The new Fuji XT-1

Discussion in 'Mirrorless Digital Cameras' started by cc_chang|1, Jan 23, 2014.

  1. http://www.fujirumors.com/enjoy-more-x-t1-images-evf-specs-bigger-evf-than-e-m1/
    Nikon, Nikon, Nikon, hope you are reading. ISO dial on the camera in 1/3 stop! Look at the size of that EVF! Thoughtful and cleaver design of dials and buttons. So far so good.
     
  2. I emailed a friend that is a Nikon devotee that the Df should have been more like that. Of course I didn't get any response. In the interest of being objective, I suppose one could say that the new XT-1 is fine if you are happy with a smaller sensor and less than state of the art af speed (which remains to be seen however.)
    I would have to say though that the Fuji reflects an approach to photography that Nikon has all but abandoned. I would even go so far as to say that if I didn't need to accommodate my existing collection of some of the best Leica and Nikon lenses, I would agree that APS-C sensor is just fine with me.
     
  3. I think it is a good thing that camera makers are experimenting new ways to make it easier for photographers to take pictures. Despite the advent in digital photography, aperture, shutter speed, and ISO are still three of the most critical settings that can greatly impact the look of the photos. It is frustrating that in most of the camera they cannot come out with three direct controls for these. We need direct control for these and dials are more intuitive to use than buttons. Due to the inaccuracy of the meter (if you shoot in matrix metering in particular), EC becomes another important control. By putting aperture control back to the lens, we now only need to put three dials on the top plate, which reduces clutters. The ISO dial is expected to be used less often so it is on the left side, which makes perfect sense. I also like the fact that their dials are multifunctional which allows a separate button for AE-L and AF-L while leaving the back pretty clean. The screen can be tilted. The XT1 does have one command dial which most likely will control aperture of two light weight compact lenses that do not have built-in aperture. These features, combined with their superb collection of lenses, are just wonderful. I already bought into m4/3 as my light camera kit and I need the videos from m4/3. Otherwise, I will get the Fuji w/o hesitation.
     
  4. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Nikon, Nikon, Nikon, hope you are reading. ISO dial on the camera in 1/3 stop!​
    Are there some Nikon DSLRs that cannot provide ISO selection in 1/3-stop increments?
    Meanwhile, it looks like Fuji still cannot provide shutter speeds selection in 1/3-stop increments on their shutter-speed knob. That is one issue Nikon doesn't do well on the Df.
     
  5. Sorry Shun, it is the Df, that I was thinking about. I know, enough about the Df, we should let it go now. Not sure why the shutter speed is not in 1/3 stop, was it ever? I think it may not be that important to feather the shutter speed to freeze/blur the motion just right but it is more important to fine tune the ISO to control noise and proper exposure. May be 1/3 stop of ISO is no longer needed if we also have easy access to EC.
     
  6. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    CC Chang, the ISO dial on the Nikon Df lets you adjust it in 1/3-stop increments; in fact, you can only adjust it in 1/3-stop increments, although you can skip through a few increments all at once.
    On modern cameras, we can adjust the aperture, shutter speed, and ISO all in 1/3-stop increments. Some cameras give you the option to adjust in 1/3-stop, half stop or full stop increments. There is no reason that we can't do that with shutter speed. That is the problem with these retro-style cameras. That restriction was from a couple of decades ago and we have had better solutions for many years. To me, it seems silly to move backward. Worse yet, people provide silly excuses on why we only need full-stop shutter-speed adjustments.
     
  7. I like the camera but I cannot see the advantages of a dedicated ISO dial. I leave my ISO on auto with an upper limit set. If I ever need to change it, most cameras have a dedicated button.
     
  8. I like the camera but I cannot see the advantages of a dedicated ISO dial.​
    the thing the Fuji does the Df doesnt is have an auto-ISO setting on the ISO dial. that's something developed with the shooter in mind, since you can turn auto ISO on and off without going into menus. helpful when switching between flash/no flash, for instance.
    Even though the x100 has a configurable Fn button you can set to ISO, a dial is better. in the x100 you have to go into menus to change Auto ISO value or switch it on/off. it takes five button presses to do this. On the xe1, the Fn/ISO button has auto-ISO on the pull-down screen, but changing any value still requires three button presses. with a dial, you can toggle between auto ISO on or off instantaneously and tactile-y, meaning you may not have to move your eye from the EVF to do it. that can make the difference between a keeper and a missed shot, on the fly.
    the XT1 looks good; i'm hoping AF speed will be as fast as the x100s at least. it would be great if the PDAF sensors improves a generation too. this is getting close to the perfect compact body IMO, with in-body stabilization one of the main missing features that could substantially improve it. (the stabilized kit lens on the xe1 means i can get shots at much slower shutters than i can with the x100 (which does have a faster lens to compensate somewhat. it would be great to have stabilization available for those nice fuji primes as well as their zooms).
     
  9. Well, I get more upset now, seeing the beautifully and logically designed Fuji X-T1. Why Nikon designed the Df in the way, it is as is, and you don't haver a chance to upgrade the camera with an optional battery grip? . . . Why they blocked all way to even had some aftermarket battery grip, like some of the cheeper Nikon bodies, like the D40 , etc. It is really bothering me so mach, regardless of the quality of the images the camera producing, it is ruining my enjoyment of the camera. This camera, Fuji, is beautifully form designed, not like the Nikon Df. Those, whom my not agree with me, try to mount a 17-35/2.8 or a 24-70/2.8 or a worst case the 70-200/2.8 and you will see, how the camera is unfit for big lenses in the way as it is, without an extended body like an optional battery grip.
     
  10. so, someone finally made the d300 successor, it seems. ;)
     
  11. Instead of making Fuji's camera a disguised lesson for Nikon, can't we just be happy that Fuji is succeeding in adding good, solid, useful and well designed cameras to the mix? Every brand gets some stuff incredibly wrong, and some stuff incredibly right. The Df is a perfect example of both happening in one body, but that doesn't mean it needs constant comparison to other cameras. At least Nikon is also trying to diversify the mix, and meet the wishes of more people - even if the attempt is flawed, it's still better than rinse and repeat.
    The problem is that what is right for one person isn't right for the other. Having a button for ISO doesn't bother me much on my D700; it's not a setting I change much (and only full stops, really). Good direct access to shutterspeed and aperture matter, and I do not think any of the manufacterers manage to get that terribly wrong. But good direct access to metering modes (which I do change frequently) for example can differ a lot, and to me that button or switch puts a large dent in usability. The size and heft of a grip (see Bela's case, the Df indeed looking to be a small-prime-optimised design, not a f/2.8-zoom-body).
    Ergonomics and the relative importance of some controls do differ from one photographer to the other. I can live with full stops, a button for ISO and without AF. Others can't. All brands have to find compromises there to appeal to a wide enough audience, and as a result, they get it right for some of us, and wrong for others.
    Let's be happy with the choice we have, and Fuji is about to add to that choice. Good times.
     
