Reading mode: Light Dark

Fuji X-T1 Two part review

Go to last post
axlotl said:
http://cameraergonomics.blogspot.com.au/2015/03/fuji-x-t1-review-part-1-image-quality.html

This short review is a bit late in the X-T1 product cycle, for which my apologies.

I recently had the opportunity to borrow an X-T1 with 23mm f1.4 lens for a week and used it for tests and comparisons with other cameras.

There are two posts. The link to the first one is above. The second one is about ergonomics.

There is nothing really new here. The current version of Photoshop Camera Raw still doesn't work well with the Fuji X-Trans RAW files. I found some other issues with picture quality which I was unable to explain.

The post about ergonomics is a continuation of my comparative analysis of 'traditional' vs 'modern' camera control systems, with a newly developed scoring system for ergonomics which I am still trialling.

All constructive feedback welcome, especially about the ergonomics scoring system.

Happy reading

Andrew
Click to expand...
Several reasons why the "over lens" left-hand-hold illustrated in the article is a poor choice.

1) overall lack of stability and support, especially for longer lenses.
2) good chance of the hand blocking the viewfinder for a DSLR and for any OVF based rangefinder.
3) the hand will block the onboard flash for almost any camera.

For these reasons, it's a bad habit. Sure, it's a choice, but it's not a smart choice. In fact, I've never seen anyone but amateurs hold a camera in such a way. It's almost like a new piano player who doesn't listen to his teacher when presented with proper technique. It may be more "comfortable" in the short term to be lazy with your wrist but you'd better learn time honoured methods or you'll find it difficult to advance.
 
deednets said:
Jared Huntr said:
deednets said:
Jared Huntr said:
deednets said:
He is clearly trying to get more subscribers, more clicks will lead to more credence amongst his advertisers. Those advertisers don't necessarily read those comments here so for him it's a no brainer to cross link his findings.
Click to expand...
How come we never see the same protests about posters that write glowing reviews of Fuji gear on their blogs? So it's ok for someone to try to monetize a site as long the author's opinion coincides with yours?
Click to expand...
I was mentioning his side linking, you clearly read too much into this ... and I would have noticed this regardless of his opinion of any camera.

Deed
Click to expand...
ummm...the point of the internet is to link together information. Not interested? Then don't click on the link. Your choice. It's not like he misrepresented the content of the link or tricked you into clicking on it.

So do you also criticize bloggers for linking off to their own sites which praise Fuji gear or present pro-Fuji reviews?
Click to expand...
You are biased and want me to admit that I wouldn't have a problem if he had been more positive.
Click to expand...
deednets said:
A bit too childish for my taste I am afraid.
Click to expand...
Not childish at all. Fact remains that no one around here gets called out for linking to favourable Fuji reviews, however ad-laden that site is.
deednets said:
Linking and advertising are 2 different things. How would you feel if I advertise my business here, after all you don't have to click, right??
Click to expand...
As long as you don't break the forum rules, there's not much I can do.
deednets said:
But some will ... you apparently like this, I don't. Otherwise this forum would over time be a platform to get hits on other websites, that will turn into clicks for the advertiser, masked as a review, a freebie, you call this whatever you like.
Click to expand...
I think you misinterpret. I'm interested in the sharing of ideas whether I agree with them or not. I think you are reading too much into the OP's site as though he has a hidden agenda by trying to single out Fuji in a bad light.
deednets said:
How about this: I have an opinion, but won't tell you what it is unless you go to my website, where, as it happens I mention how surprised I am with regards to all the hit I got ... and you are part of this ...
Click to expand...
Read the OP first post in this thread. He clearly indicates a negative opinion on the Fuji. You know this before clicking on his link.You clearly didn't have to click after reading that.
deednets said:
Will leave it at that, how about some party advertising, after all you don't have to click, right?

Deed
Click to expand...
 
Jared Huntr said:
Jared Huntr said:
that I wouldn't have a problem if he had been more positive.

A bit too childish for my taste I am afraid.
Click to expand...
Not childish at all. Fact remains that no one around here gets called out for linking to favourable Fuji reviews, however ad-laden that site is.
Jared Huntr said:
Linking and advertising are 2 different things. How would you feel if I advertise my business here, after all you don't have to click, right??
Click to expand...
As long as you don't break the forum rules, there's not much I can do.
Jared Huntr said:
But some will ... you apparently like this, I don't. Otherwise this forum would over time be a platform to get hits on other websites, that will turn into clicks for the advertiser, masked as a review, a freebie, you call this whatever you like.
Click to expand...
I think you misinterpret. I'm interested in the sharing of ideas whether I agree with them or not. I think you are reading too much into the OP's site as though he has a hidden agenda by trying to single out Fuji in a bad light.
Click to expand...
I believe the OP does have a hidden agenda to drive traffic to his ad-laden site by posting controversial "articles" posed as reviews.

