Previous page Next page

Image Quality and Raw

On the whole the X-T1 produces lovely-looking JPEGs, and in many cases we'd be happy to use them without further editing. But the camera does sometimes get things wrong of course, so we'd still usually make a rule of shooting Raw alongside. Like other Fujifilm models the camera includes an excellent in-camera Raw developer, so you don't necessarily even have to move your files to a computer if you just want to make basic tweaks to white balance and tonality etc.

When you do wish to convert Raws on a computer, though, support for the X-T1's X-Trans CMOS sensor is a bit lacking compared to the options available for conventional Bayer-sensor cameras. We're not huge fans of Fujifilm's bundled Raw File Converter EX, which is a customised version of SilkyPix. It doesn't match the camera's own colour output, and its somewhat obtuse menus and controls mean that the learning curve to take advantage of all of its features is pretty steep.

Third party support is provided by most of the usual suspects - Adobe Camera Raw, Lightroom, and Capture One - but DxO Optics Pro notably doesn't support the X-T1. Crucially, Adobe and Fujifilm have worked together to produce colour profiles that closely match the camera's own Film Simulation Profiles. Not all users are happy with Adobe's rendition of fine detail from X-Trans sensors, though, which means that some prefer to use Capture One or less well-known programs such as PictureCode Photo Ninja and Iridient Developer (which is Mac only).

In-camera Raw conversion

As on other Fujifilm models, in-camera Raw conversion is available when browsing your images with a quick press of the 'Q' button. All of the main image-processing parameters are up for grabs, meaning that you can make pretty substantial changes to the look of your images. One small but useful improvement compared to older models is that when you make a new conversion, the camera now goes back to your original image in playback. This is great if you want to do through your shots in-camera and make small adjustments to any that would benefit from tweaking.

Options available for adjustment during in-camera RAW conversion
 • Push/Pull Processing
 • Dynamic Range
 • Film Simulation
 • White Balance
 • WB Shift
 • Color
 • Sharpness
 • Highlight Tone
 • Shadow Tone
 • Noise Reduction
 • Lens Modulation Optimizer
 • Color Space

The example below illustrates a case where this can be useful. The camera's Auto White Balance has veered drastically towards blue in the original version of the image, but a quick re-conversion with a simple white balance correction has produced a much better result.

Original image from camera Reconverted with white balance corrected

It's perhaps easy to dismiss this as a gimmick that 'serious' photographers would never use. But it helps you quickly make usable versions of shots that you'd otherwise have to fix using a computer, and you can do it during a break in shooting. It's the kind of feature that you won't miss if you've never used it (and some users may genuinely never want to manipulate their images this way). But like in-camera Wi-Fi, we've come to appreciate it more and more as an aid to sharing your images quickly.

ACR 8.4 and Film Simulation Profiles

Until recently, Fujifilm users have had no simple means of matching their camera's attractive colour reproduction using an external Raw Processor. The supplied software (RAW File Converter EX) is based on SilkyPix, and while it's a powerful processor in its own right, it makes no attempt to match the camera's colour output.

With the release of Adobe Camera Raw 8.4 the situation has changed. You now have the option of choosing any of the Film Simulation modes offered by the camera itself, as well as Adobe's own default profile. We're led to believe that these profiles have been developed in a collaboration between Adobe and Fujifilm, meaning they should offer a pretty good match to the camera's JPEG output.

ACR 7.4 now offers a full set of Film Simulation modes in the Camera Profile drop-down.

In the rollover below we're looking at how closely the profiles in ACR 8.4 match the X-T1's own Film Simulation modes in practice. On the top row we're showing the camera's JPEG output, which you can compare with the ACR version of each profile by rolling your mouse over the cell immediately below. Here we're mainly looking at colour and contrast, but interestingly there's also a slight difference in distortion correction between the camera and ACR.

JPEG Provia JPEG Velvia JPEG Astia JPEG Pro Neg High JPEG Pro Neg Std
ACR Provia ACR Velvia ACR Astia ACR Pro Neg High ACR Pro Neg Std

What you should be able to see from this is that Adobe's profiles generally match the camera's colour rendition pretty closely. There are a couple of caveats though, most notably that ACR is slightly higher in contrast by default, resulting in even more abrupt clipping to black. However this can be offset by tweaking the 'Shadows' and 'Blacks' settings to reveal as little or much shadow detail as you choose.

Fine detail rendition

One criticism of Adobe's output from X-Trans cameras is its rendition of fine detail; in particular, fine low contrast detail in foliage can look indistinct and mushy (although it's possible to improve this somewhat using the 'Detail' slider). Capture One provides a more convincing conversion if this is important to you, but this does come at the expense of matching the camera's own colour output options. Instead you get one single colour profile, which is a reasonably close approximation to 'Standard / Provia'.

XF 23mm F1.4R, F5.6, ISO200
Camera JPEG 100% crop
Adobe Camera Raw 7.4 default conversion 100% crop
Capture One default conversion 100% crop

Shadow detail

One useful characteristic of many modern sensors is their huge low ISO dynamic range. This allows extensive shadow detail to be recovered from Raw files, which means that you can expose to retain highlight detail, then pull up shadows in post-processing.

The X-T1 performs pretty well here. In the image below we're using the same image as above, but extensively manipulated in Adobe Camera Raw 8.4 to recover shadow detail (Exposure +0.15, Highlights -40, Shadows 100, Blacks 100, Clarity +20, Vibrance +20). The resultant file is obviously rather 'flat', which is inevitable when trying to squeeze so much range into a single output file in this way. But it does show that there's plenty of extra detail to play with in the shadows.

XF 23mm F1.4R, F5.6, ISO200
ACR with shadow recovery ACR default conversion
100% crop 100% crop

DR Modes and Raw processing

Like other Fujifilm models the X-T1 offers extended Dynamic Range settings to capture additional highlight detail, known as DR200 and DR400. However it's worth knowing that neither Capture One nor ACR will render the extra range that's available in DR200 and DR400 Raw files by default. Instead you'll have to use their highlight recovery controls to make use of all this extra information. In the example below, ACR's default conversion of a DR400 file has no more highlight detail than a DR100 JPEG. To fix this we've set the Highlights slider to -70, and balanced the local contrast by setting the Clarity slider to 20. This reveals plenty of extra detail in the sky.

DR400, ACR default conversion DR400, Highlights -70, Clarity +20

High ISO Image quality and Noise Reduction

The X-T1's high ISO image quality is excellent, with rich colours and low noise. This is something of a characteristic of Fujifilm's X-Trans CMOS sensor and associated image processing, although it's also important to understand that Fujifilm's extremely conservative sensitivity ratings mean that ISO6400 on the X-T1 is closer to ISO4000 on most other cameras. Even taking this into account, though, the X-T1 produces very good results.

ISO 6400, camera JPEG ISO 6400, Raw + ACR
JPEG, 100% crop ACR, 100% crop

Here we're comparing the camera's JPEG output at ISO6400 (the highest sensitivity it'll record a RAW file) with a default ACR conversion of the same shot. The ACR version has no luminance noise reduction applied, which gives a grittier look, and the impression of more fine detail in the woodwork.

Lens Modulation Optimizer

The X-T1 includes Fujifilm's latest processing wizardry called 'Lens Modulation Optimizer', which claims to improve image quality by using knowledge of the each lens's aberrations to optimize the processing. So, for example, if a lens has soft corners, the camera can selectively sharpen to compensate; or when shooting at small apertures, the camera can likewise adjust the sharpening to compensate for the softening effects of diffraction.

Fujifilm isn't the only manufacturer to do this; indeed Olympus and Sony implement similar concepts on the OM-D E-M1 and Alpha 7 (arguably the X-T1's closest competitors). And just as we've seen before, Fujifilm's version certainly does something, but generally the effects are quite subtle. It can't do much with either extremely soft corners (as on the 14mm F2.8 wide open) or severe diffraction softening at F22, but in less extreme situations it can have a visibly-positive impact.

