Fuji Fujifilm X-Pro 1: my impressions

Those are review copies, mind you, otherwise my wife would be very upset. And, frankly speaking, while I'm really tempted, I think both cameras in terms of ergonomics and efficiency are worse than my own Panasonic GH2 (although image quality is, of course, better).



Thanks!

It is all a matter of personal preference, I for one find the XPro my favorite when it comes to ergonomics.
 
Two shots from the X-Pro 1.

fyLOKSh71fPyjxTwMK0g.jpg


Full size: http://photo.torba.com/images/pavel.urusov/f/fyLOKSh71fPyjxTwMK0g.jpg

ANsFHbRGhSqNDnooNuz2.jpg


Full size: http://photo.torba.com/images/pavel.urusov/f/ANsFHbRGhSqNDnooNuz2.jpg

Had to bump up the ISO to 1600 to avoid motion blur. The results are jaw-dropping. I am lost for words, frankly. Color, exposure — everything is perfect. And those are SOOC JPEGs!
 
B&W image developed in RPP and edited & converted to B&W in Lightroom:

rUxAzRnGTrhQxNYAexv9.jpg


Full size: http://photo.torba.com/images/pavel.urusov/f/rUxAzRnGTrhQxNYAexv9.jpg

I think the result is excellent. Most luminance information is contained in the green channel, and X-Pro 1 has more green pixels than any other camera of the same total resolution. And no AA filter to soften the image.


Thanks for the comments on the B&W conversion! I was curious on this after reading Reid's review. He was very positive about the camera, but then said his B&W conversions were somewhat flat. He speculated that it could be something to do with the X-trans color filter. I figured it had probably more to do with the RAW conversion tool and settings.

By the way, how much do you need to sharpen the XPro images versus the K-01? I realize there were different tools used, but I am curious to hear your feedback. Thanks!
 
By the way, how much do you need to sharpen the XPro images versus the K-01? I realize there were different tools used, but I am curious to hear your feedback. Thanks!

I used zero sharpening in RPP and added a tiny amount of sharpening (15, which is way less than standard 25) in Lightroom. K-01 requires dealing in at least 50 to look as sharp.
 
I can't say that I had problems with B&W conversions, so far.
I don't even underSTAND how a particular camera that's good in color could be less good for B&W conversions. Your conversion software will interpret the color information, let you manipulate it as you wish, and you end up with a B&W file that looks like you want it to. I have yet to have a camera that I liked in color that I didn't like equally well in B&W. And a few cameras that I did NOT love in color I was still very happy with the B&W I could get out of it. When I see comments like Sean's on the X-Pro or on the new mono-Lieca I just have to think they're looking for things that might not exist. Or else I just don't look at photography in such a way that I'd ever see what they're complaining about. The Leica images are lovely, as many are, due mostly to the photographers and the amazing lenses. I don't see how one camera is better for B&W conversions than another, as long as they produce decent colors...

And, as if I needed to say it, I'm more than happy with the B&W capabilities of the X-Pro 1... (and EM5, and X100, and GRD3 and GXR, etc, etc, etc...

-Ray

6939653294_6a5fc147ea_c.jpg


7079623825_72a8a1d36e_b.jpg


View attachment 54095
 
These two were taken using the B&W with Red filter setting on the Xpro. All the hype about the Leica M9M has got me thinking about the Xpro as a B&W camera. It does the job plenty fine for me. So I have to agree with Ray on this. The first shot when examined has all "zones" from 0 through 9. Both were taken with the 35 f1.4.

XproBW1.jpg


XprBW2.jpg
 
Back
Top