Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: mas55101 on January 15, 2012, 07:22:48 pm

Title: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: mas55101 on January 15, 2012, 07:22:48 pm
From what I've been reading, the new Fuji looks to be close to what I want.  My major question though, is how well the focus by wire works. I remember totally hating the G1 rangefinders about 10 years ago.  Do DSLR's use fbw (focus by wire) or is that a different technology?

I wish the 23mm (35mm eq) were coming out in the first batch of lenses.

Thanks.
Michael
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: RazorTM on January 17, 2012, 08:58:51 am
Some of Canon's lenses use focus by wire.  Examples include the 85mm f/1.2L and 85mm f/1.2L II, 50mm f/1.0L, 200mm f/1.8L and others.

The problem with the X-Pro1, in my opinion, is the viewfinder parallax without any accurate way to manually focus.  You have to either autofocus or use the autofocus points for focus confirmation.  Or, worse, switch to the electronic viewfinder.  The X-Pro1 should have been a rangefinder from the start, not just a camera in the same style.
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: Dennishh on January 17, 2012, 11:14:29 am
Not good I'm afraid. http://vladdodan.ro/blog/fuji-x-pro-1-hands-on-preview/
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: K1D27H on January 17, 2012, 10:43:46 pm
From what I've been reading, the new Fuji looks to be close to what I want.  My major question though, is how well the focus by wire works. I remember totally hating the G1 rangefinders about 10 years ago.  Do DSLR's use fbw (focus by wire) or is that a different technology?

I wish the 23mm (35mm eq) were coming out in the first batch of lenses.

Thanks.
Michael

If the 23mm comes out in the first batch, then the usefulness of X100 would have been reduced to the leaf shutter and its size, does not sound good when there are another 10k units of black X100 coming out.
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: nightfire on January 18, 2012, 12:08:25 pm
Not good I'm afraid. http://vladdodan.ro/blog/fuji-x-pro-1-hands-on-preview/

Just when I was about to salivate and forget the basics, it was heartbreaking to be reminded by the practical example (http://vladdodan.ro/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/DSCF3814-Edit-800x266.jpg) of the DOF difference between full-frame and this "Leica contender" again.

What good is the claim of "outresolving a 21MP full-frame sensor" (Fuji) if the soul of the image is lost?
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: amsp on January 18, 2012, 07:23:38 pm
Just when I was about to salivate and forget the basics, it was heartbreaking to be reminded by the practical example (http://vladdodan.ro/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/DSCF3814-Edit-800x266.jpg) of the DOF difference between full-frame and this "Leica contender" again.

What good is the claim of "outresolving a 21MP full-frame sensor" (Fuji) if the soul of the image is lost?

+1 Why in the world didn't they release a real full-frame competitively priced alternative to the M9, it would have sold like hotcakes.



Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: uaiomex on January 18, 2012, 09:43:27 pm
Because Fuji is a Leica fanboy.  :D
Eduardo

+1 Why in the world didn't they release a real full-frame competitively priced alternative to the M9, it would have sold like hotcakes.




Title: Why not 35mm film format? cost?
Post by: BJL on January 18, 2012, 10:23:40 pm
+1 Why in the world didn't they release a real full-frame competitively priced alternative to the M9, it would have sold like hotcakes.
Probably because that super-sizing of the sensor adds a thousand dollars or more to the price (compare prices between good APS-C DSLR's and even the cheapest of the 35mm format DSLRs), which would make them very expensive and rather slow selling hot-cakes. And with this pseudo-rangefinder style less mainstream than SLRs, and so likely to sell in lower volumes than 35mm format DSLR's, the price would be even higher ... I would guess $3000 or more.
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: EgillBjarki on January 19, 2012, 05:14:43 am
I for one think that this new Fuji camera is a good addition to what is out there. I think they did a very good job with the X100 and looks like they also did with X Pro 1 as well. There is always room for improvement, but I think that it is obvious that Fuji listened to the users of X100 when designing the X Pro 1 when it come to menu construction and buttons placement and functions.