The Lens Modulation Optimizer can be enabled or disabled in the menu as you see fit. It's also an option available in the camera's internal Raw processor, which means that you can choose to apply (or remove) its effects after the event. This is a nice touch that's not available from other brands (we've used it to make the comparison examples below).

Corner corrections: XF 18mm-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS

The XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS zoom is a cut above the average 'kit' zoom, and has a price to match. But it's not entirely immune to optical defects, showing somewhat soft corners at wideangle (due in part to software correction of barrel distortion, a process shared with most modern camera systems). Here Fujifilm's Lens Modulation Optimizer can do quite a nice job of sharpening things up. This is shown in the example below.

Fujinon XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS, 18mm F5.6
Lens Modulation Optimizer On Lens Modulation Optimizer Off
LMO On, 100% crop LMO Off, 100% crop

The Lens Modulation Optimizer also promises to improve image quality when you want to shoot at small apertures for increased depth of field. In the example below we're looking at the XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS telezoom shot at F16. Here again there's a subtle, but visible increase in sharpness with LMO turned on.

Fujinon XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS, 172mm F16
Lens Modulation Optimizer On Lens Modulation Optimizer Off
LMO On, 100% crop LMO Off, 100% crop

Overall, we think that while LMO's effects are rather subtle, they do seem to be pretty much always advantageous. They are of course entirely lens-dependent; for example LMO doesn't really seem to do very much with the XF 23mm F1.4R, simply because there's so little to correct. On balance though we'd probably leave it turned on and forget about it most of the time.

Overall image quality / Specifics

In terms of image quality, there's not a huge amount to say about the X-T1, aside from the fact that it's excellent in almost every situation you can throw at it. We've shot many hundreds of frames with the camera across a wide range of lighting conditions, and it delivers fine results time after time. White balance is well-judged, and colour rendition is excellent. High ISO image quality is extremely impressive too, even under artificial light where many cameras can struggle.

The X-T1's low light, high ISO image quality is impressive. This ISO 6400 JPEG example shows attractive, saturated colour and well-judged white balance in particularly difficult lighting. Noise levels have been kept impressively low too.

One huge advantage of the X-T1's excellent electronic viewfinder is that it provides a pretty accurate preview of how the image is going to look in terms of brightness, white balance and colour. This makes it very easy to achieve the results you want with the minimum of fuss.

Here we applied negative exposure compensation compared to the camera's metered reading. With an SLR we'd have been relying on guesswork and experience, but with a good EVF like the X-T1's you can be pretty sure you've dialed-in the right settings before shooting.

It's worth reiterating here that the optical quality of the lenses, along with Fujifilm's integration of software corrections into the system design, obviously plays a large part in the system's overall image quality. Indeed Fujifilm's best primes - the XF14mm F2.8 R, XF23mm F1.4 R, XF35mm F1.4R, and perhaps most of all the latest XF 56mm F1.2R - count as some of the very best lenses we've had the pleasure of using over the past few years. The XF zooms are exceptional too, offering faster-than-usual maximum apertures for their size. They're not cheap, but if you're prepared to pay for the quality, you're unlikely to be disappointed.

RAW files for download

Don't just take our word for it - take a look at the Fujifilm X-Pro1's RAW files for yourself, and run them through your preferred software and conversion settings. Here, we provide you with a selection of raw files of 'real world' scenes, and if you want to take a closer look at the X-Pro1's studio scene shots you can download original raw files from our 'Compared to (Raw)' page.

Previous page Next page
894
I own it
692
I want it
108
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 605
1234
Rodolfo R

I just realized that the camera is designed only for ambient light. I tried to expose in manual mode with flash and the screen and viewfinder are black. In manual mode the screen/viewfinder shows the correct exposition for ambient light, but it does not work if I want to expose only the flash light. If someone know how to solve this issue please let me know. Don´t tell me please that this is it, and there´s no solution for that.

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
jkrumm

Hmm, check to see if there is a viewfinder boost mode. My EM1 has the same problem, very irritating, but if I turn on viewfinder boost I can at least see what I am shooting when using strong flash, though I lose wysiwyg.

0 upvotes
acktown

There is a menu setting for exactly what you are experiencing.

Blue Menu #1 --> SCREEN SET-UP --> PREVIEW EXP. / WB IN MANUAL MODE.

0 upvotes
mainvision

I have just taken possession of my new camera - very nice, but don't expect to use it with an iPhone if you value your sanity - the feedback I left in the app store: "You buy the lovely Fuji X-T1 and you want to connect to your iPhone or iPad. Your manual tells you that you need the Fujifilm Camera Remote. You install it and select your camera in wifi settings, as directed. There are four panels on your iPhone screen: Remote Control, Receive, Browse Camera, Geotagging (because the camera has no GPS, in this day and age…) It works about right once you manage to connect, but if you want to change from one panel to the next, you have to disconnect, then go back to your iPhone wifi settings, reconnect laboriously by going through settings in the camera ... Once you’ve done it a few times, you come to the conclusion that the app is worse than useless and you forget it to preserve your sanity..."
Has anybody had a better experience with this aspect?

0 upvotes
oliviergaston

I'm interested in this camera and would like to know two things from anyone with experience.

1. Would the pictures be in a resolution and quality high enough to make large prints, like 24"x36"?

2. Would the sensor and available fast lenses give very good results in low light without flash?

thank you

0 upvotes
Brubaker

The xt-1 is a great camera let down by a few nasty bits.Both the 'doors' on the camera are unbeleivably frail.X-pro1 ones seem like tanks in comparison. I love the flush buttons on the back as I've been prone to connecting with buttons on digi cameras over the years I don't want to.Like the x-pro and the x100 series the exposure correction dial has a mind of it's own and is never where I left it.Pictures are superb and in my opinion rival anything from anywhere else including some full frame cameras. Certainly better than either of my Nikon DSLR's.The x100s is my perfect street camera lacking little and with stunning results.The x-pro1 is my Leica M substitute used alongside the x100s with a 35mm lens and the optical finder it's just a pleasure to hold and use.The xt-1 is a week or two old and going to replacing one of the DSLR's (need one for action).Don't forget the picture is the 'thing' and the 'thing' that makes the picture is the one pressing the button not the bits in between!

0 upvotes
Maklike Tier

Sorry silver fans, but it is available in grey.....

0 upvotes
GreatOceanSoftware

I've had the X-T1 for a couple of months now and just want to say kudos to Fuji. This is the first camera in decades that's inspired me to get out and take photos. I think it's the manual controls that I've been missing. I've been slowly lulled away to programmable buttons and touch screens, all the while not realizing I really missed the feel of my Olympus OM 35mm cameras of the 70's. Thanks to Fuji, it's great to be back.

0 upvotes
Andrewjmarino

I really wanted to love this camera. But, I opted for the OMD EM1 which I'm not disappointed with. It certainly has its own issues - too much crapware - but the images appear neutral and true and very detailed when enlarged.
I think I would have liked the Fuji colors more than Olympus and Fuji has a very good set of lenses. It's a great design and better built (more metal) than the EM1.
My reasons for not buying it:

- It needs a deeper handgrip
- The dials were a little too difficult for me to finger/thumb flick. Granted, they are much stronger than the EM1's plastic buttons but they were too stiff for me.
- The eyecup needs to be deeper. I wear glasses and am left-eyed. I couldn't get to the back buttons which, yes, are a bit spongy, but, usable.

I also looked at the XE2 which was easier to use because the viewfinder is on the left. But, still the dials were a bit too stiff for me to flick.

I hope Fuji reads this, makes some changes and I might become a buyer:)

1 upvote
richscence

wondering which to buy...fujifilm XT-1 or nikon 5300? can advise?

