Not overly thrilled w/X-Pro 1 in hand...

[gavinlg]

Originally Posted by awilder

One thing that surprised (disappointed) me was that the X-Pro-1 didn't have a built-in diopter adjustment like every other camera on the market but required old school accessory diopter eyepieces. Maybe that's acceptable for an RF camera with a finder that dates back to the 50's but its still a PIA. The problem for me was that the standard eyepeice power of -1 D made it hard to see the finder sharply with my old presbyopic eyes camera is difficult at this time. I wonder if like their old GS645 folder, it took Nikon F style eyepiece diopter eyepieces? I've also heard getting accessories from Fuiji is difficult so if the eyepiece thread is unique, it may be an issue.

It's 19mm - same diopter the bessa/zeiss ikon/epson r-d1 use.



The reason they didn't put an inbuilt diopter in it is probably because the viewfinder mechanism is already jam packed with technology and it wouldn't have met size constraints. Think about it - optical VF with projected LED frame lines, electronic viewfinder with curtain slider at the front, and a frame line magnification mechanism as well.

[thegman]

I held the XPro-1 in a shop once, liked the build, however I'm not in the market for one anyway. I will say that sometimes fondling a camera in the shop is enough to dispel GAS, the magic is gone, and it's just another camera.

[noimmunity]

The X-Pro1 with 35 is very well balanced, solid, and yet thankfully much lighter than the M8/M9.

Aki-Asahi now offers a full range of coverings for it, too.

[macjim]

I have both the M9 and the X-Pro1 and find them just right in the hand, and very similar too. Ok, the X-Pro1 is lighter, but that's a good thing. Both cameras have their good points - and bad. Ive had quite a few cameras in the last three years and I have to say, the X-Pro1 is the one I'm happiest with. Better than the Nikon D90 (smaller and lighter), Sony nex-5n (easier to handle with my big hands) Leica D-lux5 (larger and with an optical viewfinder). Yes these cameras had better features such as through the lens viewing, faster focusing, compact size etc but I would say the X-Pro1 is a good all round camera — just the right size, weight and handling abilities for most.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by thegman

I held the XPro-1 in a shop once, liked the build, however I'm not in the market for one anyway. I will say that sometimes fondling a camera in the shop is enough to dispel GAS, the magic is gone, and it's just another camera.

I was working on that theory when I went into a shop to fondle the OMD ... bad move!

[Bike Tourist]

I have them both, not much bothered by size difference:



X100 has not enough diopter adjustment for me so I have to wear glasses when using it.

XP1 has interchangable lenses and will accumulate sensor dust.

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by hausen

Felt sort of plasticy and light weight to me. M9 is so much nicer in the hands.

But, it isn't plastic and since when is light a bad thing?

[dct]

Originally Posted by gavinlg

It's 19mm - same diopter the bessa/zeiss ikon/epson r-d1 use.



[...]

I don't get it: Will this replace the original VF glass or will it be added like a filter on a lens? Would this also fit a Hexar RF VF?

[Nikon Bob]

I am a bit like the OP in that I think I prefer the X100 size wise. I was looking for a camera as a companion to my DSLR kit for those times when I want something small,light and simple. I don't want another inter changeable lens system and for versatility I'll stick to my DSLR kit. The X100 may just be it for those reasons.

Bob

[boomguy57]

Originally Posted by David_Manning

Anyway, just an impression. I guess I expected basically an X100 with interchangeable lenses. It's bigger than that.

Yeah, I was initially lusting after it but have come to the same conclusion. After using the X100, maybe I'm spoiled--but I'll stick with my X100 for the foreseeable future.

[willie_901]

Originally Posted by David_Manning

I didn't mean to offend anyone with my own first impressions!

I am carrying an XP1 daily and you did not offend me (but maybe I was suprised a little bit).

M lenses can deliver high performance with a compact size. The XP1 lens/sensor design means the lenses will be larger. The 18/2 XF being an obvious exception. Did you know the X100 lens is much larger than it looks? That lens is recessed into the body. Otherwise the XP1 feels like a lot of RF bodies... except it's lighter.

The X100 (which I also use regularly) has it's strengths and weaknesses compared to the XP1. I find they compliment each other. If the X100 meets all your needs, there's no reason to add the XP1. If you find the XP1 too large, there are plenty of smaller systems out there.

