Steve Huff reviews the x pro 1

It's all his opinion, on his site ...how is that not fair?

It's up to the reader to interpret and realize that in my opinion.

Yes ...some of your points are very valid, but's it's fair.

BobYIL said:

• The Fuji 35/1.4 is the closest one to the IQ of Leica's 35/1.4 or 50/1.4 asphericals, the closest one with a price less than 1/8 of the reference class of the industry.

• The comparison of the Nex-7 with 35/1.4 Summilux against the XP1 with its native lens is absurd. On one side saving $500, on the other side having to afford for a $5000 lens. Yet, the Fujifilm was so close in performance.. Now let's flip the coin: How would the Summilux on the XP1 stand against the native 35/1.4? I wonder if he's seen this:

http://picabroad.com/2012/03/24/fuji-x-pro-1-grand-test-with-leica-m-mount-lenses/

• A most fair comparison could be performed if it was possible to mount the Fuji 35/1.4 on the Nex-7 (however it would still be a non-auto operation..)

• 24/1.8 Zeiss: The only wide angle with comparable IQ to the Fuji 23/2 or 35/1.4 is a Retrofocal design, large in size (and weight also) offsetting the advantages of Nex- compactness. ( + $1100).

• Aperture control with manual lenses on the Nex-series is cumbersome when one needs to focus wide open and then stop down to shoot. (I use the 5N with Leica and Zeiss lenses). Unless it's supported by automatic diaphram action, focus "peaking" is not an instantenous operation while using small apertures.

• For the use of conventional design (rangefinder) wide angle lenses shorter than 35mm, the sensor on the 5N (or C3) is far more suitable than the one on the Nex-7. (Less smearing, less color-shift toward corners.) Photozone found the Nex-7 sensor design rather not optimal..

• The hi-ISO characteristics of the XP1 is unique in its sensor class; the closest one to the top FF sensors in this regard.

• Through film-simulation modes Fujifilm provides a great deal of convenience for top color control to eliminate the need of PP for most of the users. Any camera including the professional DSLRs to deliver the same pleasing colors OOC?

IMHO, all the other quirks aside (which are not that critical at all) the XP1 has one major issue needing to be attended, at least with the next version: AF speed and accuracy.. Preferably the same as the new generation of the M43s, as the clip below demonstrates:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-WLvEvqMZE

--
BobYIL

Click to expand...

--
http://www.wanderinground.wordpress.com
http://www.pbase.com/happypoppeye

It's almost all opinion folks, gonna have to deal with it.

Equipment: 1 Finger, an eye, a camera body and 50mm (equivalent) lens, half a brain, and a lot of money leftover to spend on using that equipment

happypoppeye said:

It's up to the reader to interpret and realize that in my opinion.

Yes ...some of your points are very valid, but's it's fair.

BobYIL said:

• The Fuji 35/1.4 is the closest one to the IQ of Leica's 35/1.4 or 50/1.4 asphericals, the closest one with a price less than 1/8 of the reference class of the industry.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

When you or I write a review, our individual view, opinion or even experience could be regarded somewhat as fair, for we are simple users or amateurs. No matter how biased they may sound or "funboyism" they may smell, the readers may not need to mind it much by simply regarding it "probably not true" or as exaggeration.

However the situation for the reviewers like Steve Huff, Ken Rockwell, Rob Galbraith, Thom Hogan or Erwin Puts is totally different; for thousands are following their web sites with the sole purpose of "to be informed from a reliable source", to listen to "the authority". This, IMO is a very important responsibity against the masses and being biased or unfair commentary could only raise doubts about their credibility.
--
BobYIL

I have been using a mac book pro for a while now and have NEVER had this problem with my X100! I will test it with the XP1 today but I seriously doubt that I will see the issue...

Ray Sachs said:

Chris Dodkin said:

No idea what he's on about with his SD card and Photoshop/Bridge issues

Never seen that - X100 or X-Pro1

Click to expand...

When you use a card reader to upload files to a Mac, the Mac writes some sort of file to the card. Once that file is on the card, Fuji's have a real hard time starting up. 10-20 second sounds right to me. The X100 does it, the X10 did it, and the X-pro 1 does it. It's not a huge deal - once you understand it you just don't upload until and unless you're going to format the card as soon as you put it back in the camera. I'd do this anyway as a matter of course with any camera during the upload session. It just takes a few seconds longer with the Fuji. I don't LIKE it, but it doesn't affect my shooting, it just adds a few seconds to my upload time. It's a fuji issue because none of my other cameras do this and all three of my Fuji's do or did. He's not wrong, but I don't get why it bothers him so much. How often do you upload to your computer (or iPad) and then have to shoot right NOW?

-Ray
-------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20889767@N05/collections/72157626204295198/

Click to expand...

--
Mark Hilliard

Gallery: http://www.TheLensWorkGallery.com
Blog: http://www.infraredatelier.Wordpress.com
IR Web http://www.InfraredAtelier.com

Well, I use the X100 and X-Pro1 - and I use Mac, and Photoshop/Bridge, and I've never seen this issue.