0 upvotes
FodgeandDurn

The XT-1 is a much higher spec camera than the 5300. The XT-1 has far more manual control, but that only matters if you intend to use manual control. The Nikon only has one control dial - this will limit you if you intend to learn to shoot with more manual settings. If however you intend to shoot on 'auto' settings, the XT-1 will be a total waste of money - Fuji make cheaper cameras that would suit you better.

The D5300 and XT-1 are not competitors, the XT-1 is much more similar in spec to the Nikon 7100. I suspect that if you have to ask this question, then you do not need an XT-1. Also note - Fuji lenses are much more expensive than most Nikon APSC lenses.

The Nikon is very big for an entry-enthusiast camera, there are many mirrorless cameras like the Sony a6000 with better/same performance, a similar price, and much smaller size.

It does not sound like you need an XT-1, unless you are extremely ambitious, in which case you would not be looking at a 5300.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
jadmaister2

the 5300 has full manual, aperture priority, shutter priority, auto and full programme modes all easily accesible.
It has much faster, more reliable auto focus, an excellent 24mp sensor, Nikons full lens range and some superb 3rd party alternatives from Sigma, Tokina and Tamron for example.
In terms of actual pic quality, it will outperform the fuji if used with the best glass you can afford.
If I had £2000 (the cost of the Fuji and a fuji zoom lens or two)
I'd go for the 5300 with something like Nikon's 24-120, or Sigma's amazing 18-35 f1.8 instead. Indeed, the latter will save you near £700 and blow the fuji away image wise.
The fuji wins hands down imo on looks, build, image, weather sealing and easy to reach controls. A nicer ergonomic feel if you are a traditionalist.

0 upvotes
FodgeandDurn

I'm not at all convinced that the Nikon would have a faster more reliable autofocus. The saying 'DSLR's have better autofocus' does not apply when we are talking about an entry level DSLR and a semi-pro mirrorless.

The modes (aperture priority etc) you list on the D5300 are all easily available, but there is only one control dial, so shooting manual is borderline pointless. Great you can change aperture, but oh no not exposure now!

Why on earth would you recommend the Nikon 24-120 on a crop sensor body? You're talking about a £700 full-frame lens.

Define 'blow away' image wise? Fuji have fantastic lenses, and 16mp combined with their excellent auto-balance could well mean better images out of the body than the entry Nikon.

I owned a 5100, it was a great camera, but it gave me nothing a far smaller camera like the Sony a6000 wouldn't do better now. Entry DSLR's are a waste of space literally, you can get that sensor in a much smaller body for the same price with better autofocus.

3 upvotes
OldManualMan

For saved images, is the lens focal length, f/stop and shutter speed recorded?

0 upvotes
Craig Atkinson

is there a way to show on screen / in VF, the 35mm equiv focal length that you're at when using a zoom lens? Sy you have it to your eye and quickly want 35mm, or 50mm equiv. You have to look at the lens barrel which seems clumsy.

Have I missed the feature somewhere?

0 upvotes
Jensano

Today I bought a black X-T1.
I foung it very loud when turned on. Is there a cooling fan in it? It is so loud when I record a video there is a constant not very quiet noise at the audio.
Has someone else this problem? I know from my SLR it makes no soung it is quiet. But what is that in the X-T1?

0 upvotes
SteezySteeze

I would take that back aspap. XT-1 owner since launch and I have never noticed such a thing in my model.

1 upvote
CaPi

All the bells, dials and whistles on this one. I handled her once. Nice! But surprisingly heavy. The impression of weight (and a lasting impression of value.. what a make!) was increased by its relatively compact size.

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
1 upvote
SyedSadaqatAli

See a complete album shot with Fuji xt-1, 14mm f/2.8, 10-24, 56 f/1.2 and35mm f/1.4. I left my Nikon d700 and other full frame lenses behind.
http://albums.phanfare.com/isolated/HxsgqcLD/1/6575546

0 upvotes
Michael Berg

Nice shots. Can you say a bit about how they were processed? I think in some shots the skies are a bit overdone, they have a Kodak feel to them (deep blues, nearly completely white clouds) which is a bit distracting.

3 upvotes
SyedSadaqatAli

i agree. I have tried silky pix, iridient developer and capture one pro, they all do little bit better job than lightroom, but I have gone too much down the road with LR for last many years. Yes lightroom sucks with Xtrans files but to be honest, I feel same way for all other processors i mentioned. None of the above could show me significant improvement over LR 5.4. Yes, the skins tones look better on Capture one, the sharpness and no water color effect on photoninja or silkypix but then I have everything catalogued in LR and cannot afford these minute improvements over the convenience of my workflow. I agree, I have difficulty processing these pix, however since I shoot raw and keep all raw for all my keepers so I am hoping that one day there will be a good processor for Xtrans files.

0 upvotes
Artphotoman

Hi. Your reply interested me as I have been shooting with a d700, waiting for Fuji to bring out an X-pro 2 with a full sensor. I had the x-pro 1 and found it tedious. How do you pics compare to your d700, and have you tried to print out in large sizes?

thanks

0 upvotes
SyedSadaqatAli

I will be getting a book printed soon with BLURB (which I always use to print the photo books). D700 is a beast, the reasons you may want to get to mirorless world are (i) reduce the weight (ii) be discreet on the street, both these cannot be a achieved by any full frame body and lens. Probably a full frame from fuji will suffer same problems.

0 upvotes
JR Johnson

Yes... some excellent images in that file I particularly loved the BW and the Street shots of individuals.

0 upvotes
Ed555

I didn't see any dial for A,S, or P priority mode. I'm sure that this can be control by the shutter and Aperture auto positions. Still, I think that there should have been some discussion on there use. Sop, how do you set Programmed Priority AE mode?

0 upvotes
Richard Butler

If you set the shutter speed dial and the aperture rings to 'A' then the camera will set both, automatically (i.e. P mode).

0 upvotes
rgleich

From what I have read:

FULL AUTO = Set BOTH Dials to "A"
APERTURE PRIORITY = Manually Select Aperture as desired
Set Shutter Speed Dial to "Auto"
X-T1 will compute optimum Shutter
SHUTTER PRIORITY = Set Shutter Speed as desired
Set Aperture Dial to "Auto"
X-T1 will compute optimum Aperture

0 upvotes
Musicman666

I tried focussing on a foreground subject ....half pressed it so I got the confirmation .... then I reframed it by positioning the subject to the side of the frame while still half pressing the button....then I took the shot and the original subject is totally sharp and in focus.

As far as I can tell the focus lock function works fine.

I would be amazed if fuji hadn't got this right and somehow missed it or purposely ignored it as a design flaw.....

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
prossi

Probably this has been discussed already but I am looking at the static samples on page 17 and the image looks out of focus to me. I am looking at the paint brushes and sponges on the bottom right and they clearly are fuzzy vs other cameras. Is it a camera issue or what?
thanks.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
lovin denmark

I see it has manual focus modes. Does it have continuous full time manual focus as with some DSLR's? Thanks. Mark

0 upvotes
DP1

(Part 1 of my post)

Am I the only one who is seeing a focus lock problem with the Fujifilm X series cameras in AF-S auto fucus mode (at least with the X-E2 and the X-T1)?

I am NOT talking about the issue of needing to put the AF Mode switch in the front of the camera to M for the AF-L button to be functional that everyone is aware of. Of course I was NOT using AF-C mode and complain about focus change like an idiot either.

I was in a Fujifilm showroom displaying most of their products somewhere in Asia yesterday. I spent about two and half hours trying out the X-T1 and the X-E2 and loved most features and ergonomics with the two cameras (image quality is a given that goes without saying). However, I realized a serious defect with both cameras. The focus lock actually DOES NOT lock focus very well, no matter which button you use to hold focus (shutter release on the top or AF-L on the back).

Focus just DRIFTS!

