Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Fuji X pro1  (Read 20399 times)
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #40 on: January 12, 2012, 12:21:38 PM »
ReplyReply

The SLR lenses have a long registration distance to account for the mirror box.  Theoretically, they could have been used on rangefinder cameras with the appropriate spacing, but there would have been no way to judge focus.  In the mirrorless+EVF world, most SLR lenses will work with an appropriate adapter, including your old Nikkors.  Of course, rangefinder lenses are mostly useless on DSLRs due to the short registration distance, except for the use of mirror lockup to clear the mirror box from the lens mount on the rangefinder lens. 


Yes, I know, but using the slr lenses with the greater back-focus distance, how will they ever focus fully with a body that has a short back-focus distance? How do you bring them near enough to the film sensor?

Rob C
Logged

uaiomex
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 973


WWW
« Reply #41 on: January 12, 2012, 12:27:54 PM »
ReplyReply

If the competition is not worried, they should.
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_pro1/sample_images/img/index/ff_x_pro1_003.JPG

Eduardo
Logged
semillerimages
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 163


WWW
« Reply #42 on: January 12, 2012, 02:17:41 PM »
ReplyReply

I downloaded those Fuji sample images and did a DRASTIC highlight/shadow adjustment for the shadows and it's quite simply amazing how noise free the shadows are on these images, even with them pumped open beyond anything I would ever do.
I'm definitely going to consider buying one of these...

*steve
Logged

semillerimages.com
MarkL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 330


« Reply #43 on: January 12, 2012, 03:34:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Looks like the same awful af system an terrible laggy fly by wire focus ring, the sensor might be nice but if you can't focus it's not too much use.
Logged
LKaven
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 784


« Reply #44 on: January 12, 2012, 04:45:53 PM »
ReplyReply


Yes, I know, but using the slr lenses with the greater back-focus distance, how will they ever focus fully with a body that has a short back-focus distance? How do you bring them near enough to the film sensor?

Rob C
Maybe I misunderstood your question?

The Nikon has a registration distance (distance from mount to sensor) of 46.50mm.  The Sony E-mount bodies have a registration distance of 18mm.  If you add a spacer to go from 18mm to 46.50mm, you can mount your Nikkor lenses on the E-mount bodies and have them focus as they would normally.  I'd expect the same to be true of the Fuji. 

Note also that the reason you can put Nikon lenses on Canon cameras, but not the other way around, is because the Canon has a shorter registration distance.
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #45 on: January 12, 2012, 05:08:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Maybe I misunderstood your question?

The Nikon has a registration distance (distance from mount to sensor) of 46.50mm.  The Sony E-mount bodies have a registration distance of 18mm.  If you add a spacer to go from 18mm to 46.50mm, you can mount your Nikkor lenses on the E-mount bodies and have them focus as they would normally.  I'd expect the same to be true of the Fuji. 

Note also that the reason you can put Nikon lenses on Canon cameras, but not the other way around, is because the Canon has a shorter registration distance.


I also notice that my last sentence was misleading, even to myself! Not closer, but further away is what's required. I suppose a spacer would do it - a bit of a pointless thing in the end, because by using slr glass you lose the benefits of dedicated rf lens designs. In which case, it all becomes a sort of false economy, I suppose.

Regarding Nik to Can conversions, doesn't Can also have a wider throat than Nik? That alone would put hellish obstacles in the way of the opposite interchange!

I suppose it's a route I won't be travelling.

Rob C
Logged

Pelao
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 200



« Reply #46 on: January 12, 2012, 06:43:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Looks like the same awful af system an terrible laggy fly by wire focus ring, the sensor might be nice but if you can't focus it's not too much use.

Maybe, but I think I'll await some comprehensive reviews, especially user reviews. I am not convinced there is enough evidence out there for a conclusion. Even when the reviews are out, I'll try one anyway because I know my specific needs. AF measurements have never helped me much - I want to know if it will work for what and how I shoot. Fuji are openly claiming that the AF is much faster than the X100.

Logged
amsp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 787


« Reply #47 on: January 12, 2012, 07:43:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Looks like the same awful af system an terrible laggy fly by wire focus ring, the sensor might be nice but if you can't focus it's not too much use.

