An entry level camera that captured my heart...

Ben Herrmann wrote:

If you took the time to read one of my first replies above, you would have seen that I agreed with another reader who meant to clarify Kfishers statement. And I most certain never referred to him (or thought) as being a Troll - at the time of my initial reading of his terse reply, the "snapshots" did initially rub me the wrong way.

As for your diatribe about "thin-skinned," "passive aggressive," and "seeing it in lots of my posts on other forums," well that's a new one. Isn't that what you're doing with your posts in this thread?

I dunno you tell me?

I suppose we could make this all about me.

It is a good way of deflecting attention from you, right?

I'm sure over the past 12 years and with countless postings, I've gotten irritated now and then - it's bound to happen. And I'm sure if one were to research all of your ramblings, they'd find a good bit of "flying off the handle" on your end also. In fact, one could say that you do lots of rambling under the guise of humor (which is a very subjective scenario).

I don't think you will find that Tedolph is thin skinned. Many other things but not thin skinned.  Indeed, Tedolph seems to be immune from insults of any sort.  It may have something to do with his superiority complex.

But, you could do a search and tell us what you find.

That would be interesting.

And as I mentioned in the OP, yes, this is an entry level camera - but one whose (within the the parameters of what they give you) performance in the IQ department is a cut above many other competitors.

It is, just don't be so quick to take offense.

Intent is a very difficult thing to detect over the Internet.

-- hide signature --

Have a great one....

You too Ben!

Bernd (Ben) W. Herrmann
North Carolina, USA
link

TEdolph

Speaking just like the actor on the old Seinfeld TV series who spoke in the 3rd person all of the time.  Let's see...how does it go?

OK.  "But Ben never tried to analyze or personally insult Tedolf.  It seems that the accusations and diagnoses of Ben's thinking and behavior are being levied by Mr. Tedolf."  And how does the ole' saying go, "it takes one to know one?"  

Ben will let you go now...

Ben Herrmann wrote:

Speaking just like the actor on the old Seinfeld TV series who spoke in the 3rd person all of the time. Let's see...how does it go?

OK. "But Ben never tried to analyze or personally insult Tedolf. It seems that the accusations and diagnoses of Ben's thinking and behavior are being levied by Mr. Tedolf." And how does the ole' saying go, "it takes one to know one?"

Ben will let you go now...

Thanks..

-- hide signature --

Have a great one....
Bernd (Ben) W. Herrmann
North Carolina, USA
link

Tedolph

"Soon, you won't have Tedolph to kick around anymore"

tedolf wrote:

Ben Herrmann wrote:

Care to clarify what you meant by "...spent so much time processing these snapshots?" Has a very condescending, sarcastic tone to that.

Kfisher is right.

These are basically just snapshots.

And, there is nothing wrong with that.

The Xa-1 is targeted at a snapshot, vacation type photographer (loot at the controls) so that is the type of photographs they are likely to take. I seriously considered the X-A1 as a replacement for my E-pl1 but rejected it primarily because it couldn't take a viewfinder (needed to stabilize long lenses) and ultimately I didn't want to give up IBIS to get the better high ISO performance since those types of photo's are so rare.

It's not so much the suggestion that they're only 'snapshots' as it is the implication that he might be wasting his time putting the effort into processing them which comes across as pretty condescending.

If he'd said "I prefer a look that is less post-processed" it would be fine, a personal choice. Maybe that's what he meant.

Beat Traveller wrote:

tedolf wrote:

Ben Herrmann wrote:

Care to clarify what you meant by "...spent so much time processing these snapshots?" Has a very condescending, sarcastic tone to that.

Kfisher is right.

These are basically just snapshots.

And, there is nothing wrong with that.

The Xa-1 is targeted at a snapshot, vacation type photographer (loot at the controls) so that is the type of photographs they are likely to take. I seriously considered the X-A1 as a replacement for my E-pl1 but rejected it primarily because it couldn't take a viewfinder (needed to stabilize long lenses) and ultimately I didn't want to give up IBIS to get the better high ISO performance since those types of photo's are so rare.

It's not so much the suggestion that they're only 'snapshots' as it is the implication that he might be wasting his time putting the effort into processing them which comes across as pretty condescending.

Not to me. I don't see any sort of insult at all.  It is just his opinion.

Why be offended?

You people must have ESP and be able to read minds to find offense in this stuff.

If he'd said "I prefer a look that is less post-processed" it would be fine, a personal choice.

Wow.

I guess you have to be really, really careful how you craft your responses here so as to avoid offense.

Seems like splitting hairs to me.

Maybe that's what he meant.

Maybe this isn't really a photography forum.

Maybe it is a Girls' Jr. High School social site!

Tedolph

"Soon, you won't have Tedolph to kick around anymore"

tedolf wrote:

Beat Traveller wrote:

tedolf wrote:

Ben Herrmann wrote:

Care to clarify what you meant by "...spent so much time processing these snapshots?" Has a very condescending, sarcastic tone to that.

Kfisher is right.

These are basically just snapshots.

And, there is nothing wrong with that.

The Xa-1 is targeted at a snapshot, vacation type photographer (loot at the controls) so that is the type of photographs they are likely to take. I seriously considered the X-A1 as a replacement for my E-pl1 but rejected it primarily because it couldn't take a viewfinder (needed to stabilize long lenses) and ultimately I didn't want to give up IBIS to get the better high ISO performance since those types of photo's are so rare.

It's not so much the suggestion that they're only 'snapshots' as it is the implication that he might be wasting his time putting the effort into processing them which comes across as pretty condescending.

Not to me. I don't see any sort of insult at all. It is just his opinion.

Why be offended?

You people must have ESP and be able to read minds to find offense in this stuff.

I'm talking about how it comes across, not whether or not he intended to offend someone. Appreciate the difference.

If he'd said "I prefer a look that is less post-processed" it would be fine, a personal choice.

Wow.

I guess you have to be really, really careful how you craft your responses here so as to avoid offense.

It's just good advice generally to be polite and think about how other people are going to react.

Maybe that's what he meant.

Maybe this isn't really a photography forum.

Maybe it is a Girls' Jr. High School social site!

Meow!

Beat Traveller wrote:

tedolf wrote:

Beat Traveller wrote:

tedolf wrote:

Ben Herrmann wrote:

Care to clarify what you meant by "...spent so much time processing these snapshots?" Has a very condescending, sarcastic tone to that.

Kfisher is right.

These are basically just snapshots.

And, there is nothing wrong with that.

The Xa-1 is targeted at a snapshot, vacation type photographer (loot at the controls) so that is the type of photographs they are likely to take. I seriously considered the X-A1 as a replacement for my E-pl1 but rejected it primarily because it couldn't take a viewfinder (needed to stabilize long lenses) and ultimately I didn't want to give up IBIS to get the better high ISO performance since those types of photo's are so rare.

It's not so much the suggestion that they're only 'snapshots' as it is the implication that he might be wasting his time putting the effort into processing them which comes across as pretty condescending.

Not to me. I don't see any sort of insult at all. It is just his opinion.

Why be offended?

You people must have ESP and be able to read minds to find offense in this stuff.

I'm talking about how it comes across, not whether or not he intended to offend someone. Appreciate the difference.

If he'd said "I prefer a look that is less post-processed" it would be fine, a personal choice.

Wow.

I guess you have to be really, really careful how you craft your responses here so as to avoid offense.

It's just good advice generally to be polite and think about how other people are going to react.

Maybe that's what he meant.

Maybe this isn't really a photography forum.

Maybe it is a Girls' Jr. High School social site!

Meow!

Hiiiissssssssssss!

Tedolph

Hi Bernd,

can only agree in all points to your review. Entry level only applies to the price but IQ wise, and here especially in regard to the colour reproduction, the X-A1 is a little gem. I've been fiddling with my X-T1 (and X-E1) for quite some time to achieve the same colour rendition as the X-A1 but so far without big success. I'm surprised that my X-S1 bridge can produce something similar.

Meanwhile, and having been initially sceptical, I've got used to the fact that it is a camera without a viewfinder (it's my only one) and for bright daylight conditions with strong light from behind and the sides I'm using a detachable LCD hood.

My numerous MF lenses (Nikkor, Topcon, Konica, Fujinon, Russians) work perfectly by means of various adapters. The combination Clearviewer (magnifier) and focus peaking almost lets me forget the fact that I'm operating a camera without a viewfinder.

Have continuous fun with your X-A1!!!!

X-A1 with detachable LCD hood

X-A1 with detachable LCD hood, slightly tilted

X-A1 with detachable LCD hood

X-A1 with detached LCD hood and mounted Clearviewer

X-A1 with mounted LCD hood and Clearviewer

Brgds
Michael (Vienna)

That would be wonderful on a very bright day.  Any links as to where you purchased this?  I'd love to check it out?

Thanks...

Ben Herrmann wrote:

That would be wonderful on a very bright day. Any links as to where you purchased this? I'd love to check it out?

Thanks...

Hallo Bernd,

I actually bought 2 last year for the X-S1 and X-A1. At that time they were offering 4:3 and 3:2 side ratios. Apparently the 3:2 (fitting the wider LCD screen of the X-A1) is out of stock. Here's the link for the 4:3 LCD hood:

http://www.enjoyyourcamera.com/Display-Kameraschutz/Display-Sonnenblenden/Lichtschacht-Quenox-4-3-DigiCap-3-0-Zoll-7-62cm-Made-in-Germany::4164.html

Another possibility which I use on my X-100 and X-T1 are the LCD hoods from JJC. These are also mounted on a frame stuck on the LCD screen and are also detachable. The difference to the ones above is the fact that the JJC frames are collapsible (foldable) and function as a screen protection which comes in handy since the LCD screen doesn't become greasy when I'm using the viewfinder only. Here's the link:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Camera-LCD-Monitor-Hood-for-3-0-Screen-Universal-3-Sided-Canopy-Ultra-Slim-NIB-/310763532023?pt=UK_Photography_DigitalCamAccess_RL&hash=item485af32ef7

Brgds und alles Gute
Michael (Vienna)

Snapshots or not, the image quality is quite impressive for a camera of this class. I like the colour and detail rendering better than Fuji's X trans sensor output. Bummer the XA has no EVF. Thanks for the images and information.

Zagato wrote:

Ben Herrmann wrote:

That would be wonderful on a very bright day. Any links as to where you purchased this? I'd love to check it out?

Thanks...

Hallo Bernd,

I actually bought 2 last year for the X-S1 and X-A1. At that time they were offering 4:3 and 3:2 side ratios. Apparently the 3:2 (fitting the wider LCD screen of the X-A1) is out of stock. Here's the link for the 4:3 LCD hood:

http://www.enjoyyourcamera.com/Display-Kameraschutz/Display-Sonnenblenden/Lichtschacht-Quenox-4-3-DigiCap-3-0-Zoll-7-62cm-Made-in-Germany::4164.html

Another possibility which I use on my X-100 and X-T1 are the LCD hoods from JJC. These are also mounted on a frame stuck on the LCD screen and are also detachable. The difference to the ones above is the fact that the JJC frames are collapsible (foldable) and function as a screen protection which comes in handy since the LCD screen doesn't become greasy when I'm using the viewfinder only. Here's the link:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Camera-LCD-Monitor-Hood-for-3-0-Screen-Universal-3-Sided-Canopy-Ultra-Slim-NIB-/310763532023?pt=UK_Photography_DigitalCamAccess_RL&hash=item485af32ef7

Brgds und alles Gute
Michael (Vienna)

That JJC hood is actually a copy of the one manufactured by Delkin.  I've had the Delkin on my Pentax K-01 for a couple years now.

caver3d