For all intents and purposes he's trolling us and making money at the same time. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he did this on the other brands' forums as well. The content of his site doesn't matter as long as its getting hits. What better way to drive traffic to your site than put up controversial material and call it a product review?
Jared Huntr said:
Jared Huntr said:
How about this: I have an opinion, but won't tell you what it is unless you go to my website, where, as it happens I mention how surprised I am with regards to all the hit I got ... and you are part of this ...
Click to expand...
Read the OP first post in this thread. He clearly indicates a negative opinion on the Fuji. You know this before clicking on his link.You clearly didn't have to click after reading that.
Jared Huntr said:
Will leave it at that, how about some party advertising, after all you don't have to click, right?

Deed
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
...the attempt to objectify the ergonomics based on your personal subjective criteria to be almost ... offensive.

I'm no Fuji fanboy, I've used DSLRs or mirrorless bodies from Minolta, Sony, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus and Fuji. None for less than 6 months, several for multiple years. I have enjoyed using every last one of them, and all had pleasant ergonomic factors. I personally prefer the Fuji, but I'm not going to try and pretend that my ergonomic preferences mean a hill of beans to anyone else. And to assign numbers, or a scale, as if this is some kind of ... I don't know ...

I get it, you didn't like the Fuji experience when compared to others, but the article seems to assign too much importance to your preferences and shooting style.
 
Jared Huntr said:
deednets said:
Jared Huntr said:
deednets said:
Jared Huntr said:
deednets said:
He is clearly trying to get more subscribers, more clicks will lead to more credence amongst his advertisers. Those advertisers don't necessarily read those comments here so for him it's a no brainer to cross link his findings.
Click to expand...
How come we never see the same protests about posters that write glowing reviews of Fuji gear on their blogs? So it's ok for someone to try to monetize a site as long the author's opinion coincides with yours?
Click to expand...
I was mentioning his side linking, you clearly read too much into this ... and I would have noticed this regardless of his opinion of any camera.

Deed
Click to expand...
ummm...the point of the internet is to link together information. Not interested? Then don't click on the link. Your choice. It's not like he misrepresented the content of the link or tricked you into clicking on it.

So do you also criticize bloggers for linking off to their own sites which praise Fuji gear or present pro-Fuji reviews?
Click to expand...
You are biased and want me to admit that I wouldn't have a problem if he had been more positive.

A bit too childish for my taste I am afraid.
Click to expand...
Not childish at all. Fact remains that no one around here gets called out for linking to favourable Fuji reviews, however ad-laden that site is.
Jared Huntr said:
Linking and advertising are 2 different things. How would you feel if I advertise my business here, after all you don't have to click, right??
Click to expand...
As long as you don't break the forum rules, there's not much I can do.
Jared Huntr said:
But some will ... you apparently like this, I don't. Otherwise this forum would over time be a platform to get hits on other websites, that will turn into clicks for the advertiser, masked as a review, a freebie, you call this whatever you like.
Click to expand...
I think you misinterpret. I'm interested in the sharing of ideas whether I agree with them or not. I think you are reading too much into the OP's site as though he has a hidden agenda by trying to single out Fuji in a bad light.
Jared Huntr said:
How about this: I have an opinion, but won't tell you what it is unless you go to my website, where, as it happens I mention how surprised I am with regards to all the hit I got ... and you are part of this ...
Click to expand...
Read the OP first post in this thread. He clearly indicates a negative opinion on the Fuji. You know this before clicking on his link.You clearly didn't have to click after reading that.
Click to expand...
No you don't have to click. But the OP sure hopes you do and knows that many will.

From Wikipedia:

Clickbait is a pejorative term describing web content that is aimed at generating online advertising revenue, especially at the expense of quality or accuracy, relying on sensationalist headlines to attract click-throughs and to encourage forwarding of the material over online social networks. Clickbait headlines typically aim to exploit the "curiosity gap", providing just enough information to make the reader curious, but not enough to satisfy their curiosity without clicking through to the linked content.
 