  12. >>> Having a button for ISO doesn't bother me much on my D700; it's not a setting I change much (and
    only full stops, really).

    Same here. Two of my cameras (Canon 6D and Fuji X-A1) I use auto ISO with a minimum shutter speed
    essentially all of the time. *If* there's a peculiar situation (flash, for example) where I want to specify ISO it's a single
    dedicated button-push away on both cameras.

    For me, having a separate knob/dial for ISO, in 1/3 stops no less, would be more of an issue of valuable space wasted, less than great design/ergonomics, and unnecessary complication. That said, if I were interested in and decided to purchase an X-T1, I would just view that issue as an annoyance and move on.
     
  13. I believe, Nikon has to go to Fuji, or hire the guy who designed the Fiji X-T1 to redesign the Df or future Df. After more then a months, I realized, this camera is for the average amateurs or family shooters with smaller lenses and probably a modern and very expensive point & shoot camera. Or a street photographer with 1 or 2 small prime in the packets, blazing around city streets to get some shoots. Yes, it is a big expensive P&S camera. The only reason I'm not returning the camera, because it is painful to loose some money, and fortunately, I can afford to keep it as a third body, just incase. An expensive back-up camera for the D3s & D4. Ugly, ugly and limited. Period.
    You can't hold this camera in your right hand, specially with bigger lenses, you have to hold it in your left hand witch is not always practical and conformable.
    It is no question, the camera build physically superbly, images are excellent too, the rest of it is very questionable.
     
  14. Instead of making Fuji's camera a disguised lesson for Nikon, can't we just be happy that Fuji is succeeding in adding good, solid, useful and well designed cameras to the mix? Every brand gets some stuff incredibly wrong, and some stuff incredibly right. The Df is a perfect example of both happening in one body, but that doesn't mean it needs constant comparison to other cameras. At least Nikon is also trying to diversify the mix, and meet the wishes of more people - even if the attempt is flawed, it's still better than rinse and repeat.​
    actually, i would be happier if Nikon had just come out with the camera i wanted, because of my investment in nikon lenses. Now i'm in a position where i need to consider selling off some nikon gear to get into this new system. The xt1 on the surface is very close to what everyone wanted from a d400. When you don't treat your customers right, they get angry.
     
  15. super-happy i didnt buy a Df though.
     
  16. Well, I get more upset now, seeing the beautifully and logically designed Fuji X-T1. Why Nikon designed the Df in the way, it is as is, and you don't haver a chance to upgrade the camera with an optional battery grip? . . . Why they blocked all way to even had some aftermarket battery grip, like some of the cheeper Nikon bodies, like the D40 , etc. It is really bothering me so mach, regardless of the quality of the images the camera producing, it is ruining my enjoyment of the camera. This camera, Fuji, is beautifully form designed, not like the Nikon Df. Those, whom my not agree with me, try to mount a 17-35/2.8 or a 24-70/2.8 or a worst case the 70-200/2.8 and you will see, how the camera is unfit for big lenses in the way as it is, without an extended body like an optional battery grip.​
    I guess because they designed it for people like me. I don't want the battery grip nor want an EVF finder. It is a good thing because fewer people would buy it.
    By the way the Panasonic DMC-L1 has the shutter speed dial in 1/3 stop and the aperture ring also in 1/3 stop but although the bundled lens is very good the camera doesn't perform well so I passed on that one.
     
  17. "Fuji, is beautifully form designed, not like the Nikon Df"
    Beauty is the eye of the beholder.
    That Fuji looks to me a ugly beast stuff of nightmares.
    Now my Fuji X100 is a object of beauty....superb in nice light otherwise in bright/difficult light it is crap. Really crap.
    .
     
  18. The Df's looks are its strong suit, actually. Ergonomics might be a different story.
    Those, whom my not agree with me, try to mount a 17-35/2.8 or a 24-70/2.8 or a worst case the 70-200/2.8 and you will see, how the camera is unfit for big lenses in the way as it is, without an extended body like an optional battery grip.​
    if you're planning on mounting long lenses, the Df is clearly not the camera for you.
    That Fuji looks to me a ugly beast stuff of nightmares.​
    Really? To me it looks like a nice blend of form and function.
     
  19. btw, the reason fuji is coming out with this camera now is because they are now making high-quality zooms which require more heft than the XE/XPROs, which are more suited for small primes and the 18-55. in particular, the 50-140/2.8 OIS, which will be a game-changer. what a concept: design a photographer-centric system around a sensible lens roadmap, with sensible cameras.
    the problems nikon is having now stem from their failure to make d300 and d700 replacements. not keeping the 16mp APS-C sensor and going to 24mp, is also a mistake. i'm still not sure who needs 24mp on a consumer DX camera, since nikon's consumer lenses arent built for the high magnification of that sensor, which causes diffraction and other issues. And, most pros don't need 24mp DX either. But with the discontinuation of the d7000, nikon doesnt have a 16mp sensor on a prosumer DSLR anymore. Too bad, because Fuji has proven the 16mp sony sensor can be tweaked for better performance, and they are now matching it to bodies that have an escalating feature set, combined with lenses aimed at advanced enthusiasts, semi-pros and pros (a lot of whom are now shooting with the fujis).

    the lack of a d700 replacement, meanwhile, created confusion within the nikon FX line that the Df only adds to. it's not really a speed camera, and not really a PJ camera. obviously its not a sports camera either. it's not a mini-D4, which is what Nikon needed to stay competitive. and it has strong competition at that price point -- the A7r (mitigated only by the lack of native lenses for that body, which may not matter to anyone spending that much) -- as well as much more more sensible competition in the $1000-$2000 range.
    I think we're already seeing somewhat of a migratory shift toward Fuji, at least as a second body for pros and advanced amateurs -- coming from Canon as well as Nikon. i also think nikon is getting caught behind the curve a little bit, as Fuji has out-maneuvered them by capitalizing on a neglected segment of the market. so far it remains to be seen how deep the shift will go, and how far behind the curve nikon will fall. you cant say they were totally blindsided by fuji, as the Df is a grandiose attempt to capture the retro/nostalgia market, albeit as it's becoming evident, a flawed one. in some ways, it's not a bad thing, that people have a bunch of nikon DSLRs already. but in other ways, it is a bad thing, if nikon's abandonment of the prosumer market causes it to lose pros as well.
     