It's all good.

[CK Dexter Haven]

I completely agree.
I went to B&H yesterday, for the first time in quite a while - to look at the whole field of new cameras. Trying to decide if i should shift to Nikon for the D800e instead of the 5DIII; and sorting through the mirrorless sector.

I finally wound up at the Fuji counter.... The XPro1 looks gorgeous in all the online images. In person, not so much. And, the weight - yes, i've read some people find it to be a relief, but i just found it felt cheap. It looks like a tank online. Feels like a mock-up in the hand. I really was expecting something along the lines of a Contax G2. If the G2 is a Mercedes, the Fuji is a Honda. Nothing wrong with Hondas, of course....

The X100, though - wow. I was impressed. Of all the mirrorless cams i messed around with, this was the one that felt like a real camera. I just wish for a bigger file from it....

In other notes - the NEX7 feels like a refined Sony electronic device. Not so much a camera. It's quick and responsive and all that, but it doesn't remind me of 'photography.' And, everyone seems to love the electronic viewfinder.... I don't. It's not nearly as impressive as the reports led me to believe.

Olympus OM-D / E5.... Again, i'm bewildered by the glowing reports. I actually HATED this thing. Picked it up, turned it on, and only had it in my hands for less than a minute before i wanted to move away. Ick.

Couldn't even find the Samsung NX line. Unfortunate, as i was really interested in the NX210.... If Sony had a pancake 30/f2 like the Samsung, the NEX7 would be an easy choice.

Oooh.... Just read the above comment about the X-pro.... "a tank, a solid piece of iron." Then, perhaps the B&H rep handed me a plastic demo mock-up.... Whether or not it can take a beating is one matter. But, the thing feels light, and not of substance. Same with the lenses. I'm not sure how they can be made so light - glass and metal surely have more weight than that. Compare the fuji 35/1.4 to a Contax 45/2.... The Contax lens FEELS like something. The Fuji feels like a lot of air.

I'm not speaking of operation on the Fuji, though. The store's battery died as i was first holding it. They ought to keep a supply of batteries. Kinda ridiculous for a store like that to only have ONE for that camera.

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by CK Dexter Haven

I finally wound up at the Fuji counter.... The XPro1 looks gorgeous in all the online images. In person, not so much. And, the weight - yes, i've read some people find it to be a relief, but i just found it felt cheap...

...The X100, though - wow. I was impressed. Of all the mirrorless cams i messed around with, this was the one that felt like a real camera. I just wish for a bigger file from it....

It shocking to hear some say the X100 feels more like a "real" camera than the X-Pro1. I cannot agree with that at all. To me, the X-Pro1 fixed all that was cheap about the back panel of the X100.

[tbarker13]

Sort of funny how we all want different things. I've used both the X100 and the XPro1. And for me, the XPro1 is far and away the better camera in terms of ergonomics. I felt like the X100 was just too small and hard to control because of the tiny buttons.
The Xrpo1 is still considerably smaller (and more importantly, lighter) than my D700. But it's still large enough for me comfortably use.

[Landshark99]

I have both the XPro and X100 as well as the Contax G2, I really like my X100 but since getting the Xpro, it is pretty much sitting in a case. I loved my G2s and have been looking for a digital replacement for them for a long time; with the XPro I have finally found it. They are almost exactly the same size body with the Contax lenses being a little smaller, for me I personally find the lighter weight of the XPro1 an advantage, I usually use two bodies, one wide one, short tele, the weight and comfort difference when using two, makes me forget I am carrying two. For me the XPro feels almost perfect in the hand and encourages me to use it. As to how it looks, I like the simple industrial look, but at the end of the day I want to use my cameras more than look at them.

I also have the OM-D and much prefer the ergonomics of the XPro

[CK Dexter Haven]

Originally Posted by jsrockit

It shocking to hear some say the X100 feels more like a "real" camera than the X-Pro1. I cannot agree with that at all. To me, the X-Pro1 fixed all that was cheap about the back panel of the X100.

I didn't mean that the X100 felt more like a 'real camera' than the XPro. I was referring to the other mirrorless - Sony NEX, OMD, etc.

Still, though - the X100 did feel more solid than the XPro. The x100 felt like what i expected, maybe better. The Xpro felt much worse than i hoped/expected. I really did look at the Xpro online images and imagine something like a G2 or Leica-M. And, it felt not nearly as good as either of those.