J Frank Parnell said:
Jared Huntr said:
deednets said:
Jared Huntr said:
deednets said:
Jared Huntr said:
deednets said:
He is clearly trying to get more subscribers, more clicks will lead to more credence amongst his advertisers. Those advertisers don't necessarily read those comments here so for him it's a no brainer to cross link his findings.
Click to expand...
How come we never see the same protests about posters that write glowing reviews of Fuji gear on their blogs? So it's ok for someone to try to monetize a site as long the author's opinion coincides with yours?
Click to expand...
I was mentioning his side linking, you clearly read too much into this ... and I would have noticed this regardless of his opinion of any camera.

Deed
Click to expand...
ummm...the point of the internet is to link together information. Not interested? Then don't click on the link. Your choice. It's not like he misrepresented the content of the link or tricked you into clicking on it.

So do you also criticize bloggers for linking off to their own sites which praise Fuji gear or present pro-Fuji reviews?
Click to expand...
You are biased and want me to admit that I wouldn't have a problem if he had been more positive.

A bit too childish for my taste I am afraid.
Click to expand...
Not childish at all. Fact remains that no one around here gets called out for linking to favourable Fuji reviews, however ad-laden that site is.
J Frank Parnell said:
Linking and advertising are 2 different things. How would you feel if I advertise my business here, after all you don't have to click, right??
Click to expand...
As long as you don't break the forum rules, there's not much I can do.
J Frank Parnell said:
But some will ... you apparently like this, I don't. Otherwise this forum would over time be a platform to get hits on other websites, that will turn into clicks for the advertiser, masked as a review, a freebie, you call this whatever you like.
Click to expand...
I think you misinterpret. I'm interested in the sharing of ideas whether I agree with them or not. I think you are reading too much into the OP's site as though he has a hidden agenda by trying to single out Fuji in a bad light.
J Frank Parnell said:
How about this: I have an opinion, but won't tell you what it is unless you go to my website, where, as it happens I mention how surprised I am with regards to all the hit I got ... and you are part of this ...
Click to expand...
Read the OP first post in this thread. He clearly indicates a negative opinion on the Fuji. You know this before clicking on his link.You clearly didn't have to click after reading that.
Click to expand...
No you don't have to click. But the OP sure hopes you do and knows that many will.

From Wikipedia:

Clickbait is a pejorative term describing web content that is aimed at generating online advertising revenue, especially at the expense of quality or accuracy, relying on sensationalist headlines to attract click-throughs and to encourage forwarding of the material over online social networks. Clickbait headlines typically aim to exploit the "curiosity gap", providing just enough information to make the reader curious, but not enough to satisfy their curiosity without clicking through to the linked content.
Click to expand...
Couldn't have said it better!
 
J Frank Parnell said:
Jared Huntr said:
deednets said:
Jared Huntr said:
deednets said:
Jared Huntr said:
deednets said:
He is clearly trying to get more subscribers, more clicks will lead to more credence amongst his advertisers. Those advertisers don't necessarily read those comments here so for him it's a no brainer to cross link his findings.
Click to expand...
How come we never see the same protests about posters that write glowing reviews of Fuji gear on their blogs? So it's ok for someone to try to monetize a site as long the author's opinion coincides with yours?
Click to expand...
I was mentioning his side linking, you clearly read too much into this ... and I would have noticed this regardless of his opinion of any camera.

Deed
Click to expand...
ummm...the point of the internet is to link together information. Not interested? Then don't click on the link. Your choice. It's not like he misrepresented the content of the link or tricked you into clicking on it.

So do you also criticize bloggers for linking off to their own sites which praise Fuji gear or present pro-Fuji reviews?
Click to expand...
You are biased and want me to admit that I wouldn't have a problem if he had been more positive.

A bit too childish for my taste I am afraid.
Click to expand...
Not childish at all. Fact remains that no one around here gets called out for linking to favourable Fuji reviews, however ad-laden that site is.
J Frank Parnell said:
Linking and advertising are 2 different things. How would you feel if I advertise my business here, after all you don't have to click, right??
Click to expand...
As long as you don't break the forum rules, there's not much I can do.
J Frank Parnell said:
But some will ... you apparently like this, I don't. Otherwise this forum would over time be a platform to get hits on other websites, that will turn into clicks for the advertiser, masked as a review, a freebie, you call this whatever you like.
Click to expand...
I think you misinterpret. I'm interested in the sharing of ideas whether I agree with them or not. I think you are reading too much into the OP's site as though he has a hidden agenda by trying to single out Fuji in a bad light.
J Frank Parnell said:
How about this: I have an opinion, but won't tell you what it is unless you go to my website, where, as it happens I mention how surprised I am with regards to all the hit I got ... and you are part of this ...
Click to expand...
Read the OP first post in this thread. He clearly indicates a negative opinion on the Fuji. You know this before clicking on his link.You clearly didn't have to click after reading that.
Click to expand...
No you don't have to click. But the OP sure hopes you do and knows that many will.