  20. The X series has given us some wonderful products, with the future looking even brighter thanks to the roadmap. Sadly it has given rise to such bitterness (envy?) that it makes me wonder how much time people spend with their head up their glass. Not so much here thankfully, but on other forums (you know who I mean) the vitriolic and ignorant responses border on obscene. How can people deride a company for pushing the envelope to make a better product? And fuji aren't alone here obviously. And to criticise a camera before it's released, before anyone has seen a picture from it simply beggars belief. Surely not all fall into the naysayer/troll/Sony fanboy/gear junkie/idiot categories? Or...maybe they're just not into photography at all. Since aquiring the X series I seldom use my dslrs any more. Not because they're "no good" but because I prefer the Fujis and I get more joy and better pictures from them. I don't give a rat's clacker about "marketing", "profit", "sales", "industry trends" etc, that's for the suits to worry about. I just want a camera system to suit my desires/needs, and I found one. And the X-T1? Probably awesome, we'll just have to wait and see ;-)
     
  21. +1 Mark. Regarding the 'other forum' I just ignore most of what is posted.
    I was an early adopter of the X-10 and it was replaced by Fuji...orbs. I bought a used X-100...like it a lot and was pleased to get new firmware from Fuji after it was discontinued. Great service and support. Down the road my dslr may be replaced with an XT-1.
     
  22. Sanford Edelstein [​IMG][​IMG], Jan 23, 2014; 08:25 p.m.
    I like the camera but I cannot see the advantages of a dedicated ISO dial. I leave my ISO on auto with an upper limit set. If I ever need to change it, most cameras have a dedicated button.
    I agree with Sanford's comment, I typically leave the ISO on 100 or auto, I don't see the big deal of having this on the body taking up real estate space.
    Otherwise, this is a great camera based on the specs released today.
     
  23. That's one of those "there's no point in having this feature, because I don't use it" comments. Of course, there are also
    people who do want a dedicated ISO knob. PErsonally I think I would use it if my camera had it.
     
  24. I'm unable to imagine any photographic assignment or situation where 1/3 stop of exposure would be critical, or even visible without examining the graphs and numbers in PP. Or are you folks still shooting Kodachrome?
    Ming Thein, one of the deeper thinkers in the photo-blogosphere, agrees with that in a recent column, and Mike Johnston, in an older one. You can get bogged down in useless degrees of precision. So I set everything in half-stops, and every camera I have, from the a900 to the LX7, gives me files that will easily withstand a full stop of exposure adjustment.
     
  25. Anyway, there's a lot to love about the XT-1 and the whole X-system. The styling reminds me of Contax, which is a very good thing. I can't wait to try one, but I won't be buying one. The Oly OM-D cameras offer in-body stabilization and a 4:3 aspect ratio, which I prefer. And the RF layout of the XPro-1 appeals to me more, because I have a nose. For now, the x10 is still a delight...
     
  26. I wonder if this will be a replacement for the X-Pro1 or a parallel offering to go along with their rangefinder style cameras. The X-T1 sounds like it has some nice features but I would still like to have the option of an optical viewfinder. The X-T1 seems too similar to all the Olympus, Sony and Samsung designs, but the X-Pro has a uniqueness to it that I admire.
     
  27. I came very close to actually jumping up and down upon seeing this. I really want one. It's just got that grown-up, functional, German look to it which never dies. I saw the DF the other month and the word which sprung to mind was "Bvlgari"- pretty, but effectively jewellery. I will almost certainly not buy an X-T1 though- I already have three bodies and don't want to start all over again with yet another family of lenses when I am as happy with my GX1 & Leica 25/1.4 and (strongly) considering the 42.5/1.2. Lovely lovely stuff from Fuji. If I manage to sell my Nikon stuff there might be room in my photography corner for this. This body with a really good lens on it will certainly produce better images than my current fave set-up.
    p.s. I do think the Nikon Df is more than relevant to this discussion- with droves of dedicated Nikonistas finally realising the company they love has ditched them for a marketting strategy, while several other companies (Fuji, Pentax, Olympus et al) are so obviously bending over backwards to bring out cameras designed for and by enthusiasts, the Df seems to me like the ultimate statement of contempt from Nikon: "Ah, everyone and their wife has told us they want a D400, let's give them this". I will never again enquire after the D300s replacement. I don't give a stuff what Nikon are doing. They won't be getting another penny from me, not even for a lenscap.
     
  28. "Ah, everyone and their wife has told us they want a D400, let's give them this"


    I think that Nikon has realized (probably correctly) that the demand for high end crop sensor DSLR's is probably waning. When the D300 came out, it was a viable option for those wanting a high end body with Nikon's pro-control layout and heavy duty build quality, but couldn't yet justify the high price tag of going full frame. Now full frame has dropped more in price and competes for this market segment. I don't know what a D400 would cost, but it would most likely be in the the same neighborhood as the lower cost full frame cameras like the D-610. I have to assume that most people would opt to go for lower end full frame as opposed to a high end crop body costing nearly as much even if they don't have the same layout and rugged feel of a D300. I am a case in point. I own a D300 and love it, but I would never replace it with another high end crop body if Nikon were to release a D400. I would rather go full frame but for now I am still waiting for Nikon's full-frame cameras with the pro/prosumer build quality and layout (ex: D800) to come down in price.
     
  29. p.s. I do think the Nikon Df is more than relevant to this discussion- with droves of dedicated Nikonistas finally realising the company they love has ditched them for a marketting strategy, while several other companies (Fuji, Pentax, Olympus et al) are so obviously bending over backwards to bring out cameras designed for and by enthusiasts, the Df seems to me like the ultimate statement of contempt from Nikon: "Ah, everyone and their wife has told us they want a D400, let's give them this". I will never again enquire after the D300s replacement. I don't give a stuff what Nikon are doing. They won't be getting another penny from me, not even for a lenscap.​
    You don't like the Df is fine because it does have a mirror and a rather large one. None of the Fuji, Pentax, Olympus et al you mentioned has a mirror. That's where one either want one or not because of just that.
     
