Previous page Next page

Fujifilm X-E2 Review

March 2014 | By Richard Butler, Andy Westlake
Buy on Amazon.com From $1,098.95


Based on a production Fujifilm X-E2 running firmware v1.2

The X-E2 is the mid-range model in Fujifilm's X system of mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras, sitting between the relatively affordable X-M1 and X-A1 twins, and the unashamedly high-end X-Pro1 and X-T1. It's an update of the X-E1, which we liked a lot for its combination of 'old school' handling and excellent image quality, giving it our Gold award in our review.

The X-E2 is superficially very similar to the X-E1, with the same basic body design and control layout; at a quick glance it's almost impossible to tell them apart. It keeps the same top-plate layout, including analogue shutter speed and exposure compensation dials, and has the same 2.36M dot OLED electronic viewfinder. The rear of the camera is still covered in buttons in much the same places as the X-E1, but their functions have been rearranged.

The headline updates are the sensor and processor: the X-E2 sports the same X-Trans CMOS II sensor as we first saw in the X100S, which includes on-chip phase detection elements for autofocus, and in concert with the EXR Processor II promises much improved autofocus speed. It also gains Fujifilm's rather basic but easy-to-use Wi-Fi system for sharing images. There's also a much nicer rear screen: a 3", 1.04M dot 3:2 aspect ratio unit, and a whole host of further tweaks and improvements. The net result is a camera that retains all the best bits of its predecessor, but has also been improved in many respects.

Fujifilm X-E2 key features

  • 16MP X-Trans CMOS II sensor
  • EXR Processor II
  • ISO 200-6400, plus 100 - 25600 expanded (JPEG only)
  • 7 fps continuous shooting; 3 fps with continuous AF
  • Lens Modulation Optimizer (for sharper JPEGs when shooting at large or small apertures)
  • 2.36M dot OLED electronic viewfinder
  • Top-plate analogue shutter speed and exposure compensation dials
  • 3" 1.04M dot 3:2 fixed LCD (non-tilting, not touch-sensitive)
  • Built-in Wi-Fi for image transfer to smartphones or computers
  • Full HD movie recording (1920x1080/60p, ~38Mbps bitrate), with built-in stereo microphone
  • 2.5mm stereo microphone socket, also accepts electronic remote releases
  • Available in silver or black

The X-E2 - not revolutionary, but distinctly evolved

Alongside the most obvious changes, the X-E2 adds a wide array of improvements and refinements compared to the X-E1, including a sensibly-revised control layout. The top-plate shutter speed and exposure compensation dials have been tweaked, with the latter now offering a range of +/-3 stops in 1/3 stop increments. Instead of a combined AE-L/AF-L button the X-E2 has separate controls for each, whose behavior can be user-defined. The rear plate controls have been rearranged, and four buttons are now user-customizable. There's also a number of small changes in response to user feedback, including the ability to specify a minimum shutter speed for Auto ISO, and live view exposure preview in manual exposure mode.

The back of X-E2 is slightly rearranged compared to the X-E1 (right), with some of the the buttons serving different functions. It's dominated by the 3" 3:2 1.04M dot screen - a big improvement over the X-E1's 2.8" 4:3 420k dot LCD.

The result may not be enough to tempt existing X-E1 owners to trade in their year-old cameras and upgrade, but that's not necessarily the point. In general, the days when photo enthusiasts could expect significant advances in speed and image quality with each year's new model are long gone. Instead the X-E2 is designed to keep the line up-to-date against the current competition, to draw new users into the system, and it does that pretty well. Impressively, Fujifilm has extended many of the firmware-based improvements to X-E1 customers - the company seems determined to be seen to support its existing customers.

Changes/improvements compared to X-E1

The list below summarizes changes relative to the X-E1 - some more significant than others (Fujifilm says there are more than 60 in total). Many of these reflect users' requests for operational changes and new features; some of them count more as bug fixes than anything else. But Fujifilm has to be given huge credit for listening and actively responding to such feedback.

  • Exposure compensation dial offers expanded range of +/-3
  • Shutter speed dial adds 1/180sec X-sync position, and increases separation of 'A' position
  • Separate AE-L and AF-L buttons
  • AF point selection moved to 4-way controller (reflects recent X-E1 firmware revisions)
  • Old AF point selection button is now customizable Fn2 - sets white balance by default
  • Four customizable buttons in total (Fn1, Fn2, AF, AE)
  • Repositioned 'Q' button (less likely to be pressed accidentally)
  • View mode button removed (now a menu setting)
  • Low-speed (3 fps) continuous shooting mode, with focus tracking and live view between frames
  • AF-C no longer limited to centre of frame - uses same 49 point array as AF-S
  • Configurable Auto ISO (max and min ISO, minimum shutter speed)
  • Exposure preview in Manual exposure mode (can be disabled in menu)
  • Three manual focus aids (magnified view, peaking display, digital split-image)
  • Face detection autofocus/autoexposure available (enabled as menu setting)
  • JPEG-only bracketing modes hidden when shooting RAW
  • 'Advanced Filter' creative shooting modes (JPEG-only)
  • Multiple exposure mode moved to drive menu, grouped with panorama mode
  • 14-bit Raw recording
  • 1.8x faster file write times
  • Improved EVF framerates in low light (60 fps vs 20 fps)
  • Zoomed-in focus check view available in AF mode (by clicking rear dial)
  • Conventional playback and file naming of images shot in continuous drive mode
  • Images can be deleted when viewing them zoomed-in
  • Exposure settings can be changed when AE-L is engaged

The world's fastest autofocus?

At launch, Fujifilm proudly claimed that the X-E2 offers the 'world's fastest autofocus' of 0.08 sec - an attention-grabbing statement designed to dispel the reputation the X system gained in its early days for slowish performance. The small print is revealing though - Fujifilm's tests used the XF 14mm F2.8R wideangle lens and the camera's 'High Performance' mode, which is disabled by default and has to be turned on in the menus. As tends to be the way with these things, you're not quite going to see that speed in day-to-day shooting.

The X-E2's tracking autofocus is substantially improved too - on paper at least. With the camera in its 3fps 'Continuous Low' speed and the focus switch set to AF-C, the camera can re-focus between frames, and show a live view display too. The focus point for AF-C is no longer limited to the centre of the frame, but can be moved around freely. Strangely though the live view feed doesn't show up during continuous shooting in other focus modes - the camera plays back your just-taken shots between frames instead.