From Wikipedia:

Clickbait is a pejorative term describing web content that is aimed at generating online advertising revenue, especially at the expense of quality or accuracy, relying on sensationalist headlines to attract click-throughs and to encourage forwarding of the material over online social networks. Clickbait headlines typically aim to exploit the "curiosity gap", providing just enough information to make the reader curious, but not enough to satisfy their curiosity without clicking through to the linked content.
Click to expand...
Quite well summarized ... ticks all the boxes!

Deed
 
deednets said:
J Frank Parnell said:
Jared Huntr said:
deednets said:
Jared Huntr said:
deednets said:
Jared Huntr said:
deednets said:
He is clearly trying to get more subscribers, more clicks will lead to more credence amongst his advertisers. Those advertisers don't necessarily read those comments here so for him it's a no brainer to cross link his findings.
Click to expand...
How come we never see the same protests about posters that write glowing reviews of Fuji gear on their blogs? So it's ok for someone to try to monetize a site as long the author's opinion coincides with yours?
Click to expand...
I was mentioning his side linking, you clearly read too much into this ... and I would have noticed this regardless of his opinion of any camera.

Deed
Click to expand...
ummm...the point of the internet is to link together information. Not interested? Then don't click on the link. Your choice. It's not like he misrepresented the content of the link or tricked you into clicking on it.

So do you also criticize bloggers for linking off to their own sites which praise Fuji gear or present pro-Fuji reviews?
Click to expand...
You are biased and want me to admit that I wouldn't have a problem if he had been more positive.

A bit too childish for my taste I am afraid.
Click to expand...
Not childish at all. Fact remains that no one around here gets called out for linking to favourable Fuji reviews, however ad-laden that site is.
deednets said:
Linking and advertising are 2 different things. How would you feel if I advertise my business here, after all you don't have to click, right??
Click to expand...
As long as you don't break the forum rules, there's not much I can do.
deednets said:
But some will ... you apparently like this, I don't. Otherwise this forum would over time be a platform to get hits on other websites, that will turn into clicks for the advertiser, masked as a review, a freebie, you call this whatever you like.
Click to expand...
I think you misinterpret. I'm interested in the sharing of ideas whether I agree with them or not. I think you are reading too much into the OP's site as though he has a hidden agenda by trying to single out Fuji in a bad light.
deednets said:
How about this: I have an opinion, but won't tell you what it is unless you go to my website, where, as it happens I mention how surprised I am with regards to all the hit I got ... and you are part of this ...
Click to expand...
Read the OP first post in this thread. He clearly indicates a negative opinion on the Fuji. You know this before clicking on his link.You clearly didn't have to click after reading that.
Click to expand...
No you don't have to click. But the OP sure hopes you do and knows that many will.

From Wikipedia:

Clickbait is a pejorative term describing web content that is aimed at generating online advertising revenue, especially at the expense of quality or accuracy, relying on sensationalist headlines to attract click-throughs and to encourage forwarding of the material over online social networks. Clickbait headlines typically aim to exploit the "curiosity gap", providing just enough information to make the reader curious, but not enough to satisfy their curiosity without clicking through to the linked content.
Click to expand...
Quite well summarized ... ticks all the boxes!

Deed
Click to expand...
Particularly the bit about "especially at the expense of quality or accuracy"
 
Jared Huntr said:
Everyone is conveniently evading this point:

Fact remains that no one around here gets called out for linking to favourable Fuji reviews, however ad-laden that site is.
Click to expand...
Can you provide some examples of links where positive clickbaiting statements have been used to drive traffic to an ad-laden site where pseudo-scientific, biased opinion is presented as a factual review?

If found, I would have no qualms if someone called them out too.
 
