steve_solomon2

<p>Interesting image! What techniques did you use in post processing, or was this done in-camera using an Art Filter?</p>

<p>Andy, congrats on your Fuji X-E1 with the 35mm f/1.4! I am now researching that model as well as the Fuji X100S, as a high-quality "travel" system. I'll be looking for test reviews comparing the image quality betwen those two bodies, at least as closely as possible, since there will be a dofference in focal length. </p>

<p>Andy, you've illustrated what made me reconsider the NEX-7. I don't profess to own any Sony gear, but I have done a LOT of research into camera systems, and I am now considering either the Fuji X100S or the Olympus OM-D as a "travel" system to complement my Pentax K-5 DSLR system. FWIW, unless I'm missing something, I think the 2 (and only 2) Sony lenses that are worthy of the NEX-7 sensor are the Sony/Zeiss 24 and the Sony 50. Of course, I could be wrong.</p>

<p>Or, if you can live with a fixed focal length (35mm), I might suggest the new Fuji X100S. It's possible that the IQ from it will be better than those you mentioned.</p>

<p>JC, As for me, yes, I have a "proper" APS-C DSLR (a Pentax K-5), but I'm seekign a smaller and lighter kit for travel only, hence my consideration of the OM-D or the Fuji X100s. Still researching though, and awaiting test results of the Fuji X100s. If it is as improved over the original X100 in terms of AF speed and even image quality (sharpness, detail rendition, dynamic range), it may serve my purposes.</p>

<p>Good points Zack. For me however, your "Lens issues" comment really pertains more to the NEX system than the OM-D system, as when I was strongly considering the NEX 7, there were only 2 "Sony" lenses worthy of that sensor...the Sony/Zeiss 24 and the Sony 50, whereas the Olympus 12, 46, 60 macro and 75 Primes are acknowldeged to all be superb optics. Not to mention the Panasonic 12-35 zoom, among others. For Olympus, is not the 12mm (35mm equivalent = 24mm) wide enough for most purposes? That said, I am now considering keeping my excellent Pentax K-5 system and going with the Fuji X100s as a "travel" and backup system. Although I still love the features (and lenses!) of the OM-D EM-5! Have fun with your NEX 7!</p>

<p>Zack, An interesting comment...I'm glad to see that you would consider the OM-D system as well. Frankly, I'm torn between it and the new Fuji X100s...I guess I have to determine if I can live without interchangeable lenses, ergonomic grip, weather-sealing, and Image Stabilization. I'm still 99% sure the OM-D woudl be a pretty darn good travel system.</p>

Matt, first, congrats on that Sigma! I

was also considering it, but I am still

too enamored of the Oly OM-D with its

superb prime lenses, IS, weather-

sealing, and system options. I do

recognize the IQ from that Sigma

foveon sensor though! Have fun with it.

<p>Shawn, before you get that NEX 6, I might consider checking out the new Fuji X100s. It does have a fixed lens, but supposedly it addressed the AF issues of the X100, among other things. And if you liked the IQ of the X-Pro1, I am guessing that the X100s has even better image quality, being a newer sensor and processor. (Especially if they addressed the not too widely publicized edge artifacting issue with the X-Mount sensors.) Other that that, I think Fujifilm is a great company with great groundbreaking products. I am researching the Fuji X100s myself, and along with an Olympus OM-D EM-5, as a "travel" kit. I seek a small system that can handle large prints (20x30) with no "jaggies".</p>

<p>Agreed, Bob. I am a detail nut, and having come from large format (4x5, 8x10) film many years ago, I think I know "REAL" detail when I see it. However, I also realize that there are always compromises when it comes to large prints and optimum sensor size, lens quality, camera mount, exposure, etc. In this case, I'm just seeking a high-quality "travel" system, the best bang for my buck, hence my interest in the OM-D and/or Fuji X100s. Frankly, I think there's alot to be said for medium format, as you know, to say nothing of large format. Good luck in your quest!</p>

<p>Greetings, Bob.<br>

I too, am in a similar dilemma...I shoot a Pentax K-5 (with some awesomely sharp Pentax DA and FA Limited optics), and have successfully printed up to 24x36 posters with very high detail, sharpness dynamic range, and no "jaggies"! However, I am considering a smaller, lighter "travel" system such as the OM-D EM-5 or even the new Fuji X100s. But I too, am concerned about how these large prints will look ffrom the 4/3 sensor. My past experience with m4/3 was with a nice little Panny G2 and their beautiful 20mm f/1.7. That kit worked fine, until I printed a custom 9x12 print, which to most folks would be fine, but to us "pixel peepers", I was less than pleased. That said, I realize that the OM-D is a new 16meg (vs the G2's 12megapixel) sensor, but the question is how much has this technology improved over a few years? I am thinking a LOT, but I've never seen a very large print made from a 4/3 sensor. I also wonder how the new Fuji X100s does in that department, and if Fuji addressed the reported X-sensor edge artifacts issue. </p>