Lens Modulation Optimizer

The X-E2 is Fujifilm's first interchangeable-lens camera to offer its 'Lens Modulation Optimizer', as previously seen on the X100S and X20. This uses Fujifilm's knowledge of each lens's characteristics to adjust the in-camera processing and sharpening, in an attempt to combat diffraction and lens aberrations. The idea is to give sharper out-of-camera JPEGs when shooting at large or small apertures. The concept isn't exactly new - Raw developers such as DxO Optics Pro and Canon Digital Photo Pro do much the same thing - but it's only just starting to find its way into in-camera JPEG processing engines.

The Lens Modulation Optimizer function is compatible with all of Fujifilm's X-mount lenses, although it appears the camera firmware will need updating when new lenses are launched to fully understand their characteristics. It can be turned on or off in the menu, so you don't have to use it all the time if you don't want to, and it can also be applied to individual images during in-camera Raw conversion.

Movie mode updates

The X-E2's movie mode still feels like something of an afterthought on what is primarily a stills camera (there's no record button, so it's accessed as a drive mode), but Fujifilm has added some extra capabilities. It's now possible to choose a Film Simulation mode, and adjust exposure compensation during recording. You also get a choice of framerates, but this is limited to 30fps or 60fps.

Fujifilm X-Trans CMOS II sensor

The X-E2 uses Fujifilm's X-Trans CMOS II sensor, which employs a novel color filter array to suppress color moiré. This in turn means it doesn't need an anti-aliasing filter, and can therefore (in principle) offer higher resolution compared to other cameras with the same 16MP pixel count but conventional Bayer-type sensors. You can read more about the technology behind this in our in-depth review of the X-Pro1.

When the X-Trans CMOS sensor it first appeared, third-party Raw support was patchy at best, with even the mainstream converters struggling to deliver sharp, artefact-free results. Since then, though, much has changed, and recently we've both seen a wider variety of choices, and a general improvement in results. Most recently, in a hugely welcome development, Adobe has started to add support for Fujifilm's Film Simulation modes.

The X-E2's sensor also includes phase detection pixels to assist autofocus, as previously seen on the X100S. There are 86,000 of these all told, arranged across 36% of the sensor's area in the centre of the frame.

Kit options and pricing

The X-E2 is available in a choice of silver and black finishes, either body only at a list price of $999 / £799.99 or bundled with the premium XF 18-55mm F2.8-4R LM OIS zoom for $1399 / £1199.99. These are the same as the X-E1 at launch.


If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

Images which can be viewed at a larger size have a small magnifying glass icon in the bottom right corner of the image, clicking on the image will display a larger (typically VGA) image in a new window.

To navigate the review simply use the next / previous page buttons, to jump to a particular section either pick the section from the drop down or select it from the navigation bar at the top.

DPReview calibrate their monitors using Color Vision OptiCal at the (fairly well accepted) PC normal gamma 2.2, this means that on our monitors we can make out the difference between all of the (computer generated) grayscale blocks below. We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.

This article is Copyright 2014 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

Previous page Next page
497
I own it
291
I want it
74
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 305
12
Eddy M

The body feels cheap plasticky!!! EM10 feels solid like a tank but cheaper.

0 upvotes
Irlaender

Where is the tilt screen... pleeeeease...

1 upvote
Eugene232

IMO Fuji is too overpriced

3 upvotes
Menneisyys

Their current models - sure. Their previous ones, most of them delivering exactly the same IQ (but, obviously, not the same AF speed)? Nope - they have excellent price/performance ratio. This is why I've gone myself for Fuji with an X-E1 double-kit (18-55 + 50-230 for 750 euros), actually.

2 upvotes
Alexloyola

I am looking for a light and small machine to go slowly replacing the heavy canon 1d mk iv. but both suggest waiting a little longer. Not much to ask, is it? Less weight, more photo.

1 upvote
paul simon king

Thinking of getting one, I checked one out at the local store and it does seem to focus reasonably quickly - especially compared to the various `"X-1" versions.

Also the EVF , while taking some getting used to when coming from DSLR territory, seems to be fast enough at switching orientation when cahnging from landscape to portrait and back.

what I forgot to check was the focus-recompose ability. I have never used anything but the centre Focus point on my cameras (5Dxx) and use focus -recompose for all sorts of situations, force of habit, something Ive done for decades.

Please can anyone tell me - does focus -recompose and also exposure lock exist/work?

I ask because this is what Im used to and really want a small 'street' camera where I can use the technique I am familiar with to get the fastest way to catch what I see.

Video? not interested
Complaints about ISO 3200 and above? Not interested.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
1 upvote
swisst

Yes, focus-recompose and exposure lock works

0 upvotes
Mateus1

Everything is great about X-E2 apart from plastic and "waxy" high iso jpg oefrormance.... 3200-6400 images look terrible, no details, they are worse compared to X-E1. In this area X-E2 is a big dissapointment... it's is sad that Fujifilm is deaf to all pleas of many X-E2 users to solve it in new firmware.

0 upvotes
Miwok

Very nice camera.
Too bad than Fuji doesn't offer lenses at reasonable price..

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

The kit lenses are more than reasonably priced. And you can always use the new, very cheap but having great IQ XC lenses on the E2.

1 upvote
norsman

Fantastic camera! Took it to Mt Rushmore and to Devil's Tower. It begs you to shoot manual. Other than using auto focus, I thought I was back in the 60's shooting with my Electro 35 or my SR7. Most every photo was spot on. Haven't had this much fun in a long time. My daughter is a wedding photographer & she loved the weight and the simplicity of the XE-2. Used the 18-55mm and the 35mm lenses with a SanDisk Extreme Pro 95mb/s card. By the by- Got some nice action photos of my dogs running and jumping. Who says it doesn't do action well. You just have to get your mind out of auto and shoot like the 60's.

1 upvote
zinsavage123

I prefer Samsung, but this one isn't bad. All preference really.

0 upvotes
ChrisPercival

I'm seriously considering this camera but have one remaining concern. Looking at the studio test scene there are two patches of resolution lines that show a strange type of moire/crosshatch. These are the bottom two of the series that runs diagonally from the lower left to the upper right through the center.

I haven't seen this effect on any of the sample images posted. Has anyone noticed this effect in any real world images?

0 upvotes
ChrisPercival

What lens and settings were used for the studio test scene?

0 upvotes
Matt1645f4

Can we please stop with the lower marks for bloody poor video!!! this site is called Digital Photography review, it you insist on scoring cameras down because of video make it a totally different section or start a Digital Video Review Site, i'm bored about the lengthy failings a camera his in its lack of video......

