[kadajawi]

Hm. I have had some time in a Fuji store that doesn't sell cameras (more like a permanent Photokina booth located in a shopping mall), and tried out the X-Pro1 amongst others. Such a joy to hold and shoot... it feels really nice.

As for the XT1... it is gaining more frame rates and manual control for video next month.

[audiobomber]

I found the XT1 AFC better able than the K3 to lock on a moving object.

In AF-C, or AF-S? Would you mind posting your settings for tracking? I find the K-3 awesome, not having much success with the a6000.

[eddie1960]

I went with the XE2 the XT was just to much along the SLR line for me and I would have gone K3 if that was where i was going this time. The focus by wire i guess is an issue (thpough to be realistic the only manual focus i really seem to be doing is adapted lenses, the fujis all focus very well - at least the 18/23/35/56
If i didn'
t have the K7 (and sooner or later an upgrade) to handle longer lenses and maybe add a zoom again then I likely would have gone the XT1 route. If the thieves come back and grab my remaining Pentax kit and medium format gear I may add one (after the 645z )

[PENFRED]

In AF-C, or AF-S? Would you mind posting your settings for tracking? I find the K-3 awesome, not having much success with the a6000.

For both cameras, I tried tracking with AFC, 8 fps, and center focus point. K3 did a pretty good job, but XT1 seemed to lock on a bit better, at least in my one test with BIF. Others may differ.

[audiobomber]

For both cameras, I tried tracking with AFC, 8 fps, and center focus point. K3 did a pretty good job, but XT1 seemed to lock on a bit better, at least in my one test with BIF. Others may differ.

Try these setting with the K-3:

Expandable AF point for tracking (27-point for BIF)
16. 1st frame action in AF-C - Focus priority
17. Action in AF-C Continuous - Focus Priority
18. Hold AF status - Low

For tracking to work, you have to ensure that the first shot is locked on your target. If the first shot locks on anything other than the subject, it will not let go and you will have a string of misses.

[PENFRED]

Try these setting with the K-3:

Expandable AF point for tracking (27-point for BIF)
16. 1st frame action in AF-C - Focus priority
17. Action in AF-C Continuous - Focus Priority
18. Hold AF status - Low

For tracking to work, you have to ensure that the first shot is locked on your target. If the first shot locks on anything other than the subject, it will not let go and you will have a string of misses.

I'll try it; thanks

[Wheatfield]

This camera is becoming very, very tempting to me. I wish Pentax would come out with a nice EVF camera, but that wait might be until the end of the universe. Anyone have one?

I entered the Fuji world a couple of years ago when Fuji was giving away 35mm f/1.4 lenses to entice people to buy the X-Pro1. I like fast standard primes, and for some reason, this is a lens that Pentax hasn't bothered to market for their DSLR cameras.

Anyway, the X-T1 came out and I fell in love with it. I am an old Pentax LX film camera user, and picking up the X-T1 was like reacquainting myself with an old friend that I hadn't seen for far too long. It is, in effect, a digital Pentax LX, and for me, it is darned near perfect.

What I don't like? The viewfinder, as wonderful as it is, gives me eyestrain if I look through it for too long (like more than half a minute). This has cause me to change my shooting style somewhat, though I've never really been one to look through a viewfinder for long periods of time anyway.
And the battery life is pretty bad on the Fuji. It's a small battery hungry camera that carries a small battery. A lot of my user strategy revolves around not wasting the battery. I've heard of people getting as few as 50 shots on a battery, which tells me they are spending a lot of time with the viewfinder or rear screen running. I get around 250 shots on a battery.

The Fuji lenses are every bit as good as Pentax glass, a bit better in some metrics, not quite as good in others. I still think Pentax has better flare control, but so far I have found the Fuji lenses to be sharper, contrastier and having better bokeh, though it's a close race.
I have the full set of Fuji premium primes, and also pretty much every lens Pentax has made in bayonet, and so have been able to do some fairly direct comparisons.
The Fuji 14/2.8 is on par with the 15/4 LTD, but gives an extra stop of speed, the 23/1.4 is far better than the 23/3.2 in every metric but size, the 35/1.4 is as good as the 35/2.8 LTD, but gives up macro for two extra stops of speed, the 56/1.2 runs circles around the DA*55/1.4 (it just makes the Pentax lens look bad in every respect), and the 60/2.4 macro is a very nice lens, but is no better than the 100/2.8WR macro.

If I come across as a bit of a fan boy, I apologize, but the Fuji system is that nice, and should be forcing everyone, Pentax included, to up their games.

The X-T1 has taken it on the chin somewhat for the fact that Adobe doesn't have the best rendering engine for X-Trans raw files. While i am sure the problem exists, I haven't really noticed it, and the AF isn't as good as that from some of the other makers, Pentax included if using the K3 as a comparative.

I am still shooting with Pentax a lot, but if I have the focal length that i need in a Fuji lens, the X-T1 is the camera I am reaching for.

