I am rapidly changing to Fujifilm X

[Mellow]

Likewise without wanting you to take this wrongly, I think that you're seeing the benefits of Micro 4/3 through only one facet (small is beautiful) when in fact the capabilities of the cameras and the breadth of the system still puts it ahead of what Fuji, Samsung, Sony and Canon have to offer at this time. Fast forward a couple of years to when the others might have caught up in that regard and there is still the fact that the difference in output between any of them in not so significant that it comes down more to personal preference.

You may be right, though I do appreciate the other things m43 has to offer. I appreciate, for example, the snappy, accurate AF and the highly flexible UI (the same one others criticize). But it's true that above all I value small size. I've had larger cameras and I just don't take them out very much, no matter how good they are.

 

[robbie36]

John... I'm sure you'll be fine with Fuji... as with m4/3. I tried an X-E1 with 5 lenses for a very short time. I really didn't have the gear long enough to get into the groove with it before I decided to just hang in there with m4/3 for another year. (I have a LOT of lenses/bodies in m4/3).

I liked the Fuji gear enough, though, to decide to revisit the system again, perhaps middle of 2014, to consider switching over myself. The upcoming m4/3 bodies are interesting, but are unlikely to make much, if any, noticeable difference in resulting images as compared to EM5, GH3, etc. (Most of us know that the person making the images matters far more than what format that person happens to be using.)

It's the focal lengths (especially the 7-14 and 9-18), IBIS, and AF which keeps me in m4/3 for the time being. But considering how few of the many lenses I actually USE in my m4/3 system, I could certainly get along just fine with a Fuji system as well!

In the end, neither Fuji nor m4/3 make enough of a significant difference to me to force a major switch, though the slight edge is there with the larger sensor. And the great lens & body selection, IBIS, and AF is certainly there with m4/3.

I wouldn't be surprised if sometime next year I may move over to Fuji as well, except, perhaps, for keeping a GX7 or EP5 body and a couple of lenses for a minimalist m4/3 kit. We shall see.

Mid 2014 may well present a significantly modified landscape for those of us who like to shoot mirrorless, and I'm always open to any and all possibilities and would have no qualms with changing to another system.

Looking forward to hearing about your experiences with this switch of systems.

As I see it your 2 comments at illustrate the different competitive dynamics of the system.

As you say Fuji always has that 'bigger sensor' which, as many of us accept slightly larger cameras, has its advantages.

M43 has the competitive dynamic between 2 major producers that really results in tech moving faster. It might be 'IBIS' and 'AF' now but it is just as likely to be 'faster shutter speeds' 'pdaf implementation' 'improved IBIS' 'EVF quality' 'LCD quality' etc in the future.

 

[DHart]

Robbie... yes, so true. M4/3 is likely to march forward with continual and wonderful improvements and benefits resulting from the competition with other formats as well as between Pany and Oly. And m4/3 possesses superb suitability for a significant range of photographic applications, particularly where output to print is restricted to smaller sizes (let's say 13x17 or smaller)... or not needed at all.

For myself, I'm interested in an adjunct imaging system which will give me more capability of producing exhibition size (30 to 40") prints for display on large walls. I love the m4/3 system and will likely continue to use it for some applications for quite some time to come. But m4/3 output doesn't particularly suit one of my photographic objectives, which is producing exhibition size wall prints.

My considerations for alternative imaging capability:

https://www.mu-43.com/f51/considerations-alternate-camera-systems-52309/

 

[jyc860923]

I just recently purchased a used x10 and I know that's not a real X that people have been talking about here but, I think the reason we like the X is that it's built with the concept of being unique, and exquisite. We don't expect it to beat m43 in AF or other areas it doesn't do well, but it's fully capable of delivering excellent results who takes the time to get used to it.

Sent from my M040 using Tapatalk 4

 

[yekimrd]

I think the reason we like the X is that it's built with the concept of being unique, and exquisite. We don't expect it to beat m43 in AF or other areas it doesn't do well, but it's fully capable of delivering excellent results who takes the time to get used to it.

Sent from my M040 using Tapatalk 4

I do agree with what you said about the exquisite feeling with handling one. And mind you, I've never handled a film camera. I believe it was Gary who said that his OM-D was his workhorse while his X-Pro1 was an art tool (can't remember what his exact words for his X camera was).

If a job needed to get done, the OM-D just works. I remember being able to mash my way into getting 'the shot' in any situation when I had my OM-D. But I would always labor over correcting WB with my indoor shots. My X-E1 on the other hand requires some planning ahead. But the auto WB just works especially indoors.

Lastly, there is just something special about how Fuji renders its colors. Olympus is no slouch either. But just like CaNikon users, some people will prefer Olympus colors while some will prefer that of Fuji's.

 

[woof]

Sorry to see you go John. I've enjoyed your shots. Glad you will still be posting at the sister site.

woof!

 

[mattia]

If/when Fuji comes out with a higher megapixel sensor (I like big prints of landscape stuff), or if Sony's rumoured FF NEX brings the goods with Zeiss glass to match, the days of my 5dII/Canon FF kit may definitely be numbered. I quite like having multiple camera systems.

 

[entropicremnants]

I love the discussion but I wasn't trying to start an argument here, lol -- I LOVE micro four thirds, I truly do. This is strictly a personal decision and I'm not saying anything negative about micro four thirds at all... just that the Fuji suits me better.