19 upvotes
fabrica64

Well... many people here are interested in video functionality, I don't see why it should not be taken in consideration. It's a separate rating so you can ignore if you want

9 upvotes
Lawrencew

Well I can't be the only one who wants to take top quality stills AND top quality video, but not have to lug two separate cameras around.

I would seriously consider the X-E2 for its stills capability. But as long as the video is poor then it isn't even on my selection list.

0 upvotes
srados

Video whaaaat? Who need to spend another 30-60 hours to edit your vacation video or other event...I could not care less for video functionality.Editing photos take enough time to be interested in video.I do a agree it should be separate rating for video...

6 upvotes
Casadilla

Auto-focus whaaat? Who needs to waste money on a feature that anyone can do themselves! /snark/

Honestly though, some people use video. I'm sorry that you don't see the utility.There happens to be a large market for it, one being dominated by some of Fuji's competition (Panasonic & Sony).

0 upvotes
Matt1645f4

I admit people want to use cameras for video i just fed up it makes a dent in a cameras score because it lacks a feature or ability Cameras should have separate scores to make it fairer and easier for each buyer to see how it performs in their chosen category.

0 upvotes
Casadilla

I'm not sure how to respond? It's just a score, man. Cameras don't have egos, so just in case you were worried--no cameras were harmed in the making of this review ;) Seriously though, a camera isn't going to perform better for you because DPR gave it a "gold" award. If you like a camera, like it for your own reasons, not because the internet said so.

1 upvote
larryis1

I am considering this camera, although concerned about the review finding relating to JPG waxy skin tones. Does anyone know what this really means in practical terms. Can't see waxy skin tones in sample gallery. Help...

1 upvote
mO0nkey

I bought the X-E2 beginning this year. I had some doubts, but mostly concerning the AF. I was pretty sure about the IQ though and the 23mm 1.4 made me decide to go for it.

Having experienced the camera I can say I'm really impressed with the AF! But the only thing I can complain about is the fact that on images taken beyond ISO 3200 the skin tones look unacceptably waxy. Mostly I use RAW's, but the inability to use the JPEG's when in a hurry (or sending them right away by wifi) is a bit annoying. The more so, because even with noise reduction set to the lowest it's not much better.

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
MrChristopher

Could someone elaborate on the inability to use a flash remotely (wireless) as claimed in this review? My x100 can fire a Fuji or YN-560II flash in "commander" mode, does the XE-2 not have this ability?

0 upvotes
Mupepe

Hi, X-E2 can trigger a flash unit remotely. But, unfortunately, only one small flash unit in Fuji line (I think it is the EF20) is wireless. Mine is the more powerful EF42, but it is not wireless).

0 upvotes
Richard Butler

@MrChristopher - the X-E2 can't 'control' an external flash (setting its output), it can only trigger it. Nikon, Olympus and Canon all have systems that allow you to remotely control the output of external flashguns - that's what the X-E2 (and Fujifilm in general) is missing.

0 upvotes
725C6C2B8E504AA2A4936EF7A90D77FC

A question for Richard B: Does the 'Commander' mode of the X-T1 operate in a similar way? (Ie Trigger only and not full flash control)

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake

The X-T1 behaves in exactly the same way, because Fujifilm simply doesn't have a wireless TTL flash system.

0 upvotes
hoxton fives

hoxton fives

0 upvotes
b craw

It is the bread and butter of DPR and its members to compare cameras based upon functionality and IQ hair-splitting; and I enjoy this nearly as much as anyone because I am fascinated by cameras. But any camera in the rough price range of the X-E2 will be a good tool in the right hands. Certainly qualitative differences do exist between cameras, and, quite appropriately, comments are made about those differences here.

My concern, as an photography instructor, is that newer photographers are too influenced by minute differences in quality and performance (this not referring to things tangibly applicable in terms of proper camera types for different situations - sports, inconspicuous street work, etc.). The visceral impact of this camera or that one in an individual's hands - that subject rightness or wrongness - is going to be more important to producing quality images/art than whether in-camera noise reduction is too heavy-handed in a particular camera. Given the advantage of better perceptive skills and concepts, a photographer will generally produce more compelling work with my Samsung NX300 than others using a full frame camera of any sort. This is, of course, is widely understood by most experienced photographers (although sometimes I do wonder if it is), but such an observation should be presented periodically to those new to the media that might otherwise feel priced out of the possibility of producing excellent photography.

13 upvotes
Bill3R

I have seen beautiful photographs produced by a pin hole camera. I often think of the quote, "The best camera is the one you have.", when I find myself tempted by the latest, best new models.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
brownie314

I agree - all this hair splitting over IQ is over blown. What really matters about a camera - how quick it is to respond to user inputs - AF speed - are talked about only briefly and not really quantified in testing. For my type of shooting, I need fast AF speeds. After reading this review, I have no idea how the Fuji AF speed compares to say Nikon D7100. There is no quantitative test devised for that purpose.

1 upvote
srados

I personally find overexposed images from this camera, lack of details in shadows.

0 upvotes
Nikonhead

Nikon D7100 focuses much quicker than Fuji XE2. I have both[ XE2 only 1 week]. If you need fast AF the D7100 wins hands down. I do believe the Fuji has better dynamic range and white balance. The XE2 also beats the D7100 in high ISO. Totally clean detailed files at 3200 from the Fuji. Also the black and whites are a work of art.

0 upvotes
kadardr

It seems that with the advent of X-T1, the X-E2 refresh is pretty much uninteresting. One tier cheaper though.

1 upvote
Pippo50

Ho acquistato da poco la fuji xe1, la qualità delle immagine è molto buona anche a 3200 iso, la messa a fuoco è un po' lenta rispetto alla mia Nikon D90,
quando mi segnala il verde la messa a fuoco corrisponde , ho acquistato successivamente oltre al 18-55 il 55-200 una buona ottica, ma ho rilevato un po' di gioco nell' incastro dell'ottica nella sua sede, nel complesso sono soddisfatto.

0 upvotes
KodaChrome25

per google... for the spanish challenged:

I recently purchased the fuji XE1 the quality of the picture is very good even at 3200 ISO, the focus is a bit 'slow compared to my nikon d90, when I noted the green focus is, then I bought the 18-55 over the 55-200 good optics but I found a little 'game in the' interlocking lens in place, overall I'm satisfied.

0 upvotes
loadofcobblers

You are Italian-challenged.

8 upvotes
SF Photo Gal

Couldn't have said it better myself.

