How serious is the slow focus of X-Pro1 affecting purchase decision?

Started Apr 26, 2012 | Discussions thread
brudy Senior Member • Posts: 1,510
Re: How serious is the slow focus of X-Pro1 affecting purchase decision?

It's funny - I have the 10-22 for my 7D and love it (as well as the 70-200f4). I'm not anti-zoom at all. But I'm pro smaller size and larger aperture. It seems like a longer/faster prime is a glaring hole in the road map. It will be interesting to see how big the Fuji 70-200 turns out to be. If it's as big as the Canon, I wouldn't get it (and it's not even that big compared to Canon's other zooms). I'll be getting the fuji mostly for travel and walk around, so I want the kit to be smaller. FWIW, I'm strongly considering getting rid of most of my Canon stuff except my birding lenses, which the fuji will never be able to do adequately.

In terms of usage, personally I usually shoot on the wide end (except for birds), but it'd be nice to have a longer option than 60mm. To me that seems like an odd focal length. On my 7D I use the 85 for portraits, but that space between 85 and say 50-55, I don't seem to ever want it. I also use rangefinders (epson r-d1 and others) so I'm used to primes.

RealXenuis wrote:

You may be right. Personally, I wouldn't use a slightly longer/faster prime. I would still likely just use it for portrait/macro work. I haven't found that FL particularly useful for anything but. I'd be more interesting in a 200+ prime with reasonable speed. I have NO problem with the 2.4 on the 60, nor it's IQ. It's at least fantastic if not better (I also think this of the 35). I'm also one of those who has no issue with a good zoom. Think Nikkor (and really, Tokina and Tamron FOR Nikon). I, personally, don't see a lot of quality diff btwn the Tokina 12-24 i used w/my D7000 and the 18 on the Fuji, other than (of course, most importantly) character. Color mostly. The 12 was sharp at 12 and beyond. It suffered about the same (maybe slightly more?) with CA in high contrast. I felt the 12-24 was extremely useful and a great lens, but it suffered in that system b/c the D7000 wasn't as good at high ISO, where the Fuji should shine. Same with the long tele-zooms. I'd find a 70-300 IS at a reasonable f-stop MUCH more useful than a middling-length 85, even at f/1.whatever. I could make up a lot of the diff w/the 35, even with cropping, but I could never make up for subjects at + - 300 (450 FF) with say, an 85 and cropping. The 70-200 Fuji has planned should be quite useful (if done well like with nikon), even if a bit shorter than i'd prefer.

 brudy's gear list:brudy's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Canon EOS 7D Sony a7R Fujifilm X-T10
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow