Fuji DPR Review of X-E1

There was a time - way back in history - when you had to focus the camera by hand while looking at a focusing aid in the viewfinder for guidance :)eek:). Somehow, the photographers of that age were able to create some decent images...
 
There was a time - way back in history - when you had to focus the camera by hand while looking at a focusing aid in the viewfinder for guidance :)eek:). Somehow, the photographers of that age were able to create some decent images...

Indeed! It's amazing one could even take a photo without blazing fast auto focus. For proof I submit these which were done MF. Terrible.

http://www.solepictures.com/index.php#mi=1&pt=0&pi=2&s=0&p=0&a=0&at=0

I highly recommend the book.

New Delta Rising: Solé, Magdalena, Smith, Barry H., Lassiter, Tom, Bragg, Rick: 9781617031502: Amazon.com: Books
 
For those worried about the AF in upcoming models, here's David Hobby (an actual professional photographer as opposed to a camera reviewer) on the X100S:

"Oh, nothing, just hanging out in Dubai with a pre-production Fuji X100s. I love my original X100, but this thing's volume dial goes to 11, as Spinal Tap would say. The chip is much improved (from an already very good chip) and the focus is damn-near instantaneous.

This is through a subway window (and cropped) but still, I love the palette on this camera. The original X100 is (well, now was) the only camera I take with me when traveling. I do not see myself lugging a DSLR again anytime soon."

From: Sign in - Google Accounts

If anyone is interested in studio lighting his blog has some really good ideas:

Strobist: On Assignment
 
I find that AF speed with the 35mm is plenty fast for me provided there is enough contrast to focus on. What I am having a problem with is focusing on faces since skin doesn't seem to have enough contrast for the camera to focus on. I've tried changing the size of the focus box and placing it right over one of the eyes, and that works sometimes, but can still be a challenge. The camera has no problems focusing on clothing, but that doesn't always put the eyes in focus at wider apertures if the face is on a different plane than the shirt for example. Not to derail the thread, but since we're talking about AF, does anyone have any tips for focusing for portraits?
 
There was a time - way back in history - when you had to focus the camera by hand while looking at a focusing aid in the viewfinder for guidance :)eek:). Somehow, the photographers of that age were able to create some decent images...

That was not my point. I have NEX cameras that are not blazingly fast and that's fine with me, as is the X-E I have on loan. What I DON'T want is false claims by either manufacturers or reviewers, because there ARE people who *need* fast autofocus up to Panny G or E-M5 standards, and those people deserve a faithful assesment of the camera's true abilities, not being lied to.
 
That was not my point. I have NEX cameras that are not blazingly fast and that's fine with me, as is the X-E I have on loan. What I DON'T want is false claims by either manufacturers or reviewers, because there ARE people who *need* fast autofocus up to Panny G or E-M5 standards, and those people deserve a faithful assesment of the camera's true abilities, not being lied to.

I'll be frank and say I think you are seriously overstating both the case and the importance. But hey, each to their own. Plenty of reviewers comment on the Fuji AF being slower than some competitors. If consumers purchase solely on marketing statements then they are in deep trouble.

As I noted before, what matters is the speed in actual use, not in relation to other cameras. Potential buyers will look into that.
 
I'll concur with nianys. I bought an XE1 yesterday and its being returned today for one reason, poor AF, not just inconsistent, but slow. As a poster has said above it seemed to really struggle focussing on the eyes, and i primarily take photos of kids. A shame, as its a beautiful piece of kit in every other way :(
 
I'll concur with nianys. I bought an XE1 yesterday and its being returned today for one reason, poor AF, not just inconsistent, but slow. As a poster has said above it seemed to really struggle focussing on the eyes, and i primarily take photos of kids. A shame, as its a beautiful piece of kit in every other way :(

That's a swift decision. Good for you. If it doesn't work for you, move on.
 
That was not my point. I have NEX cameras that are not blazingly fast and that's fine with me, as is the X-E I have on loan. What I DON'T want is false claims by either manufacturers or reviewers, because there ARE people who *need* fast autofocus up to Panny G or E-M5 standards, and those people deserve a faithful assesment of the camera's true abilities, not being lied to.
Exaggerated claims in marketing materials?!?!?! Oh my God, WHAT will they think of next? It's an OUTRAGE! Here's a suggestion - don't believe it until you start seeing 3rd party accounts and test results. Or until you get to try it out yourself...