1 upvote
Anastasios Papatsoris

It is clear the dynamic range of X-E1 is substantially better than X-E2's capturing much more shadow detail.

1 upvote
$$Policy$$

Is there a reason for this, in your opinion?

0 upvotes
$$Policy$$

How did you determine this difference? Do you own both cameras? There is a learning curve associated with the XE2's Dynamic Range control settings, which can make a substantial difference in IQ.

0 upvotes
NOLA4LIFE

$$Policy$$ any tips on those settings would be appreciated. Still getting to know my X-E2 but enjoying the hell out of it. Thanks.

0 upvotes
57even

There is no difference in dynamic range at all. There is a difference in the default tone curve used in each camera for processing JPEGs. What this has to do with dynamic range (it should actually be JPEG exposure range) I will never know.

Since nearly everyone boosts contrast in post processing, Fuji merely adjusted the default tone curve to be more contrasty. You can adjust the camera many ways to offset this if you insist on shooting JPEGs.

3 upvotes
George Christofi

Anastash eixa kai thn XE1 kai thn XE2 einai kai h dio kameres to idio
H Xe2 einai pio grigorh sto focus ara an exis thn XE1 allaxe tin kai tha dis megali diafora ston xirismo kata ta alla poiotita oikonas einai to idio

1 upvote
muesliman

I dunno, George...
it's all Greek to me.

0 upvotes
fuxicek

back in film days I used compact minolta http://www.amazon.com/Minolta-Freedom-Zoom-150-camera/dp/B0000AUFK7.. I wonder, how did they squeeze the full frame into tiny body with tiny lens and why its not possible with digital?

2 upvotes
afterswish1

Does it have an LCD screen covering most of the rear surface of the camera? Is a digital camera's sensor, including power and data connections, as thin as a piece of film?

Is the lens on the Minolta interchangeable? The answer to the mystery is but a few seconds thought away ;)

1 upvote
Causio

1. It's not a dslr (and is it that smaller than the sony a7)?
2. That lens: 37.5-150mm f/5.4 - 11.9, 6 element/6 group construction
Well... you get what you paid for I guess? :)

1 upvote
More On

It's very clearly softer than the OMD-10. As is the T-X1.

Compare some text, especially at higher ISO's. I'm talking JPG OOC so it's nothing to do with RAW conversion.

What's that all about?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
PrebenR

Do you use the inferior Adobe software to post process? The RAW images looks rather soft compared with m43.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

m43 isn't a raw extraction process.

And yes, I understand that you probably know that, but that's what you implied.

When I process XE2 raws with ACR 8.4, they look plenty sharp, so I just don't understand the "inferior" thing.

Suggestion: Download the raws, and process yourself with: ACR 8, PhotoNinja, and CaptureOne (skip Silkypix).

1 upvote
vesa1tahti

I copied the test scenes of both X-E2 and D7100, and compared those in Photoshop CC, JPEG, ISO 6400. It seems to me that the Fujifilm IQ (low noise) is due to very strong processing of the images in the camera. By minor adjustments I got the Nikon images to have better IQ with respect to noise. No reason to switch from Nikon to Fuji. BTW, today's mirrorless cameras are too small for big european hands. Cameras like D7100 do have the 'right and real' size. But this is my personal opinion only. Cheers.

4 upvotes
b craw

I find it strange - the tendency to convert simple personal preference into something, seemingly more universal. No criterion could possible exist to definitively advantage one or the other of the models you mention. And this idea of an ergonomic determiner seems to ignore that humans tend to adapt quite well to different positioning of hands on tools of all sorts, regardless of the size of said hands. In the days of film, some of the most modest sized rangefinders didn't lead to a parade of claims of poor ergonomics.

1 upvote
Nikonhead

I thought the concept of mirrorless was the smaller size. Now when I pick up my D7100 it feels unusually heavy. The smaller size is much better for street or everyday photography. The D7100 is better for faster AF shooting like sports or wildlife.

0 upvotes
Polytropia

DPreview can't even afford softboxes?!

1 upvote
malteser01

Sirs, every now and then I hit a problem with my XE2 and I wonder if you saw this in your testing. Every now and then I focus on something and get the green confirmation box but the subject on which I focussed is out of focus! I've sent the camera back to Fuji and they confirmed that it was all within tolerance, but this keeps happening. Have you seen this? Any observations/suggestions? This happened just the other night when taking a shot of my wife at a restaurant across the table. I tried focussing three times in succession without moving. The whole photo was out of focus every time. Once I moved, it focussed perfectly. Don't know what to do...oh and this happens with both 18-55 kitlens and 35mm/1.4.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
raygraham

I occasionally get this with my XE-1 and I was beginning to think that I was doing something wrong but clearly Fuji have a glitch which needs sorting out. Otherwise I am delighted with the camera and I am considering the new XT-1....

0 upvotes
malteser01

I used to have an XE1 and never had a problem with it. I wouldn't have changed to the 2, except it was stolen. So I wouldn't say fuji clearly have a glitch per se, not on the basis of 2 reports of an issue!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Timmbits

That sort of question is what the FORUMs are for.
I'd be on the lookout for a firmware update, but according to malteser's experience with his xe1, it doesn't seem like they want to address that.

0 upvotes
Polytropia

Gasp! You mean there is an AF system that's not _100%_ accurate?! What is this, 1992?

0 upvotes
Nismo350Z

I had this happen when I tried a friend's X-E2 with 35mm lens on a sunny day. Then it also happened while testing out the X-A1 and the 18mm lens in a well-lit store. Tried 3 times and I always get the green dot focus confirmation but the image is clearly out of focus.

Comment edited 48 seconds after posting
1 upvote
malteser01

Actually poly, in 1992 I had a Canon EOS650 and I can confidently say its autofocus was never foxed. The odd thing is that I never had this problem with my XE1, never! Maybe it IS a firmware thing then...

0 upvotes
More On

Seems this is standard fare on Fuji's. It's certainly the case on my x100s. If there's something contrasty in the background (even outside the square) it'll pick it 2 out of 3 times. So when the focus is described as "fast" it's not telling the whole story.
In the short time I've played with an X-T1 it appeared to exhibit the same trait. Nice camera though.

1 upvote
$$Policy$$

Check the position of the Focus Mode Selector (8) AND that your index finger isn't interfering with the AF-assist illuminator (12).

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
malteser01

This happens in good light as well as bad. Focus mode selector is always in S.

0 upvotes
Murray87

Maybe the af area is too large? have you tried to set it the smallest possible with the thumb wheel?

