Previous page Next page

Fujifilm X-T1 Review

April 2014 | By Andy Westlake, Jeff Keller
Buy on Amazon.com From $1,298.95


Based on a production Fujifilm X-T1 with Firmware 1.0

After starting at the top-end with its X-Pro1, Fujifilm has been steadily expanding its X-series mirrorless camera to appeal to a broader audience. With its X-T1, Fujifilm has moved back towards the high-end, offering a fully-loaded mirrorless camera in a weather-resistant, SLR-style body. There's plenty more where that came from - the X-T1 has one of the largest EVFs we've ever seen, numerous manual control dials and, for the first time on an X-series camera, an optional battery grip.

The 'guts' of the X-T1 are very much like those found on the recent X-E2. This includes the 16 megapixel X-Trans CMOS II sensor (with on-chip phase detection), EXR Processor II, built-in Wi-Fi, and full HD video recording. The main differences between the X-T1 and X-E2 are the LCD (tilting vs fixed) and EVF (in terms of magnification), the maximum burst rate (8 vs 7 fps, now with focus tracking at full speed), a flash sync port and, of course, the design. But more on that later.

Fujifilm X-T1 key features

  • 16MP X-Trans CMOS II sensor
  • EXR Processor II
  • Weather-resistant body
  • ISO 200-6400, plus 100 - 51200 expanded (JPEG only)
  • 2.36M dot OLED electronic viewfinder with 0.77x (equiv.) magnification
  • 'Dual view' in EVF shows regular view and focus peaking/digital split image at the same time
  • Top-plate ISO, shutter speed, exposure compensation, drive mode and metering controls
  • Six programmable function buttons
  • 3.0" 1.04M dot 3:2 tilting LCD
  • 8 fps continuous shooting with continuous AF (3 fps with live view)
  • Built-in Wi-Fi including remote control from a smartphone or tablet
  • Full HD movie recording (1080/60p, 36Mbps bitrate), with built-in stereo microphone
  • Clip-on external flash (included)
  • Optional battery grip

As you can see, that's quite a spec sheet. The highlight on the X-T1 is undoubtedly its huge electronic viewfinder, which is even slightly larger than the optical viewfinder on the Canon EOS-1D X. Combine that with its excellent resolution and it's truly a pleasure to use. The large EVF also allows for some neat tricks, such as 'Dual View', which shows the full scene plus a magnified view in a smaller window to one side, with focus peaking or digital split image for manual focusing. The EVF also has a portrait orientation view, which keeps the camera settings at the top and bottom of the image when the camera is rotated 90 degrees.

Another feature of note is the camera's weather-resistant body. Using more than 75 seals, the X-T1 is dust and water-resistant, and freezeproof to -10°C/+14°F. The X-T1 is also chock full of dials on its top plate, allowing for easy adjustments to ISO, shutter speed, and exposure compensation. Under two of those dials are switches for drive mode and metering.

Fuji has made some big claims about performance, saying that the X-T1 has the 'world's fastest AF of 0.08 seconds'. Whether that's true or not, the X-T1 is certainly an impressive improvement over early X-series cameras, which haven't been as competitive in the autofocus arena as their peers. The X-T1 can also shoot at 8 fps with subject tracking - the best of any X-series model - and it's also the first camera to support ultra-fast UHS-II SD cards.

One thing that the X-T1 doesn't have is a built-in flash. Instead, Fuji has bundled a small external flash, which has a guide number of 8 meters at ISO 100. The camera offers a flash sync port, in addition to its hot shoe, for attaching studio strobes.

The most direct competitor to the X-T1 is certainly the Olympus OM-D E-M1. The X-T1 has a larger APS-C sensor, but lacks the E-M1's in-body image stabilisation that works with all lenses. Aside from this they're very similar, both in terms of design and features. But given its pricing and feature set, we suspect Fujifilm also has the Canon EOS 70D and Nikon D7100 in its sights.

Kit options, lenses, and accessories

The X-T1 is priced at $1299 / £1049.99 / €1199 body only, or $1699 / £1399.99 / €1599 with the 18-55mm F2.8-4.0 lens (which is not water-resistant). It is available in black only (sorry, silver fans).

When Fujifilm released an updated lens road map at CES 2014, it kept something secret: that several of the lenses on it will be weather-resistant to match the X-T1. The lenses in question are the XF 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 R OIS WR, XF 16-55mm F2.8 R OIS WR, and XF 50-140mm F2.8 R OIS WR. The bad news is that these lenses won't be available until the middle of this year.

