Fuji XT1 Questions

This is also my only fault I can pick. Wish there was some way to fix it!

So long as you are skilled in panning and tracking, I don't see a big problem. I'm not great at it myself, but if I drift I can get back on so long as the target is moving at a fairly constant and predictable rate.

It's something you need to try for yourself, hands on.

There is no other way to do this with an EVF camera.

Using my A99 I didn't see it as a big problem. You get used to panning one way or the other. You can always use your other eye to track with as well (works if not too telephoto). I used the A99 at a skate park and I was able to use it fine for panning after skaters.

I haven't used XT1 specifically, but both my Sony and Samsung EVF cameras show you the preview from the previous shot. At 10 fps you have to figure your view is lagging by about 1/10 second. Depending on the camera this might be more or less since it might not show you every previous frame.

OVFs aren't necessarily better; you still have a lot of flipping mirror blackout, which you don't have in the EVF.

Eric

Exactly. You just need to pan with the action. Hold the camera in front of you if needed. Its not much of an issue.

Greg.

Thanks and let me ask one more question..what advantages does this system have over the Nikon D 7100.. I am thinking of switching but part of me says its the "new camera syndrome" and not anything rational..

Astrophotographer 10 said:

Exactly. You just need to pan with the action. Hold the camera in front of you if needed. Its not much of an issue.

Greg.

Click to expand...

It is if you are shooting tight,the subject will not be framed as expected.

riman said:

Thanks and let me ask one more question..what advantages does this system have over the Nikon D 7100.. I am thinking of switching but part of me says its the "new camera syndrome" and not anything rational..

Click to expand...

For me, better lenses and hugely better ergonomics. I've always found Nikons to have really awful interfaces.

Wheatfield7 said:

riman said:

Thanks and let me ask one more question..what advantages does this system have over the Nikon D 7100.. I am thinking of switching but part of me says its the "new camera syndrome" and not anything rational..

Click to expand...

For me, better lenses and hugely better ergonomics. I've always found Nikons to have really awful interfaces.

Click to expand...

Most of Fuji's lenses are better than Nikon's cheaper lenses but by the same token, many of Nikon's much more expensive lenses are much better than the lenses that Fuji doesn't yet have or won't ever have. I like my (many) Fuji cameras, but excellent ergonomics has always been a hallmark on Nikon's 'pro' and 'advanced amateur' cameras. I can't know for sure but you appear to be talking about the ergonomics and iterfaces of Nikon's entry level cameras.

I have a D7000 I haven't used in ages. I like the XT1 controls, the terrific lenses, the color tones produced by this sensor, the tilting LCD.. the list goes on. I have no intention of upgrading my D7000.

mrgooch2008 said:

Astrophotographer 10 said:

Exactly. You just need to pan with the action. Hold the camera in front of you if needed. Its not much of an issue.

Greg.

Click to expand...

It is if you are shooting tight,the subject will not be framed as expected.

Click to expand...

At 8 fps you can nail framing that exact to the point that seeing an image 1/8 of a second in the past is an issue that you can't adjust for? Impressive.

Well, do you shoot sports or fast action a lot? if you do, then stick with the true and tested, either Nikon or Canon. If you shoot, travel, landscape, portrait or even documentary, the X-T1 is a great camera.

Have been using it for 5 months now and before, I was shooting with 1Ds Mk2. So it was quite a departure in performance for me especially in the autofocus and the EVF area. But my shoulders seem to appreciate the much lighter gear that the X-T1 has over the 1Ds, so I'm okay with any minor inconvenience.

If you work with TTL a lot, you should also stick with the big 2 systems.

But ever since I got the camera, I've been able to carry the camera attached with a 35mm lens wherever I go.

Cheers

dtssounds said:

Well, do you shoot sports or fast action a lot? if you do, then stick with the true and tested, either Nikon or Canon. If you shoot, travel, landscape, portrait or even documentary, the X-T1 is a great camera.

Have been using it for 5 months now and before, I was shooting with 1Ds Mk2. So it was quite a departure in performance for me especially in the autofocus and the EVF area. But my shoulders seem to appreciate the much lighter gear that the X-T1 has over the 1Ds, so I'm okay with any minor inconvenience.