  30. it would most likely be in the the same neighborhood as the lower cost full frame cameras like the D-610.​
    But the D610 does not have the top of the line AF module and a large buffer, and the crop factor in the DX helps sports shooters with long lenses.
     
  31. Doesn't have a mirror? I do not care at all about that and it is obvious many others are also very comforable with EVFs. In fact, I love using my GX1 which has no viewfinder at all....and often don't look at the LCD screen. I have been training myself for some time now not to need to look at my camera and I am quite satisfied at how I am progressing. Having a mirror is not even on my radar.
    00cLfq-545180484.jpg
     
  32. I don't see the mirror as having any particular advantage. the mirror-slap is noisy; also EVFs are getting to the point where they are better than OVFs because you get WYSIWYG framing and composition.
     
  33. I popped into Sundan today, one of China's leading electronics chains, and was astonished to see what I believe is almost the entire Fuji range now in stock. They have the X100S, XE1 and XE2, The "Pro" and the X-M1, all out for me to have a play with. I was suprised at the lightness of the X100S and the blockiness of the Pro, but am very glad to see them in the most mainstream location you can get. Sales are bound to rocket. Also, they had the Sony A7, which is growing on me, for 11.5K.
     
  34. "I am quite satisfied at how I am progressing. Having a mirror is not even on my radar."
    Hmm, I have tried the same technique myself, however, it is "hit and miss" regardless of how much practice.
    To my mind it is simple, frame the photo, press the big button and hey! No "hit and miss" involved and it works when it really matters....Nothing to my mind about being shy when taking a photo.
    We are photographers, and we take photographs, because that is what we do.
    Thanks for the photo in a gear thread; a pleasant experience....I thought it was interesting and of good technical quality.
     
  35. That Fuji looks to me a ugly beast stuff of nightmares.Allen
    Really? To me it looks like a nice blend of form and function.Eric.
    I'm biased being a long time Nikon user.
    Yes, form and function is very important and how instinctive the camera feels to you in your hand.
    But I still think it looks like a ugly beast,;but in the big scheme of things, there are other important considerations; like how does it perform in the real world? Nikon have been doing a very good job for a long, long time.
    And the really good thing, for those without pockets full of gold, a Nikon can be picked up very cheaply. Let us have a little think the D7000 for £500 now there's a deal.
     
  36. The D7000 is an old model. Yet for $140 less than the price of a D7000 body you can have a current model X-M1 with a
    pretty decent lens.
     
  37. Thank you Allen.
    I'm sure many of us will be taking a trip down to our local photograhy shop when the XT-1 becomes available.
    As ever, whatever you use and whatever you shoot, have fun and good luck!
     
  38. Just on that ISO dial....i really like it and the fact that it's on the "wrong" side doesn't bother me. I'm pretty good discerning left from right ;-) And honestly how many times do you change ISO in a day's shooting? The other day We shot from 2:30 - 8pm in hard Aussie sun, open shade and finally the evening with flash. Changed ISO twice, maybe three times. I've just come from that "other" forum where the percentage of bulletheads is unreasonably high. Everyone has a right to be dim, but they just abuse the privilege. Some of the reasons the X-T1 is bad. Yes bad. Doesn't have 1/8000th sec...we're all shooting cheetahs and speeding bullets now. 1/180th flash sync, no touch screen focussing (what are you, 15?), Fuji doesn't have a big enough market share (so we have to check the stock market before we buy a camera?) X trans sensor poor image quality ( this guy is from Cataract City and a notorious DPR troll. He went from Fuji article to Olympus to Zeiss, bagging all the way. I don't think he even owns a camera and rapes the English language with nonsense and something about dual pixel AF ?), EVERYTHING hinges on the upcoming 50-140 lens (yes, some nut actually said that), it's not FF (yeah. It's not humanly possible to take a good picture without FF) and my favourite...it's just a marketing exercise! Oh, and YOUR brands aren't a marketing exercise? AAAAARRGH! So you can imagine my relief coming here lol! You kind of get an idea where they're at when DPR post an article about Don McCullin and very few guys post anything there. Don who? Anyway, sorry about that, I just needed to vent....and the X-T1 is looking awesome, a colleague of mine (D800 wielder) is visiting NYC this april and plans to pick one up there. The Lens Roadmap is looking thrilling and as far as I'm concerned it's a great time to be a photographer. Awesome backgrounds, great light, fascinating subjects, inspiration...but YOU guys know that. Cheers, Mark (hot & bothered) ;-p
     
  39. I lasted about 2 weeks before I gave up on DPR fora. The review site is obviously required reading, but the some of the posts on some fora are beyond belief. Don't go anywhere near the Street Forum! It seems to be populated mainly by bitchy 12 year olds who think they are the next HCB.
     
  40. "Don't go anywhere near the Street Forum! It seems to be populated mainly by bitchy 12 year olds who think they are the next HCB."
    Well, most of us don't want to be the next HCB, we like to do our own thing.
    You had a issue with one person on the street forum. Who, if you actually got to know him is alright sort of bloke. I had had my issues with his direct, in your face comments, but I started to listen to his words rather than listen to my emotions....
    We are not all the same in this world it is about give and take.
    Do not judge a book by its cover. Old maxim but true.
    Your natural home for your, very interesting, photographs is the street forum where you will be welcomed with open arms.
    Hey, but expect a bit of banter from time to time.
    00cMEp-545256284.jpg
     
  41. Allen, I don't know what the link to Snapsort is about but I can tell you that all digitals with a short flange distance can get that type of effect, which is not actually "flare". Nasim writes some good stuff, but he also sometimes seems to jump at opportunities to report "problems". E.g., he recently reported that the D600 has a problem with its shutter, but only when set to high ISO and a fast shutter speed. It turns out he was just observing AC light flicker. I have thousands of photos shot with various mirrorless cameras that are reported to suffer from that "flare" issue, and only one example that looks anything like this problem, so I feel confident saying this is a rare problem.
     