I read images from the card right into PS via Bridge as well - without copying them to the HD.

So it's not a Mac issue - it's something that the reviewer has set-up wrong/differently

It may be that he formatted the card initially on the Mac instead of the camera?
--
http://www.dodkin.com
[email protected]
Mac Pro/MacBook Pro/iPods/iPhones/iPad

Ryan1938 said:

I think his reviews are honest and like him, I'm a bit of a Leica man... However, I sure wish he would work on his writing skills. It's enough to drive a writer mad.

Click to expand...

Have you taken the time to send some feedback to him instead of just posting it here? I'm sure he has an open ear for honest opinions.

BobYIL said:

happypoppeye said:

It's up to the reader to interpret and realize that in my opinion.

Yes ...some of your points are very valid, but's it's fair.

BobYIL said:

• The Fuji 35/1.4 is the closest one to the IQ of Leica's 35/1.4 or 50/1.4 asphericals, the closest one with a price less than 1/8 of the reference class of the industry.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

When you or I write a review, our individual view, opinion or even experience could be regarded somewhat as fair, for we are simple users or amateurs. No matter how biased they may sound or "funboyism" they may smell, the readers may not need to mind it much by simply regarding it "probably not true" or as exaggeration.

However the situation for the reviewers like Steve Huff, Ken Rockwell, Rob Galbraith, Thom Hogan or Erwin Puts is totally different; for thousands are following their web sites with the sole purpose of "to be informed from a reliable source", to listen to "the authority". This, IMO is a very important responsibity against the masses and being biased or unfair commentary could only raise doubts about their credibility.
--
BobYIL

Click to expand...

Fair point I think but at the end of the day anybody out there for a new camera should do the clever thing first: go out and try it for yourself. The opinion of others, no matter how "pro" or "enthusiast" you personally think they are, should be an additional piece of information, and for these private reviews, I am fine with what the mentioned people provide. If you disagree, feel free to set up your own site, get a following and do it better.

I have... But at the end of the day it's his site and his style... and regardless of his writing ability, I still read it. That should tell him and me something.

...and concludes that "it doesn't come close". Seriously ? Shame on Leica if their $10,000 camera system can't match or beat a $2200 combo!!

I think a more appropriate comparison is between the Leica M8(.2) and the XPRO-1. I've owned and used both. With basic M8's still going for $2,000 body-only, I think the $1,699 XPRO is a good deal. It trounces the M8(.2) IQ at every ISO and with much cheaper glass.

YMMV.
--
Vern Dewit
Calgary, Alberta Canada
http://www.explor8ion.com
http://verndewit.com/

Many have already told it like it is but they get told they don't know what their talking about, they don't know how to use a camera etc.

I have the same slow startup problem when I read the SD card with the Mac.

Actually, there's a specific way that the SD card is read that will cause MacOS to write files onto the SD card. If I don't remember wrongly, those are meta files that index the directory and its content so that they can be searched faster on the Mac.

The Mac related problem is pretty well known. I had similar trouble using either iPhoto or Aperture downloading files from my X100. I just make sure I reformat the card now. I learned about this from this very forum a year ago.
--
I have more gear than talent

burnymeister said:

...and concludes that "it doesn't come close". Seriously ? Shame on Leica if their $10,000 camera system can't match or beat a $2200 combo!!

I think a more appropriate comparison is between the Leica M8(.2) and the XPRO-1. I've owned and used both. With basic M8's still going for $2,000 body-only, I think the $1,699 XPRO is a good deal. It trounces the M8(.2) IQ at every ISO and with much cheaper glass.

YMMV.

Click to expand...

True.. however I doubt he would do it, for he tested the M8 before and he knows what the outcome would be.

And "it doesn't come close" to the M9! How about posting some OOC pictures from the M9 vs XP1, or some RAW ISO 2500 shots from each? Where the M9 loses its breath, the XP1 keeps on shining up until ISO 6400.

--
BobYIL

My mac writes hidden files to the sd card almost everytime is inserted, causing slow startups in my X100. There are some solutions, kind of. Try an app called Blueharvest, it removes strange files and thumbs previews from cards automatically. there are other apps that do the same, like Clean my mac and iRemove, some are free.

Hope this helps.

--
http://www.apiza.com

yes it does.
It's a hidden file.

It happens when you delete a file off the SDCARD. It also matters how you have osx setup.
I am on osx lion latest and MBP 13" and it does it.

However, as long as I copy files off my card but DON'T delete any files off the card it doesn't have a delay start up on my x100.

I have experienced this in 2 different x100. And I have the latest firmware 1.21.

Once you know the issue/cause, it is very easy to deal with and not an issue for me.
love my x100

Alessandro63 said:

Copying files from the card to the HD does not write anything in the card (Mac user here).