It irritates me to read about all the negative stuff people are writing about both the X100 and X Pro 1. Fuji just made a really compact, very well performing and beautifully designed rangefinder camera, I seriously don't think that there is that much to cry about.
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: Rob C on January 19, 2012, 10:22:00 am
+1 Why in the world didn't they release a real full-frame competitively priced alternative to the M9, it would have sold like hotcakes.



That's exactly what I have been asking, but about Nikon: they already had the expertise in rangefinder cameras of very high quality levels back in the 50s and 60s. Sheeesh, what a wasted opportunity to have go at Leica's leg!

Their skills, their FF sensors and a realistic price - wham! bam! clean-up time!

Rob C
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: nightfire on January 19, 2012, 11:28:35 am
Thats exactly what I have been asking, but about Nikon: they already had the expertise in rangefinder cameras of very high quality levels back in the 50s and 60s. Sheeesh, what a wasted opportunity to have go at Leica's leg!

Sometimes I can't help but wonder how surreal all of this is. I mean, before digital... we all shot full-frame, right? I made great bokeh shots with my father's Canon A-1 and his 50/1.4 lens when I was 10! (actually, not because of my artistic genius, but because I knew nothing about aperture and therefore always left the setting at f/1.4  ;D)

Fast-forward to 2012, and look at how we're struggling to get back the same kind of creative control, ergonomic design, and performance which was taken for granted only decades ago. We all go ooohh and aaahh at APSC cameras while forgetting that from a creative point of view, these are barely better than the 110-type film cameras of yesteryear. And we all dream of "upgrading" and scraping together our savings one day for the next big thing (be it full-frame, or even just a working, well-designed camera without bugs) - something I already walked around with when I was a child. I know, I know, the comparison is flawed, today's cameras give us HD video and what not, but still - stepping back , I can't help but wonder what else we did strictly from a user, not a technology point of view in the last 10 years, except for going full-circle...  ::)
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: Rob C on January 19, 2012, 01:28:11 pm
Sometimes I can't help but wonder how surreal all of this is.

I know, the comparison is flawed, today's cameras give us HD video and what not, but still - stepping back , I can't help but wonder what else we did strictly from a user, not a technology point of view in the last 10 years, except for going full-circle...  ::)



They told us some decades ago in the title of this song: I'm Wallking Backwards for Christmas

I never was a camera club kind of chap - joined one once in my late teens and had the very bad experience of getting framed for something I knew nothing about (no pun etc.) and I have distrusted clubs ever since. But anyway, I think the difference today is that special interest clubs and groups can attract the huge number of theoretical photographers for whom the social side of the thing is where the importance lies, not in the doing of much photography.  Where else can people chat endlessly about cameras, lenses, and now with digital, all the paraphernalia that's been spawned to make the enterprise more complex, expensive and open to cynical marketing ploys than film photography ever could be? I expect a majority of wives wouldn't see participation in said chat as part of any marriage vows, implied or explicit, so where to go other than clubs and chat rooms? And once there, the modern world supplies all the fodder they need and then some! Snow for the masses.

Rob C
Title: massively OOF backgrounds have never dominated creative photography
Post by: BJL on January 19, 2012, 01:48:37 pm
Sometimes I can't help but wonder how surreal all of this is. ...We all go ooohh and aaahh at APSC cameras while forgetting that from a creative point of view, these are barely better than the 110-type film cameras of yesteryear.
Sometimes I can't help but wonder how surreal it is that so many photography forum posters equate "photographic creativity" so overwhelmingly with "most of the image blurred by OOF effects by using fast primes wide open". It seems to me that in the totality of great photography done with film formats 35mm and up, low f-stops like f/1.4 account for only a small fraction. And if, like me, you do not consider soft-focus posed portraits to be particularly great or creative, the fraction is even lower.

Perhaps as a child, someone should have told you "f/8 and be there" --- then something between f/4 and f/5.6 gives the same DOF with most of today's system cameras (f/3 for Nikon One), and even staying at f/8 allow far higher shutter speeds, so either way you greatly expand the variety of creative opportunities, particularly when subject motion or low light are factors.
Title: Re: massively OOF backgrounds have never dominated creative photography
Post by: BernardLanguillier on January 19, 2012, 10:01:30 pm
Sometimes I can't help but wonder how surreal it is that so many photography forum posters equate "photographic creativity" so overwhelmingly with "most of the image blurred by OOF effects by using fast primes wide open".

Funny, I had the exact same reaction when reading the post above.  :)

Now, it is probably true that, unless you are really into optimizing landscape images, the FF cameras deliver some of the widest array of options in terms of DoF control though. You can make things look reasonnably sharp at f16 (again forgetting about diffraction for a second).

If you want more DoF, smaller formats are obviously better though. The good news is that the smaller cameras we have today deliver image quality somewhere between 35mm and MF in the film days... which could be seen are expanding amazingly our creative enveloppe.

Cheers,
Bernard
Title: Re: massively OOF backgrounds have never dominated creative photography
Post by: JBerardi on January 19, 2012, 10:44:08 pm
Funny, I had the exact same reaction when reading the post above.  :)

Now, it is probably true that, unless you are really into optimizing landscape images, the FF cameras deliver some of the widest array of options in terms of DoF control though. You can make things look reasonnably sharp at f16 (again forgetting about diffraction for a second).

If you want more DoF, smaller formats are obviously better though. The good news is that the smaller cameras we have today deliver image quality somewhere between 35mm and MF in the film days... which could be seen are expanding amazingly our creative enveloppe.

Cheers,
Bernard


Sure, if you're willing to DESECRATE THE VERY SOUL OF PHOTOGRAPHY by allowing more than one millimeter of subject matter to be in focus.



Title: Re: massively OOF backgrounds have never dominated creative photography
Post by: nightfire on January 19, 2012, 11:35:59 pm
Now, it is probably true that, unless you are really into optimizing landscape images, the FF cameras deliver some of the widest array of options in terms of DoF control though.

That's my point - in former times, any 35mm camera would deliver that wide range of options right from the start, since 35mm was by definition full-frame.

Today, you start with an APSC (or smaller) device and hope that, one day, you can afford to own a camera with the same level of control again like you had before you went digital.

All would be fine if the X1pro were priced like a reasonable APSC camera. But for this amount of money - last time I read, Amazon pre-orders for the body only at $1699? - the 5Dmk2 looks dated, but sexy too.
Title: Re: massively OOF backgrounds have never dominated creative photography
Post by: nightfire on January 19, 2012, 11:48:08 pm
Sure, if you're willing to DESECRATE THE VERY SOUL OF PHOTOGRAPHY by allowing more than one millimeter of subject matter to be in focus.

Since you're obviously making fun of my use of the word "soul", let me clarify that of the two image examples I referred to, I personally prefer the one with shallow DOF and used "soul" to characterize that difference. This alone has nothing to do with "soul of photography" or whatever you're misinterpreting here.
Title: background creativity
Post by: hsteeves on January 20, 2012, 09:02:12 am
nothing personal but pretty well everything I did creatively 20 years ago, I can duplicate or do better with my APS cameras.  What do I lose? 1 stop of depth of field wide open. But I gain that back on the backside.  That's about it. 35mm was by definition 35mm - the only time frame ever entered into it were the half frame cameras.  It was all about format and in reality it still is.  This concept of full frame and crop cameras is marketing BS.
Title: Re: background creativity
Post by: Rob C on January 20, 2012, 11:47:23 am
nothing personal but pretty well everything I did creatively 20 years ago, I can duplicate or do better with my APS cameras.  What do I lose? 1 stop of depth of field wide open. But I gain that back on the backside.  That's about it. 35mm was by definition 35mm - the only time frame ever entered into it were the half frame cameras.  It was all about format and in reality it still is.  This concept of full frame and crop cameras is marketing BS.




If only!

Rob C
Title: Re: massively OOF backgrounds have never dominated creative photography
Post by: JBerardi on January 20, 2012, 02:17:27 pm
Since you're obviously making fun of my use of the word "soul", let me clarify that of the two image examples I referred to, I personally prefer the one with shallow DOF and used "soul" to characterize that difference. This alone has nothing to do with "soul of photography" or whatever you're misinterpreting here.