If that's the case, just put a leica or any other M-mount lens on it.
Logged
Steve Weldon
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1445



WWW
« Reply #48 on: January 13, 2012, 12:33:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Looks like the same awful af system an terrible laggy fly by wire focus ring, the sensor might be nice but if you can't focus it's not too much use.
I suppose if you count classifying it as the same type "contrast detect" as the x100 and a few hundred other cameras out there..

As a x100 user I tend to agree the AF needs to be suitable for more types of photography than is the x100.  The x100's autofocus isn't "terrible", it's outstanding for certain types of photography, okay for other types, and mehhh for others.   

Perceptions are funny.  I loaned my x100 to a friend who took it to China for 4-5 weeks and he constantly complained about the AF.  I didn't think it was that bad, but I had just did that major firmware update before I sent it out without testing it, so I was eager to get it back to see if maybe the firmware update had some detrimental effect.  Most of his images weren't OOF.. but they were soft.  Once I had it back I used it for 2-3 outings and my images were sharp.. same sort of shooting, same type of subjects.  There is an obvious discrepancy between our images.  This guy isn't an inexperienced photographer either, but I do believe if I was standing next to him I'd be able to pick out why he was getting soft images with the same type of shots I was getting sharp images from.  It's a huge guess, but I'd guess this is probably true for the 50% of users who are okay with the x100's AF and the 50% who aren't.

And obviously it's not suitable for several types of photography..

Before I had the x100 I had the NEX-5 and 10+ other PNS cameras.. and I felt there was a void.  The x100 filled about 90% of that void.  Everyone's void (needs) is different.  The XPro1 is an exciting camera, but I no longer have that void to fill.. or as much of it.  So I can afford to sit back and wait for the reviews and user reports to come in.  If the XPro1 fills the void 98-100% then I'll look at the price, the functions the x100 doesn't have, and make a decision.

What I don't expect it to do, is to replace my DSLR's.  I use these professionally and they need to be suitable for a wide variety of photographic needs.  I don't expect the XPro1 to be that capable.  I doubt any camera of this type will be that capable.  This means the XPro1 fills the void for personal use.  And frankly the x100 does a really good job of that.. it fills that void 90%.   

Yet, I really like the XPro1 concept and I'm sure most x100 owners do as well.  Fuji has to know that we'll be watching to see 'how much' better the XPro1 is than the x100.  Interchangeable lenses alone won't cut it.  It will need to be a complete camera with no major issues.  At this price point autofocus will need to be one of the best out there on cameras of this type.  Manual focus as well.  Fuji knows this, and they know the XPro1 will most likely be a failure if they don't correct the issue.   I would hope they're not that blind.
Logged

----------------------------------------------
http://www.BangkokImages.com
gullevek
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 25



WWW
« Reply #49 on: January 13, 2012, 02:14:14 AM »
ReplyReply

This camera will be great if they fix the three major things that bug me with the X-100

* the slow wake up from sleep. This is not excusable in this day and age, when every cheap DSLR is instant shoot ready
* if they have a more sane button selection. Not having a dedicated ISO button but this ridiculous RAW button then I am already more happy. What I can see they fixed the very bad select button and wheel configuration. One of the most frustrating things. I also hope they use the jog dial more. That one is heavy underused on the X100
* and if they have a better firmware. It is just annoying to go for all the settings you often need into sub sub menus (AF spot/multi, ND filter, etc) because you cannot have a personal menu and there is only one custom button available.

As much as I love the quality of the images from the X100, the usability is beyond bad. But let's wait until there is purchasable model and some proper reviews.
Logged

gubaguba
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


« Reply #50 on: January 13, 2012, 08:14:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Ultimate hipster camera.  There I said it.  I have seen more Fuji X cameras draped on shoulders like fashion accessories.  Not to say that it is a bad camera or incapable of taking great pictures.  As a serious photography tool... not so much.  It was not meant to be one.  If it was there wouldn't have been a need to make it look so much like an M camera.  Its main selling point is a connection to nostalgia. 