  42. But I still think it looks like a ugly beast,;but in the big scheme of things, there are other important considerations; like how does it perform in the real world? Nikon have been doing a very good job for a long, long time.
    And the really good thing, for those without pockets full of gold, a Nikon can be picked up very cheaply. Let us have a little think the D7000 for £500 now there's a deal.​
    the d7000 cost reduction is a good thing but it also brings up some points worth consideration. the Fuji's use the same 16mp sensor but get better IQ and low-light performance. perhaps nikon should have continued improving the 16mp sensor rather than moving to 24mp DX--which creates all kinds of technical/performance issues.--?
    also, an XE1 body can be had now for less than a d7000.
     
  43. Hey Allen,
    Thanks for the kind invitation, but I'll pass, for now at least. I had issues with far more than one person, although the person I think you're thinking of should have been banned from DPR months before I even arrived, if the spiteful, adolescent garbage he was spouting when I was there is anything like his normal "output". I have no interest in even reading the ordure which I saw on a regular basis on the forums I visited, at the time of my visits.
     
  44. "the d7000 cost reduction is a good thing but it also brings up some points worth consideration. the Fuji's use the same 16mp sensor but get better IQ and low-light performance[​IMG]. perhaps nikon should have continued improving the 16mp sensor rather than moving to 24mp DX--which creates all kinds of technical/performance issues.--?"
    FYI, the D7000 and Fuji X cameras don't share the same sensor.
     
  45. FYI, the D7000 and Fuji X cameras don't share the same sensor.​
    actually, they both share the same 16mp Sony APS-C chip -- also found in the Coolpix A, Ricoh GR, NEX-3, and NEX-5. The Fuji has no AA filter and uses a different color array, which accounts for some of the technical performance differences.
    In any event, the point was that instead of moving away from this sensor in its DSLRs, Nikon could have continued to tweak it, thus avoiding some of the issues that the larger 24mp APS-C chip has, such as diffraction and focus accuracy. The Coolpix A, with no AA filter, is sharper than the D7000, as are the Fuji cameras. Fuji also gets better low-light performance out of the same sensor. Another thing they get right is their XF lenses, which are well-matched to the sensor. Nikon's consumer lenses are mostly designed for lower-MP sensors and have issues with both 16mp and 24mp sensors. Yet Nikon effectively stopped making pro or prosumer DX lenses awhile back. Meanwhile Fuji's kit offering, the 18-55, absolutely smokes Canon and Nikon's kit lenses and has earned comparisons to pro lenses for IQ. Fuji's primes are also better than most of nikon's, both in terms of IQ and build quality.
    It's for those reasons that people are calling the XT1 the "D400" -- the camera Nikon could, and perhaps should have made. What makes the XT1 so appealing isn't just its spec sheet or build, but the fact that it caters to the prosumer/high-end APS-C audience Nikon more or less abandoned after the d300s. Sure, you can get a D7100 for around the same price, but the Fuji appears to be the more performance-oriented body.
     
  46. Interesting post.
    It does seem strange that Canikon are so willing to give up the middle ground. I might be wrong, but I feel that Canon are in dire need of an upgraded APS-C sensor themselves. I don't think the big two realised how much room there actually is in the middle of the market and with Fuji, Olympus et al demanding more and more "elbow room" and sensor performance at the top of the range almost too demanding, we have a plethora of high performance machines to choose from. The momentum is definitely with mirrorless systems at the moment.
     
  47. It does seem strange that Canikon are so willing to give up the middle ground.​
    i think it's the result of a few things: 1) having to protect their preferred upgrade path into full frame, with its higher profit margins; 2) having to cover both full frame and crop sensor lenses; which leads to 3) downgrading APS-C into a consumer format, symbolized by the lack of pro-spec lenses and bodies.
    I don't think the big two realised how much room there actually is in the middle of the market​
    the big two put most of their efforts into competing with each other and continuing to wage the megapixel wars--which may have come back to bite them. So if Canon comes out with a 20mp APS-C sensor, Nikon's response is 24mp APS-C. That's an approach that leaves little room for actual innovation (and as i've outlined earlier in this thread, actually creates technical issues). The big two's response to market trends has been half-assed--i.e., the EOS M and Nikon 1--and they've left off features which could have elevated the products they have put out, such as not putting CLS commander feature on the Coolpix A, which is overpriced for its market segment. Nikon's response to Fuji's retro style was the (overpriced, Frankensteinian) Df -- a camera whose design flaws and bizarre mix of hybrid parts practically guarantee it won't be anywhere near as trendy as the x100 or x100s. and if all you want is retro, why do you need to pay almost $3000 for it when an x100s is $1300, with a lens?
    the obvious inference here is that canon and nikon misread, and possibly mistreated, their consumer base by making decisions which maybe helped in the short-term, but resulted in long-term confusion with the direction of their product line (probably moreso in Nikon's case than Canon's). Nikon also made some critical errors with the flawed d600, and not admitting their mistake soon enough--a marked contrast to Fuji, who keep releasing firmware updates to older cameras.
    That said, the big two still control most of the DSLR market, and mirrorless sales are still underwhelming despite all the buzz. m4/3 has a deep lens lineup and some interesting bodies, but still has some of the issues that 4/3 did, namely a smaller sensor that is always going to be less capable than larger sensors. Full-frame also has its limitations--cost being the most obvious--and though mirrorless full frame sounds good on paper, both Sony A7 bodies are compromised both in terms of implementation and available native lenses at launch. Meanwhile, we're seeing more and more pros go with Fuji X as their backup or secondary systems, a movement which can only get louder with the announcement of the XT1 and Fuji's new lenses. If mirrorless is generating momentum, it remains to be seen what Canikon can do to regain the hearts and minds of "middle-ground" (non entry-level, non-pro) shooters.
    In the meantime, Fuji is a small company and doesn't need to overtake Nikon or Canon in overall sales-- they just need enough of a niche and profitability to continue making products. What i like about the XT1 release is a commitment to the prosumer base which is backed up by a sensible product line and what seems to be a rational, considered market approach. if you buy an XT1 and a lower-end or more compact Fuji X body, you can use the same lenses on each -- making it easy to build a functional multiple body ILC system (which doesnt make total practical sense for the most part with hybrid DX/FX formats). there's also no pressure to move to a different sensor format and invite confusion. I'm not sure if Fuji targeted Nikon purposely, or if they just studied their mistakes and avoided them, but as long as Fuji keeps releasing quality products which are both innovative and timely, while evoking a photographer-centric aesthetic, they stand a chance of weathering the technology storm.
     