The X-T1 with battery grip and XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 lens
VG-XT1 battery grip MHG-XT hand grip

One accessory that you won't find on any other Fujifilm X-series camera is a battery grip. The VG-XT1 holds an additional WP-N126 battery, allowing for 700 shots in total (CIPA standard). Naturally, this grip also comes with additional buttons for holding the camera vertically. But given the camera's reliance on its top-plate dials, this ends up limited to the shutter button (with encircling lock switch), plus AE-L, AF-L, and Focus Assist buttons.

If you just want to make the standard grip a bit larger, Fuji also offers the MGH-XT hand grip. Like the recently-released updated grips for the X-Pro1 and X-E series cameras, this has a cut-out to allow easy access to the battery compartment, and incorporates an Arca Swiss-type quick release fitting for tripod use. We think this will offer better handling if you shoot the X-T1 with larger zooms.

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.

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 1998 - 2015 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
1288
I own it
811
I want it
165
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 642
1234
sgoldswo

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

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

2 upvotes
Olymore

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

0 upvotes
Gaggle

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

1 upvote
Peter62

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

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

10 upvotes
laughingor

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

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

1 upvote
dlbeck

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

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
LightBug

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

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake

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

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

2 upvotes
Debankur Mukherjee

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

7 upvotes
ThePhilips

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

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

1 upvote
badi

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

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

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

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Just a Photographer

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

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

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

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

Comment edited 41 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
km25

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

1 upvote
laughingor

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

0 upvotes
HFLM

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

1 upvote
Combatmedic870

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

4 upvotes
RichRMA

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

9 upvotes
HFLM

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

1 upvote
Dr_Jon

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

0 upvotes
ThePhilips

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

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

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

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

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

1 upvote
davids8560

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

0 upvotes
calking

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

4 upvotes
armandino

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

0 upvotes
Olymore

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

0 upvotes
J2Gphoto

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

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

3 upvotes
RichRMA

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

1 upvote
badi

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

2 upvotes
calking

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

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

8 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (Apr 15, 2014)

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

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

1 upvote
J2Gphoto

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

1 upvote
Steve_

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

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

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

1 upvote
vadims

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

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

0 upvotes
Just a Photographer

Native ISO range 200-6400

Comment edited 12 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Andy Westlake

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

0 upvotes
andywhoa

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

12 upvotes
pdelux

Where do you think they learned such behaviour?

5 upvotes
King Penguin

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

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

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

3 upvotes
AlexRuiz

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

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

0 upvotes
Mike_Hessey

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

0 upvotes
MaxiMax

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

1 upvote
AceP

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

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

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

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Just a Photographer

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

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

Best EVF currently available.

1 upvote
Dr_Jon

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

2 upvotes
beavertown

Similar price of the V3?

0 upvotes
montygm

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

4 upvotes
Richard Murdey

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

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

2 upvotes
montygm

Hi Richard,
Haven't logged on here for some time. Heard the same thing about the recessed button being a bit problematic from other users also. Can only hope that Fuji will recognise this and rectify the problem on the next gen model hopefully.

0 upvotes
JPMontez

I want one...

4 upvotes
brycesteiner

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

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

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

3 upvotes
km25

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

0 upvotes
lonelyspeck

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

0 upvotes
Kurt_K

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

17 upvotes
calking

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

5 upvotes
badi

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

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

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

3 upvotes
walgarch

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

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

Thank you for the review Andy!

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
32 upvotes
Zvonimir Tosic

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

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
walgarch

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

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

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
11 upvotes
bluevellet

Amen, walgarch

1 upvote
utomo99

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

0 upvotes
Zvonimir Tosic

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

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
11 upvotes
Zvonimir Tosic

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

7 upvotes
Richard Butler

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

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

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

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
15 upvotes
Zvonimir Tosic

We shall ask Pentax for better timing next time then.

4 upvotes
calking

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

1 upvote
armandino

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

1 upvote
Olymore

Perhaps Canon never supplied one for review ?

0 upvotes
JDOnrust

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

0 upvotes
DDWD10

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

3 upvotes
JDOnrust

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

1 upvote
caver3d

JDOnrust - just get the camera and stop torturing yourself!