I think he's having Lightroom (or any other SW) access the card directly to load images, instead of copying them to the HD. Well, it should work without introducing problems. Apparently, Fuji's FW is a far from optimized patchwork, and the camera hangs while trying to understand what those hidden file are for.

I don't think Apple will change it's file management system. It's up to fuji...

MPA1 said:

I don't own PS or Bridge though. But Aperture certainly does not make it happen.

Ray Sachs said:

Chris Dodkin said:

No idea what he's on about with his SD card and Photoshop/Bridge issues

Never seen that - X100 or X-Pro1

Click to expand...

When you use a card reader to upload files to a Mac, the Mac writes some sort of file to the card. Once that file is on the card, Fuji's have a real hard time starting up. 10-20 second sounds right to me. The X100 does it, the X10 did it, and the X-pro 1 does it. It's not a huge deal - once you understand it you just don't upload until and unless you're going to format the card as soon as you put it back in the camera. I'd do this anyway as a matter of course with any camera during the upload session. It just takes a few seconds longer with the Fuji. I don't LIKE it, but it doesn't affect my shooting, it just adds a few seconds to my upload time. It's a fuji issue because none of my other cameras do this and all three of my Fuji's do or did. He's not wrong, but I don't get why it bothers him so much. How often do you upload to your computer (or iPad) and then have to shoot right NOW?

-Ray
-------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/20889767@N05/collections/72157626204295198/

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
http://www.onreb.net

Click to expand...

so the solution is to leave the files on the card until you put it back in the camera, then delete or format?

I look forward to and enjoy Steve Huff's reviews for their not-overly-technical, user friendly style. He has a conversational style of writing that I could imagine putting some people off but I think it fits well with the things he looks for and discusses in a camera used in real life. In addition, he shoots a lot of new cameras so, to my way of thinking, he has a wealth of comtemporary camera experience to make comparisons.

I looked forward to his review of the XPRO-1 because it is a camera I have considering buying. I bought and sold the X100 for many of the same reasons Mr. Huff found fault with so the fact that Fuji seems to have not addressed those issues makes me moe wary of the XPro-1.

I also shot Leica's in the past and I can understand why he frequently uses them in comparison to other manufacturers' offerings. There is nothing that compares to the mechanical feel of a Leica rangefinder in operation and most Leica lenses are superb. I do not understand why Mr. Huff is not more put off by the outrageous overpricing of Leica products though and, in my mind, that makes him more of a Leica fanboy than anything .

All things, considered, his review of the XPro-1 seems to be written by someone who wanted very much to fall in love with the camera but couldn't because its manufacturer has not worked hard enough to improve over its prior offerings. And for that reason, the review has made me hold out for the Olympus OMD. At the same time, he pointed out that if you value image quality over the slow AF and other quirks , this may be your camera. I don't need anything more in a good review.

I think the most significant statement in the review is that he no longer thinks the M9 is worth $7000!

That's a pretty harsh review when you take into account that Steve Huff is known for giving overly glowing reviews.

The review looks very rushed though. At the beginning of the review he says the autofocus speed is about the same as the X100, then he says at the end that the X100 is now faster. He also said he sold his X100.

So it was about the same, and now it is faster, but he has no X100. Did he test this? Or is he just going off of memory?

He also said called the 18mm a 24mm at the beginning of the review.

Sounds like he just didn't like the camera and didn't even bother to edit his work.

I suppose this is either a love it or hate it camera.

I went with an X100 for the meantime.

It's good shooting discipline to format your cards whenever you replace them in the camera, regardless of the make of the camera.

I always do it to both slots when I reload my D3s's after a job and I strongly advise anyone to do it. It reduces the likelihood of corruption and so on and ensures that you have maximum available space on the cards for each new job.

luckyvic said:

The Mac related problem is pretty well known. I had similar trouble using either iPhoto or Aperture downloading files from my X100. I just make sure I reformat the card now. I learned about this from this very forum a year ago.
--
I have more gear than talent

Click to expand...

Before considering the XP1, I was researching the Nex-7. He was more than enthusiastic about it - to the point that I questioned his sincerity. Just a bit over the top. Hearing that his review of the XP1 was less than favorable doesn't surprise me. Seemed a bit like a stacked contest from the beginning. But, I say that's just a feeling. I haven't read enough of his reviews to get a sense of how consistent he is.

Photohobbyfun said:

That's a pretty harsh review when you take into account that Steve Huff is known for giving overly glowing reviews.

The review looks very rushed though. At the beginning of the review he says the autofocus speed is about the same as the X100, then he says at the end that the X100 is now faster. He also said he sold his X100.

So it was about the same, and now it is faster, but he has no X100. Did he test this? Or is he just going off of memory?

He also said called the 18mm a 24mm at the beginning of the review.

Sounds like he just didn't like the camera and didn't even bother to edit his work.

I suppose this is either a love it or hate it camera.

I went with an X100 for the meantime.

Click to expand...