If you work with TTL a lot, you should also stick with the big 2 systems.

But ever since I got the camera, I've been able to carry the camera attached with a 35mm lens wherever I go.

Cheers

Click to expand...

Yes one of the things I shoot is sports. and I used TTL flash a lot...so i think should stick with what I have..and besides there is only a six ounce difference between the two bodies.. and I dont see any real advantages to the Fuji system that would make the switch worthwhile

I just like to always keep my mind open to new possibilities and I do think mirrorless is the future..just not today

Thanks to everyone

photoreddi said:

Wheatfield7 said:

riman said:

Thanks and let me ask one more question..what advantages does this system have over the Nikon D 7100.. I am thinking of switching but part of me says its the "new camera syndrome" and not anything rational..

Click to expand...

For me, better lenses and hugely better ergonomics. I've always found Nikons to have really awful interfaces.

Click to expand...

Most of Fuji's lenses are better than Nikon's cheaper lenses but by the same token, many of Nikon's much more expensive lenses are much better than the lenses that Fuji doesn't yet have or won't ever have. I like my (many) Fuji cameras, but excellent ergonomics has always been a hallmark on Nikon's 'pro' and 'advanced amateur' cameras. I can't know for sure but you appear to be talking about the ergonomics and iterfaces of Nikon's entry level cameras.

Click to expand...

Valid point but the lenses Fuji has are excellent and all new designs. Fuji has a long history of making expensive high-end lenses for a wide variety of applications such as for HD broadcast with some costing $100K+. I've been a Canon shooter for years and I'm very particular about lens performance and I'm finding my 18-55 and 55-200 to rival my Canon 24-105L and 70-200f4LIS. In fact the OIS is actually more effective than Canon's IS. I'm anxiously awaiting the arrival of Fuji's 120-400 to see what they do with that FL zoom.

Bob

riman said:

Yes one of the things I shoot is sports. and I used TTL flash a lot...so i think should stick with what I have..and besides there is only a six ounce difference between the two bodies.. and I dont see any real advantages to the Fuji system that would make the switch worthwhile

I just like to always keep my mind open to new possibilities and I do think mirrorless is the future..just not today

Thanks to everyone

Click to expand...

You are absolutely right. For your work, a DSLR makes life easier.

I had a 5Dii which was completely useless at tracking. Success rate: 0%! The only way to get a shot was to focus on a spot, switch to manual focus and wait for the subject to approach the target spot and then fire off at full speed and hope!


My X-T1 does track reasonably well. I tried it on my 11 year old grandson running towards me as fast as he could and got a ca. 70% success rate. I’ve no doubt that a top-line Canikon can do better, but even they are not successful all of the time. And they cost and weigh very much more. Horses for courses as usual.


To answer your question, as someone has mentioned there is a very brief EVF blackout but on testing it against my 5Dii there was very little in it and certainly nothing to cause me concern.

Actually it was interesting to deliberately look for the 5Dii mirror blackout. It was quite noticeable when looking for it but in normal use its effect was not even detected. I find it is similar with my X-T1. I was worried about it initially but no longer. HOWEVER you do have to set the camera up appropriately and there are some invaluable blogs such as:




There is also lots of info if you Google or search these forums appropriately.


The main points are turn off auto review, turn on high power, use a medium size focussing area and keep the subject in the centre of the EVF where the phase detection sensors are situated.
Failing all of that, hire an X-T1 for a couple of days and try it out but make sure you have set it up optimally first.


Let us know how you get on.


Good luck

Phil

I tried some tracking with the XT-1 last week and found it to be almost completely useless with this kind of camera. Then after awhile I thought that maybe it was just useless for my way of doing things and that I just may need to relearn and adjust to it. Not sure yet, as this may take some time, but I am not completely writing it off at this point.

rwbaron said:

photoreddi said:

Wheatfield7 said:

riman said:

Thanks and let me ask one more question..what advantages does this system have over the Nikon D 7100.. I am thinking of switching but part of me says its the "new camera syndrome" and not anything rational..

Click to expand...

For me, better lenses and hugely better ergonomics. I've always found Nikons to have really awful interfaces.