0 upvotes
rfsIII

I'm pretty tired of Nikon's weird green color cast, I'll tell ya that. And the ugly way that highlights blow out on the human face. But I'm also being forced by clients to shoot video, and I would love to shoot with Fujis starting today but only stills/video camera that has usable autofocus at a reasonable price is the Panasonic G6. So there you have it, everyone needs a little different feature set.

1 upvote
raygraham

Take a look at Ken Rockwell's site as he has a way of adjusting the green cast out which is a common Nikon problem and which I sorted with my D600. From memory I think you step up the magenta but take a look and see because he knows his stuff and his advice is free.

1 upvote
Shunda77

Why are all the Canikon fan bois running so scared over these Fuji cameras?

Is it because Nikon's woeful jpeg engines and Canon's outdated sensors are developing into festering sores on the buttocks?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
4 upvotes
justmeMN

I'm sure that both Canon and Nikon are working feverishly to match Fuji's "wax-like" skin tones. :-)

5 upvotes
Shunda77

I'd take Fuji's skin tones over the crap that Nikon cameras spit out any day. I am a Nikon shooter by the way, but just don't prescribe to this brand loyalty bs that drives so much discussion on this site.
Nikon = lots of time post processing
Canon = weak dynamic range and outdated sensor performance.

5 upvotes
PrebenR

Fuji is sure doing something right! Nikon and Canon are clinging on to their old technology.

That said, I'll wait for 2nd or 3rd gen sensor from Fuji before buying into yet another system

It is still just a Bayer sensor after all.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Robert Garcia NYC

I like Fuji but has your photography improved is question. It's just a device and I think it prolly hard to buy a bad camera nowadays.

2 upvotes
Provia_fan

Photography is no longer what you can do with you camera, but what can your camera do for you, if I am judging by some peoples perspectives from their comments.

2 upvotes
PrebenR

Well, most of the time is it the person behind the camera that is the limiting factor. But as for DR, then our eyes are far superior still.

0 upvotes
vincent0923

despite the fact that the iso rating is over stated. the iso 6400 X-E2 shots still beat many other camera's iso 3200 shots.
I really hope Fuji would allow Auto iso max 12800, which is more like iso 6400 for other brands.

I can also see that the X-pro1 retains better detail at high iso, giving a notably less waxy look for skin tone

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
PrebenR

Well that depends on whether you enjoy details or NR

0 upvotes
HarryLally

Slightly rose-tinted review IMO. I'm very surprised that the review didn't mention the lack of a dedicated Custom button as outlined in Michael Reichmann's article in LuLa. Also, surely the point of having an EVF is that you can put on the EVF a histogram and over-exposure guidance like flashing highlights so you can use EC to correct exposure while the camera is still to your eye. When they do that and add a Custom button, I'll get one. Longing to get rid of my heavy Canon DSLRs and those heavy white lenses, as most of my photography these days is while travelling!

2 upvotes
Anthony20D

Everyday I am amazed at the level of discourse I encounter on these forums. Picture quality is subjective,
can we just agree to disagree? From the jpgs I have seen, they all look great.

1 upvote
historianx

All the bitch slapping going down lol

1 upvote
Robert Soderlund

What is going on, i see complete discussions deleted at least one where i was active

0 upvotes
M DeNero

More absolute nonsense about how these types of controls create a stronger sense of control and require a commitment to learn photography. I got a chuckle over the silly infatuation with the dedicated exposure comp dial. Why does it make a difference?

BTW, I really like the new Fuji cameras. For their portable size and image quality.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
molnarcs

Easy exposure compensation is the first thing I look for in a camera. The EC button is the most used button (apart from the shutter release of course) on my d800. In fact, EC compensation dials or buttons are prominently placed or accessible on all enthusiast/pro grade bodies. It makes a big difference for certain types of shooting.

Shooting events (shows, concerts, etc.) in low light means you usually stay between 0 and -3 depending on what you shoot. Stage shots need quick reaction, and there is nothing faster than flicking your thumb left or right while composing. Or you want to get a quick silhouette shot? Flick and shoot.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
M DeNero

I understand that. What I am saying is that having a big nob right there is no simpler or quicker than what you do with your D800. In fact, it can be achieved near instantaneously with your D800 without much of a thought or movement of your finger.

0 upvotes
tecnoworld

This camera is almost perfect for me. Gorgeous rangefinder style, oled (not sequential) high res evf, lots of physical controls, high quality fast prime lenses, great iq and dr at any iso, good af speed, decent buffer.

It just have some minuses, imo: low mp count (I'd like 24+ mp for cropping), no touch screen, no native iso 100.

0 upvotes
helltormentor

The review directly says that JPEGs of X-E2 are inferior to those of X-Pro1 but the score comparison chart, at the end of the review, shows something different. Why is that?

3 upvotes
Spectro

Jpegs is 8bit. Raw are 12,14 bits, much better tonal quality. I shot some jpeg sooc while I was in Hawaii, because I didn't want to edit. Worst camera move I did in awhile.

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady

Nice camera but I feel one flaw that was only mentioned on the "noise" page (not on the conclusion page), is actually magnified by another. Like most of the X series cameras, ISO's are overstated up to 2/3 EV (1 stop difference compared to many other cameras). But in RAW, the camera also tops out at an indicated ISO 6400. Which means that if you want to shoot RAW, compared to many other cameras, the top sensitivity is actually comparable to ISO 3200. Not exactly high in the current age, where a lot of crop cameras are already used at even higher ISO's.

And while I acknowledge that users can push RAW files further themselves, choice is removed and it does affect the LV experience.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Raist3d

Having to under expose and develop up is not as bad for two reasons:

#1. Fuji has a dedicated EV on this camera
#2. Fuji can push up to 3 stops up when using its in-camera RAW converter. Think they are the only ones allowing such a push in an in-camera raw conversion.

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady

It's not that there are no work arounds, the point is that simple choice was removed for unknown reasons.

In A and S mode, the viewfinder will still go dark if you want to go past ISO 6400 (equiv. of about 3200...) in RAW.

1 upvote
mO0nkey

'Like most of the X series cameras, ISO's are overstated up to 2/3 EV (1 stop difference compared to many other cameras)'.

That was what I thought when I first tested the camera. What? Was Fuji cheating?

But after testing the camera a little better and comparing it with my DSLR I found the truth is a total different story.

First of all the difference between my DSLR and X-E2 is different in different situations. Sometimes it's 1 full stop, then 2/3, 1/3 and in quite some situations there is no difference at all.

