 upvotes
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (1 week ago)

Sony's economical outlook is far worse then any other company at this moment with its junk rating on Wall Street.

Wouldn't be at all surprised if they would sell off their Consumer Products including their Digital Imaging product group.

Then going ahead as a component maker for OEMs.

1 upvote
Olymore
By Olymore (1 week ago)

Olympus doesn't make any 'camera profits'. Having said that provision has been made for much of damages and the other division's profitability means that it the lawsuits are unlikely to be terminal.
If the "accounting scandal' hadn't occurred they most likely would have failed back in the early 1990s

0 upvotes
lcolonezi
By lcolonezi (1 week ago)

Nice camera, but no way this should be pricing like Sony A7... a full frame camera with amazing video...

3 upvotes
AlexRuiz
By AlexRuiz (1 week ago)

The A7 is indeed very competitively priced. The A7 is $1.6K though, the X-T1 is $1.3K or 18% less expensive.

And keep in mind the A7 lacks lenses. A camera is only good if it's part of a good system.

9 upvotes
Franco8
By Franco8 (1 week ago)

Another moron that calls a 35mm camera as a full camera. It is half the size of a medium format camera

4 upvotes
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (1 week ago)

First it was megapixels, now its full frame -
Forget the marketing culprit. They just want you to believe that A is better then B. For every plus there is a negative as well.

Comment edited 14 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
kinglau711
By kinglau711 (1 week ago)

Very good review ! Worth the wait ! Thx

2 upvotes
IstvanNagy
By IstvanNagy (1 week ago)

Looking at the Image Comparison Scenes, there are some very noticeable differences between the X-T1 and X-E2:
- There is a dent? on the aluminum tray in the bottom left corner on the right side of the brush. The X-T1 has a strong high-light clipping (lack of detail) in a larger area here. The X-E2 has much less clipping than the X-T1, other cameras don't clip this area at all (or maybe a small line). It looks very strange (and bad) on X-T1's picture (both JPG and RAW).
- The text 'R&E Encaustic' (at the same corner) looks sharper and more contrasty on the X-E2. The X-E2 has slightly stronger contrast in the fine details (e.g. green plants top right corner).
- It is easier to differentiate the last three black fields (17-19) on the X-E2 on the Kodak grey chart than on the X-T1. The Nikon D7100 performs really bad on these fields btw. The brightness in the first field here (A) is noticeably stronger on the X-T1 than X-E2.

Very likely, Fuji has changed the image processing on the XT-1.

0 upvotes
Sirandar
By Sirandar (1 week ago)

Looks like a great camera and the image quality seems almost as good as a Oly EM5 and it is about the same price.

4 upvotes
Spectro
By Spectro (1 week ago)

I image this being a little better the om5 especially in low light. I do believe they are both Sony sensor with different pattern layer on top, so the color should be similar. Processor is a factor more in jpeg then in raw. If I was in the market for another milc it would be this camera. I am fine with my setup now.

3 upvotes
FlowerHappy
By FlowerHappy (1 week ago)

Almost as Good, Ha-Ha that's a good one!

20 upvotes
AlexRuiz
By AlexRuiz (1 week ago)

I have owned both, the EM-5 (sold a few months back) and now an X-T1. Be assured the IQ is better in the X-T1.

3 upvotes
badi
By badi (1 week ago)

@Spectro:
Actually for sensors with the same technology, the color quality is largely affected by the pattern on top. The exact colors used in the filter (the tonality of RGB) affect the color recording capability of the sensor.

Of course, you may ask why not this to be 100% accurate. They are not because allowing a bit of color blending (using a not strict red, but allow a bit adjacent spectral colors to get in) will provide the sensor a bit more sensitivity, and so on and on, and on....
And after that, there is the software that also affect the color response of the camera...

