x-pro1 auto focus speed

[froyd]

I've read many complaints about the slow AF of the X-Pro, but for each one of them, there's another message from somebody who gets along with it just fine. Obviously, it's a matter of perspective and expectations.

My point of reference in the world of AF is the Nikon F4. First generation AF stuff, leagues behind current DSLRs. Doe the Fuji X-Pro compare favorably or at least match the focus on the Nikon? I can live with that. Actually, I would be very happy with that level of performance.

 

[intheviewfinder]

In a word no. The F4 while it uses an early version of phase detection is still faster than the XP1. The Fuji uses contrast detection and if you're aiming at a low contrast area to focus it has issues. So depending on the contrast of the targeted focus area the XP1 could be just as fast or it could completely miss.

With that said I'd still take my XP1 over a late rendition of an F4. It does require a bit more of a rangefinder mentality (no it is not a rangefinder). This camera relies more on old school controls and simplicity. It's not a rapid-fire SLR. It's not meant to be. A lot of folks forget that. If you're a rapid fire shooter this camera will frustrate the heck out of you.

--Rich

 

[froyd]

In a word no. The F4 while it uses an early version of phase detection is still faster than the XP1.

That's too bad. My other frame of reference is the Contax G, which I find easy to use and can focus reliably. Do you have experience with that system? How would you compare the AF?

 

[intheviewfinder]

I really don't have much experience with the Contax G. I took a roll with a friend's camera quite awhile ago and I can remember some trick about locking the focus because of the screw drive focus mechanism. It was quick and fun to use but I probably can't say much more than that.

--Rich

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

That's too bad. My other frame of reference is the Contax G, which I find easy to use and can focus reliably. Do you have experience with that system? How would you compare the AF?

To my mind, the XP1 is a digital recreation of the Contax G series, and I find the focus mechanism to be similar, except more reliable, faster, and with more helpful framelines and (weirdly implemented, yes) parallax correction. And the finder is way nicer. It feels like the G2 in the hand, too.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I should clarify that, I don't think that Fuji were attempting to re-create the G series, but the two have a very similar vibe. And I never had much trouble focusing with the G's, especially the G2.

Also, if you get into a tough focus situation with the XP1, you can use the EVF for stronger confirmation, and for manual focus. I'm not wild about the EVF on this camera, but it is very handy in a pinch.

 

[keytarjunkie]

I agree that the X-Pro1 seems like a digital version of the Contax G. I haven't used the Fuji very much, but I've used a G2 a lot and I have a X100. I think the flaws of the G series (mainly, the terrible viewfinder...and the autofocus, although I never had serious problems with it) are mostly fixed with the Fujis. The X100 has a distance scale you can turn on for the optical and digital viewfinders, so you can always see where your focus is at. Also, if you're using the optical viewfinder and you're unsure about the focus, you can very quickly switch to the digital viewfinder to see exactly where it is. I find that to be very helpful, and usually I'll use the optical viewfinder for landscapes/farther away images, and the digital viewfinder for closer stuff.

 

[gavinlg]

That's too bad. My other frame of reference is the Contax G, which I find easy to use and can focus reliably. Do you have experience with that system? How would you compare the AF?

For what it's worth, I use a Contax G1 and an X100. I generally prefer the x100 as a camera - it's ergonomically much nicer, has a MUCH nicer vf, and it's AF is more responsive and predictable. That doesn't mean I have any problems with the G1, just the x100 feels more 'sorted'.

If your contax G is your reference point for AF, I'd say you'd be fine with the x-pro1. It's like the x100 - still heaps of people saying it's slow, but it's not slow at all. I'd say the AF is on par with my canon 5d, or any other non-pro DSLR. Keep in mind the x-pro1 AF will get faster and better with every firmware update too - just like the x100 did.

 

[Shade]

The af speed of the xpro1 is not spectacular, but yes I do still believe that the F4 is faster. I have a huge respect for Nikon and their Af sensors, I still think they're the Af leaders (also olympus now) in the market.

However, despite my disappointment, the xpro1 can still deliver well, providing you're not shooting sports or kids running around then you should be fine. To be fair, their af is indeed an improvement over the x100..

 

[gavinlg]

To be fair, their af is indeed an improvement over the x100..

Are you talking about x100 when it first came out, or x100 with current firmware? Because when I used the x-pro1 in a shop with the 35mm lens, it was definitely slower than my x100.

 

[froyd]

However, despite my disappointment, the xpro1 can still deliver well, providing you're not shooting sports or kids running around then you should be fine. To be fair, their af is indeed an improvement over the x100..

There's a cure for that. I just finished shooting my four-years old nice birthday party with the Rolleiflex. Sure teaches you a lot about predictive focusing

Seriously, 95% of my photography is my kids and my wife (and she's harder to get to sit still than the two of them). I manage well enough with a host of MF cameras and occasionally the Contax G, so from the reassuring comments I'm reading above, I should be OK with the X-Pro.

Sorry to be asking so many questions, but I don't have convenient access to a store that carries the x-pro and I would have to sell my M4 + lenses to go to Fuji...hence the trepidation.