Ironically, pre A series lenses from Pentax work better on the Fuji than they do on Pentax, so if you are like me and have a number of older Pentax primes, the X-T1 and a K-Mount adapter might bring you some joy as well.

Hope this helps

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

---

Last edited by Wheatfield; 11-19-2014 at 03:16 PM. Reason: Adding a picture

[Rupert]

Seems like an honest evaluation Wheatfield, hard to compare it to a Pentax since it is so obviously different, yet the X-T1 seems to hold its own in the comparison.
I seriously considered the X-T1 for some time...before I came to the realization that I am a true Toy Camera shooter. I have the X10/X20 and have enjoyed both immensely.
One question for you....long glass? Fuji doesn't have much long glass currently, would my Bigma work half decent on the X-T1 with an adapter? Would the manual focusing be reasonably easy? Just wondering....I doubt I will ever get away from Toy Cameras, but if I do the X-T1 would be my choice.

Regards & thanks for the review!

[cali92rs]

Manual focusing is a snap with this camera, with one touch magnification and focus peaking.
HOWEVER, if you can wait a year, there will be a telephoto zoom in the range you are looking for:
Fujifilm updates X-mount lens roadmap through end of 2015: Digital Photography Review


And unlike other companies, Fuji has been very forthright with their lens schedules and I would bet dollars to donuts it releases per the roadmap.
In fact, there was a mock-up at photokina:
http://www.fujirumors.com/first-image-of-the-140-400-prototype-shown-at-photokina/

[luftfluss]

<snip>

Hope this helps

Helpful & interesting, thanks a bunch for posting it.

[clackers]

Really good lens selection, Whitfield, but the prices are eye-watering. And with that 16Mp sensor and no FF that will put off some of the aspirants around here.

[Wheatfield]

Seems like an honest evaluation Wheatfield, hard to compare it to a Pentax since it is so obviously different, yet the X-T1 seems to hold its own in the comparison.
I seriously considered the X-T1 for some time...before I came to the realization that I am a true Toy Camera shooter. I have the X10/X20 and have enjoyed both immensely.
One question for you....long glass? Fuji doesn't have much long glass currently, would my Bigma work half decent on the X-T1 with an adapter? Would the manual focusing be reasonably easy? Just wondering....I doubt I will ever get away from Toy Cameras, but if I do the X-T1 would be my choice.

Regards & thanks for the review!

I'm not familiar with the Bigma, but if it is good on your Pentax it should be equally good on the Fuji. If you are going to adapt it, you need an aperture ring on the lens (I really don't know the Bigma...), and you will be giving up auto focus (if the Bigma has it, I really, really don't know the Bigma). You will be giving up your in body shake reduction.

Really good lens selection, Whitfield, but the prices are eye-watering. And with that 16Mp sensor and no FF that will put off some of the aspirants around here.

Eye watering is an understatement. However, when I bought the X-T1, Fuji was giving away a free grip with the body, and two of the lenses were quite deeply discounted as well. I think I paid full price for the 14 and 56, and about a 30% discount on the 23 and 60, and as mentioned, the 35 was a freebie.
Fuji was in a generous mood when both the X-Pro1 and X-T1 were introduced, and I took full advantage of their largess.

The 16mp sensor is fine, it's good for a 13x19 inch print.
One thing I have noticed is how little sharpening I do compared to the Pentax files. I have sharpening turned off completely in the converter and only have to sharpen very slightly in Photoshop. The Pentax files take quite a bit more sharpening.
I really do like the 24mp files off of the K3 though.

I'm calling the full frame thing a bit of a canard, though I understand where you are coming from. The X-Mount is designed from the ground up as an APS-C format, so there are none of the compromises that full frame mounts such as the K-Mount requires. My biggest complaint with APS-C SLR designs is the APS-C sized viewfinder. The EVF in the X-T1 is slightly bigger than a full frame Canon finder. This, combined with the form factor that is so similar to the film LX camera really makes the Fuji a pleasure to use.

Ironically, had Pentax released a lens in the 35mm f/1.4 range, the Fuji would never have been on my radar, especially as it is an EVF, something I was railing against less than a year ago.

Yes it is helpful thanks Wheatfield

Helpful & interesting, thanks a bunch for posting it.

My pleasure to both of you.

[Doundounba]

[...] and the 60/2.4 macro is a very nice lens, but is no better than the 100/2.8WR macro.

A quibble in an otherwise very informative post, but I don't think that's quite accurate. The Fuji maxes out at only a 1:2 macro reproduction ratio and is very significantly shorter at 60mm. (And I doubt it's weather sealed, though I have no idea if Fuji lenses have the equivalent of quickshift. But both those things are very secondary for me.) Anyway, for serious macro shooters, a Pentax 100mm macro - whether it be D-FA WR, D-FA, FA or even F - is a much more desirable lens than the Fuji 60mm...

