Living with the Fuji X-T1

[Harald L]

Dear Kevin

thanks for this article which proves that I've done right to invest in this system, too! And you're really right. Shooting with that camera is pure fun without any grain of salt. Even the 50-140 mm is a honey! The OIS is the best I've ever experienced. You can really shot 1/6 seconds on 140 mm without an tripod! I'm just on holidays in Noordhoek (ZA) and I've shot this picture of a guy from Kansas:



I've joked a little bit with him on using a tripod and in the end he was a little bit jealous of this system;-)

So thank you for your articles and happy holidays from Germany / South Africa.

Harald

[E.J. Peiker]

Very nice article and review Kevin.  I enjoyed the read and concur with almost everything you have said from my limited use of the system with various client's cameras.  The layout of controls is better than any other camera on the market and more intuitive (at least for old school film shooters that grew up in photography decades ago).  About the only thing that is keeping me from investing in that system is the pixel count and I realize that may be my own personal bias and issue 

[01af]

Nice review indeed, Kevin ... makes me wonder if my decision to buy into the µ4/3 system earlier this year was the right one ... no, not really. My OM-D E-M1 is very nice too. I chose it over the X-T1 due to smaller lenses in the telephoto range, the super-fast auto-focus, and the versatile in-body image stabiliser. Still, ever since that purchase I keep looking at the Fujifilm X system with the other eye ...

Kevin, you mentioned you're using Capture One and Lightroom for processing the X-Trans files. May I suggest to give Photo Ninja a spin? In my opinion, this one can extract more detail from the X-Trans files than any other raw converter.

[DaveCurtis]

Thanks for the review Kevin and Merry Christmas from New Zealand.

I am tossing up between the A7II and the XT1. The Fuji has a great layout which I really like. It seems it was designed by a photographer. It also has a very good selection of lenses. I struggle with the Sony and all it customisable buttons and dont find the system that intuitive.  However I really like the Sony full frame sensor.

Perhaps I need to get both and see which camera stays in my camera bag.

If the gossip is correct, next year will be interesting with the xpro2 and A9.

Dave

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Kevin in action in Chicago:

[Telecaster]

Very enjoyable article. It puts home the point that we currently have so many excellent choices in camera systems. Fuji's lenses in particular are most impressive. I'm kinda glad camera makers have never agreed on a universal mount…I'm already swimming in adapters, but if they weren't needed my house would be stuffed floor to ceiling with lenses & I'd be broke. 

-Dave-

[Iluvmycam]

Fuji X is OK.


It produces fine under ideal conditions.


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a9/Deer_Still_Life_Copyright_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr_2013.jpg/1280px-Deer_Still_Life_Copyright_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr_2013.jpg


Under harsh conditions is where the Fuji drops off.


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Burnout_no._2_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg/1280px-Burnout_no._2_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg


nsfw

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/Pole_Dance_Selfie_%40_Bikers%27_Mardi_Gras_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg

it needs to be boosted to 24 to 28 mp and organic.

Fuji also need to make a FF Leica knockoff for $2500 to $3000.

[David Sutton]

About the only thing that is keeping me from investing in that system is the pixel count and I realize that may be my own personal bias and issue 

Yes, it doesn't seem right that 24" wide prints I make from this camera are at least as good (and in many respects better) than those from my Canon 5DII. The lenses are remarkable but that doesn't completely account for it.

[Kevin Raber]

iluvmycam,  I'd tend to disagree as I shot this camera under harsh condition, very dark conditions and it never let me down.  And, as I showed in my article the recovery of dark shadow areas is completely possible.  What I see in the few links you showed could be a result of poor RAW processing and I did say one should look at doing comparisons of RAW processors.  Not everyone has mastered getting a good conversion off the X-tran chip. I have a lot of faith in this camera now that I know what it can do.

Kevin Raber

[jed best]

Kevin,

Thanks for the great article. I have recently gotten the X T1 and look forward to using it. It feels terrific in the hand.

Have a Great Holiday.

Jed

[JV]

Excellent article!  I very much enjoyed reading this.

As far as raw conversion goes, I used to swear by Iridient Developer.

I have found that C1 with version 8 is also excellent now for Fuji X.  

As C1 is also the preferred raw developer for Sony I tend to use it a lot more now since version 8 usually trying out both C1 and Iridient.

I am bit torn by having both Fuji X (X-Pro1 and X-T1) and Sony (A7s) and asking myself whether I should keep both.

What makes Fuji stand out for me is the excellent glass (better than Sony IMO up till now) and better more intuitive handling.

Not mentioned in the article but obviously if video is a consideration then Fuji falls a bit short...  I am pretty sure that must be on their radar for the future...

[Stephen Scharf]

Kevin,
Thanks for writing what I think is the best LuLa article to date this year. Like you, I started with the wonderful X-Pro1, which is still in my bag and which I use frequently, especially with the Fuji 14mm and 23 mm primes.

The X-T1 is the more versatile of the two cameras, as it's EVF provides greater and more useful functionality with the advent of the really fine Fuji zooms. Like you, I shoot with the 18-55 a majority of the time, and occasionally with the 55-200. I will be getting the 50-140 once the motorsports racing starts up again in 2015, as I do professional motorsports photojournalism for a racetrack in Northern California. Additionally, I really like the enhancements the recent firmware update brought to the camera; Fuji brought significant new enhancements with that release.

Your thoughts, experiences, and conclusions about the Fuji X-T1s design, operation, user interface parallel my own exactly. As someone who learned photography with an Olympus OM-1 and manual focus lenses, I love the rotary dial and aperture ring control sytem. IMO, the X-T1 is fully capable professional workhorse with an ever expanding set of beautiful lenses to provide a very high level of performance in a wide range of use scenarios and applications. I look forward to them working with Metz to bring a proper TTL flash system online, and the implementation of the Fuji X Professional Services (FPS) in 2015.

I also own and use the very fine Olympus OM-D E-M1. I principally use it with the excellent Panasonic f/2.8 zooms, the 12-35 and 35-100. But like you, when I reach for a bag these days, it's the Fuji 90% of the time.

Today I will be putting up some landscape images I've taken with the X-T1 this year in another posting, but here's one from my trip to the Grand Tetons in October.



Thanks for the article.

[David Mantripp]

Nice article, but just one thing. You write:

- If you are a casual shooter and want a real good compact camera and print no larger than 13x19 inches then you should look at the Olympus.  The new Pro lens series, in body camera stabilization and phase and contrast detection auto focus, make this a super great camera in a prefect size package.

And yet a few weeks ago you were saying how impressed you were with 17x22 prints from the E-M1 and 40-150 lens. And this "casual shooter" thing sounds rather dismissive, don't you think? I'm trying to decide between both systems, and your user reports are very welcome, but a degree of consistency would help. You (and Michael) do seem to oscillate wildly between systems. Didn't Michael dump his X-Pro1 ... And now he wants an X-T1?  Well, it's entertaining, anyway :-)

[Telecaster]

My guess is Kevin was thinking of folks with 13" wide printers in one case and 17" wide printers in the other. In my experience print quality at 13x19" or 17x22" won't be the deciding factor when choosing between Fuji X or m43. Both systems are plenty capable in that regard. Handling, durability, user interface & options and lens selection are IMO more significant considerations.

-Dave-

[robertvine]

Great article! I was initially frustrated by the lack of histogram in the live image review on my X-E2 but it's made me shoot differently and for the better. I have the live histogram up in the EVF now so I'm back in the habit of getting the exposure right before I take the shot. This saves so much time re-shooting and results in less files to cull prior to processing.

[Thomas Koenig]

The X-Trans sensor Fuji is in most cases highly rated and classified as significantly better IQ than the Bayer sensor camera  systems.

Based on my personal experience, I can not confirm that. Comparisons with the Pentax K-5 IIs showed that the IQ of the K5-IIs was always better than the Fuji X-T1 (developed with C1 V7).
My friend - who is is a pro - owns the Fuji X-T1. In his opinion there is no way to replace the Canon 5D III against a Fuji XT-1 (Noise; DR ...).

The comparisons revealed also that there seems to be a an impact from the raw processing software on the IQ. Strangely Iridient which is not the market leader delivers a much better IQ.

I would like to summarize my experience with the Fuji X-T1 :

- The IQ is not better than other APS-C systems w/o AA-filter.
- The IQ of X-T1 depends on raw software (most developers are optimized for Bayer sensors).
- FF cameras are still in another league.

Thomas

[OldRoy]

Great article! I was initially frustrated by the lack of histogram in the live image review on my X-E2 but it's made me shoot differently and for the better. I have the live histogram up in the EVF now so I'm back in the habit of getting the exposure right before I take the shot. This saves so much time re-shooting and results in less files to cull prior to processing.

I was confused by the reference to the "review histogram" in the piece. I had intended to ask if I'd understood correctly as it seemed to me to imply that there was no live histogram: which would have been hard to believe (although I'm convinced that it's SOP to cripple or omit some functions on all cameras in order to give the hapless punters a reason to buy the next release: which seems to work every time.) But surely the absence of a review histogram, whilst bonkers, is utterly secondary to having the histogram available before pressing the shutter button!
As for poorly implemented HDR, that's surely required from the initial design brief.

[HSway]

The X-Trans sensor Fuji is in most cases highly rated and classified as significantly better IQ than the Bayer sensor camera  systems.

Based on my personal experience, I can not confirm that. Comparisons with the Pentax K-5 IIs showed that the IQ of the K5-IIs was always better than the Fuji X-T1 (developed with C1 V7).
My friend - who is is a pro - owns the Fuji X-T1. In his opinion there is no way to replace the Canon 5D III against a Fuji XT-1 (Noise; DR ...).

The comparisons revealed also that there seems to be a an impact from the raw processing software on the IQ. Strangely Iridient which is not the market leader delivers a much better IQ.

I would like to summarize my experience with the Fuji X-T1 :

- The IQ is not better than other APS-C systems w/o AA-filter.
- The IQ of X-T1 depends on raw software (most developers are optimized for Bayer sensors).
- FF cameras are still in another league.

Thomas

These differences debated often to exhaustion are terribly relative. In my experience with people a bit of passion coming from the choice that excites you is often more significant than the last theoretical detail (of theoretic IQ) (dis)advantage.
In these decisions I would pay attention to the lenses in the first place as the sensors come and go at a much more frequent rate.

I just saw a review of Fuji’s 50-140/2.8 (and many letters) on Lenstip as someone pointed me out to it and apart from the typical lamenting about the initial pricing these are the apc-c lenses that I think make all the difference in studying tiny differences among these systems.

Some of it applies to sensor sizes, too, though here I think the argument purely on the IQ is weakened.

edit/
Nearly forgot,

Thank you for the shot Harald. Happy Holidays!

[moolgavkar]

I am a keen amateur and shoot with both the Olympus OM-D1 and the Sony A7 system. I have been eyeing the Fuji XT-1 but would like to have a built in stabilizer, which the Olympus and the Sony A7 mk2 have. Also, there is one feature of the Sony system that I really like: it fully exploits the three degrees of freedom (aperture, shutter speed, ISO) that determine exposure. In other words, you can shoot in manual mode with your choice of shutter speed and aperture and still use the exposure compensation dial to increase or decrease exposure. This feature is not available on the XT-1 to my knowledge. It is not available on the Olympus either, but there is a work-around, which, unfortunately is not an option on the XT-1 either.

Please tell me if I am wrong and it is possible to adjust exposure compensation on the XT-1 in manual mode. One could always increase or decrease the ISO, but this is difficult to do on the fly with the camera to your eye, because of the top button on the ISO dial that must be kept pressed in while turning the dial. If the top button could be kept locked in, then of course the ISO could be changed on the fly with the camera to your eye.

Suresh Moolgavkar

[bengeo]

>> there is a work-around

Could you say what the work-around for the OM-D EM-1 is?

Thanks,

Andy