Richard Coombs Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 I've been using the X Pro 1 since it was released with good and bad results. All shots so far accepted by QC. I'm not a big fan of the X Trans sensor, but I can see that it has a future so long as Adobe, or someone, gets the RAW conversion process right. LR is a lot better than it was, but not perfect by a long shot. The original X100, which I also use occasionally is extremely good with its Bayer sensor. X100S. Any thoughts, experience? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan_Andison Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 No experience with the X100S but interested to hear what problems you've had with the X Pro 1. I've had mine for the last week. I use it with LR 4.4 for both jpg and Raw. So far I've been very impressed with the quality and even the autofocus isn't that bad at all. Occasionally hunts but not to bad and it seems to be very accurate. Using the 35mm and 18-55 at the moment and both are very impressive lenses indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gervais Montacute Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 If you have an X100 original, are you thinking of trading it in for an X100S? Other than that, the main differences as far as I can tell are focusing and the viewfinder plus higher MP rate. All in all pound for pound, best small camera with a fixed lens on the market to my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Crean Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 If you have an X100 original, are you thinking of trading it in for an X100S? Other than that, the main differences as far as I can tell are focusing and the viewfinder plus higher MP rate. All in all pound for pound, best small camera with a fixed lens on the market to my mind. Am using an X100 as a go everywhere camera...Very impressed! Think I might be looking a the XPro 1 sometime in the next year. Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Coombs Posted May 16, 2013 Author Share Posted May 16, 2013 If you have an X100 original, are you thinking of trading it in for an X100S? No, I'm definitely not going to trade my X100 for the S version, I'm very happy with the original. I might consider buying an S if there were any real advantages, which I don't really think there are Duncan. Don't get me wrong, I think the XP1 is a very good camera. I enjoy using it, and importantly, it has produced quite a few pictures that have sold. To be fair, I think my gripe is more with the software manufacturers, not least Adobe. The RAW conversion software just hasn't made the grade so far in terms of demosaicing (I think that is the right term) The watercolour effect on out of focus foliage, for instance, is particularly irritating, I am surprised that QC haven't objected to it. This phenomenon also appears in other software, including Silkypix to an extent. If I am faced with a picture that is going to include foliage I tend to reach for my Sony NEX. The very smooth, plasticky look is another source of annoyance. I have recently found that this can be avoided to some extent by setting the ISO between 500 and 800. Great for lower light levels, but a bit of a handicap in bright, sunny conditions, not that we see a lot of that in the UK! Overall, the XP1 is a great camera, but I only use it for certain subjects and use the NEX 6 or 5N for situations where I know the XP1 is likely to struggle. A lot of people complain about focus speed, and whilst it isn't blazingly fast, I find it fast enough for what I do. The 35mm is pretty good focus speed wise and has exceptionally good IQ. The 60mm is adequate on focus in good light and again has good IQ. I had the 18mm for about a week, but found it to be of very poor quality in the IQ department. Focus was a bit unreliable, and hit and miss until I recently adjusted the focus box (in EVF mode) to the size just above the smallest, having tried both largest and smallest, the medium setting is giving me the most reliable and consistent result. It should be noted that my NEX's have never, ever, let me down on focus, they never fail to lock and lock accurately. As the XP1 was going on twice the price, I think one might reasonably expect the same. The XP1 has been a steep learning curve to get the best out of it, for me anyway, but it is coming right. All the best. Rich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSnapper Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 X100s is a cracking camera......in my mind a definite step up from the X100 in terms of quality... I use it a lot for weddings and film+tv still where its extreme quietness is a major advantage. It is my 'carry around' camera...always with me....i use it day in , day out km ps..... and LR5 Beta is much, much , better at raw conversions from the Fuji .RAF files than LR4.4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan_Andison Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 X100s is a cracking camera......in my mind a definite step up from the X100 in terms of quality... I use it a lot for weddings and film+tv still where its extreme quietness is a major advantage. It is my 'carry around' camera...always with me....i use it day in , day out km ps..... and LR5 Beta is much, much , better at raw conversions from the Fuji .RAF files than LR4.4 Cheers.... i will try some raws from the X Pro1. I downloaded LR5 Beta the other day but haven't had much of a chance to play with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan_Andison Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 If you have an X100 original, are you thinking of trading it in for an X100S? No, I'm definitely not going to trade my X100 for the S version, I'm very happy with the original. I might consider buying an S if there were any real advantages, which I don't really think there are Duncan. Don't get me wrong, I think the XP1 is a very good camera. I enjoy using it, and importantly, it has produced quite a few pictures that have sold. To be fair, I think my gripe is more with the software manufacturers, not least Adobe. The RAW conversion software just hasn't made the grade so far in terms of demosaicing (I think that is the right term) The watercolour effect on out of focus foliage, for instance, is particularly irritating, I am surprised that QC haven't objected to it. This phenomenon also appears in other software, including Silkypix to an extent. If I am faced with a picture that is going to include foliage I tend to reach for my Sony NEX. The very smooth, plasticky look is another source of annoyance. I have recently found that this can be avoided to some extent by setting the ISO between 500 and 800. Great for lower light levels, but a bit of a handicap in bright, sunny conditions, not that we see a lot of that in the UK! Overall, the XP1 is a great camera, but I only use it for certain subjects and use the NEX 6 or 5N for situations where I know the XP1 is likely to struggle. A lot of people complain about focus speed, and whilst it isn't blazingly fast, I find it fast enough for what I do. The 35mm is pretty good focus speed wise and has exceptionally good IQ. The 60mm is adequate on focus in good light and again has good IQ. I had the 18mm for about a week, but found it to be of very poor quality in the IQ department. Focus was a bit unreliable, and hit and miss until I recently adjusted the focus box (in EVF mode) to the size just above the smallest, having tried both largest and smallest, the medium setting is giving me the most reliable and consistent result. It should be noted that my NEX's have never, ever, let me down on focus, they never fail to lock and lock accurately. As the XP1 was going on twice the price, I think one might reasonably expect the same. The XP1 has been a steep learning curve to get the best out of it, for me anyway, but it is coming right. All the best. Rich. I seem to have lost some of the plastic look and gained more detail by setting the in camera NR to -1 or -2. I noticed a couple of other people complaining about the same thing and that's what they advised to help it. Like yourself, I have set the focus area to be a lot smaller and that makes a difference to speed. I am still stunned that I can set the auto iso to 3200 and know that the images will be useable. The Nex 7 used to be more a less a right off after 800. I think I may also start using LR5 Beta as my main software package, hopefully there're aren't to many bugs in it. Thanks again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.