[PENFRED]

I entered the Fuji world a couple of years ago when Fuji was giving away 35mm f/1.4 lenses to entice people to buy the X-Pro1. I like fast standard primes, and for some reason, this is a lens that Pentax hasn't bothered to market for their DSLR cameras.

Anyway, the X-T1 came out and I fell in love with it. I am an old Pentax LX film camera user, and picking up the X-T1 was like reacquainting myself with an old friend that I hadn't seen for far too long. It is, in effect, a digital Pentax LX, and for me, it is darned near perfect.

What I don't like? The viewfinder, as wonderful as it is, gives me eyestrain if I look through it for too long (like more than half a minute). This has cause me to change my shooting style somewhat, though I've never really been one to look through a viewfinder for long periods of time anyway.
And the battery life is pretty bad on the Fuji. It's a small battery hungry camera that carries a small battery. A lot of my user strategy revolves around not wasting the battery. I've heard of people getting as few as 50 shots on a battery, which tells me they are spending a lot of time with the viewfinder or rear screen running. I get around 250 shots on a battery.

The Fuji lenses are every bit as good as Pentax glass, a bit better in some metrics, not quite as good in others. I still think Pentax has better flare control, but so far I have found the Fuji lenses to be sharper, contrastier and having better bokeh, though it's a close race.
I have the full set of Fuji premium primes, and also pretty much every lens Pentax has made in bayonet, and so have been able to do some fairly direct comparisons.
The Fuji 14/2.8 is on par with the 15/4 LTD, but gives an extra stop of speed, the 23/1.4 is far better than the 23/3.2 in every metric but size, the 35/1.4 is as good as the 35/2.8 LTD, but gives up macro for two extra stops of speed, the 56/1.2 runs circles around the DA*55/1.4 (it just makes the Pentax lens look bad in every respect), and the 60/2.4 macro is a very nice lens, but is no better than the 100/2.8WR macro.

If I come across as a bit of a fan boy, I apologize, but the Fuji system is that nice, and should be forcing everyone, Pentax included, to up their games.

The X-T1 has taken it on the chin somewhat for the fact that Adobe doesn't have the best rendering engine for X-Trans raw files. While i am sure the problem exists, I haven't really noticed it, and the AF isn't as good as that from some of the other makers, Pentax included if using the K3 as a comparative.

I am still shooting with Pentax a lot, but if I have the focal length that i need in a Fuji lens, the X-T1 is the camera I am reaching for.

Ironically, pre A series lenses from Pentax work better on the Fuji than they do on Pentax, so if you are like me and have a number of older Pentax primes, the X-T1 and a K-Mount adapter might bring you some joy as well.

Hope this helps

Very nice evaluation; "digital LX" was what grabbed me as well. I find the XT1 (even with the EVF, which I like) handles very well with all small lenses,including the WR 18-135. I've also used a 200 mm M pentax lens with adapter, and the focus peaking made it very effective.

Like the LX, the XT1 is great camera for walking around and travel (as is the X20).

However, I'm keeping my 24 mp K3 and DA*200 + 1.4 TC for wildlife, and looking forward to the upcoming pentax super zoom. If it's a nice 200-400, the TC would give me 560, which would be great.

[eddie1960]

A quibble in an otherwise very informative post, but I don't think that's quite accurate. The Fuji maxes out at only a 1:2 macro reproduction ratio and is very significantly shorter at 60mm. (And I doubt it's weather sealed, though I have no idea if Fuji lenses have the equivalent of quickshift. But both those things are very secondary for me.) Anyway, for serious macro shooters, a Pentax 100mm macro - whether it be D-FA WR, D-FA, FA or even F - is a much more desirable lens than the Fuji 60mm...

fuji has an 11mm and 16mm tube coming in December for the XF line. the 16 will take the 60 macro to .76 x magnification so a big jump, the 18mm will actually end up 1:1 with the 16mm tube. I was going to buy the 60 (and still may) but for the limited macro I do the 16mm tube gives me .39 on the 56 and .56 on the 35 , .83 on my 23 and 1:1 on the 18 so $109 candian gives me a lot of flexibility (I would need to do the math and see how stacking the 11 and 16 would change things - may make the 35 1:1)

charts here

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/accessories/pdf/mcex_01.pdf

The Zeiss 50mm 2.8 is also a 1:1 Macro

Aside from that since you usually are working in manual focus for macro there are all the adapted lenses you could work off of you'd just need the mount adaptor (and the lens would need an aperture ring)

---------- Post added 20th Nov 2014 at 12:31 ----------

And I like your Digital LX evaluation Wheat - from what little i tried of it in store that would be a good description - I opted for the XE2 because I wanted a form factor change as well. It's till not a rangefinder but it is very unobtrusive (I've ac=tually blacked out the lettering so it's black on black and with a pancake like the 18 really unobtrusive, I need to pick up a cheap 27 one day to compliment it
the next Firmware update (3.0) will bring interval shootin Classic Chrome AF+MF and remote operation via the app from the XT 1 down to the XE2