Oh, ok. Let me fix your original post:

What good is the claim of "outresolving a 21MP full-frame sensor" (Fuji) if I personally don't like the look of the images from APS-C sensors?

If you don't like APS-C sensors, that's ok. But I like 'em just fine. So do plenty of other people. Certainly enough to justify Fuji making this camera.
Title: Out of focus backgrounds
Post by: Gordon Buck on January 20, 2012, 03:52:09 pm
Not sure which individual to reply to ...

I am a member of a photography club and enjoy the experience.  Our club members have a wide range of interests, backgrounds and ages.  We have a photo contest every month.  Last night's contest was for prints and those that entered usually entered an 8x10 print although a few were larger.  Last night's theme was "Junk".

As I walked around looking at many nice prints, I suddenly realized that virtually all of them were taken with smaller than 35mm "full frame" sensors at mid-range aperture.  Many would have benefited from increased -- even severe -- background blur. As I was making a note to encourage new members to take more control and force a larger aperture, I suddenly realized that very few club members had large aperture lenses and even fewer had a full frame sensor digital camera.  In fact, I don't have full frame digital myself!  In order to follow that advice myself, I'd have to revert to one of my old film cameras -- and I'll be doing that soon (for a roll or two).
Title: Re: massively OOF backgrounds have never dominated creative photography
Post by: scooby70 on January 23, 2012, 09:22:00 am
Since you're obviously making fun of my use of the word "soul", let me clarify that of the two image examples I referred to, I personally prefer the one with shallow DOF and used "soul" to characterize that difference. This alone has nothing to do with "soul of photography" or whatever you're misinterpreting here.

Just a quick personal point about DoF.

I have a 5D and a 20D with the usual lenses including 50 and 85mm f1.4's and I also own a GF1 and a G1 with a small selection of lenses including a 25mm f0.95. Now when it comes to DoF I can get shallower DoF from my G1+25mm than I can get from my 5D plus a f1.4.

I'm quite interested in the new Fuji as before I bought in to "full frame" digital or Micro Four Thirds APS-C cameras, the 20D and before that a 300D, were my daily toys and in some ways I think that APS-C is a happy medium offering a good for most things blend. A 20D+ a 30mm f1.4 is a nice thing and I think that a S Pro 1 + 35mm f1.4 could possibly be too. But having said all that a G1+25mm f0.95 manual lens when used with the screen folded to the body is a very nice thing and also a very film like experience IMVHO despite the EVF and will be a difficult thing to replace even with something as nice as the fuji. 
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: mediumcool on January 26, 2012, 05:54:03 am
We all go ooohh and aaahh at APSC cameras while forgetting that from a creative point of view, these are barely better than the 110-type film cameras of yesteryear.

Your dictionary must be a doozy.
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: Christoph C. Feldhaim on January 26, 2012, 07:13:00 am
To me it appears the discussion of FF vs. APS-C is a bit overrated.
The difference in DoF if I'm not totally mistaken is about 2/3 F-Stops.
Diffraction is another point, but in the same range of about 2/3 F-Stops.
With f 1.4 lenses for an APS-C camera there is a lot of room to play with shallow DoF.
And when I feel the pain in my arthrotic hip the decision for a lighter system comes easy.
I'm very much tempted to buy an APS-C system as long as I get really good and fast glass for the focal lengths I desire.
Just my 0.02 Ä ..
Title: Re: massively OOF backgrounds have never dominated creative photography
Post by: mediumcool on January 26, 2012, 07:40:08 am
I'm quite interested in the new Fuji as before I bought in to "full frame" digital or Micro Four Thirds APS-C cameras, the 20D and before that a 300D, were my daily toys and in some ways I think that APS-C is a happy medium offering a good for most things blend.

+1
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: AlfSollund on January 26, 2012, 08:22:51 am
I'm for one would purchase this without lens, and use my M lenses. So the choice of Fuji lenses is of no consequences for me.

As to format; IMO the larger format will always be "best". With "best" I mean resolution (and therefore details), S/N and DoF options.
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: nightfire on January 26, 2012, 08:36:39 am
Your dictionary must be a doozy.

Thanks for this on-topic contribution.
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: mediumcool on January 26, 2012, 08:50:56 am
Thanks for this on-topic contribution.

I think it is on-topic; you made a statement that I thought was ridiculous, but I tried to make it a bit lighter.

Barely? No.
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: mediumcool on January 26, 2012, 03:59:17 pm
How big is this camera compared to a Leica? Seems kind of chunky to me.
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: mediumcool on January 26, 2012, 05:55:29 pm
About the same size. The following link shows a comparison.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/fujifilmxpro1/page4.asp (http://www.dpreview.com/previews/fujifilmxpro1/page4.asp)

Given the smaller sensor, could they not have worked a little harder?

(http://www.dpreview.com/previews/fujifilmxpro1/images/sbsm9p.jpg)
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: fotometria gr on January 26, 2012, 06:17:40 pm
Given the smaller sensor, could they not have worked a little harder?

(http://www.dpreview.com/previews/fujifilmxpro1/images/sbsm9p.jpg)

I believe they could, but I feel they didn't want to..., it's supposed to be a Leica alternative right? So its "feeling" oughts to be similar! It's just the way "marketing" does things for ages.., especially in Japan and more so in Japan's photo industry. Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: fotometria gr on January 26, 2012, 06:30:37 pm
Sometimes I can't help but wonder how surreal all of this is. I mean, before digital... we all shot full-frame, right? I made great bokeh shots with my father's Canon A-1 and his 50/1.4 lens when I was 10! (actually, not because of my artistic genius, but because I knew nothing about aperture and therefore always left the setting at f/1.4  ;D)

Fast-forward to 2012, and look at how we're struggling to get back the same kind of creative control, ergonomic design, and performance which was taken for granted only decades ago. We all go ooohh and aaahh at APSC cameras while forgetting that from a creative point of view, these are barely better than the 110-type film cameras of yesteryear. And we all dream of "upgrading" and scraping together our savings one day for the next big thing (be it full-frame, or even just a working, well-designed camera without bugs) - something I already walked around with when I was a child. I know, I know, the comparison is flawed, today's cameras give us HD video and what not, but still - stepping back , I can't help but wonder what else we did strictly from a user, not a technology point of view in the last 10 years, except for going full-circle...  ::)
I can assure you that all the Canon 7d, Nikon d7000, fuji S5pro and Leica M8, .....are much more "from a creative point of view" than "barely better than the 110-type film cameras of yesteryear" you foolishly state up there.  ??? Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: allenmacaulay on January 26, 2012, 08:19:13 pm
Fast-forward to 2012, and look at how we're struggling to get back the same kind of creative control, ergonomic design, and performance which was taken for granted only decades ago. We all go ooohh and aaahh at APSC cameras while forgetting that from a creative point of view, these are barely better than the 110-type film cameras of yesteryear.

One of these photos was taken with an Olympus Pen-FT, a half frame camera with about the same frame size as APS-C, the other is a full frame OM-1, both of them using their standard F1.8 kit lenses (38mm & 50mm, respectively) wide open.  I've shot tons of photos with both cameras and other than the difference in aspect ratios I'd struggle to tell the pictures apart.

(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-XwTaiXLLo60/TyH1bsJu_UI/AAAAAAAADEY/Rl5zNLJJ4vg/s640/Scan-110902-0048.jpg)

(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-xX0bvRAnmVo/TyH1aEQbThI/AAAAAAAADEQ/pvP1GPp6FMI/s640/Scan-110507-0001.jpg)

Quote
And we all dream of "upgrading" and scraping together our savings one day for the next big thing (be it full-frame, or even just a working, well-designed camera without bugs) - something I already walked around with when I was a child. I know, I know, the comparison is flawed, today's cameras give us HD video and what not, but still - stepping back , I can't help but wonder what else we did strictly from a user, not a technology point of view in the last 10 years, except for going full-circle...  ::)

That, I'd agree with.  There are very few cameras which I can pick up and use without first spending a few hours reading the manuals and fiddling with the menus & buttons.  There's a DSLR, which I won't mention, where I couldn't find the power switch for a good minute or two.  The Pentax K-5, Samsung NX100, and Fuji X100 are the only cameras where I can adjust the shutter, aperture, focus, ISO, and white balance just by picking it up and playing with it for a minute or so.  They make things simple, pretty much every other camera makes things a PITA for me.
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: gullevek on January 27, 2012, 01:26:46 am
I for one think that this new Fuji camera is a good addition to what is out there. I think they did a very good job with the X100 and looks like they also did with X Pro 1 as well. There is always room for improvement, but I think that it is obvious that Fuji listened to the users of X100 when designing the X Pro 1 when it come to menu construction and buttons placement and functions.

It irritates me to read about all the negative stuff people are writing about both the X100 and X Pro 1. Fuji just made a really compact, very well performing and beautifully designed rangefinder camera, I seriously don't think that there is that much to cry about.

When people write online comments they all whine. Of course the X100 is not perfect, but some people love to whine, or perhaps try to convince themselves why the spend 10K for a M9 + lenses. I love my X100, even with the flaws, because it is a camera I have with me every day, where ever I go. Furthermore I can give this camera to someone and say, press the button here and they can use it like a simple P&S camera.
Plus the image quality is really amazing.
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: gullevek on January 27, 2012, 01:39:45 am
I have no idea why people are so obsessed with full frame for this camera. The reason we wanted full frame M-mount rangefinder and full frame SLRs were for only reason because the lenses were designed and made for full frame. So to be able to shoot your 50mm like before you needed a full frame.

The X-pro 1 has lenses designed for this size of the sensor. Plus in this short distance, having a smaller sensor is better, just look how much things need to get "fixed" in the M9 for several lenses. Not to forget the cost that a full frame lens + sensor would be. Because a sensor is always a certain size, the chances of one being bad and has to be discarded is high in comparison to the amount of sensor you get from one original wafer. This is not like CPUs that get smaller and smaller so you can put more of them on one wafer anyway.

I doubt there will be any full frame mirror less cameras any time soon. Especially as all the current lens lines are fixed on this size.
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: Rob C on January 27, 2012, 04:14:01 am
I have no idea why people are so obsessed with full frame for this camera. The reason we wanted full frame M-mount rangefinder and full frame SLRs were for only reason because the lenses were designed and made for full frame.



No, that's only one raeson, and valid for people who already have a good stock of such glass; for anyone else, it wouldn't be a reason.
The prime reason is size: larger, as with film, allows more flexibility in any number of areas. What is seen as a disadvantage by some becomes an advantage to others (different DOField, for example), but generally speaking, the more one is likely to be engaging in large prints, the more advantageous the larger format.

Frankly, the only valid reason I can see for not owning an MF camera is cost as it relates to budget. Even though I would ideally like an M9 for a walkabout camera, that doesn't mean I wouldn't actually be grateful for a larger camera on other occasions. I did use both 135 (35mm) and 120 (6x6 and 6x7) formats in my pro days, and yes, I abandoned 4x5 as soon as my interests allowed, which was almost as soon as I went solo. I currently use dslr FF and cellphone, so what about that as a range? Neither can replace the other for what each does.

Rob C
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: fredjeang on January 27, 2012, 08:58:46 am
(http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/7200000/1968-Mini-Cooper-S-MkII-mini-cooper-7272819-440-317.jpg)
(http://www.mini.es/_common/_shared_files/product_presentation/mini/cooper/intro/teaser_design.jpg)




(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a1/1970_Fiat_500_L_--_2011_DC_1.jpg/250px-1970_Fiat_500_L_--_2011_DC_1.jpg)
(http://www.cochesadictos.com/coches/fiat-500/imagenes/index1.jpg)
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: fredjeang on January 27, 2012, 11:22:19 am
So do I.