<p>Hi Perry.<br>

I too, was quite interested in either the X-Pro1 or the X-E1, until I read several accounts of edge artifacts even at base ISO, which limits very fine detail. I did have the chance to handle both the X-Pro1 and the X-E1, and frankly, found the X-Pro1 to be rather bulky and "boxy" compared even to my Pentax K-5. I am seeking a smaller, lighter "travel" system, and actually thought the X-E1 body was fantastic in this regard. Plus, the Fuji lenses are outstanding in terms of build, sharpness, and handling. But, the artifact issue has kept me away. Instead, I am now researching the Olympus OM-D system, which I find ergonomically superior as well as lens selection and weather-sealing. The Olympus primes are said to be superb as well. </p>

<p>I agree with Stefan about the OM-D system! One thing that the OM-D has that the others don't, is the superb 5-way Image Stabilization system integrated into the body, so it works with <em>any</em> lens! (Of course, if you shoot the majority of your work on a tripod as I do, then this is moot, but for those hand-held shots, it is marvelous. Frankly, I think this image quality between all the aforementioned systems is comparable, despite the smaller 4/3 sensor in the OM-D. It's still a 16 megapixel sensor, and I think that unless you are a sports photographer, the OM-D System will serve you well. That said, I also am researching the Fuji X-E1, but I always seem to come back to the superb ergonomics (especially with accessory battery grip ), build quality, weather-sealing, and lens selection of the OM-D system! </p>

<p>Season's Greetings, Jim. <br>

I too, was debating between the Sony NEX-7 and the Fuji X-Pro-1, that is, until I attended a Photo Expo recently and actually handled those, plus the Fuji X-E1 and the Olympus OM-D EM-5. Frankly sir, I was not impressed by the size, speed and handling of the X-Pro-1, but <em>was</em> impressed with both the Fuji X-E1 and especially the Olympus OM-D. The Sony NEX-7 was also nice, but as others have said, the scarcity of quality Sony lenses to match that very nice APS-C sensor has made me reconsider Sony. The direct opposite is true of the OM-D however, as there are numerous <em>very high-quality</em> optics available (from Olympus, Panasonic, and a host of others via adapters) for the very nice OM-D EM-5. I tried it with the accessory Oly battery grip, and was quite impressed with the handling (not to mention weather-sealing) of that combo. I currently shoot a Pentax K-5 (for examples of my work, please contact me) and want a "travel" system that won't sacrifice image quality, particularly sharpness and detail. I think I'm leaning towards the Olympus system, however, the Fuji X-E1 was very nice as well, though not weather-sealed. I think the X-E1 addressed most of the weaknesses of the X-Pro 1 rather nicely (AF speed, Write speed, handling). The only omission was the hybrid viewfinder, I believe. Anyway, I highly recommend checking out the OM-D system. It is small, but the optics are some of the best I've ever seen in my 30 years in photography. Steve Huff has some reviews of this equipment that corroborate my opinion as well. Good luck to you. </p>

<p>Season's Greetings!<br>

I too, am in a similar predicament, and after much research into alternative systems to a DSLR, I believe that the Olympus OM-D System wins out for several reasons:<br>

1. Lens system: The m4/3 lens system is mature and well-established, with some awesomely high-quality primes from Olympus (12, 48, 75) and Panasonic (20mm f/1.7, not to mention the new Panasonic 12-35 and 35-100 "pro" zooms, and the reputedly superb Olympus 60mm f/2.8 Macro lens!<br>

2. In-camera Stabilization: The OM-D EM-5 has what I think is the best im-camera image stabilization technology on the market, and I don't even shoot video.<br>

3. Build Quality: The OM-D is magnesium alloy, weeather and dustproof, and from all acounts, very robustly built. (Of course, that weather-sealing is dependent on the same properties being built into the lens that is mounted...of which there are a few.)<br>

4. Compact Size: The OM-D is quite small, as are most of the primes, at least. True, the faster the lens, generally the larger it must be, but those Olympus Primes (12, 48, 75) are supposedly fantastic!<br>

5. AF performance: From what I've read, the OM-D AF is pretty darn quick and reliable. (Understanding that a DSLR is still king when it comes to sports photography.) But for everything else, I think the OM-D should suffice nicely.<br>

BTW, I was considering the Fuji X-Pro System, as I too, read positive reviews about the image quality of that system, but I can't get past two things: AF performance/reliability, and small lens base. The Sony too, may have a great APS-C sensor, but very few top-notch lenses to support it.<br>