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Nigel Ward 2
By Nigel Ward 2 (1 week ago)

Hopefully, there will soon be a gadget to unlock the ISO button....I'm ordering one...

http://isounlocker.com/

2 upvotes
robertbrockmann
By robertbrockmann (1 week ago)

Very nice and comprehensive review. However, I wonder if in video camera reviews there is a section that says "it does / does not take very good stills". Save for a very few pro DSLR cameras that do yield astounding video results, if you want to make videos, buy a camcorder. Speaking strictly for myself, Fuji could completely kill the video option.

3 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (1 week ago)

"If you want to take video buy a camcorder"

Well the Panasonic gh2 hacked gh3 and gh4 can great professional video. These are MUCH better the any video camera in their respective price range. They have been used in excellent nature videos.

It's a con people looking for an all round mirrorless that can do both will be dissapointed. Looking at just stills the xt-1 is quiet phenomenal. And that's why it got an real high 84% score and an gold award.

8 upvotes
Lab D
By Lab D (1 week ago)

Who really wants to carry a camera and a seprate camcorder??? How can you use both at the same time?
You are right, it is a "con".

Comment edited 51 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
ButterflySkies
By ButterflySkies (1 week ago)

Cameras like these are mainly for stills. But if someone whats to shoot both stills and video, why on earth would that person buy a still camera and then spend extra money on a video camera and pack extra weight when he/she could just buy a camera that does both video and stills.
There are tons of still cameras with great video modes, there's no reason to leave it out anymore.

4 upvotes
DouglasGottlieb
By DouglasGottlieb (1 week ago)

"If you want to take video buy a camcorder" may have been true up until recently, but it sure sounds like the Panasonic GH4 and the Sony A7s will provide pro challenging video while delivering best in class (okay, maybe tied with Fuji) stills. What a great time it is to be a photographer, videographer, or both! For me, as the review also points out, lens lineup is also key. M43 is unrivaled in mirrorless in that arena, but Fuji is also doing a great job. Sony on the other hand, has a lot to prove when it comes to supporting their typically well appointed hardware with a range of similarly capable glass. They always seem to lag in that area... NEX! Cough, cough!!! ;)

0 upvotes
calking
By calking (1 week ago)

I think if most on here were really honest with themselves they'd realize they EITHER shoot MOSTLY stills or video, not both equally. Those that TRULY need the best of both in ONE body will invariably use something else.

And let's not forget....the reason video is so good in Sony and Panasonic and Canon is because those companies excel in camcorders. It's not a mystery.

0 upvotes
badi
By badi (1 week ago)

one more thing to remember...
Sony A7s is developed for video, actually if you want amazing top quality photo and video, you will probably end up with a A7R + A7S, so two cameras :). But you can use both lenses on both.

Maybe Fuji should think of doing some "more video oriented camera" ... like an XT-V :D

0 upvotes
mosc
By mosc (1 week ago)

What's the next review on tap? Should be G1X-ii (however the hell you want to abbreviate that)

0 upvotes
Underdog 3000
By Underdog 3000 (1 week ago)

Next is the GH4 and A7s. Are you not paying attention?
These reviews will certainly be quicker than the K-3

0 upvotes
Jorginho
By Jorginho (1 week ago)

Nice review and very well rounded cam this Fuji! Excellent choice for many shooters clearly.

3 upvotes
TheScrambler
By TheScrambler (1 week ago)

It's nice. It's small. It feels good and it's quality is nearly at full frame level. But should i really leave APSC-DSLR technology ? I really dont know...;-)

1 upvote
AlexRuiz
By AlexRuiz (1 week ago)

According to this very forum a year ago, APSC was dead...then the K3 and X-T1 came along.

4 upvotes
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (1 week ago)

I am glad with the APS-C sensor inside the X-T1.
Best of both world allowing for lighter glass and therewith a totally lighter system.

By buying the right lenses you can more or less get the same results as you would have with a full frame DSLR camera.

Personally I don't see the need for a FF Fuji mirrorless camera.

7 upvotes
brdeveloper
By brdeveloper (1 week ago)

I want using my legacy lenses, so another brand new APS-C camera is more of the same c*** to me.