Click to expand...

Most of Fuji's lenses are better than Nikon's cheaper lenses but by the same token, many of Nikon's much more expensive lenses are much better than the lenses that Fuji doesn't yet have or won't ever have. I like my (many) Fuji cameras, but excellent ergonomics has always been a hallmark on Nikon's 'pro' and 'advanced amateur' cameras. I can't know for sure but you appear to be talking about the ergonomics and iterfaces of Nikon's entry level cameras.

Click to expand...

Valid point but the lenses Fuji has are excellent and all new designs. Fuji has a long history of making expensive high-end lenses for a wide variety of applications such as for HD broadcast with some costing $100K+. I've been a Canon shooter for years and I'm very particular about lens performance and I'm finding my 18-55 and 55-200 to rival my Canon 24-105L and 70-200f4LIS. In fact the OIS is actually more effective than Canon's IS. I'm anxiously awaiting the arrival of Fuji's 120-400 to see what they do with that FL zoom.

Click to expand...

I agree that Fuji's lenses are excellent, but none of them rise to the levels of Fuji's broadcast lenses, nor do they rise to the IQ and AF performance levels of Nikon's wide aperture "exotic" telephoto lenses such as the $5,800 200mm f/2 and 300mm f/2.8, $9,000 400mm f/2.8 ($12,000 for the new version), $9,800 600mm f/4 and $17,900 for the 800mm f/5.6 Nikkor.

I like my Fuji 55-200mm lens but Fuji will have to replace it with a significant upgrade before it will compete with Nikon's 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II lens. There's a reason why it costs almost $2,000 more. Fuji's 50-140mm f/2.8 lens that should arrive later this year will be a step in the right direction for sports and some wildlife photography and it should be better in every conceivable way than the 55-200mm lens, other than size, weight and price.

rwbaron said:

I really liked the X-T1 in the mid-range and wide angle as well. It holds into the shadows a little better than the Olympus, and it handles high ISOs a little better, too. The 56mm lens is a stunner on the X-T1, and great if you can get something framed fully with it. I was far less happy with the 55-200mm f/3.8-4.5. It drifts to initial focus rather than snaps. Fujifilm needs some better telephoto options to round out the X system.

Click to expand...

http://www.bythom.com/photographic-travel/south-america/galapagos/galapagos-workshop-2014/

riman said:

I like what I am reading about this camera except one thing from one reviewer. He said that on high speed continual shooting what you are seeing is the object, not as it is, but as it was photographed in the previous image... He said there was a significant problem here..

The problem being that the subject has moved and so you dont know rxactly were it is at the time its there..

Anyone have trouble with this when shooting fast moving subjects?

Also how much lighter is this than the D 7100 and how do the pics compare
How good it is with noise in low light?
Thanks

Click to expand...

I found it quite usable actually, particularly if you enable high performance mode.

Tracking something moving quickly is difficult with even an optical VF. Once you get into the high (8+fps) frame rates, between the mirror blackouts, you're not getting that much better view of the action than you are with the XT1. You are tracking and adjusting either way.

I found the far larger issue was initial acquisition of the subject if they were moving fast. I had better luck if I started tracking when the subject farther away so it was ready to go when I needed to start shooting.

The other issue is, once you exceed the buffer, tracking becomes about impossible. That said, the XT1 has a pretty good buffer, so I seldom run into this. It's also an issue for many DSLRs (camera locking up until buffer cleared).

Here's a shoot I did soon after getting the XT1...I was very happy with the keeper rate. The final images weren't quite as "poppy" as a shot I did with a 5D3 and 70-200 2.8, but the keeper rate was remarkably similar.

photoreddi said:

rwbaron said:

photoreddi said:

Wheatfield7 said:

riman said:

Thanks and let me ask one more question..what advantages does this system have over the Nikon D 7100.. I am thinking of switching but part of me says its the "new camera syndrome" and not anything rational..

Click to expand...

For me, better lenses and hugely better ergonomics. I've always found Nikons to have really awful interfaces.

Click to expand...