I would buy a remake Mini cooper but not the Fiat remake. ;)

Still waiting for a remake of a triumph (without roof)

Ps: have you seen the absolute horror they did with the CitroŽn DS remake ? A complete failure !

about cars and the thread:

Honestly guys,

Are you all going into nostalgic aberrations attack (to stay in photography nomenclature) with this Fuji as its main attractive ?

Marketing department product ? or a real 2012 tool ? Maybe bit of both. But, pfffff...we're still on the same design from the latest ice-age.



  
Title: Re: massively OOF backgrounds have never dominated creative photography
Post by: AlfSollund on January 27, 2012, 12:46:17 pm
Just a quick personal point about DoF.

I have a 5D and a 20D with the usual lenses including 50 and 85mm f1.4's and I also own a GF1 and a G1 with a small selection of lenses including a 25mm f0.95. Now when it comes to DoF I can get shallower DoF from my G1+25mm than I can get from my 5D plus a f1.4. 

Are you sure? I was under the impression that a 25 f/1.0 on a m43 would give the same DoF as a 50 f/2 (2 stops) on a FF. So a 50 f/1,4 on a FF would allow a shallower DoF.
Title: Re: massively OOF backgrounds have never dominated creative photography
Post by: Rob C on January 27, 2012, 02:24:30 pm
Are you sure? I was under the impression that a 25 f/1.0 on a m43 would give the same DoF as a 50 f/2 (2 stops) on a FF. So a 50 f/1,4 on a FF would allow a shallower DoF.





Why do I always read your stage name as Alfasud?

Rob C
Title: Re: massively OOF backgrounds have never dominated creative photography
Post by: fredjeang on January 27, 2012, 03:12:08 pm




Why do I always read your stage name as Alfasud?

Rob C

 ;D So do I Rob !

I had an alfasud, the 1,5 Ti. I was racing with a friend who had a Ford XR3.

Result: on relatively straight roads, the XR3 always won. On curves, the Alfasud won.

(http://www.clasicosydeportivos.com/imagenes/fotos_coches/177/5.jpg)

Then I put myself in sport motorcycles.



Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: nightfire on January 27, 2012, 04:01:03 pm
Are you all going into nostalgic aberrations attack (to stay in photography nomenclature) with this Fuji as its main attractive ?

Marketing department product ? or a real 2012 tool ? Maybe bit of both. But, pfffff...we're still on the same design from the latest ice-age.

Probably more of a marketing department product.

The technical department probably would have added a medium-format sensor to a Fuji GA645 Zi body, the same way Leica conceived their M9. That would have been an exciting tool, ice-age design or not  ;)

Title: Re: massively OOF backgrounds have never dominated creative photography
Post by: scooby70 on January 27, 2012, 04:50:43 pm
Are you sure? I was under the impression that a 25 f/1.0 on a m43 would give the same DoF as a 50 f/2 (2 stops) on a FF. So a 50 f/1,4 on a FF would allow a shallower DoF.

I think I'm sure  ;D At the same camera to subject distance the shots will look different as one lens is a 50mm and the other is 25mm so background items may very well look different but I'm pretty sure f0.95 does beat f1.4. One situation in which I can definitely get shallower DoF from my MFT and 25mm f0.95 is when using it as a sort of psudo macro lens as it'll focus a lot closer than a 50mm f1.4 will, so close in fact that f0.95 isn't really useable unless you're going for a very arty effect. f0.95 does come in very useful in lower available light as I can shoot at much lower ISO than I can with a f1.4.
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: Petrus on March 31, 2012, 01:47:44 pm
Given the smaller sensor, could they not have worked a little harder?

(http://www.dpreview.com/previews/fujifilmxpro1/images/sbsm9p.jpg)


Work harder to make a camera which is too small to handle ergonomically and no space for all buttons and levers? Make smaller cameras when the human hands have evolved smaller (blueberry typing size?)
Title: Re: New Fuji X Pro 1 Lenses
Post by: Petrus on March 31, 2012, 01:51:53 pm
I'll add that I have never seen a lens to resolve at full open f:1.4 as well as the new XF 35mm f:1.4. Tack sharp to the corners, and no color fringing at all.