Furthermore (and this is the point), there is more to photography then watching the settings on your camera, for instance the actual image taken. And comparing the images it becomes obvious that the Fuji is not less sensitive at all, but in low light produces brighter images! So it's a difference in metering. And I have to say I prefer the Fuji :-)

Comment edited 42 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
TorsteinH

Strange, but to me the files, both RAW and JPG looks like they have a heavy noise reduction done. Faces looks like they are made of plastic! The loss of detail is obvious compared to Nikon 7100 or Olympus OMD E-M5. (Just select RAW and compare the files here at DPR) So how this camera can get a high score for image quality is hard to understand.

7 upvotes
Raist3d

It's been said countless times that the Fuji Xtrans RAW files shine with Iridient, Capture One 7, not with Adobe's software.

Even though this has been explored many times twenty there is still this question. As for the JPEGS- shoot out in the real world and compare jpeg per jpeg. Fuji keeps color and tone very well while having some good areas of detail too.

10 upvotes
TorsteinH

I am quite sure this has more to do with the x-trans technology than RAW developer.

2 upvotes
helltormentor

@ TorsteinH This sofness that you see in the RAW files has nothing to do with X-Trans. This is specific to files converted by ACR or LR. Download the RAW files and use another converter yourself, you will notice the difference immediately. At present, all converters work better than Adobe products when it comes to X-Trans but, to me, Irident, Photo Ninja and Capture 1 are the best. As long as DPReview sticks to ACR, readers cannot judge the quality of Fuji RAW files easily.

7 upvotes
Raist3d

Torsten- and how are you quite sure? Did you try the other raw converters and see for yourself?

Based on my real world experience I am quite sure what you said is not right.

4 upvotes
Spectro

Dpreview needs to get off acr abit and try some 1st party raw converter. Even Nikon files looks soft and lack of skin gradient is apparent on acr compared to their software.

1 upvote
historianx

My X-E1 RAF files look superb in Aperture. So do my X100S with the same sensor/processor as X-E2.

1 upvote
TorsteinH

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1118191/3

0 upvotes
DonSantos

Well I'm about so sell my "gold" award x-e2 with the awesome fuji 35mm 1.4 and upgrade the the "silver" sony a7 + zeiss 55mm 1.8.

Am I crazy?

9 upvotes
Davidgilmour

Yes, you are. Check out those A7 jpegs...

17 upvotes
Andy Dan

See the light leaking problems on Sony forums :-(

4 upvotes
brendon1000

^^ Unless you do long exposures while shining a light straight into the lens you aren't going to face much problems.

In any case Sony has admitted to the problem and is working on a fix.

3 upvotes
Mike99999

Smart move. The Fuji 35/1.4 is nice, but the Zeiss 55/1.8 is another league.

I don't understand the light leak issue. The instructions to test for it instruct you to tape over all the gaps on the lens and lens cap, and then shoot a long exposure at ISO 25600. When I take pictures, I usually take off the lens cap. Wouldn't infinitely more light enter through the lens than through the 'light leak'?

Comment edited 31 seconds after posting
9 upvotes
le_alain

No you are not ... if you have some FF lenses to use.
But
- accept shooting raw to get the best, jpeg are over processed, even with NR OFF.
- IQ is good on both cameras

3 upvotes
Andy Dan

It's really sad that the A7 has those gimmicks because otherwise is a great camera and I'm sure that every Zeiss and G FE lenses that Sony will launch will be just as good as the 35 f2.8 at least.

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe

Everyone always makes a big deal out of the awards, which are really just a subjective mark of how much the reviewer "loved" the camera. It don't really give any kind of indication whether one camera is better than another. Take the Nikon DF, it got a better total score than either of those cameras but no award at all.

Also remember that the Fuji combo is worth $1750 while the Sony $2700, so the reviewer will be comparing the cameras to similarly priced models, not really to each other (Eg. the Fuji may be one of the best ~$1500 cameras while the Sony is more in the middle compared to other ~$2500 cameras.)

0 upvotes
kadardr

@AndyCrowe: You may not make a big deal out of awards, but the Gearshop and some other online retailers do, as they are selling stuff by the DPR award score. So this can be a serious marketing tool however DPR staff tries to downplay it. You cannot believe anybody in marketing. I used to be so I know

0 upvotes
photoguy622

Not crazy, but I question if it will be worth it at the end of the day. Too much "upgrading" can be fatiguing.

0 upvotes
Richt2000

Yes, keep your E2 and buy an A7r to complement it!

0 upvotes
Eleson

@Mike99999
Agree, anyone referencing that test should try it on any of the OVF based cameras using the same instructions.
I'm willing to bet that 1Dc will fail as well (and more) under the same test criterias.

0 upvotes
molnarcs

You're definitely crazy. Sorry ;) Okey, don't take this seriously, just wanna give you some tips, because I was weighing both systems for my d7000 replacement (my current backup camera) and Fuji came out as a winner. Here is why.

1) Lenses
The selection of lenses of A7/A7r are rather poor. Let's talk equivalence here. You have a slow F/2.8 35mm lens for A7. The Fuji equivalent (23mm F/1.4) gives you two stops more light (you can shoot at ISO 3200 at F/1.4 while on the Sony you'll need ISO 12800 at F/2.8 for the same exposure. Plus you still get shallower DoF on the Fuji, so basically all full frame advantages for the A7 are negated.

Your A7+zeiss combo will cost you significantly more than a Fuji with the 35mm F/1.4, and you lose flexibility in terms of lenses.

2) Size - the A7 system will always have size disadvantage. There is no way around this - covering FF needs bigger lenses.

3) Support - when you invest in s system, this is important, and Fuji's support is second to none.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
PrebenR

Yes. The A7(r) is underwhelming and I think one need to wait 2 or 3 gens before something good comes along. Besides Sony does not know to make lenses.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
mO0nkey

It's not crazy to make mistakes.

0 upvotes
Combatmedic870

There's just a couple of things in video they need.
It can be done via a FW update and make the xe-2 and xt-1 overall better multipurpose cameras and appeal to a wider audience.
1. 24p,25p,50p. This is the biggest one. Easy fix
2. Allow manual.
3. Better codecs. Meaning more then one.

Done.

1 upvote
Richard Butler

Until they sort out the demosiacing for movies, no amount of frame rates or codecs will help.

2 upvotes
Spectro

No, firmware might, but if the processor is under power it can't record faster and highdef. The processor can't be replaced.

0 upvotes
UnitedNations

As expected only a poor 1% increase in score over the X-E1. Which I think is still overly generous ...because the 'newer' X cameras(X-e2, X-t1, X100s) all have major problems with their JPEG engine.

The 'newer' Fuji X cameras not only render their JPEGs in an unnatural waxy way, but even bigger problem is that their JPEGs have severe limitations in Dynamic Range. This is a problem which was NOT present in the X100, X-Pro1, & X-E1.
Simply speaking the JPEGs are nearly unusable in the 'newer' Fuji X cameras IF you are coming from the early X cameras.

It is Fuji's free choice to suddenly make their X cameras into mostly 'RAW Shooting ONLY' cameras, but I am not sure if people who bought Fuji's early X cameras will be happy & be willing to buy the 'newer' X cameras knowing that the usability of the JPEGs has been significantly deteriorated.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 12 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
The Davinator

The DR of the jpg is virtually the same. It is the tone curve that has been adjusted. The default settings are different between the two. Seriously....instead of spouting off, actually understand what the data means. I've made huge prints from jpgs with both the new and o.d sensors. If you can't get a decent photo....the problem is you.

8 upvotes
Shamael

all the jpeg's I have seen from the new X-T1 confirm what United Nations is talking about in his comment. Waxy, water color like shots, at 800 ISO more than half of the detail is gone and some parts in straight fine lines are simply missing.

7 upvotes
UnitedNations

@ Dave Luttmann
Wow. You sound HURT. Fanboys usually get Hurt for nothing.

No they are not the same. The default settings are different & the 'newer' X cameras( X100s, X-t1, X-E2) all need extra tweaking in JPEG & still cannot get the level of DR to match the older X-cameras in JPEG.
That is why people who have bought the newer X cameras now mainly use their cameras mostly in RAW. They realise the JPEG is lacking & realise that there are limitations to the level they can revive it to acceptable high level as seen in the older X cameras.

If you can get decent photos from your JPEGS from the newer X cameras, then it must only mean that you are a person who is easily satisfied & can live with mediocre picture outcomes.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
le_alain

It was the same beetwen X10 and X20
-> X20 in raw now

1 upvote
2011windmere

I think UnitedNations is absolutely correct. I have the original x100, the XE1, and XA1. I love the X100 Jpegs and the XE1's Jpegs are different but also very good, BUT the XA1 jpegs are in my view simply unusable and a big step backwards. I therefore only shoot raw now with the XA1. I sold my X100S for that same reason as I found the Jpegs disappointing because of the reduced DR but more importantly because of the waxy skin tones and loss of detail.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
naftade

I'm shooting with an X-E2. It produces the best jpegs I ever had from any camera that I had and that includes Sony Nex5n and em5. To say the X-E2's jpegs are useless tells much more about the 'phtotgrapher' than about the camera. It's a ridiculous statement.

0 upvotes
PrebenR

Any camera is RAW only as far as I'm concerned. Who uses JPG OOC in 2014?

0 upvotes
webrunner5

Crap skin tones and crap video and it gets a 80 score??? Wow, someone at DPR REALLY likes Fuji's.

5 upvotes
RichRMA

The resemblance to Leica's is getting fainter and fainter so the fascination should fade soon.

0 upvotes
jkspepper

why should it not? at the end of the day, it's whether the package is greater than the sum of it's part and many do believe the Fuji is.

I would garner that there are devices out there that may have better technical bits but may be rubbish to shoot with and/or enjoy

0 upvotes
brendon1000

Honestly I believe anyone who shoots only JPEG is not too concerned with image quality. Any discerning enthusiast who puts a high value on IQ and shoots RAW should be pretty happy with Fuji.

2 upvotes
itsastickup

"Honestly I believe anyone who shoots only JPEG is not too concerned with image quality. Any discerning enthusiast who puts a high value on IQ and shoots RAW should be pretty happy with Fuji."

RAW snobs. Not everyone is shooting fine art.

But seriously, the OOC fuji jpegs were arguably as good as any RAW processing, using almost all the available DR with the right settings. Unlike other systems, the only significant advantages in shooting RAW was in changing your mind about exposure and WB or fussing over noise. The OOC jpegs were a great way to avoid a lot of admin.

That's no longer true.

In the meantime, RAW shooters do have a tendency to be shooting low ISO pics, whereas the Fujis were fantastic for high ISO people pics where ultimate image quality isn't such an issue.

In any case, this is about differing needs not ultimate image quality.

3 upvotes
Robert Soderlund

Ultimate image quality is always number one in thousand dollar cameras, no sane person invests that amount to just take snapshots.

0 upvotes
itsastickup

Of course they do. What do you think event photography is?

In any case, for my purposes (semi-formal portraits) the Fuji OOC jpegs were more than good enough for my clients. I certainly wouldn't be wasting my time processing RAW; they won't give a darn.

2 upvotes
Soothsayerman

Who the heck uses jpeg? and why? its a destructive file format from the word go, who gives a crap what jpegs look like. If you are going to spend several grand on camera equipment, only to then shoot jpeg, good riddance to you.

0 upvotes
itsastickup

You appear to be living in a bubble. Presumably the whole world should be filled with people just like you. What beautiful harmonies that would make for.

I refer you to my previous comments.

1 upvote
RichRMA

More fake ISO's? It's probably time for Dpreview to begin testing actual ISO's of these cameras instead of covertly changing illumination levels to match each other.

"At higher ISO settings, the X-E2 produces cleaner images than the D7100, even when compared at a common output size. However, given the longer exposure the Fujifilm requires, it's also telling to compare its performance to the D7100 set one ISO setting lower, where the difference is much smaller. It's a similar story with the EOS 70D, with more comparible results if you drop the DSLR's ISO by 1EV to more closely match the exposures."

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
10 upvotes
Richard Butler

We've included a test of ISO in the majority of our reviews for the past couple of years.

The fact that you then quote us referring to that testing, suggests that we're aware of this.

And we don't change illumination levels - we brightness match the images by changing exposure and we explain this (and, if I remember correctly, the rationale for it), in the article linked from the top of each comparison page. Which doesn't seem terribly covert to me.

5 upvotes
Tom_A

Not at all, its capabilities as a classic photo camera are obvious very very good. If this is what you want (I for one am not interested in video) then it stands out from the crowd.

4 upvotes
Robert Garcia NYC

Thank you Dpreview for your honesty about the jpegs. Besides that great camera for stills.

3 upvotes
whtchocla7e

Another ME-TOO camera. Does some things well, other things not so well, and gracefully blends in with the crowd.

