jon_kobeck1

"lightning-fast AF isn't necessarily needed for portraiture" Yea up until recently I was working with a Hasselblad 501C (manual focus lens, handheld light meter)

I was looking at the new Panasonic and OMD lineup. Nice looking bodes and specs. But I notice some are even more then the Fuji x bodies (which have larger sensors). How does the IP of an OMD or Panasonic m4/3 sensor compare to something line the Panasonic X100s ? Thanks!

Lex; yes I kind of regret ditching the X-Pro. I probably should have stuck with it. I feel silly re-buying that camera. I just looked at the X-A1. Very low price for a camera like that. How is the kit lens? I assume it has the same sensor and image IQ and the X-Pro

Yes the X100s is Very tempting to me, especially when I look at the OMD line which is pricey and has a smaller sensor. The portraiture work on my website was with a MF Hasselblad using a normal (55 mm lens in 35mm terms) but with those big square negatives it balanced out the image. on my Nikon Fm film cameras the 35m prime lives on that body. The only thing that concerns me about the Fuji is the Raw file issue. I hear alot about the Jpegs but I need RAW. I'm not a fan of the oversaturated look of those Jpegs. I also shoot black and white

I dont understand why the OMD-M1 is so expensive. Its almost as much as a full frame Sony and the same price as the Fuji X100s with no lens. I never held one, but it looks like its a big camera for a small sensor.

I was a film guy for many years, using 35mm and then Hasselblad MF. Then went digital. Had the 5D (first gen) never really liked it. Then fell in love with the notion of high quality in a small package. A couple years ago I invested in the Fuji X-pro. The IQ was as good as my old 5D, but the camera just didnt feel right. It wasn't really that small at all and the slow focus got on my nerves. Got rid of that system. It seems like most of todays digital cameras are capable of making technically great images. I'm really looking for something in a small body that has excellent IQ. the 35mm prime is on my body 99% of the time so a fixed lens camera is not an issue. I also require something that works well in black and white. I had one of the Ricoh GRD's a few years ago and I loved the IQ on that little baby. I wish it had a 35mm lens and not a 28. I was thinking of the Sony X100, or the Fuji X100s, or even an m4/3 Pany GF6 which is cheap right now in comparison to the X100s. I know the large sensor in the first two cameras are all the rage these days, but I don't think the m4/3 is any worse in IQ on the samples I have seen. I would love to hear some opinions regarding a smaller mirrorless camera for portraiture and interiors. Check out my style here http://johnkobeck.com

In looking at the current Fuji X line, from the X-Pro to the X-E1 to the X100 (new version). Which would some of you say is better for Weddings and even all around commercial work? I primarily shoot MF Film (fine art). I have a deep and long standing hatred for the DSLR. I sold my superb 5D years ago and "returned" to film to work on fine art projects. Lately I have actually turned down a few commercial assignments because I no longer own a DSLR and do not plan on ever buying one again :) But, I must say, the Fuji mirror-less digital line is VERY VERY intriguing to me! So I guess my questions are: Are any of you using these cameras exclusively for commercial work including weddings, events, product, etc? If yes, how are you handling lighting and are you using external flash? My thoughts are; the X100 would be great for candids or PJ work, but the lack of lens interchangeability would make it difficult to use as a stand alone camera. Perhaps paired with the X-Pro or E1 it would be best. But then again, if one owns an X-Pro or Xe1 then why even bother to buy an X100? Which would you buy? Thanks for your input!