  48. "...actually, they both share the same 16mp Sony APS-C chip -- also found in the Coolpix A, Ricoh GR, NEX-3, and NEX-5. The Fuji has no AA filter and uses a different color array, which accounts for some of the technical performance differences."

    Which effectively makes it a different chip, especially when coupled with different processing circuitry and Fuji's proprietary filter array.
     
  49. As for Nikon and its APS-C fumbling, they still split the lion's share of the DSLR market with Canon. Guesstimates are that up to 80% of Nikon's DSLR sales are APS-C cameras. The CIPA stats tell the tale.
     
  50. Which effectively makes it a different chip, especially when coupled with different processing circuitry and Fuji's proprietary filter array.​
    it's the same sensor. Fuji just gets more out of it. the point is that Nikon could have continued to improve the sensor and tweak it for better performance rather than go to higher megapixels. or they could have put a better AF module in the d7000 body, raised the FPS, gave it weather-sealing, and called it the d7000s or d7000p. my prediction is that if the XT1's AF-C and focus tracking is improved from the xe-2/x100s, we;ll see a lot of nikon users in particular migrate to the new body. now that EVF technology has matured, it's beginning to be an advantage over an OVF because of WYSIWYG metering.
     
  51. "it's the same sensor. Fuji just gets more out of it. the point is that Nikon could have continued to improve the sensor and tweak it for better performance[​IMG] rather than go to higher megapixels..."
    I guess the contradiction just isn't obvious here.
    FYI, this thread isn't about predictions. None of us know anything more than what Fuji's press releases revealed a few days ago. It's hard to quantify supposition.
     
  52. "Nikon's response is 24mp APS-C."​
    I for one hate it. This will just quickly fill up my storage with very little to gain. The problem is once we are at 24MP, it will never go down from here, will it? If D7100 has a 16 or 18 MP sensor, I for one will buy it now to replace my D90.

    Back to the point earlier that many Nikon users are dissatisfied with Nikon for one reason or another, I now frequent Thom Hogan's site as he is using both Nikon and mirror less cameras, and quite critical of what Nikon is doing. Increasingly I would have to agree with him that Nikon's key design strategy appears to be following what Canon is doing, and Nikon is not doing enough of its own research to find out what we really want. He complains about the lack of any outreach from Nikon to the users and the company's repeated assertion that the decline of camera sale is a result of global economical down turn, but not the lack of interest in cameras that no longer meet our needs. The economy seems to be bouncing back in the US — will more people buy Nikon? When their designs did connect, like the D90/D300 combo, or the D700, they sold lots of them and created a new category.

    I remember the time when CD players were competing with one another with ever lower and lower noise and higher and higher sampling rates, which affect the sound quality that only instrument can measure. Then came the iPod with those tiny low def ear buds and now the traditional CD players have all but disappear. I feel the same way about MP in the sensor, as well as the perception of noise and sharpness at the pixel levels. This is all madness that does not greatly impact on our ability to take better pictures easier and quicker. If Nikon can make a camera that is iPhone-like easy to use, they will sell a lot of them. People want to take things with them with ease (and style, nod to Fuji), including a top notch camera.
     
  53. I guess the contradiction just isn't obvious here.​
    that's because there is no contradiction. again, fuji uses the same sensor chip as nikon, ricoh, and sony. sure they are engineered differently, but the fact is fuji has been able to extract higher performance in critical areas. honestly, i think you're missing the point by arguing semantics. in the past, nikon has sometimes improved IQ with later generations of camera, using the same chip. the d90 has better IQ than the d300, for instance. they could have easily done this with a d7000s or d7000p, but instead they chose to play the megapixel race, resulting in a "top-of-the-line" DX body with increased resolution but also increased diffraction and buffer size issues which doesn't fully improve on the d300s--therefore creating an opening for a camera like the XT1.
    this thread isn't about predictions.​
    uh, i just made a prediction. maybe you should watch and wait to see if i'm right.
    This will just quickly fill up my storage with very little to gain. The problem is once we are at 24MP, it will never go down from here, will it? If D7100 has a 16 or 18 MP sensor, I for one will buy it now to replace my D90.​
    exactly, CC. the problem is that the d7000, now on closeout prices, does have a 16mp sensor but also an AA filter and a worse AF module than d7100. that's why it stands to reason that if the XT1 is any good at AF with moving subjects, we'll see an exodus of nikon d90, d300/s and d7000 owners.
    I now frequent Thom Hogan's site as he is using both Nikon and mirror less cameras, and quite critical of what Nikon is doing. Increasingly I would have to agree with him that Nikon's key design strategy appears to be following what Canon is doing, and Nikon is not doing enough of its own research to find out what we really want.​
    i've been reading thom for a while too. he can be a curmudgeon but the idea that he's more critical than necessary of nikon is hogwash. it's easy to see what nikon is and isnt doing right just by comparing their latest stuff to other systems.
    When their designs did connect, like the D90/D300 combo, or the D700, they sold lots of them and created a new category.​
    exactly. i think that's what's known as a logical upgrade path, which fuji has now created with streamlined bodies and lenses which use the same batteries and lenses, offer best-in-class IQ, and are more photographer/performance-oriented than some of nikon's consumer designs.
    I feel the same way about MP in the sensor, as well as the perception of noise and sharpness at the pixel levels. This is all madness that does not greatly impact on our ability to take better pictures easier and quicker.​
    it's going to be interesting to compare reaction to the Sony A7/A7r and the Fuji XT1. Sony has spread itself out across all kinds of different sizes and formats--advanced compact, small sensor superzoom, mILC, and mirrorless FF. so one has to question their commitment to the latter. looks like there's not going to be a 2.8 telezoom or a 2.8 standard zoom for the A7 for a while--sony's roadmap has f/4 versions--while Fuji has announced zooms with these specs, which should arrive later this year. the problem is that puts a state of the art sensor cam behind APS-C, FX, and even m4/3 in terms of lens options. also, early reports suggest the A7/A7r have some focus-accuracy issues and other logistical problems which could limit their effectiveness for pros and advanced enthusiasts the lack of 1.4 primes or even a 35/2 kind of obscures any DoF advantage you might get from the Sony, and there's no portrait lens, currently. all of which leads to the conclusion that mirrorless full frame may be overblown if you can't get the right features on it and also have a solid lens lineup at launch and clear roadmap ahead.
     