0 upvotes
Tom_A

Not at all, its capabilities as a classic photo camera are obvious very very good. If this is what you want (I for one am not interested in video) then it stands out from the crowd.

4 upvotes
RichRMA

Maybe Fuji can do something about that annoying blank area above the lens?

0 upvotes
Combatmedic870

What are you talking about? Where the flash is?

0 upvotes
Pat Cullinan Jr

I drill a couple of holes in it.

Jes' kiddin'! ;)

Comment edited 12 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
dinoSnake

While everyone here is whining and moaning like small children in regards to their favorite pet peeve of the moment, I'd like to take the time to compliment the writer for posting, IMHO, the nicest in-the-field test shots I've seen in along while on this site (in the Shooter's experience section). They show wonderful examples of some of the extra DR and JPEG processing available and are interesting, colorful and dynamic to boot.

Thank you for brightening up what could otherwise be a very to-the-point article.

26 upvotes
DStudio

They also show an enthusiasm for using the camera, which is more telling than anything else.

The guy at the local high-end camera shop told me yesterday that he just ordered an X-T1 - the first camera he's bought in 5 years!

5 upvotes
SF Photo Gal

Not that I care really, but curious how the X-E2 gets a score of 80 and Gold, yet the GX7 received a 78 and Silver; the GX7 was criticized for having only a 2 axis IBIS and none for video, yet the X-E2 doesn't have IBIS at all; GX7 has a tilting touch screen and the X-E2 is fixed and no touch feature; GX7 has far superior video and seems the IQ is about the same, and they seem to be in the same "class" so what's up with that?

16 upvotes
Richard Butler

Part 1: Scoring

Use the widget in the scoring panel to compare the scores and you'll see the GX7 outscores the X-E2 in terms of features and video (which is consistent with the points you've made). It also leads the Fujifilm in terms of Wi-Fi and value.

However, the X-E2 scores a touch higher in terms of image quality and ergonomics/handling. Since our scoring is weighted towards image quality, that's enough to see the X-E2 get 1% more in the overall score.

Part 2: Awards

The awards are based on how well the camera's reviewer thinks it fits what we believe to be its intended market. Silver means we believe a camera is very good, Gold means we believe it's great.

Do I believe the X-E2 is better-suited to its target market than the GX7? Absolutely. The control system is better worked out (the GX7's is fussy by comparison), and the X-E2's EVF makes the shooting experience much nicer. That, plus the slightly nicer image quality? That's enough to make the difference in award.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
33 upvotes
historianx

@sf photo gal the GX7 IQ cannot even come close to X-Sys.

7 upvotes
raincoat

a tilting touch screen is a negative in any serious camera.

4 upvotes
jkspepper

obviously you're not qualified to judge.

1 upvote
ric63

WTF?
Any serious camera SHOULD have a tilting screen!

6 upvotes
LeitzKameraAktion

I think Raincoat was unhappy with a TILTING touch screen. Think about it...

0 upvotes
TN Args

@Butler, the GX7 shameful review continues to haunt dpr, and rightly so.
Your grand defence of the GX7 score being lower hinges on image quality. So I threw the E-M1 into your widget, and guess what? It scored higher on RAW IQ than the Fuji. Now guess what? The E-M1 has a Panasonic sensor. Hah!
You scored the Fuji above the GX7 for jpeg IQ, yet all the readers here say the fuji jpegs are bad. Hah!
You scored the Fuji way below the GX7 for video quality, but I guess that doesn't count because there aren't any images in video?
So every single aspect of your score on IQ grounds just got binned.
Widget says Fuji beats GX7 on Build Quality, but everyone says the Fuji is relatively flimsy and the GX7 tank-like (it is smaller and heavier, too).
Could go on, but no room in post.
An obvious series of blunders, running arguments with your readers, never a backwards step, staff defending other staff --- I think dpr are meeting every definition of arrogance. I don't suppose you agree, of course?

3 upvotes
bobbarber

@ RButler,

Without beating the drum for the GX7, does it really make sense to weight IQ compared to other factors, such as handling, performance, etc.? I'm not saying that IQ shouldn't be considered, but maybe it shouldn't be weighted, either. Miinimal differences in IQ (pixel-peeping at high ISO, not sure if you see a difference, then you decide that there is if you look closely enough, that sort of thing) make no difference to most (any?) of us, whereas features like articulated screens or lack thereof, manual control over video, etc. can be big deals. I for one would never choose a camera with a 1/3 stop better ISO performance over a camera with an articulated screen.

To be fair, you and your reviewers do seem to value the shooting experience more than you spend time sweating the small stuff, and you do have to deal with brand shills who whine a lot about extremely minimal differences in IQ between Brand X and Brand Y that they want you to emphasize, but still...

3 upvotes
mrdancer

It's because the GX7 doesn't have the built-in level.

Wait....the GX7 DOES have a built-in level! Guess it wasn't important back then...

0 upvotes
guytano

Well there is this thing called sensor size...

1 upvote
historianx

Yea dang that big factor

0 upvotes
nicolasrao

Yea! At last one for Panasonic. I use Nikons because I have plenty of Nikon lenses from the past. Prime expensive lenses, but I started going digital with a little Lumix FZ-7 and was able to do some great stuff with it. Now waiting to try the FZ-1000... think its going to show the way to many...Already proved the FZ-200 with tiny chip can take amazing photos...Yes! I like your comment.

0 upvotes
Mike Sandman

Nice review - thank you. I have an NEX-6 and am thinking about switching. After this review, still thinking... One thing the review may have covered but which I missed -- how do you change the shooting mode (Aperture preferred, speed preferred, etc).? There doesn't seem to be a dial for this.

0 upvotes
S_Michaelsen

For P, dial both aperture and shutter to "A"
For Av, leave shutter on "A", and choose aperture.
And so forth.

0 upvotes
Chengis

The first link in,
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=x-e2+user+guide

0 upvotes
Richard Butler

@Mike Sandman - as S_Michaelsen says, it's a question of telling the camera which parameters you want it to control.

Turn the shutter dial to 'A' (Auto) and it'll be in aperture priority mode, turn just the aperture dial to 'A' and it's in shutter priority. Turn both to 'A' and it's in Program.

Comment edited 10 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Grumpyrocker

I switched from NEX-6 to X-E2 a couple of weeks ago. I couldn't be happier with my choice.

3 upvotes
guytano

It is a nice implementation of PASM with manual controls.

1 upvote
Total comments: 305
12