I tend to only really need fast AF for portrait length and longer lenses, where the DOF tends to be quite narrow and you need to be able to nail focus and shoot NOW before it all changes. For anything neutral and wider, I never seem to have a problem with slower AF unless the gear doesn't provide any good way of zone focussing. When I need speed, zone focus is faster than auto-focus will ever be and for more contemplative shooting, AF speed simply isn't an issue. I have a Ricoh GXR with the 28mm lens unit. It has got to be the slowest auto-focus I've ever seen. I'd never really noticed though, until I was doing some back to back shooting with it and the X-Pro 18mm (same focal length) a couple of weeks ago. And the Fuji, which is nobody's idea of fast, simply left it in the dust. But I'd never noticed because with its "snap focus" shortcut to zone focus, the GXR is one of the fastest and most responsive wide angle street setups I've ever used. The Fuji is fine. The slow Nex 5 was fine when I had it, I'm sure the widely criticized RX1 AF will be fine if I ever get a chance to try one. Shutter lag I can't abide, but slow auto-focus just isn't a concern for me in these focal lengths, it turns out. And I don't expect unvarnished truth in advertising - it just leads to disappointment.

For longer lenses, 90mm equivalent and up, good fast AF matters a lot. Which is just one of several reasons I'm sticking with the OMD for everything north of 90mm EFL. Between the great face recognition, stabilization of the EVF (a VERY big deal when you pull out the really big guns out in the 100-300 range), and just general competence, I can't see a reason to use anything else unless I suddenly started shooting sports or birds and needed great AF tracking. Which isn't gonna happen.

-Ray
 
I'll concur with nianys. I bought an XE1 yesterday and its being returned today for one reason, poor AF, not just inconsistent, but slow. As a poster has said above it seemed to really struggle focussing on the eyes, and i primarily take photos of kids. A shame, as its a beautiful piece of kit in every other way :(

You should probably get a DSLR for taking pictures of moving children. Although I rarely use it, I have a D700 for that type of shot. I think there are a number of good Canon, Nikon, and Pentax cameras that are great for it. The Pentax K5 is supposed to be really good if you don't want to go with the big two. I like Nikon but if I had to do it all over again, I would probably get a Canon.
 
Thanks Steve, I do have a Sony A57, but liked the idea of the XE1 and the Fuji skin tones. Unfortunately in the UK Fuji only allow a few days to return goods if not faulty. The xe2 maybe right up my alley if it follows reports of the x100s AF improvements. :)
 
Agreed that for moving children (as in running, jumping, fidgeting, etc.) a DSLR or one of the ultra-fast contrast detection systems like the E-M5 will be better, but if teefin1 is referring to the same thing I am, it was with a still subject - there just wasn't enough contrast in a face/eyes for the AF to lock on. At first I thought it was the lower light, but when I changed the focus point to the clothing the camera had no problems. I'm not giving up on the camera and intend to work on it for a bit to see if I can improve my proficiency in using the AF , but I see how it can be disconcerting, especially if you only have a few days to make a determination as to whether or not to keep the camera.
 
"Indeed Fujifilm claims the X-E1 and X-Pro1 now offer AF speeds competitive with benchmark cameras such as the Olympus OM- E-M5."

They should be sued for issuing such nonsense... I shot the X-E extensively this week with the 35/1.4 (both running the latest FW) and they were painfully matching my rather pedestrian AF'ing NEX 7. The GX-1 I still have leaves both *in the dust* in ANY kind of light or situation... This trend of shameless lying and misinformation is getting really annoying from manufacturers and reviewers alike (the same has irritated me with people ooohing and aahing over the new Sony PDAF which, once actually measured, harldy brings any improvement over the previous module, and none in low light). Damn.

The word "competitive" can be interpreted quite broadly! However, there's no doubt in my mind that based on my use that the AF of just about any m4/3 camera (save the EP1/2 and EPL1) is faster and more accurate than the XP/XE's (even with the 18-55).