2 upvotes
SBoudreault
By SBoudreault (1 week ago)

Well, then get a legacy camera for those legacy lenses, and stop whining ...

6 upvotes
FriendlyWalkabout
By FriendlyWalkabout (1 week ago)

No auto composition function!
No auto talent function!

= No buy!

14 upvotes
viking79
By viking79 (1 week ago)

"Extremely accurate single-shot autofocus, even with fast lenses"

This is why I won't shoot a DSLR if I can help it. After going mirrorless I like that my photos are more reliably in focus. There is some learning curve to how CDAF/Hybrid focus cameras operate (like watching that background is not higher contrast), but overall I have been very happy with focus accuracy.

5 upvotes
Timbukto
By Timbukto (1 week ago)

Actually accurate and fast AF results is exactly why I hang onto my 6D even though I've explored and entertain mirrorless camera's to a good degree. What needs to die as quick a death as possible are PDAF camera's with no MFA. And if there are poor combinations like issues with the K-3 + old lens or the D7100 with the Nikkor 58 1.4, they need to be criticized. People criticized the Canon 1DMK3 endlessly over issues that required certain criteria, the same degree of criticism needs to be leveled at any officially manufacturer supported Body-Lens combination. Issues like the D7100 + 58 1.4 need to have an answer not...oh its PDAF, PDAF is always screwy. Overall however I like the AF accuracy I have on the 6D with bright lenses over the Olympus E-PM2 which has a pretty up-to-date AF engine, as good as anything except maybe the EM-1.

DSLR's should not only be able to nail wide-open primes in single shot but even in AF-C/AI-Servo modes...that is my expectation.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Timbukto
By Timbukto (1 week ago)

Also different DSLR manufacturers have different approaches to PDAF...Canon supports MFA with even zooms and often their PDAF sensors include zig-zag wide aperture PDAF line sensors at f2.8, etc. Nikon tends to have more numerous narrower aperture f5.6 cross points. The K-3 is shown to have a f2.8 sensitive PDAF line at center as well. Every PDAF module is different and combination of lens with different max apertures may reveal different behaviors. The 5DMK3 and 1DX has been shown to have CDAF like accuracy on lenses that you cannot obtain similar DOF/brightness levels on mirrorless thus far.
Likewise stick on a 50mm 1.8 and experience some pretty crappy accuracy no matter what.

Comment edited 56 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
viking79
By viking79 (1 week ago)

I agree that DSLR cameras can be very accurate, but I prefer that a mirrorless camera is accurate with any lens anywhere in the frame with absolutely no calibration (phase detect fails near the edges because of how it works, especially with lenses with a lot of aberrations).

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Timbukto
By Timbukto (1 week ago)

Yes but it is not always that simple. Given an infinite time-frame CDAF can always be accurate. But given the leap-frogging race to the top speed over anything heuristics and CDAF can be prone to misfocus as any AF mechanism that prioritizes speed over accuracy. Yes less mechanical/optical alignment issues to worry about, but software algorithms and engineers are not perfect. I have gotten misfocused shots before on either my EOS-M or Olympus E-PM2, and in some ways relying on age old PDAF mechanisms from Canikon may still have some waning benefits over cutting edge software algorithms. Eventually however software algorithms and related on-sensor PDAF is only going to get better. Eventually an EFCS enabled mirrorless camera should be able to track wonderfully without any mirror slap or shutter shock. That is not the state of affairs now but we are inching very close.

0 upvotes
Timbukto
By Timbukto (1 week ago)

BTW an example of speed over accuracy heuristic with CDAF - some lenses have significant field curvature...if you apply touch focus or focus on a single point in the frame, many speed demon CDAF camera's will rack focus until that tiny selection of the frame is considered to be in optimal focus. Yet sometimes through manual focusing you can get *more* of the frame in sharper focus if that is indeed your intent. But of course the best tool for this situation is usually focus peaking to examine the entire scene, etc.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 512
123