Most of Fuji's lenses are better than Nikon's cheaper lenses but by the same token, many of Nikon's much more expensive lenses are much better than the lenses that Fuji doesn't yet have or won't ever have. I like my (many) Fuji cameras, but excellent ergonomics has always been a hallmark on Nikon's 'pro' and 'advanced amateur' cameras. I can't know for sure but you appear to be talking about the ergonomics and iterfaces of Nikon's entry level cameras.

Click to expand...

Valid point but the lenses Fuji has are excellent and all new designs. Fuji has a long history of making expensive high-end lenses for a wide variety of applications such as for HD broadcast with some costing $100K+. I've been a Canon shooter for years and I'm very particular about lens performance and I'm finding my 18-55 and 55-200 to rival my Canon 24-105L and 70-200f4LIS. In fact the OIS is actually more effective than Canon's IS. I'm anxiously awaiting the arrival of Fuji's 120-400 to see what they do with that FL zoom.

Click to expand...

I agree that Fuji's lenses are excellent, but none of them rise to the levels of Fuji's broadcast lenses, nor do they rise to the IQ and AF performance levels of Nikon's wide aperture "exotic" telephoto lenses such as the $5,800 200mm f/2 and 300mm f/2.8, $9,000 400mm f/2.8 ($12,000 for the new version), $9,800 600mm f/4 and $17,900 for the 800mm f/5.6 Nikkor.

Click to expand...

True and that's why Canon and Nikon will always hold a significant advantage in the foreseeable future for certain types of photography. The vast majority of consumers buying APS C and even FF DSLR's will never see that exotic glass from Canon or Nikon. I've been shooting for 40 years and do wildlife and BiF and it's done with my 7D and 400f5.6L or 300f4L and I'm not unusual in that respect. If Fuji has a good 120-400 and it's no slower than f5.6 with their excellent OIS then that relegates my Canon long glass to second status unless it's a moving target but who knows what the XT2 may offer?

photoreddi said:

I like my Fuji 55-200mm lens but Fuji will have to replace it with a significant upgrade before it will compete with Nikon's 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II lens. There's a reason why it costs almost $2,000 more. Fuji's 50-140mm f/2.8 lens that should arrive later this year will be a step in the right direction for sports and some wildlife photography and it should be better in every conceivable way than the 55-200mm lens, other than size, weight and price.

Click to expand...

There's little to no difference between your 70-200f2.8 VR II and my 70-200f4LIS at f5.6 or 8 so I have to ask where you see the significant difference in IQ? If you mean the Fuji doesn't do anything below f3.5 (or 4.8 at 200) then yes, you have a point. If you're not seeing similar results at f5.6 or 8 vs the Nikkor on a Nikon APS C such as the D7100 then my guess is something's not right. Using defaults in LR my Canon looks better than the Fuji but if I convert the Fuji RAW with Iridient Developer the Canon falls behind. I can make the LR version of the Fuji RAW very similar to the ID conversion by doing some adjustments but the Canon RAW doesn't improve nearly as much with LR tweaks so I believe there is something in the way ACR renders X-Trans RAW files. No, the Fuji zoom doesn't have the snappy AF of the Canon (may be body issue) but IMO it's IS is better and at half the price, size and weight it's amazing what Fuji's accomplished with this lens.

photoreddi said:

photoreddi said:

I really liked the X-T1 in the mid-range and wide angle as well. It holds into the shadows a little better than the Olympus, and it handles high ISOs a little better, too. The 56mm lens is a stunner on the X-T1, and great if you can get something framed fully with it. I was far less happy with the 55-200mm f/3.8-4.5. It drifts to initial focus rather than snaps. Fujifilm needs some better telephoto options to round out the X system.

Click to expand...

http://www.bythom.com/photographic-travel/south-america/galapagos/galapagos-workshop-2014/

Click to expand...

What's important for one photographer, especially one like Thom Hogan, is not to another. I read his XT1 review and felt a sense of bias on his part. You have to accept the X system for what it is and it certainly has it's limitations at this point. It's not for everyone but for it's intended purpose it's a great system that neither Canon nor Nikon offer any option. It's certainly not perfect as for my purpose I'm not completely comfortable with the EVF and the battery life sucks but when I consider how small and light it is and the UI and look at the images on screen it usually puts a big smile on my face :-D

Bob