The best thing is to let the market decide. In reality it doesn't matter how fast or accurate AF is when measured against other cameras. What matters is how it is when measured against the needs of the photographer. If the AF fails as a photographers tool, it will ultimately fail in the market.

What I find interesting is that Fuji seem to be doing OK with the X series, when it's clear the AF is slower than some competing products. Most reviews mention this. Yet people buy them and seem to be able to make photographs with them.

Agreed! Fuji is doing well in spite of an inferior AF. And that's because the X's "speak" to a target segment of photographers that aren't necessarily looking for blazing AF speed. Dare I say, much like Leica does? But having a blazing AF speed can only help to expand the market share.
 
Agreed that for moving children (as in running, jumping, fidgeting, etc.) a DSLR or one of the ultra-fast contrast detection systems like the E-M5 will be better, but if teefin1 is referring to the same thing I am, it was with a still subject - there just wasn't enough contrast in a face/eyes for the AF to lock on. At first I thought it was the lower light, but when I changed the focus point to the clothing the camera had no problems. I'm not giving up on the camera and intend to work on it for a bit to see if I can improve my proficiency in using the AF , but I see how it can be disconcerting, especially if you only have a few days to make a determination as to whether or not to keep the camera.

I would still go with a DSLR from one of the big two. All things being equal APSC trumps MFT just like FF trumps APSC. Honestly I just don't see the advantage you would be getting from an OMD vs a mid tier Canon or Nikon or Pentax other than the body being smaller (which of course leads to cramped control interfaces). You will get more control over DOF (among other advantages) which I think would be important for someone shooting children. Nikon (again wishing I had gone Canon) and Canon have some REALLY good inexpensive fast prime lenses. I can only speak to Fuji and Nikon but the D700 at F1.4 and Fuji at F1.4 given the same focal length are different. Optically the Fuji is as good, but you do get more DOF control with the Nikon, no doubt about it. Additionally with a DSLR you get a optical viewfinder which I think is probably better for moving subjects. I used to shoot Pentax before switching to Nikon (and of course now I'm switching to Fuji.....). They make some really rugged cameras but I think there lens selection isn't quite up to Nikon or Canon. Their high end lenses are really good but I'm not sure on the lenses in the $300-$500 range. When I did use Pentax they were usually a stop or two slower and not as well built. Their FA Limited lenses are fantastic but you pay for them. Honestly I can't tell much difference between the Nikon 50mm 1.4G and the Nikon 50mm F1.4D that I have except the D is a good bit less expensive. :D
 
You should probably get a DSLR for taking pictures of moving children. Although I rarely use it, I have a D700 for that type of shot. I think there are a number of good Canon, Nikon, and Pentax cameras that are great for it. The Pentax K5 is supposed to be really good if you don't want to go with the big two. I like Nikon but if I had to do it all over again, I would probably get a Canon.

Believe it or not I shoot moving kids with MF with a pretty sweet keepers rate. Focus Peaking is the magic that allows this to happen. Oh, that's with wide open fast primes, too...
 
Believe it or not I shoot moving kids with MF with a pretty sweet keepers rate. Focus Peaking is the magic that allows this to happen. Oh, that's with wide open fast primes, too...


Yes, the Sony lineup do spoil us with focus peaking. I have a number of m42 lenses that MF flawlessly at wide apertures with the help of focus peaking.
 
I would still go with a DSLR from one of the big two.

I have a DLSR from one of the big two. Unless I'm using it in the house or on a shoot, it doesn't get used because even with the relatively small lenses you're referring to I still don't like carrying it with me. You mention not seeing the advantage of an E-M5 apart from the size, but to me that would be the whole advantage. That said I handled and couldn't get on with the E-M5 as the buttons were indeed too cramped, which is part of what led me to the X-series camera and their controls coupled with the superb IQ. Initially I was hoping the X-E1 could replace a DSLR for my uses (which don't include fast movement), but based on my experience trying to take a portrait of my wife (sitting still) I had some issues in getting the camera to focus where I wanted it to using AF. I'm not making a hasty decision though and intend to try and work to get the best out of it, because I'm simply not willing to carry my DSLR around if I don't have to.
 
Back
Top