0 upvotes
DP1

(Part 2)
No matter which lens I mated the cameras with (about four to five of them), after you think you’ve locked focus by the confirmation green light and the beep sound, you move your focus area away from the subject to re-frame for better composition like everybody normally would before taking a shot. The subject would be slightly out of focus (when it is not at the focus point at the time when the shutter release was pressed)!

After I found out about this issue and asked the Fujifilm rep, he actually QUIETLY confirmed my finding. We were very curious why no one brought this up in the their review. Now you understand why I withheld the exact location of this showroom earlier.

Did the reps and I do something wrong? Is there anybody else that has the same experience? If you do, how do you go about it?

I am on the verge of buying the X system as I like everything else so much. This focus problem is absolutely a deal breaker. Anybody in the know, please shed some light. Thank you.

0 upvotes
HansVar

OK...let's precisely analyze what you are saying to prevent misunderstandings: you have focused on a certain subject (a direct important issue is already: what method of focusing you use and how great is the chosen focus rectangle) and then you block the the focusing distance via half pressing the shutter button, correct? And next you go back to the initial subject, keeping the button half pressed and then your main subject should be out of focus? Or this happens after you discontinue the the focusing preset?

0 upvotes
danielyrh

unless your focus point (after AF lock) is on the exact same focus plane as your pre-focus, this method of focusing will fail on all cameras. With flexible AF points I always drop an AF point on the subject I wanted and take a shot, "half-press then recompose" method does not work well on large aperture/large image sensors.

On a smartphone yes it will work.

3 upvotes
paul simon king

Following...

My wife is about to buy one - this would be a deal breaker for her too

0 upvotes
DP1

My apologies to all previous posters. I did not receive any notification of your reply so I couldn't respond sooner.

What I did was the most typical method of using AF-S mode, i.e. I aimed the camera at my subject, let's say using the center focus point on a face; half-pressed the shutter release to lock focus; recompose the shot (panning the camera away to position the face on one side of the frame while nobody was moving); and the focus on the face would drift. That was my original observation.

However, since no one else echoed having this issue with their Fujifilm X series cameras since my posts on different websites. I guess it was purely my paranoia. And for paul simon king, your best bet would be to try out the camera on your hands, or your wife's for that matter and decide if the camera is good enough for her.

0 upvotes
paul simon king
0 upvotes
Michael Berg

If the focus really did change, you should be able to notice that by the mechanical movements that would have to be involved. Did you notice anything like that? It really does sound weird.

0 upvotes
snogglethorpe

What danielyrh said.

Remember, the focus plane is a _plane_, not a sphere centered around the camera. So if you reframe just by rotating the camera after focusing on something, the focus plane will rotate as well, and the target object will now be out of focus... In many cases the error will be too small to be noticeable (although it's always there), but if you're using an extremely shallow DOF on very close objects, this effect can indeed screw up your focus.

But this is the case with all cameras, it's not a bug with the X-T1. [I guess it would be possible to actively compensate for this effect, but it would require sophisticated tracking of your movements...]

0 upvotes
DrXian

silly question probably but why cant i compare the TX-1 to the OM E-M1? since they are going head to head in the same market...

2 upvotes
ccarrier

DPR : error on page 15 of the review ? At the bottom of the page, on serveral places, when you're talking about "iso 100" mode, the graph shows iso 50. I think there is a mistake in either the graph or the text.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Richard Butler

I'll look into that.

0 upvotes
Mateus1

X-E1 delivers best images quality compared to X-E2 and X-T1 and has the widest DR. Hope Fuji will improve them (X-T1 and X-E2) in next firmware update.

1 upvote
jmoro

It's the same damn processor. I own both the XE1 and the XT1. When side by side, using the same settings the images are identical.

0 upvotes
hrt

The cover for SD slot indeed is fragile and is loosely fit to the body which begs the question as to whether the SD slot is exempt from X-T1's -10 C weather-seal spec.
But you know, once you hold this camera, it makes you feel like you've been using it for decades - I just can't wait to see the weather-sealed zooms that aren't announced yet and most probably it's a matter of time that this camera becomes my buddy.

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Langston643

I received my X-T1 six days ago and installed the Sandisk ExtremePro 32Gb card and took the camera to the Air Show at Ocean City this weekend. The results for Saturday, using the 55 - 200 mm lens, including single shots, high-speed bursts and video were outstanding.

The problem came when I removed the memory card. When I did that the outer plastic cover of the memory card slot cover popped off. The inner metal slot cover now sticks out at a 90 degree angle from the side of the camera. There seems no way to reattach the plastic outer cover and I may have to cover the slot with black plastic tape to finish tomorrow's Air Show.

It's hard to believe that this fine camera, whose designers appear to have paid so much attention to detail, could have designed and assembled a part that gets such potentially heavy use as a memory card slot cover so cheaply that it would make the manufacturer of a Dollar General P&S camera blush. Color me disappointed.

0 upvotes
Alexloyola

I think the DSLR market is changing. and I think the miniaturization photo via iphone, not yet touched Canon and Nikon. I know that fuji challenge, but there are still doubts. good photo, less weight.
I'm in Brazil and unfortunately we can not experience this machine. I'm curious to use the work of parliamentary advice and see if I can replace the brick 1d MK IV.
Anyone know how to say the performance of the lenses Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 and 23mm F1.4 R?

0 upvotes
Reality Check

Not sure 'not yet touched Canon and Nikon' is accurate, least not Canon.. have you seen the SL1?? Its pretty miniature, and unlike other manufacturers 'miniature' systems you get to use Canons full line of lenses.
Perhaps you meant that neither has seriously approached mirrorless...

0 upvotes
enenzo

Canon is out and dead in the water... look at there productline! Sony, Panasonic and Fuji rules this game. If Canon do not step up - they will be out of business within 3 years.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Vignes

enerzo. most of your comments is ok (emotional) but to say Canon will be out business is a bit too much? Are you a financial analysis by profession? People have been saying this for years but everywhere I look, I see people carrying Canon cameras. go to an event and see what the professionals are carrying? I see Canikons and i can't see this landscape changing. Go to the Professionals website, you'll see Canikon diehards.

0 upvotes
enenzo

If there are camera manufacturers that are innovative it's Fujifilm, Panasonic and Sony. What has Canon delivered the last 3 years? What have they delivered this year - other than minor upgrades of existing products. Please tell me. I'm sorry ... but Canon is the next Nokia. Send me your email address and I'll gloat when this happens... it will not take long :-)

Look at Sony. They have delivered a NEX series of small cameras with great image quality. No response from Canon. They've made the best compact camera in the world with the RX-100 III. No response from Canon. They have produced the smallest full frame camera DSC-RX1, the best bridge camera with RX10 and the first and smallest Interchangeable Lens Cameras Sony A7, A7R and A7S... No response from Canon. And then look at what Fuji and Panasonic makes? I say goodbye Canon.

0 upvotes
vladimir vanek

Canon's business aren't cameras and DSLRs. The real money goes well behind that with some 100x superzoom lenses for TV production and the like. 1 mil. a piece.
Although I agree with you that they came with no major innovation during the last years, I believe they will not be out of the game anytime soon.

0 upvotes
vladimir vanek

Canon (Powershot A10) was my first digital camera and I have some sympathy with the company. I went through many P&S', entry level DSLRs up to 5D II with a portion of L-lenses. So it's not much of a happy picture to see what they showed recently. That's why I sold all of the gear and went for an Olympus E-M10 for a while. And I am rather happy with it! But what SONY did recently, deserves respect!

1 upvote
zentechandsons

I have the XT1 for about 2 months now and the battery grip as well. I love using it. Reminds me of my F2.

Comment edited 13 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
MarshallG

DPReview, you did an excellent job, once again! I'm always amazed at how thorough your coverage is, and how you're able to cover every nuance and detail, and explain it's relevance. This review obviously took a lot of work, and it shows.