Last edited:
Jared Huntr said:
Everyone is conveniently evading this point:

Fact remains that no one around here gets called out for linking to favourable Fuji reviews, however ad-laden that site is.
Click to expand...
Grow up, dude ... you are a great supporter of that guy I get that, but annoyingly rubbing this in that people like me are only critical because his "review" is not favorable is childish and immature.

Just troll elsewhere with your assumptions ok?

Deed
 
deednets said:
Jared Huntr said:
Everyone is conveniently evading this point:

Fact remains that no one around here gets called out for linking to favourable Fuji reviews, however ad-laden that site is.
Click to expand...
Grow up, dude ... you are a great supporter of that guy I get that, but annoyingly rubbing this in that people like me are only critical because his "review" is not favorable is childish and immature.

Just troll elsewhere with your assumptions ok?

Deed
Click to expand...
It is interesting that you should be accusing others of making assumptions when your entire basis of complaint against this poster is based on assumptions.

Let's be clear. It's not that I support the OP but rather that I support the dissemination of information and varying opinions. Note that I was one of the first to criticize the OP's methods. There is a certain maturity in being able to deal with an opposing opinion without attacking the individual or accusing them on the basis of ulterior motives. It is also plain intellectually lazy to dismiss someone and all ideas put forth by them just because you strongly disagree with a few points.

Oh, and save the over-used 'T'-card for genuine cases. To call someone that these days simply means that one is unable to defend their position. It is easier to just label the opposition and be dismissive than to deal with questions head-on.
 
Jared Huntr said:
Everyone is conveniently evading this point:

Fact remains that no one around here gets called out for linking to favourable Fuji reviews, however ad-laden that site is.
Click to expand...
Nobody is evading that point, we've already said it's also wrong for that to be the case, what more would you like us to do? hack the site and delete their posts?

Fact remains this guy is fishing for clicks and you are defending his behaviour so based on that you should have no issues with anyone else doing the same, whether they defend Fuji, Sony, Nikon or Osama Bin Laden!
 
Jared Huntr said:
deednets said:
Jared Huntr said:
Everyone is conveniently evading this point:

Fact remains that no one around here gets called out for linking to favourable Fuji reviews, however ad-laden that site is.
Click to expand...
Grow up, dude ... you are a great supporter of that guy I get that, but annoyingly rubbing this in that people like me are only critical because his "review" is not favorable is childish and immature.

Just troll elsewhere with your assumptions ok?

Deed
Click to expand...
It is interesting that you should be accusing others of making assumptions when your entire basis of complaint against this poster is based on assumptions.

Let's be clear. It's not that I support the OP but rather that I support the dissemination of information and varying opinions. Note that I was one of the first to criticize the OP's methods. There is a certain maturity in being able to deal with an opposing opinion without attacking the individual or accusing them on the basis of ulterior motives. It is also plain intellectually lazy to dismiss someone and all ideas put forth by them just because you strongly disagree with a few points.

Oh, and save the over-used 'T'-card for genuine cases. To call someone that these days simply means that one is unable to defend their position. It is easier to just label the opposition and be dismissive than to deal with questions head-on.
Click to expand...
Jesus, will ignore you from now on and would suggest you do the same! We are simply not and never will be on the same page.

Your logic is based on the assumption that I haven't read his "review".

Will leave it at.

Ignore ...
 
SSantana75 said:
Jared Huntr said:
Everyone is conveniently evading this point:

Fact remains that no one around here gets called out for linking to favourable Fuji reviews, however ad-laden that site is.
Click to expand...
Nobody is evading that point, we've already said it's also wrong for that to be the case, what more would you like us to do? hack the site and delete their posts?
Click to expand...
The question wasn't one of asking whether it was right of wrong, but rather WHY there exists this hypocrisy. It's one thing to have a point of view, but your credibility is diminished when you aren't consistent with how you apply it, or apply it only when it is convenient.
SSantana75 said:
Fact remains this guy is fishing for clicks
Click to expand...
There is nothing confirming that he is fishing for clicks other than the fact that you say so. So no, this is not a 'fact'.
 