  54. "that's why it stands to reason that if the XT1 is any good at AF with moving subjects, we'll see an exodus of nikon d90, d300/s and d7000 owners."
    I'm fond of Fuji products, too. However, you should tone down the fanboy outgassing and have a look at CIPA stats re: Nikon-vs-Fuji and the state of MILC sales. What's obvious and verifiable to Hogan somehow's escaping you here.
     
  55. However, you should tone down the fanboy outgassing​
    oh, please. i wouldnt call my self a fanboy. i'm more about functionality in the field than getting all hyped over specs on paper. i just really like what fuji is doing right now. so much so that even though i'm heavily invested in nikon (both DX and FX), i went out and bought an XE-1+18-55 and an x100. that's partially because i'm tired of waiting for a D400, and also because i'm tired of lugging around a D3s+pro lenses. now i'm looking at the XT1. why? simple. if i can get similar functionality in a smaller camera, and have a compact 2-body system that uses the same batteries and chargers, and has great lenses and almost as good hi-ISO as the D3s, then i'm all about it. Personally, i don't care about last year's MILC sales [which is never a good reason to make a personal purchasing choice], and yes, i read the Reuters article and Hogan's response. i care about functionality and getting the right tool for the right job.
    The fact of the matter is that the d300 came out in 2007, and the d300s is just a minor upgrade. So d300 users have been waiting 6 years for Nikon to make a prosumer DX body as good. Since i'm not the only person in this boat, it stands to reason i'm not the only one who will move in this direction. I'm seeing a lot of blogs from pros who are also going to Fuji. Nikon just made it a lot easier for them, by ignoring its customers and not meeting expectations. if that bothers you, then so be it. unless you're in charge of R&D at Nikon, your opinion of what i think doesn't matter. it's not like i have to live up to your expectation of what i can and can't comment on.
     
  56. "Personally, i don't care about last year's MILC sales [which is never a good reason to make a personal purchasing choice], and yes, i read the Reuters article and Hogan's response. i care about functionality and getting the right tool for the right job."
    So far, MILC sales aren't exactly killing Canon and Nikon in the N. American market. Friends who eke out a living selling cameras remark less on how many Fuji X cameras they sell than on who buys--mainly flush boomers who want a lightweight alternative to their hulking DSLRs. They're numerate, though, and know sales of mid-market APS-C kit pays the rent and feeds the kids. They had a slow holiday season and aren't exactly buoyant about demand. Hogan's recent comments on the market may, sadly, be prescient. Most "pros" are too busy finding and keeping business to run tell-all blogs unless chattering is their "business." "Pros" I know don't spend much time parsing fanboy blather, either.
    Thankfully, Fujifilm isn't dependent on camera sales for survival. Even if their products weren't as sweet as they are, they're far better at service and support in my market than the major makers.
     
  57. I got old waiting for a replacement for my D300, too old to carry that monster around for very long anymore. That's why i transitioning into mirrorless, M4/3 now and maybe one of these at some point. BTW, the Fuji sensor is unique, manufactured by Fuji and shared with no other camera.
     
  58. I assume and actually hope, that DSLR sales will drop as people currently using 550Ds etc look to replace their kit and see all the new shiny things in the shop. DSLRs have the momentum at the moment and I feel it will be a long while before there is any viable alternative to a D4s or 1Dx for those who see it as a business expense. We have to be honest with ourselves here- a 5DIII or D800 is a great camera for the job it was designed for. This is why I see mirrorless as the middle ground, the alternative to traditional APS-C models. I feel if Nikon had introduced a fully-mature D400 18-24 months ago (likewise with a 7DII) there would not have been any need at all for many people to start looking for alternatives. I strongly considered the K3, but the AF module let it down- this is il-logical as I took the Canon M1 on holiday with me to see exactly what I could coax out of it- so far, it's looking good but I am keenly aware that there are oodles of cameras out there which are just as capable. If I'd had a 5DIII and killer prime, I could not have made that statement. The 5DIII is the best all-round image-maker in the business, the D800 is the best still-life camera in the business. Mirrorless has a way to go, but I believe it will get there. And for what the average D5300 user needs, it is there already. I think the buzz with MILCs at the moment is the fact that it is almost exclusively an enthusiast's niche- like fixed gear bikes in the cycling community. It's cool. But anyone who needs to cycle for 400 miles and has lots of money gets a carbon bike with gears on it. I was at a temple today watching successful men with 7Ds and D800s take pictures with tripods in the blazing sun and I felt in-the-know with my tiny M1. Mirrorless makes us feel special...and that's ok, since we are all spurred on to prove our credentials. But we must admit there is still a long way to go before a bod shooting the next Vogue cover reaches for a Fuji, even though it could actually do the job. I mean, how much resolution do you need for A4!? But try telling that to an editor who just spent 50 grand on a day's shoot
     
  59. I got old waiting for a replacement for my D300​
    so did everyone else who bought one 5-6 years ago.
    BTW, the Fuji sensor is unique, manufactured by Fuji and shared with no other camera.​
    can you cite a source for this? Fuji doesn't make sensor chips, AFAIK. Most digital camera chips are manufactured by Sony or Toshiba. That's why we see so much standardization of sensor sizes across different platforms and manufacturers. Occasionally, we'll see nikon come up with its own sensors, like the D4/Df chip, but the d7000, d7100, d610 and d800 sensors are all made by Sony.
    also, i don't see how my remarks on a possible exodus from Nikon are all that different from what Hogan has to say in his most recent blog post: "Bottom line: some form of D300s successor needs to appear in 2014 or else Nikon risks losing all traction in this segment."

    I mean, it's a fairly obvious conclusion: you ignore a market segment, someone else moves in with a better product aimed at those same consumers. the overall MILC sales figures as of 2013 are totally irrelevant to how the market will shape up in 2014. Right now, consumers have the most choices they've ever had, and while MILCs may not totally outstrip DSLRs for some time, if ever, DSLRS have very little momentum as far as industry buzz compared to 5 years ago. in other words, if you already have a DSLR, there needs to be a compelling reason for you to upgrade, especially when faced with more compact competition with innovative features and design aesthetic.
     
  60. "I mean, it's a fairly obvious conclusion: you ignore a market segment, someone else moves in with a better product aimed at those same consumers. the overall MILC sales figures as of 2013 are totally irrelevant to how the market will shape up in 2014."
    This is simply magical thinking.Unless it's coupled with basic innumeracy, you can't really argue on the basis of CIPA data that MILC sales are likely to surge to the point that they threaten depressed DSLR sales. Find a new chew toy.
     