I will end saying that I think mirrorless cameras will be the way to go in the future.  The Fuji X pro1 is not that future.
Logged

gullevek
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 25



WWW
« Reply #51 on: January 13, 2012, 09:36:00 AM »
ReplyReply

uh, some Leica fanboy throws a hissy fit. I had this confrontations. I really have no idea why. I take awesome pictures with my X100 without spending 10.000$ on some camera gear.

And looking like Leica? I could also say it looks like a Bessa rangefinder, or a Zeiss one or an old Nikon or any old rangefinder. Leica has no patent on rangefinder design.
Logged

LKaven
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 784


« Reply #52 on: January 13, 2012, 12:06:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Looks a little like an X-Pan....hmmm, there's the "X" factor again.  I'd be very happy if it /felt/ like an X-Pan.
Logged

KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1649



WWW
« Reply #53 on: January 13, 2012, 12:17:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Looks a little like an X-Pan...

...a forerunner perhaps?
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #54 on: January 13, 2012, 02:20:48 PM »
ReplyReply

...a forerunner perhaps?



Interesting thought, Keith; do you think they'll ever make something called an X-Pan?

Now, if they were to get in touch with Hasselblad, do some co-operative deal on names...who knows what might happen! Visually, could even be a sort of longish version of other rangefinder 135 film cameras. I'm sure it would find a home with landscape photographers. And with a short range of additional lenses...

The future will tell.

;-)

Rob C
Logged

MarkL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 330


« Reply #55 on: January 13, 2012, 03:02:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Maybe, but I think I'll await some comprehensive reviews, especially user reviews. I am not convinced there is enough evidence out there for a conclusion. Even when the reviews are out, I'll try one anyway because I know my specific needs. AF measurements have never helped me much - I want to know if it will work for what and how I shoot. Fuji are openly claiming that the AF is much faster than the X100.

The videos by the fuji guys and one user (lots of red af fail boxes) make it look like exactly the same system, plus there is no mention of AF changes in any of the releases just a dubious comment by a marketing person. I have an X100 and it's a great camera with a terrible focusing system, the af area is so big it's often impossible to know what it's focused on. On top of all this, there is no mention or demo of focus peaking for manual focus use/use with M lenses.

This camera could have been great but will probably get all the same criticisms levelled at it that the X100 did, at least they moved auto ISO into the ISO menu though Wink
« Last Edit: January 13, 2012, 03:05:01 PM by MarkL » Logged
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1649



WWW
« Reply #56 on: January 13, 2012, 04:26:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Interesting thought, Keith; do you think they'll ever make something called an X-Pan?

Now, if they were to get in touch with Hasselblad, do some co-operative deal on names...who knows what might happen!

Hi Rob

As you no doubt know the XPan was a collaboration between Fuji and Hasselblad. The relationship continues today with the H series.

I've said before that I think it likely that Hasselblad will make an additional more mainstream system and I would also think it likely that this could again be a collaborative project. Time will tell.

In the meantime I have to say the Fuji X-Pro1 looks to be an exciting prospect and I'll be keeping a close eye on developments. It could well be just what I've been hoping for as a carry around camera and back up for my current Hasselblad system.
Logged

Steve Weldon
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1445



WWW
« Reply #57 on: January 13, 2012, 06:01:10 PM »
ReplyReply

I have an X100 and it's a great camera with a terrible focusing system, the af area is so big it's often impossible to know what it's focused on.

You've tried reducing the size of the AF area?  The x100 is the only camera I know of which offers this feature.   You can see the size changing (to very small) in the EVF, but you'll need to visualize the change in the optical..
Logged

----------------------------------------------
http://www.BangkokImages.com
LKaven
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 784


« Reply #58 on: January 13, 2012, 06:42:48 PM »
ReplyReply

...a forerunner perhaps?

That's what I was wondering...obviously Fuji know how to make a 35mm camera that feels very nice.  I don't know if those Fujiblads were very reliable, but they certainly felt good. 
Logged

Bernard ODonovan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 114


« Reply #59 on: January 13, 2012, 07:54:17 PM »
ReplyReply


Ignore the bit around 4 minutes 50 seconds when he is in Macro mode...

At 4 Min 55 secs onwards he starts focus tests in normal mode... 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ChjzvHPOq4
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad