The new Fuji XT-1

<p>http://www.fujirumors.com/enjoy-more-x-t1-images-evf-specs-bigger-evf-than-e-m1/</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.)<br>

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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Nikon, Nikon, Nikon, hope you are reading. ISO dial on the camera in 1/3 stop!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Are there some Nikon DSLRs that cannot provide ISO selection in 1/3-stop increments?</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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. </p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I like the camera but I cannot see the advantages of a dedicated ISO dial.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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).</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>so, someone finally made the d300 successor, it seems. ;)</p>

<p>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. <br>

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).<br>

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.<br>

Let's be happy with the choice we have, and Fuji is about to add to that choice. Good times.</p>

>>> 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.

<p>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 <strong>limited</strong>. Period.<br /> 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.<br /> It is no question, the camera build physically superbly, images are excellent too, the rest of it is very questionable.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

<p>super-happy i didnt buy a Df though.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>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.<br>

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. </p>

<p>"Fuji, is beautifully form designed, not like the Nikon Df"</p>

<p>Beauty is the eye of the beholder.</p>

<p>That Fuji looks to me a ugly beast stuff of nightmares.</p>

<p>Now my Fuji X100 is a object of beauty....superb in nice light otherwise in bright/difficult light it is crap. Really crap.</p>

<p>.</p>

<p>The Df's looks are its strong suit, actually. Ergonomics might be a different story.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>if you're planning on mounting long lenses, the Df is clearly not the camera for you.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>That Fuji looks to me a ugly beast stuff of nightmares.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Really? To me it looks like a nice blend of form and function.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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).<br /> <br>

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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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 ;-)</p>

<p>+1 Mark. Regarding the 'other forum' I just ignore most of what is posted.<br>

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.</p>

 

<p ><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=127625">Sanford Edelstein</a> <a href="/member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub10plus.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/1roll.gif" alt="" /></a>, Jan 23, 2014; 08:25 p.m.</p>

 

<p>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.<br>

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.<br>

Otherwise, this is a great camera based on the specs released today.</p>

 

 

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.

<p>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?<br>

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.</p>

<p>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...</p>