  61. Magical thinking? Perhaps, but that's not what i said. or even implied.
    I dont know how one conflates referencing a specific market segment--likely D400 buyers moving to the Fuji XT1--with a grandiose pronouncement that the entire mirrorless market is going to "surge to the point that they threaten depressed DSLR sales." if you can find such a statement in any of my verbatim quotes, please let me know.
    What i actually said was that we're probably going to see an exodus of people who would have considered a d400 move toward the XT1, which has just about everything a d400 buyer would want, except for compatibility with Nikon lenses.
    Why that obvious and logical statement bothered you, i have no idea. As i said, it's not really any different from what Thom Hogan has said, or what the OP has said, or what just about everyone who's blogged or previewed the XT1 has said. Just the anecdotal evidence on this thread alone confirms such an exodus away from DSLRs and toward MILCs is already happening.The XT1 in some ways seems like a perfect storm as it arrives just as Fuji's X-mount is maturing into a viable system, and at the apex of Nikonista discontent.
    The next question should be, how much of an exodus are we talking about? That, obviously, remains to be seen.
    We should also remember that it's not just DSLRs that are "depressed," but the entire digital camera industry. According to Hogan, " Canon just predicted that their compact camera sales will be down 20% in terms of units in 2014. "
    The implication there is that this is an industry rife for change--and feeling a lot of competition from smartphones--so its no surprise to careful observers that innovative products are being embraced. I don't expect DSLRs to go away, but the endless reiteration of models hasn't resulted in any real innovation in that segment since either the d300 or the d7000, depending on your perspective.
    Nikon hasn't helped with all its variations on 18-xx kit lenses, lower-end bodies with better specs or features than hi-end bodies, overpricing of its Mirrorless fixed-focal compact, confusing design decisions of the Df, and failure to make high-end DX lenses. In the meantime, other manufacturers have responded by putting out models with features that people actually want and/or need. Again, this goes back to my earlier point that while Canon and Nikon were busy one-upping each other, Fuji, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, and Ricoh were addressing market trends and putting out more innovative products. Magical thinking? Nope, just simple logic. There's a problem when my D300s and D3s have better performance in some respects to the newer breed of bodies, because there's no need for me to upgrade at that point. Either i'm staying put where i am, or i'm looking to other manufacturers, especially if they're offering something i can't get with Nikon. Hope that clears things up for you.
     
  62. Who else makes or uses an XTrans sensor that "mimics the structure of silver halide film"?
     
  63. Fuji doesn't have sensor manufacturing capability. The sensor in X-Trans cameras is made by another company (I think it might be Toshiba?) to Fuji's specs. This is a pretty common thing to do - e.g., Nikon also does not make sensors, but gets Sony and Toshiba to do it for them.
    The non-Bayer color array filter that Fuji puts on top of the sensor is the proprietary part. Fuji might be manufacturing that themselves - I know they've converted a lot of their expertise and production capacity from making photo films to other types of coated film materials, like their LCD components.
     
  64. "Hope that clears things up for you."
    Simply reading the CIPA stats would clarify a great deal for you and show there's really no quantitative basis to what you're on about here. "Fact-free" seems to be your M.O. hereabouts. No more troll feeding.
     
  65. there's really no quantitative basis to what you're on about here. "Fact-free" seems to be your M.O. hereabouts.​
    C Watson, do you realize that you've offered no quanititative argument yourself, other than referencing vague "stats" you can't even be bothered to cite, much less analyze?
    Obviously a bee got in your bonnet. If you want to blame the messenger, that's not my fault. I asked you to point to anything i said which would indicate that you hadn't misquoted me badly. Instead we get more ad hominem attacks, which is generally a sign of when someone has lost an argument, but is too stubborn or prideful to admit it.
    As i noted earlier, i've already read the Reuters article, and the NY Times article, and Hogan's analysis. I did all that before i bought into the Fuji system. As i also noted earlier, i own both FX and DX Nikon bodies, and have heavily invested in their lenses -- which hardly makes me a Fuji "fanboy," as you alleged. If Nikon was making innovative products which compelled me to buy more of their cameras, i would have done so.
    But whatever. I don't even know what you're defending here, other than your own faulty argument, which seems to be based on an erroneous reading of statements i didnt even make. Which is otherwise known as projection. At this point, you can take your ad hominem attacks and your distorted misconceptions and just go away.
     
  66. The sensor in X-Trans cameras is made by another company (I think it might be Toshiba?) to Fuji's specs.​
    Apparently, Andy is right, although the Toshiba 16mp chip appears to be very similar to the BSI CMOS sensor made by Sony.
     
  67. I thought fanboys used Sonys and hung out under bridges. Or Fuji forums. Whatever, I think Eric is too erudite (yes, we use words like that in Oz. It's the heatwave we're currently experiencing) to be called that. Fuji seems to have lit a fire and the enthusiasm that's followed is fanning the flames. This seems to have upset some people. I don't know why but it's irrelevant to me, as are things like market share, trends, Thom's latest post, Ken's latest opinion, or the price of petrol/gas in Lee's Summit, Mo.....what is relevant is that Fuji are making terrific cameras & lenses and my Nikons are getting less and less use. Now my colleagues love the results I've been getting and have no problem with the change in my direction gear-wise. They use D700, D800, D800E, 5Dmk2 and 5Dmk3. In fact the D800 young lady will be picking up her X-T1 this April in NYC. Anyway back to "fanboyism"....Zack Arias, Kevin Mullins, David "strobist" Hobby, Damien Lovegrove, Patrick La Roque, Dave Kai Piper & a group of guys called the Kage Collective. Call me a fanboy and put me in their company. Please ;-)
     
  68. just to add on there, for 3 years i've been lugging around a D3s+24-70 to PJ shoots. my backup was a d300s+sigma 17-50. i shot an art show with the XE1 and 18-55 and was amazed at the acuity of the pics. and it didnt hurt my back afterward. the XE1 doesnt have PDAF and isnt great at AF tracking, so that's an obvious limitation for moving subjects. if the XT1 rectifies this, my uses for a big, heavy set up are gonna be cut way down. just saying.
    00cMru-545363884.jpg
     

Share This Page