I'm not a partisan -- I just want what I want, lol.

Thanks all for the well wishes!

 

[Bokeaji]

I love the discussion but I wasn't trying to start an argument here, lol -- I LOVE micro four thirds, I truly do. This is strictly a personal decision and I'm not saying anything negative about micro four thirds at all... just that the Fuji suits me better.

I'm not a partisan -- I just want what I want, lol.

Thanks all for the well wishes!

grabs muPitchforks! GET HIM!!!!

lol
now get off this silly forum, and go take some cool old rusty pics for me to go look at on srsC!!!!

 

[Ulfric M Douglas]

Surprised myself with this but once I tried the cameras I was a goner.

What settings did/do you use?
I took some comparison pictures in the shop and observing the Jpegs at home I was absolutely baffled by the praise I saw on the forums, so I assume I was using completely wrong settings.
The X-Pro1 coped the best of the three Fujis I tried but it had the best lens on! 35mmF1.4 is it?.

I'm itching to go back to the shop and take some more comprehensive test pictures and maybe see what YOU see...

 

[entropicremnants]

What settings did/do you use?
I took some comparison pictures in the shop and observing the Jpegs at home I was absolutely baffled by the praise I saw on the forums, so I assume I was using completely wrong settings.
The X-Pro1 coped the best of the three Fujis I tried but it had the best lens on! 35mmF1.4 is it?.

I'm itching to go back to the shop and take some more comprehensive test pictures and maybe see what YOU see...

It's good for an f/1.4 lens -- but the best? I don't know.

I used a variety of settings in the pics I took and they were in the real world and not in a store, lol. I bought a used X-E1 to try out X-Trans. I was using just the 18-55mm "kit" lens it comes with and it was that good.

I can't speak to your results, but personally I don't know as the 35 1.4 (or any 1.4) is the best test unless you are willing to step down to like f/4 or more. In the center it's still good but the edges aren't very good from what I can see if you are wide open. Pretty typical fast prime.

 

[Al.]

my next step is fuji too, maybe sooner then later

 

[Ulfric M Douglas]

OK John, I'll stick the very good kit zoom on next time.
How about RAW/Jpegs, how about the extended dynamic range, what about sharpness settings?
I do know without a doubt the e-pM2 resolved more fine detail on the day, and my venerable e-P1 stabilised best of the bunch, and the AWB was best on the olympii.
I honestly want to see the very good Fuji Jpegs and have something right there to compare against.

 

[mnhoj]

I'm a recent convert.

All things considered, I think the XE1 may be my favorite camera body of all.
And that is at the top of a pretty long list.

The lenses aren't too shabby either.

 

[entropicremnants]

OK John, I'll stick the very good kit zoom on next time.
How about RAW/Jpegs, how about the extended dynamic range, what about sharpness settings?
I do know without a doubt the e-pM2 resolved more fine detail on the day, and my venerable e-P1 stabilised best of the bunch, and the AWB was best on the olympii.
I honestly want to see the very good Fuji Jpegs and have something right there to compare against.

Sorry, I didn't fully answer your question but I was in a hurry, lol.

• Noise Reduction: 0 (Normal)
• Sharpness: 0 (Normal)
• Shadows: medium soft
• Highlights: medium soft
• Film type: Provia or Velvia

That quite simply works for me and the jpgs look better than my RAW from the micro four thirds pixel-to-pixel. What I mean by that is something I can only call "acuity" in that for the same resolution there seems to be better differentiation from pixel to pixel at 100% resulting in a greater perception of detail without massive sharpening.

I also feel that the general treatment of the curves is better in the JPG's and more like what I try to do in RAW. This results in minimal tweaking of the JPG. I'm really quite impressed as I've guess I've communicated, lol.

It's a shame you're not local as we could go shoot and you could shoot it with your memory card to take home and play with.

 

[Just Jim]

GL with Fuji... Good photographic company and I certainly wish them the best. I've found with their other products they can be great at giving attention to the little details to improve their offerings until they're on par with the best and further. I've used their films, papers, and lenses for years, rarely a clunker.

TBH, if they were seriously in the game a few years ago, I would probably have gone with Fuji. I think they only had some compacts...

 

[LovinTheEP2]

If IQ is the only absolutely requirement in a rf like body irregardless of af ability..

then yeah Fuji X is a killer system

As for the getting 98% (illustrative purpose) of the IQ, amazing fast s-af and now capable c-af and AMAZING image stablization.. Fuji seems like a Dinosaur.. oh yeah and Weatherproofing!

 

[RT_Panther]

LoL I suppose it was only a matter of time before this thread "expanded"....:smile:

 

[entropicremnants]

If IQ is the only absolutely requirement in a rf like body irregardless of af ability..

then yeah Fuji X is a killer system

As for the getting 98% (illustrative purpose) of the IQ, amazing fast s-af and now capable c-af and AMAZING image stablization.. Fuji seems like a Dinosaur.. oh yeah and Weatherproofing!

I owned an E-M5. I sold it. That should tell you where I am with regard to your comment. How big do YOU print?...

Capabilities do not exist in a vacuum unless you just want to argue all day about specs. Have fun. My choices are driven by specific photographic goals and the Fuji smokes the E-M5 IQ.

 

[monk3y]

LoL I suppose it was only a matter of time before this thread "expanded"....:smile:

people just can't resist :banghead:

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Mu-43 mobile app