 

[Keith]

I have yet to experience a camera with AF that impresses me and that includes my D700 and F6 so an Xpro would really frustrate me I suspect!

And as good as the OMD is reputed to be it still stalls and hunts when it strikes something it doesn't like ... apparently lack of vertical lines is a problem for contrast detection AF systems.

 

[Jamie Pillers]

I agree... the XP1 seems to be the digital incarnation of the the G2. Both have their quirks, but in the end make great images. They're cameras you have to spend some time with, learning their idiosyncrasies. Once you get them 'trained', they're great cameras.

 

[GaryLH]

Btw there is a contax g to x mount adapter. I still have my g2 setup. The 35, 45 and 90 are fine. The 28 and under are a no go. Looks like those protection fins are causing the problem .

To the op question. Af speed nothing to write home about. Slower than my Nikon dslr but faster than what I can manually focus an rf camera. But one can also use legacy lenses and zone focus. That being said, Fuji native lenses are as good as the best out there.

Gary

 

[jsrockit]

Are you talking about x100 when it first came out, or x100 with current firmware? Because when I used the x-pro1 in a shop with the 35mm lens, it was definitely slower than my x100.

As a user of both, I agree with gavinlg. The 18mm on the X-Pro1 is more comparible in speed to the X100.

 

[furcafe]

There are similarities, but in a nutshell I would say that in my experience the G2 w/any of its lenses (I have all of them except for the 16/8) focuses faster than the X-Pro1 w/either 18/2 or 35/1.4 (my only 2 lenses). The X-Pro1 undoubtedly has a better VF, including the informational display (& the option of the EVF), but I use digital primarily in dark conditions & the X-Pro1 lags behind both my Nikon D700 & any Leica M in that area (I got into Leicas primarily to shoot in available darkness). I also find the G2 to have a better-designed layout for buttons, controls, etc. (why can't more cameras have an AEL switch instead of button(s)?). That said, the X-Pro1's sensor is outstanding & I can only hope that Leica puts something similar in the M10.

That's too bad. My other frame of reference is the Contax G, which I find easy to use and can focus reliably. Do you have experience with that system? How would you compare the AF?

 

[froyd]

For what it's worth, I use a Contax G1 and an X100. I generally prefer the x100 as a camera - it's ergonomically much nicer, has a MUCH nicer vf, and it's AF is more responsive and predictable.

That's a very useful insight. I can live with slow AF (I still question if my definition of slow matches that of other people used to modern AF) but I do not want to struggle with a camera that has a hard time acquiring focus. Sounds like that won't be an issue with the X-Pro. In that case should be able to happily use it the same way I sue all my cameras when chasing my kids: prefocus on the crack on the sidewalk and wait until one of them comes stumbling over it.

 

[GaryLH]

That's a very useful insight. I can live with slow AF (I still question if my definition of slow matches that of other people used to modern AF) but I do not want to struggle with a camera that has a hard time acquiring focus. Sounds like that won't be an issue with the X-Pro. In that case should be able to happily use it the same way I sue all my cameras when chasing my kids: prefocus on the crack on the sidewalk and wait until one of them comes stumbling over it.

Yep that will work. Set to manual focus mode and hit the combo ael/afl button to focus on the crack.

Btw for those who have not tried fly by wire manual focus on the x mount lenses because the x100 experience is so bad.... Fuji looks like they tried to improve this on the x-mount lenses. 18 works the best, 35 is ok but better than the x100 experience and 60 is marginally better.

Gary

 

[willie_901]

The focus abilities of the X100 and X-Pro 1 are confounded by two facts.

The X100 focus situation improved gradually as new firmware was released. This spring's release made a huge difference. Owner impressions are often out of date The X-Pro 1 focus was better than the X100 from day one. The new X100 firmware (released ater the X-Pro 1 shipped) made the two cameras perform similarly. Right now each has it's own strengths, but both will get the job done. I own both and AF performance does enter into the decision when I choose between them.

The APS-C Fuji's are complicated too use. They are not like DSLRs and they are not like optical RFs. There are two finder modes and three focus modes. There is a macro mode. I find switching between the EVF and OVF is required to get the best overall focus performance. Different situations require different techniques. There are menu settings that significantly impact how the AF performs. I can imagine numerous sets of parameter selections that would make focusing extremely frustrating. I also know there are choices that make focusing efficient and accurate. I think user impressions reflect these complications because during the first weeks of my X100 ownership I was frustrated too. But then I found out how to make the AF meet my needs.


The Fuji APS-C X cameras' AF hardware and firmware is a weakness. Many other APS-C and m4/3 systems are stronger. None of these have optical finders compatible with AF. So, in the end you are faced with another compromise. It's hard to sort all of this out. And it's hard for a new user to evaluate the X series AF on the spot. The AF works for me, it does not work for others.

 

[jsrockit]

Wow, I'm as new of a user as can be, and after about 4 days of shooting(with Leica glass) I can say"I'm getting pretty good".
I think you don't give people enough credit, and rely on your own views.

What am I missing here? He was talking about AF and you are talking about Leica lenses (which are MF).