4 upvotes
peevee1

DPR, among the pros you list "Solid, robust-feeling, dust-and splash-proof lenses" - what do you mean, there are no such lenses available yet.

1 upvote
Andy Westlake

Sorry, spurious 'lenses' crept in there, now corrected

1 upvote
Picasso Noir

I have play around with the x-t1 in Dublin Ireland at the camera shop they called me to take it for a spin, once i got there i was some what love the camera lay-outt, just like a classic slr film but dslr:) But i really didn't like the size, it seem that the x-t1 was made for a girl:( being that they have small hand's. if it's not broke don't fix it-keep it simple Fuji. Now go back and re-design one for a man.
But i'll take it. The 56mm 1.2 WOW!!!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Wildbegonia

Nope! Just design one for girls an one for man!

5 upvotes
Picasso Noir

I,m putting some images taken with the Fuji X-Pro1
This image are studio portrait that i taken all over the world that i travel to.

0 upvotes
Picasso Noir

I like to share with DP Review and any one that would like to view some of my landscape image, it was just uploaded..and tell me what you think..
Ps. All images was taken with the fuji X-Pro1 mostly at ISO 100 and indoor ISO 800 to 3200..soon i'll upload some more.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Picasso Noir

Fuji has alway's done excellent from my first purchase of the Fuji dslr Pro s3 s5 how ever after that they stop making dslr keep me in the dark for some years I admit I was very disappointed with fuji..butttttt a few year later they drop a bombshell and professional DSLR photographers has turn head X-100 then after X-Pro1 and Ex-1 with remarkable image quality that's surpass every high-end dslr to this day including overly priced Leica rangefinder . i purchase the X-pro1 the next day. Yes it was a learning curve but quickly I was on top of it, before that i had purchase a brick Canon 5D classic I thought that Fujifilm was out all the dslr game. I wish i could share some of my Fine Art image that was I've taken with that X-Pro1 you would think i shot it with a Hasselblad medium format camera. i know the Secret of this camera inside out-that's why people don't understand this awesome piece of craftsmanship.I tell you what people i'll share a few but its gonna be screen snap shot

2 upvotes
trickiedickie3

Hello,how can I view your photos

2 upvotes
Picasso Noir

I'm not sure friend.
I uploaded it in DPreview like they said for every one to see.
Dose any one knows anything how to view them in DP site?

Comment edited 42 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Picasso Noir

Hi trickliedickie3 i had to go to my setting and enable the view option,try it now. Let me know if you have any problem viewing them.

1 upvote
pinnacle

To all of those who have doubts about the realities of what the X-T1 can produce in actual image IQ, please find a way to get your hands on one with one of the excellent Fujinon primes. Use a demo version of Photo Ninja to process a RAW file and then pass judgement.

Seriously, this camera has gotten a lot right. The handling, the ergonomics, the image IQ...

I am thinking that the reason so many people are making quick and mistaken negative judgements about what it actually can do quite well is because the camera is a game changer and has a lot of owners of expensive DSLRs thinking long and hard about whether or not it is time to consider buying an X-T1.

Do your own field test and process the images using Photo Ninja. Many of you will be pleasantly surprised and many of you will not be surprised because you have already seen how well Fujifilm has done previously.

7 upvotes
jadot

That's probably true. I personally switched from Nikon to Fuji a while ago, and though the X-T1 has it's flaws, the rewards are great.

However, at a pixel level there are problems with some RAW converters. Photo Ninja is good, but not significantly better than any other, and the software and workflow itself is so awful that it isn't worth the effort. The same goes for SilkyPix
So;
Lightroom: useable but not great with noise/sharpening/detail. Your "watercolour effect" can be found here.. Good update support through CC though.

Aperture: better conversion, better management, but no control over some terrible moire. Also update to Aperture X non existent. Poor show by Apple.

Capture One Pro; The Best for IQ and usability - just. Aperture still has the prize for workflow, but C1Pro can handle the X-trans files beautifully. If you've seen Moire in your files using Aperture or Lightroom you'll love that Phase One has got this right.

1 upvote
jadot

In any case, the differences are small. Small enough for you to keep using the DAM that you like or are used to.

Fuji could help themselves here by opening up the X-Trans to Adobe, Apple et al. I can see people coming from 36 MP might easily make the mistake of assuming that the Fuji's aren't performing in the same way that they're used to, at least at pixel level.

Personally, I'm more than happy with the X-Trans look. It's different from a DSLR, but then I knew that coming from the X100. The colour rendition is superb and the resolution doesn't kill my computer. And RAW files OOC need less attention in post.

I'll be happier still if the X-Trans conversion is given a work over by Aperture & Lightroom, but until then I'm out making pictures without compromise and without carrying a tank around my neck.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
AlexRuiz

That is exactly right. A lot of the negative comments come from people who don't own the X-T1, but have read something negative about it on the internet. Others, like you mention, hate the camera because it overshadows whatever they own at the moment. At the end of the day, this camera is superb in many ways...IQ, design, performance, etc. To understand it, you need to own it and shoot with it in many different situations.

Comment edited 53 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
badi

One more thought on raw processing.

The latest update of Adobes LR (and ACR) improved a lot. They added support for camera profiles, and it works rather well, maybe not always perfectly identical with the camera's own jpg, but close enough that i quit shooting raw+jpg, and i swiched to raw only.

However, the watercolor effect that appears on some photos (especially foliage) is due to the sharpening, and not the demozaicing itself. In this cases, if you do zero sharpening, and after that apply sharpening properly in PS to the exported image you get incredible great detail and no watercolor :)

But, to be honest, this is better to do no matter the camera...

2 upvotes
Maverick2007

Perfect Water color effect!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/thegoosenoir/13276200455

Also Bonus is you can get Nice shadow too !!!!! Very impressed by post processing by Fuji! Wait a sec, there should have been button to add additional artifacts with one click of button like sweat or artificial rain etc? Hows that Fuji?

1 upvote
theprehistorian

:D

Yeah, seriously though, I'm surprised that the weird behaviour of the X-Trans sensor doesn't get more discussion in reviews such as this one on DP Review. I've just been up to Scotland and shot my X100S and D7100 together, with lots of rocks, cairns, trees, boulders etc. It has to be said that the X-Trans produces absolutely vile images with this subject matter (camera JPG and RAF processed in LR 5.4)... at pixel level, I hasten to add; taken in the round they look fine. But then so would a photo from just about any modern camera! At the moment, the X-Trans seems to work well enough with skin, architecture, and smooth surfaces; I took a photo of a fishing boat for e.g. and it looked fantastic. Shoot a cairn though with a few trees in the background and it really doesn't look good at all. Incidentally, further investigation is leading me to think that the problem lies in the way sharpening algorithms react to X-Trans files...

2 upvotes
pinnacle

Lightroom isn't there yet. Photo Ninja is there and you can get excellent detail from foliage and other problem image elements. Adobe just hasn't been able to figure it out.

Once I learned how well the X-Trans processor and Photo Ninja worked together I changed my workflow and images look very, very good.

0 upvotes
theprehistorian

pinnacle - I hear you, but LR 5.4 produces JPGs virtually indistinguishable from the camera's, especially now it includes Fuji's film simulations. If you compare them at 100 % - LR 5.4 at default vs the camera JPG at defaults - the biggest difference is that the camera seems to apply even more sharpening than Adobe and looks even more artificial and 'paint-like'. In some shots, I find I get the best result by simply disabling Adobe's 'Detail' processes, so that there's no extra sharpening or noise reduction. I'm not crazy about NR and sharpening anyway, but if I want a bit of extra sharpness, I get a nicer result using Smart Sharpen in Photoshop, or RL Deconvolution in RawTherapee. Nonetheless, there's no hiding from the fact that the supposed advantages of the X-Trans - i.e. reduced moire - come at quite a high price. I imagine Fuji know you can't sharpen X-Trans images much, hence the somewhat soft and smooth appearance of the images when you compare them to competing cameras.

0 upvotes
badi

@theprehistorian:
yes, the horrid effects are due to sharpening, i added an answer to the comment just above to explain my findings.

I generally export all the raws from fujis Xtrans with zero sharpening, and then in PS, apply smart sharpening in lab color space, only to the luminance channel.... the results are pretty stunning compared to the "water effect" produced by LR's sharpening.

2 upvotes
Gazeomon

@Badi. Does one really have to subscribe Adobe Photoshop in order to get properly sharpened photos out of the XT1? I get pin sharp foliage out of my Pentax K3 in Lightroom 5.4 without a problem, and the K3 is not much larger than the XT1, especially with the Ltd. primes. Shooting RAW only!

0 upvotes
Paninni

My new XT1 died after 3 weeks. The dial for Metering Area got stuck. And Zoom dial or Settings dial died completely. Whatta damn dissapointment. Otherwise camera is capable of good photographs, except for sports. The sample you are looking on here and complaining is nothing i have seen on my photo quality from XT1. I see this as fraud photo.

0 upvotes
Martin1980

What zoom dial?

5 upvotes
laughingor

is the real dial...used for zoom in/out during review mode. I guess.. i feel that mine X-T1's real dial also not very smooth. perhaps one day will spoil too.

0 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (8 months ago)

I think Fuji did this camera for compete with OMD family...

Comment edited 15 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HeyItsJoel

Precisely.

1 upvote
pinnacle

Looks like Fujifilm did their homework. The migration of M43 users to Fujifilm should have Olympus and Panasonic a little concerned.

7 upvotes
Bueche

I've just migrated to M43 (Olympus E-P5) from Fujifilm (X-A1 and X-E2). Fujifilm have done many things right, but due to som wierd mushiness, nature photography is all but impossible with Fujifilm cameras.

1 upvote
sarge39

Looks like most comments are from people who don't own or never used a Fuji X camera. I own a X-Pro 1, X100s and the X-T1 as well as the OM-D E-M1 and a couple of Canon full frames DSLR's including the 5D MKIII. I use the X cameras when I want a lighter set-up and they are awesome. The image quality is fantastic for an APS-C sensor and better quality than my OM-D E-M1. I feel that poor picture quality with the Fuji X cameras is more user error or lack of knowledge about the system than the camera itself. I'm not a Fuji fan boy and I think the OM-d E-M1 is a beautiful design but not as good image quality as the X cameras. I have taken many shots with the X-T1 that you couldn't tell the difference between the Canon Full Frame sensor. I agree with the DP Review almost 100%.

15 upvotes
laughingor

can share some setting or your experience regarding the X-T1 set up? looking forward to your advice.

0 upvotes
philinnz

this is the first sentence in the conclusion "The X-T1 is Fujifilm's most ambitious camera to date, and we'd have to say, probably its best"

Has DPR forgotten about the Fuji S5 Pro? That was Fuji's best camera

6 upvotes
Yanko Kitanov

And it uses far better lenses :)

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
1 upvote
pinnacle

Have you used any of the current X system lenses? The IQ is outstanding from almost all of them.

3 upvotes
jeremyclarke

It's "the best" by default because it has modern internals, how could an older camera compete? The only real competition are the other new cameras (which is beats in pretty much every way).

If you want the S5 to invalidate the quote you should focus on it being more ambitious.

0 upvotes
philinnz

the point was, the S5 (and of course the previous S1, S2, S3) were all DSLR camera's that were all top notch cameras at their time. But instead of developing an S6 which many Fuji fans would have loved they stepped backwards in concentrating on P&S and more lately the mirrorless camera's. For many years the S5 was THE wedding camera. For pro work you need pro lenses that Nikon or Canon make. Fuji needed to continue building DSLR camera's that utilized the Nikon lens range. they didn't do it, they missed the boat

0 upvotes
jeremyclarke

As I understand it Fuji has always been a more profitable lens company than camera company, or at least that's how it's been for a while. Seems to me selling a camera (razor) without being able to profit from the lenses (razorblades) probably wasn't going to be profitable for them.

Also I'm glad they aren't dependent on Nikon, since I love the light, top-quality APSC-native lenses that Fuji is producing and no one else seems willing to.

2 upvotes
GaBen

I'm disappointed with the X-T1. :( This is a very great camera in design, handling, speed, etc...but the X-Pro1/X-E1 have much better in IQ (by SOOC JPEG). X-Pro1 and X-E1 SOOC JPEG's have much more vibrant, brillance and sharpness too. The Auto White Balance works better by the older models...And no, I do not want to take pictures in RAW. So, please Fuji, make a better jpeg engine in the first firmware update!

2 upvotes
jackspra

I want stills and video capabilities for my money.I like the look though.

1 upvote
J2Gphoto

This Fuji got my attention and I was giving it serious thought. Like I posted before I like the Olympus lens line up better. But now after reading Steve Huff's review of it and seeing the SOOC JPEG's and several other things he said the E-M1 does much better I am now convinced the E-M1 will be my next system. I'd advise anyone considering this camera to read Steve's review. He never pulls punches and gives honest real world use reviews.

4 upvotes
Dimit

There is not a single serious photographer paying attention to S.Huff. Honestly the man is a joke photography wise.His ''reviews'' are good enough for baby boys.
Same applies to another of a similar kind: K.Rockwell.
Apart from this issue,I believe that EM1 is a better choice indeed..

14 upvotes
steveh0607

But what do you really think? Try to be nice.

2 upvotes
J2Gphoto

I can agree with the K Rockwell knock, I always thought he was a douche. But I have never seen anything Steve Huff may have done to make me think he is anywhere near on the level of KRock. Maybe some so called serious photographers could learn not to be sheep if they actually read his blogs and watched his videos. There are so many SO CALLED serious photographers who use FF just because they have been told that is what they HAVE to use to be taken seriously. I read a comment the other day knocking the E-M1, the XT-1 and the new Sony A7R saying non of them can be used because clients will see others shooting with D800's and know that your gear does not add up. So they will go with the D800 shooter. No talk of skill, marketing, etc. Only gear, and far too many people cannot see past that part of photography. What gear a person uses.

3 upvotes
pinnacle

Steve Huff's opinion's are worthless. He has one goal in his photographic world and that is to drive content and his income with "click-thrus" on his useless web site.

He loves controversy because it attracts people to his site. He doesn't care how he gets traffic. He will post anything there to get attention.

People should steer well clear of him and his opinions.

3 upvotes
jeremyclarke

Aside from all the questions of journalistic integrity, I think the most important thing we should keep in mind about Steve Huff and his love for MFT is that he seems to have a full set of f/0.95 lenses from Leica etc. any one of which costs more than the MFT cameras he reviews.

The one indisputable failure of MFT is DoF control, since they cannot get shallow DoF at all with their kit lenses and even with expensive f/1.4 lenses they still barely compete with slow primes on APS-C. Steve doesn't think this is a problem, but I wouldn't either if I had f/0.95 lenses when I need them. In that way he's really out of touch with real people who will probably use just the kit lens (f/3.5!) while saving up for more.

Otherwise I find his site entertaining and informative. His passion is infectious and makes me excited about the gear instead of critical and snobby which I like. Intelligent readers will realize not to take it too seriously.

3 upvotes
kreislauf

i disagree!

we want to have good and reliable reviews about products, some of that cost thousands of dollars... (thank you DPReview Team BTW!!!)

but of course we want to have it FOR FREE!
hello?

for me it's ok that steve and ken use their websites as part of their income. we don't HAVE TO VISIT
but i do! because i like to get information about stuff i find interesting. the more the better.

and personally i love steve huffs reviews. they are fun most of the time and he is sort of grounded when he asks you in the reviews: "Do you think you need this?"
and he might have some f0.95 lenses for his m43 cameras, but he repeats it all the time: olympus 2/12, 1.8/17 and 1.8/45 besides the voigtlanders...
and he convinced me about smaller-than-FF cameras. For example i do have a nikon V1, a "toy" camera but for me it (almost) does everything i need.

1 upvote
Ijuf Nonac

This is an excellent camera for everybody who want trees to look like some funny computer generated things (or maybe a painting?).

Take a look at this image.....
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-t1/samples/lmo/DSCF3822.jpg

It certanly looks like a 'beautiful' painting and not something comming from a brand new camera. When this image is viewed at 100%, everything becomes a complete mess!!

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
6 upvotes
MJJSevilla

What an original comment. Ive never heard that one befor3. Except curiously none of my foliage shots, processed with Capture One, look like that. It's not exactly like this hasnt been discussed ad nausuem is it. Adobe processed files with trees look bad. Also soft because the default sharpening settings are wrong. Use another converter, no problem, if you dont want to use anoher raw converter, dont buy an XT1. But let's not repeat the same old same old when its not even true.

8 upvotes
Ijuf Nonac

I know my comment isn't very original, but it is nevertheless very true. And no, with very small variations, you get the same (not so funny) result from ALL available raw converters (ACR, Photo Ninja, Silkypix.....). I know because i've tried them all.

2 upvotes
Josh Bailey

Wow, that is terrible looking indeed. Thanks this just helped me knock the xt1 off the list. Looking at A7, A6000 or Em1 only now

1 upvote
Apollo XI

Mmhhhh. I have been using LR from version 2, but with my XT1 (I previously had a XE1) I have to say, for my experience, that Capture One demosaics the raw files far better than LR.

...my 10 cents.

1 upvote
scotbot

This a problem with the Adobe software, not the camera. Apparently there are still people who don't realise that Adobe are incapable of writing software that works properly with XTrans files, even though Capture One and other applications including the inicamera engine produce outstanding results.

Comment edited 10 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
Wilight

"When this image is viewed at 100%, everything becomes a complete mess!!"
So, you take an exemple whose the only visible things in focus are at the extreme borders of the frame, from a photo taken by a not-so-good zoom lens at 172mm, f/16 (the smallest aperture, highly affected by diffraction), 1/140 speed (not free from motion blur) to judge the capabilities of X-Trans sensor? Or were you looking at the OOF parts of the frame?
By the way, I really appreciate most of Dpreview reviews. But one of the problems I see is this kind of image in the samples gallery of a camera review. Even the colours are affected by the optics of a lens. The same applies to very high iso images in a lens review.
In my opinion, only the very best lenses (in this case:14, 35 and 56mm primes) should be used in a camera review. Also trying to keep the apertures between f/2.8 - f/5.6.
So, this is a good exemple to show the lens limitations, not the sensor IQ.

1 upvote
Gazeomon

@MJJ Sevilla. In order to enjoy the XT1 I have to buy another converter and radically change my workflow? Thanks, I'd rather stick with what I've got right now ( Pentax K3 & Lightroom ).

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Fri13

Problem is not in adobe, while it does has own, but the sensor just is incapable to capture green details correctly. Sorry Fuji fans but time to learn ugly truth 😬

0 upvotes
kiw

Depreview: "Pair the X-T1 up with lenses like the stellar XF 23mm F1.4R or the XF 56mm F1.2R and it can produce absolutely wonderful results, aided substantially by its ability to focus them accurately wide open without any fuss. The net result is that the overall image quality it can offer, as a combination of camera and lens, is exceptional. The flipside though is that the lenses are all pretty expensive; as yet Fujifilm doesn't offer anything to match the smaller, slower but cheaper primes you'll find in other systems."

I dont understand why Dpreview say that fuji's "super primes" is to expencive ?
Same type of lenses from Canon and Nikon is even more expencive, and what about Leica ? :-)))

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting
7 upvotes
jeremyclarke

Fuji doesn't offer cheap lenses like the Canon 50mm f/1.8 or the atrocious 75-300mm with no IS, so technically you can argue their lenses are "all expensive". That said system camera lenses are ALL expensive compared to other things in life, and the only way to make them not be is to make them super cheap. Fuji only makes good/great lenses, so none of them are cheap.

Aside from that they are pretty much all great value, and far cheaper than their Canon equivalents (e.g. 35mm f/1.4 which is $1400 from Canon and $600 from Fuji).

2 upvotes
random name

unfortunately FUJI keeps ignoring requests to upgrade AE bracketing features to a minimum of +/- 2 EV
currently stuck in : AE Bracketing (±1/3EV, ±2/3EV, ±1EV) which is insufficient for HDR photography. Why do they omit a basic feature present on all cameras including my 5 year old Pentax is a mystery.
Will pass on this one

6 upvotes
BarnET

You can still bracket yourself. It's just a flick at the dial. It can move the camera while on a tripod.
With Pentax you can't use bracketing with timer or remote. At least not on the k500 and k30. Which renders the feature useless on tripod since you will move the camera when pressing the shutter.

5 upvotes
SAPuddy

Or, you can use your smart phone or tablet and bracket as many frames as you want. It is what I do with not problems.

0 upvotes
Valeriu 64

I suspect, the people at dpreview have a problem with white balance, when test Pentax cameras, because the all turns brown color.
In reality , Pentax have the best auto white balance. I am tests Nikon D800, Nikon D4 compared to Pentax K-5 and I can say that Pentax is over.
I'm sure Pentax K-3 is even better, but do not understand why dpreview turns photo from Pentax to brown color. There's something suspicious, at least for me.

Valeriu

6 upvotes
Fri13

Best what I have found in my tests were that E-M1 wins hands down. It does it by continually sampling WB to find out the correct way. Results are that 99,9% of shots have right white balance.
The bad side is, balance is so correct that light being always white can look unnatural when mixed with different kind shots and you need to tweak WB sometimes to wrong direction to get more natural WB. It is otherwise like always shooting with calibrates lights and settings.

0 upvotes
JohnNewman

Why can't even professional writers learn the difference between 'discrete' and 'discreet'? Nice review, very useful but spoilt at the end by poor literacy.

As far as the Fuji system is concerned, it's the lenses that are the stars. If only Nikon would match them for APS-C they'd be on a winner but seem to only be interested in trying to make folk upgrade to FF. As long as they pursue this course, Fuji and Sony will continue to grow and make a killing (I ignore MFT as quality and sensor wise they cannot compete - but ok when less than best quality is sufficient).

3 upvotes
Andy Westlake

As it happens, the shutter sound is both discreet and discrete. Personally I'd also argue that there's a distinct difference between letting a typo slip into a 20 page review, and any sensible definition of the word 'literacy'. But thanks for pointing it out anyway.

4 upvotes
Ijuf Nonac

To me the test shots look extremely overcooked and unnatural, more like being the result of some fancy in-camera signal processing, then the result born out of the sensor/lens combination. F.x, dense forest and tree branches look like a complete mess. Look at the trees in this sample image....

https://s3.amazonaws.com/masters.galleries.dpreview.com/2891183.jpg?X-Amz-Expires=3600&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=14Y3MT0G2J4Y72K3ZXR2/20140417/us-east-1/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20140417T105007Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature=77e9f3009c359cb3860fbd97b9955c0cf943c0d084875bf84a48747e4246d994

3 upvotes
Class A

The X-T1 is said to have better performance than the Pentax K-3 (can easily be seen when turning on the "Compare" mode for the subscores).

Yet, the K-3 manages 720 shots per charge vs the 350 of the Fuji X-T1.

The K-3 also has a higher frame rate (8.9 vs 8.2) and a deeper JPG buffer (68 vs 40).