Jared Huntr said:
SSantana75 said:
Jared Huntr said:
Everyone is conveniently evading this point:

Fact remains that no one around here gets called out for linking to favourable Fuji reviews, however ad-laden that site is.
Click to expand...
Nobody is evading that point, we've already said it's also wrong for that to be the case, what more would you like us to do? hack the site and delete their posts?
Click to expand...
The question wasn't one of asking whether it was right of wrong, but rather WHY there exists this hypocrisy. It's one thing to have a point of view, but your credibility is diminished when you aren't consistent with how you apply it, or apply it only when it is convenient.
Jared Huntr said:
Fact remains this guy is fishing for clicks
Click to expand...
There is nothing confirming that he is fishing for clicks other than the fact that you say so. So no, this is not a 'fact'.
Click to expand...
You sound like my ex-girlfriend so I'll do exactly what I did on our last conversation and say GOOD BYE and GOOD LUCK! you can keep on talking in circles to yourself. (just because you can hear doesn't mean you are listening). Peace!
 
SSantana75 said:
Jared Huntr said:
SSantana75 said:
Jared Huntr said:
Everyone is conveniently evading this point:

Fact remains that no one around here gets called out for linking to favourable Fuji reviews, however ad-laden that site is.
Click to expand...
Nobody is evading that point, we've already said it's also wrong for that to be the case, what more would you like us to do? hack the site and delete their posts?
Click to expand...
The question wasn't one of asking whether it was right of wrong, but rather WHY there exists this hypocrisy. It's one thing to have a point of view, but your credibility is diminished when you aren't consistent with how you apply it, or apply it only when it is convenient.
SSantana75 said:
Fact remains this guy is fishing for clicks
Click to expand...
There is nothing confirming that he is fishing for clicks other than the fact that you say so. So no, this is not a 'fact'.
Click to expand...
You sound like my ex-girlfriend so I'll do exactly what I did on our last conversation and say GOOD BYE and GOOD LUCK! you can keep on talking in circles to yourself. (just because you can hear doesn't mean you are listening). Peace!
Click to expand...
He's now on my ignore list .. I rarely do that but just a tad too naive, this "I make you walk through my shop, but of course you don't have to buy..."

Peace to you too and a good week end!

Deed
 
Last edited:
deednets said:
SSantana75 said:
Jared Huntr said:
SSantana75 said:
Jared Huntr said:
Everyone is conveniently evading this point:

Fact remains that no one around here gets called out for linking to favourable Fuji reviews, however ad-laden that site is.
Click to expand...
Nobody is evading that point, we've already said it's also wrong for that to be the case, what more would you like us to do? hack the site and delete their posts?
Click to expand...
The question wasn't one of asking whether it was right of wrong, but rather WHY there exists this hypocrisy. It's one thing to have a point of view, but your credibility is diminished when you aren't consistent with how you apply it, or apply it only when it is convenient.
deednets said:
Fact remains this guy is fishing for clicks
Click to expand...
There is nothing confirming that he is fishing for clicks other than the fact that you say so. So no, this is not a 'fact'.
Click to expand...
You sound like my ex-girlfriend so I'll do exactly what I did on our last conversation and say GOOD BYE and GOOD LUCK! you can keep on talking in circles to yourself. (just because you can hear doesn't mean you are listening). Peace!
Click to expand...
He's now on my ignore list .. I rarely do that but just a tad too naive, this "I make you walk through my shop, but of course you don't have to buy..."

Peace to you too and a good week end!

Deed
Click to expand...
Might do the same. Cheers.
 
deednets said:
axlotl said:
http://cameraergonomics.blogspot.com.au/2015/03/fuji-x-t1-review-part-1-image-quality.html

This short review is a bit late in the X-T1 product cycle, for which my apologies.

I recently had the opportunity to borrow an X-T1 with 23mm f1.4 lens for a week and used it for tests and comparisons with other cameras.

There are two posts. The link to the first one is above. The second one is about ergonomics.

There is nothing really new here. The current version of Photoshop Camera Raw still doesn't work well with the Fuji X-Trans RAW files. I found some other issues with picture quality which I was unable to explain.

The post about ergonomics is a continuation of my comparative analysis of 'traditional' vs 'modern' camera control systems, with a newly developed scoring system for ergonomics which I am still trialling.

All constructive feedback welcome, especially about the ergonomics scoring system.

Happy reading

Andrew
Click to expand...
How constructive?

You mention that you compared it to other cameras. Pana outresolves the prime with its super-zoom. Pana silent af and smack on, Low light goes to the Fuji but not much else.

Reading your review part one .... and I have a hunch as to where part 2 will be going.

Thanks for sharing!

deed
Click to expand...
I did not have to go to far in the review to understand where it was going. What a bunch of poop. I have worked with the FZ1000 :( and sadly this ???review??? is bull caca.

I agree with you completely.

I think someone did not get enough attention in their early years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top