0 upvotes
JDOnrust

Hahaha, yes I will

0 upvotes
stuartgolden

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

0 upvotes
JeanPierre Thibaudeau

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

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

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

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

I'll pass.

5 upvotes
mbrobich

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

0 upvotes
calking

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

1 upvote
naththo

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

0 upvotes
miksi

Why this category?

1 upvote
Just a Photographer

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

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

Comment edited 42 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
miksi

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

0 upvotes
Beat Traveller

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

1 upvote
Ramius

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

4 upvotes
viking79

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

21 upvotes
Beat Traveller

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

7 upvotes
s11loop

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

17 upvotes
b craw

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

4 upvotes
Timbukto

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

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

3 upvotes
The Davinator

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

10 upvotes
kewlguy

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

6 upvotes
dynaxx

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

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

1 upvote
Franco8

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

2 upvotes
naththo

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

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

0 upvotes
Olymore

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

Comment edited 55 seconds after posting
1 upvote
SaltLakeGuy

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

16 upvotes
calking

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

1 upvote
sceptical1

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

0 upvotes
Lan

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

0 upvotes
KennyXYZ

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

0 upvotes
Smokymtnhiker

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

Wow.

9 upvotes
Timbukto

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

7 upvotes
viking79

Maybe you should try one?

4 upvotes
Matz03

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

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
Beat Traveller

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

2 upvotes
b craw

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

0 upvotes
xrokx

@Timbukto... fallout is so rad.

0 upvotes
logan ross

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

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

Thank you

2 upvotes
Luego

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

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

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

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
caver3d

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

3 upvotes
calking
0 upvotes
Donnie G

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

2 upvotes
PedroMZ

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

0 upvotes
Donnie G

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

2 upvotes
b craw

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

0 upvotes
Just a Photographer

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

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

Then going ahead as a component maker for OEMs.

2 upvotes
Olymore

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

0 upvotes
lcolonezi

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

3 upvotes
AlexRuiz

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

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

10 upvotes
Franco8

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

5 upvotes
Just a Photographer

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

Comment edited 14 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
kinglau711

Very good review ! Worth the wait ! Thx

2 upvotes
IstvanNagy

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

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

0 upvotes
Sirandar

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

4 upvotes
Spectro

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

3 upvotes
FlowerHappy

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

21 upvotes
AlexRuiz

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

4 upvotes
badi

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

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

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Nigel Ward 2

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

http://isounlocker.com/

2 upvotes
robertbrockmann

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

3 upvotes
BarnET

"If you want to take video buy a camcorder"

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

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

8 upvotes
Lab D

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

Comment edited 51 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
ButterflySkies

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

4 upvotes
DouglasGottlieb

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

0 upvotes
calking

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

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

0 upvotes
badi

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

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

0 upvotes
mosc

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

0 upvotes
Underdog 3000

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

0 upvotes
Jorginho

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

3 upvotes
TheScrambler

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

1 upvote
AlexRuiz

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

4 upvotes
Just a Photographer

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

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

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

8 upvotes
brdeveloper

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

2 upvotes
SBoudreault

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

7 upvotes
Rouseabout

No auto composition function!
No auto talent function!

= No buy!

15 upvotes
viking79

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

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

6 upvotes
Timbukto

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

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

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

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

Comment edited 56 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
viking79

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

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Timbukto

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

0 upvotes
Timbukto

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

0 upvotes
exdeejjjaaaa

http://home.comcast.net/~NikonD70/Charts/PDR.htm#OM-D%20E-M5,X-T1

0 upvotes
yabokkie

the curve for X-T1 doesn't look right but in ISO chart
Claff says X-T1 is more noisy than X-E2.

1 upvote
panos_m

There is something wrong with that EM5 graph. It is almost a match with the Ideal 4/3 graph. This isn't happening for any other sensor size. Bill Claff's excellent page needs data from another current top m4/3s performer (EM1, GH4) for reference IMO. Anyone willing to contribute?

X-T1 is where it should be. On par with the best APS-C sensors:
http://home.comcast.net/~NikonD70/Charts/PDR.htm#D7100,X-T1

Comment edited 14 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
exdeejjjaaaa

did DPReview mention how Fuji cameras are working with flash (HSS, remote TTL, etc) ? EFCS ?

0 upvotes
CM WORKS

Yes the X-T1 get a Great Gold Award. Thanks DPR.

4 upvotes
Total comments: 642
1234