So the X-T1's AF must be sensational to compensate the above performance disadvantages. Unfortunately, the X-T1 has not been subjected to the AF-C test the K-3 went through. Why not?

Finally, how can you claim that the X-T1's focus accuracy (& metering) is better than that of the Pentax K-3, if you haven't looked at the AF accuracy of the K-3 in a systematic manner at all (this was one of the aspects you dropped)?

BTW, the X-T1's electronic viewfinder may be very good compared to other EVFs, but to rate it better as the optical pentaprism of the K-3??? For sure, in terms of "performance" again, the K-3 will do much better in a pan when burst shooting.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 12 minutes after posting
13 upvotes
AlexRuiz

You can spin things many different ways.

An X-T1 with an extra battery will give you 700 shots and it is still much, much smaller and lighter than th K3

Frame rate - I am sure that fraction of a frame will make all the difference between getting the keeper shot or missing it. Lol. You lost credibility as a photographer here.
No point in arguing any longer.

6 upvotes
tlinn

K3 fan by chance?

0 upvotes
Impulses

While I couldn't care less about the K3 comparison (sweet camera tho), I do wish there was a site doing more systematic testing of AF and tracking... It's seldom evaluated in anything but the most subjective of tests, and it's particularly relevant in mirrorless reviews. Hasn't that been their one Achilles heel vs DSLR? Should be testing rigorously and scientifically any time any kind of improvement is claimed (E-M1, A6000, X-T1, etc).

0 upvotes
waxwaine

Seems tough DPR new tests are made for serious gear like K-3. Not "convenient" to apply the bicycle guy AF test on Fujis, ha?
On my own review about Fuji I just reproved it because I couldn't find the way to set ISO in 2 moves with out loosing my subject from focus.

0 upvotes
SayKeys

The price of extra batteries adds up on an already expensive camera. XT-1 is a nice camera but I think it is overpriced....for what it does.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler

@waxwine - when you say 'Not "convenient" to apply the bicycle guy AF test on Fujis' how does that relate to the AF test on page 10, which was shot alongside the K-3?

0 upvotes
waxwaine

Richard, I skip that page, my mistake, my excuses for my comment about it, XT-1 traking AF looks really excellent. Otoh, even you mention ISO setup as a Con, I believe that it's a hughe CON, because on real shooting action, you must have fast control, at least, of the 3 principal parameters of photography: shutter speed, aperture and ISO.

0 upvotes
mamiller

Intriguing camera, very retro-attractive. But 350 shots per battery charge is a show stopper for me. Why is dismal battery life not listed as a con in the review summary? No other camera classified as semi-pro has a rating of less than 750 shots per charge, to my knowledge -- most average even more shots than that.

6 upvotes
AlexRuiz

In the world of mirrorless cameras, 350 shots per charge is very common.

And don't get hung up on lablels like "semi-pro", or "pro-sumer". There is "pro" gear, and there is everything else.

4 upvotes
mamiller

But 350 shots per charge doesn't work for me. And it is definitely a con in the context of the review, yet was omitted from the review summary.

I need/want a lightweight camera that has robust battery life and excellent image quality for two-week+ backpacking trips.

1 upvote
Der Steppenwolf

Why not buy more batteries ?
Mirrorless will ALWAYS use more power since there is no OVF.

10 upvotes
mamiller

Not a great selling point for mirrorless cameras, I'd say. Better to supply it with a battery that can muster enough power to at least make it competitive, in terms of shutter activations per charge, with full-featured DSLRs, which the reviewers were comparing it against.

For my personal purposes, I'm willing to carry an extra battery in my backpack when I hike, but not 4 or 5 extras.

1 upvote
Couscousdelight

"Why not buy more batteries ?"
Because i make time-lapse with my cameras. And i can't change a battery during a sequence shoting.
(I can make something around 2000-2500 shots with my K5 and one battery, i've preset a mode where i turn down every stuff than consume batteries, like LCD screen, AF...)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
makofoto

? I don't get the problem of carrying an extra battery ?

1 upvote
Impulses

If time lapse is your concern you should know by now that a CIPA rating that takes screen use and even flash into account is all but useless. Mirrorless cameras often 2-3x the number of shots they're rated for during something like a time lapse. Displays can be shut off or dimmed, electronic shutters change the power profile, etc etc.

1 upvote
Fri13

Usein grip and you can swap battery without problems.

2 upvotes
ebbo

350 shots is over nine rolls of traditional film, with the money you've saved, buy yourself a spare battery

0 upvotes
Menedem

Could this adapter help with your timelapse photography? http://www.amazon.com/HQRP-Adapter-Coupler-Fujifilm-Replacement/dp/B00CRD3N5W/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1398016079&sr=8-1&keywords=fuji+cp-w126

0 upvotes
mamiller

Ebbo writes, "350 shots is over nine rolls of traditional film, with the money you've saved, buy yourself a spare battery."

While that is true, we're not comparing this camera to a film camera and the issue here is battery life not the size of your SD card. I'm curious why mirrorless owners are so forgiving about such a basic flaw in their system. With my old Canon A620 point and shoot, I can muster over 1500 shots out of a set of AA rechargeable batteries, over 2500 using a set of Energizer Ultimate Lithium single-use batteries. Ditto with my old Pentax K-X. There is no reason Fuji could not have equipped the XT-1 with a more robust battery, one rated for 700+ shots for instance, which would make it more closely comparable to the class of camera the reviewers suggested the camera belonged.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
mamiller

More to the point, I'm still wondering why poor battery life was not listed as a con in the review. It is mediocre (i.e., about average) for a mirrorless camera and poor for a camera the reviewers were suggesting belonged in the same class as the 7D, D7100 and K-3.

0 upvotes
Jon Holstein

I can agree with you that the batterylife isnt great, you could even call it mediocre (compared to the ones with good batterylife, about 500, or great about 700).
But to fit bigger battery, they would have to make the body larger, and in the class this is competing, that is not an option.

Charging would most likely take longer.

On the other hand, the batterylife should be good enough to get most entusiasts through the day.
And those getting in to interchangle cameras for the benefit of beeing able to change their lenses, would have no problem packing another battery in their bag.

Many of the time-lapsed work I've seen shift during recording, but you hardly notice that. If you are using it as a professional tool, that aboslutely cant shift during time-lapse, well then I dont see why you would be looking at this camera to begin with, most of the qualities of the X-t1 is in areas where such a tool would not reak the benefits of it.

(No AAs in the grip is a bit of let-down as well)

0 upvotes
Fri13

You can! Get a battery grip like HLD-7 and you can swap battery on the fly! I do it often. I have three batteries and one is in body, grip is used and when it is time I swap the battery in grip and place it to charge. At the time I need to swap battery again it has been charged and swap again.

If I would have 4 instead 3 it would come only more difficult to track what is where, but give wider change to get off-site shooting. With two battery I have managed to pull 950+ shots easily EVF on all the time in the three hour period. Three batteries gives huge difference compared to two.

And having 4-5 batteries in back wouldn't be a problem for me, still lighter and more flexible than any DSLR or 1.5-1.6x crop factor camera.

1 upvote
munro harrap

Great, but you wont be able to use it. Today a certainly ill-judged judge decided to give Paul Weller £10K because the Mail published pics of his family. Several years ago JK Rowling got far more from a Scots judge for same reason. The current ruling must be opposed as otherwise anyone taking you to court will win damages for photographs which include them, and as poor people are as likely to be greedy as Weller and Rowling , it'll go on happening. I hate the Mail, its a rag, but there are a lot of incompetent judges in their dottyage in the UK now so why buy a camera??????

0 upvotes
Rbrt

The fines weren't for taking photographs but for publishing them.

1 upvote
OfcrMike

Of course, because the only reason anyone would buy a camera would be to take photos of "celebrities" for publication. Who takes photos of anything else, right? And personal interest? What's that?!

0 upvotes
Total comments: 605
1234