I'm not the kind of guy who gets off on saying 'my camera can pound nails,' or 'would survive in a war,' or 'can be used to bash an attacker....' I just want gear that gives me confidence. I don't like 'flimsy.' I mean, the thing could have been designed with carbon fibre, or some Neptunian composite - i don't know. I just like the feel of solid, precision-engineered controls, and a weight that 'makes sense.' By contrast, the NEX7 'makes sense.' The X100 makes sense. The XPro1... it was like, "whoa." I suppose i could get used to it. But, it's never going to have that beautiful tactile appeal like with a G2 or M7. I hate to be so critical of something i never actually used, but it was kinda like Fuji understood the aesthetics end of it, but completely dismissed the sensual/tactile component.

I remember when i bought a Leica CM.... Out of the box, it, too, felt too light. But, then, you add the battery, and a roll of film, and then it's okay.... The XPro-1 had the battery inside, and there's nothing else to add. I guess the case or a grip might be what i need? I would rather not have to pimp it out, though. Defeats the purpose. It's like everyone with their ugly rubber cases on their iPhones..... A beautiful device, ruined.

So, back to the XPro1 - has there been a firmware update yet? Any chance the AF can be improved in THIS model?

[kuzano]

Originally Posted by Keith

When I saw one I wasn't so much put off by the size ... I really didn't like the look of it.

It didn't look like the relatively expensive piece of kit that it is to my eyes!

I put the Olympus OM-D (EM-5) in that Size Comparison along side the Xpro-1

Wow...except for a little bit of hump... the Olympus is smaller a bit

Do you think you might get the EM-5?

In fact the Fuji is 3 mm wider than the Olympus OM-1 film body...

[Landshark99]

There have been two firmware updates so far, but none that were specific to AF speed. As I have stated before faster is usually better but I have very little problem with the XPro in the area of AF, jn fact after using both the XPro and OM-D a lot on a recent trip to Spain, I found the OM-D to be faster but the XPro more accurate, could be some operator error involved but overall, I found the Xpro more accurate. The corrected AF option is probably the reason and it works great for me. The OM-D on the other hand can get away with some astonishing hand held shutter speeds because of it IS system which could lead some to believe the Olympus AF in low light is more accurate, I have now found this to be the case, if you can hold the XPro steady it seems just slightly better on accuracy.

[Landshark99]

The EM-5 almost feels heavier, and because of the hump, it packs larger than it seems

[shadowfox]

I like dense and substantial camera.
That does not always mean bigger size.
Olympus Pen E-P2 is very small, but dense.
Fuji X100 when I tried it at the store, didn't feel like that at all.

[Paul Luscher]

Well, I'd say the X1 Pro is for the "technogeek." (Reminds me of the Konica Hexar RF. A "techno" rangefinder of the Film Age, if ever there was one). The Leica is for the (ahem) "traditionalist." (Yeah, yeah, I know: yer gonna say that means "retired doctors and lawyers with too much money and too much time on their hands"...)

[Jamie Pillers]

I have the X-Pro1 now; had the X100 for the year previous. I agree that the X100 is far better if you want something compact.

I switched because I wanted to be able to switch lenses and to use 'legacy' lenses. And the X-Pro1's potential image quality boost from the bigger, no anti-aliasing filter sensor is attractive. Size-wise, the X-Pro1 is like holding a Contax G-type camera... perfect for my hands.

All the other features/quirks of the X-Pro1 are essentially the same as the X100. If I could own both, I definitely would.... hmmm (what can I sell?). :-)

[SausalitoDog]

Originally Posted by dct

I don't get it: Will this replace the original VF glass or will it be added like a filter on a lens? Would this also fit a Hexar RF VF?

Yes, it replaces the original glass which just screws out (exactly like nikon)

The thing is, you have to know what power diopter to buy - I was lucky and the first one I ordered (don't remember where) worked fine.

If you google diopters you will see that there are a number of strengths. If you wear glasses, you can figure out what strength you need from your prescription.

good luck,

[Johnhw]

David,

Go back and buy it, use it, fondle it some more, take it with you everywhere....it will feel better with every shutter click.

[mouren]

I think my xpro1 is awesome, and I would not hesitate to whack any thief or robber over the head with it.