In any case, good luck with your decision!</p>

<p>Bill, your comments are instructive...As a Pentax K-5 owner, and a sharpness/detail fanatic, I am contemplating a high-quality "travel" camera, and was considering the NEX-7, the Canon M or the Fuji X-PRO1. However, I now am very interested in test results for the upcoming Sony RX-1, the Fuji X-E1, possibly the updated Pentax K-5IIs (without AA filter), and even perhaps the Nikon D600 (although this with the requisite high-end f/2.8 Nikkors would definitely <strong><em>not</em></strong> be a small kit). My Pentax optics are wicked sharp, and the Limited lenses are small, but with the K-5 and several of them, it starts to become a bit substantial for a "travel" camera. True, I'd be giving up focal length choice and convenience, but I would do it <em>only</em> if the aforementioned compact systems give significantly sharper, more detailed large print output (24x36 in.), using good technique! </p>

Yes, I realize the Sony RX-1 is priced initially at $2800, but I am hopeful that it will come down substantially, as full-frame systems become more popular among discerning photographers like us!

<p>As John said, the X-PRO1 has the hybrid viewfinder. Other things about the X-PRO 1: Has a larger and higher resolution screen, faster fps (6 vs. 3) and is aimed more at professionals. Frankly, I was also considering the X-100, but I just read about the new Sony RX-1, a full-frame compact with a superb fixed 35mm Zeiss lens! Anxious to read test results on that one! Good luck to you!</p>

Excellent! Congratulations on your NEX-7! I am also considering it, with the Zeiss 24, of course!

<p>Hi Tony. I too, am considering the NEX-7 (a prior consideration was the Fuji X-PRO1), as a "travel" option to my Pentax K-5 kit. I am particularly enamored of the combination of the NEX-7 and the Zeiss 24, which has glowing reviews, i.e., on Luminous Landscape, where Reichman compares it favorably with a very expensive Leica Summilux. I love my K-5 with superb Pentax DA* and FA Limited optics (which, BTW, would also work on the NEX-7 via an adapter, hence increasing the value of the Sony system. Please see my micro-stock site for samples taken with the Pentax system.) I also love the Tri-Navi concept, unique to the NEX-7, along with its fantastic customizability. As for the NEX5N, I believe that the very minor improvement in HIGH ISO noise over the NEX -7 is negated by the lower resolution sensor of the NEX-5N, not to mention the superb EVF and ergonomics of the NEX-7. As for the Fuji X-PRO1, I was at first thinking that this would be my perfect compliment to the K-5, but after reading several reviews mentioning issues with AF and some functionality quirks, I decided to let that first-generation system pass for now, despite the undoubtedly fine Fuji optics. I think that the NEX-7 (with Zeiss 24, perhaps the Sony E-50mm, and K-to-E mount adapter) would make an excellent "travel" system, and not sacrifice any image quality for the increased portability! Good luck in your decision, sir.</p>

Greetings! Patrick's images are indeed excellent. However, I'm still seeking a definitive answer to which system is

capable of rendering the finest image detail, the NEX-7 with Zeiss 24, or the X-PRO1 with the new Fujinon optics.

Awesome, Patrick! I appreciate your informative feedback! Your comments (and great images) do indeed make me

reconsider the X-Pro1.

Patrick, very nice image quality you're getting from the X-Pro1! I appreciate these images and comments, as I'm still on

the fence between this system and the Sony NEX 7 with the Zeiss 24, to complement my K-5. So, based on your usage

thus far, how would you rate the X-Pro1 system as a "travel" camera? Thanks!

Patrick,

I too, would love to see comparison images taken with the X-Pro1 and the Fuji lenses vs. the Leica 50mm Summicron!

This comparison could also apply to the Sony NEX-7, as I'd be interested to see if this X-Pro1, without an AA filter, can

out-resolve higher pixel-count sensors like the Sony or even a Canon FF sensor, as I think Fuji has implied.

<p>I’ve been vacillating between the Sony NEX-7 (with the Zeiss 24) and the new Fujifilm X-PRO1 as a perfect “travel” companion to my Pentax K-5 kit. I just can’t decide which system would produce the highest resolving (sharpest) images! I know all about each system in terms of specs, but have not seen sufficient testing done, particularly on the X-PRO1 and its supposedly awesome lenses. I already have the K-5 with some deliciously sharp Pentax optics (FA43, DA*55, and DA70 Limited). I wonder if either the Zeiss 24 or the Fuji’s would equal the sharpness and micro-contrast of the aforementioned Pentax lenses.<br>

Thanks, Steve.</p>