« Happy Fourth! If Applicable | Main | Sunday Open Mike: News! »

Thursday, 03 July 2014


The X-T1 was a brief companion, along with the lovely 56mm f/1.2 lens. Fujinon is a great thing to read on a lens, that's for sure.

Lens selection and loveliness aside, I did not take to the X-T1 at all. Consider that I'm coming at it from a long line of Pentax DSLRs (currently the K-3), so the small size of mirrorless bodies aren't quite so dramatic for me.

The difficulties started with the feel of the body, like the magnesium shell was as thin as paint, with smooshy buttons and control rings around the main top dials that move on their own. The dials themselves have that button lock, which kept them from moving around, even when I wanted to quickly change something! At least Pentax added a switch to turn this off on the K-3 mode dial.

The EVF is very snappy and gives a great preview of the image (less like looking at a tiny TV in a tunnel than others), and overall the processing and menus felt really fast, along with great focus speed. Of course, I don't try to shoot sports with something like an X-T1 (or a Pentax, cough cough), and when it came to my interests (macros, informal portraits and landscapes) all the technology in the body was wasted on me.

The lovely dials on the top (that harken back to the film days) did not make it any more intuitive or easy to use for me. Oddly enough, I wished for quick access to AEB and a decent flash system more than looking down to see my settings carved in metal dials.

Great lenses, great technology, but not quite "the whole package" for me, anyhow.

Achilles heel issue with the Fuji X-cameras is the RAW processing workflow. JPGs are fantastic, maybe the best in the industry. However, if you shoot RAW, and use Adobe products to process your RAW files... then you should learn to meditate before each frustrating post processing session ;-)

Hi Mike!

I'm a photojournalist based in Jerusalem. I do mostly news reporting. For years I had used Canons professionally but always went through the dilemma of which small camera to take with me when just going out for a beer. I've used an assortment of bridge cameras and rangefinder-like cameras ... until Fuji came out with the X100. That was a turning point - it was fun to use, small and delivered extraordinary image quality, and, it became my main camera for 85% of the work. But, and with cameras there is always a 'but', the fixed 35mm equivalent lens limited what I could do.

About that time I also had a motorbike crash that left might right forearm and wrist, my dominant arm, somewhat disabled and I can no longer work long hours with a heavy camera/lens combo.

So I bought an Olympus E-M5 with a 14-150mm and tried to convince myself I was happy with the image quality. Often it performed well but not when challenged with the lighting conditions that in news reporting always works against you.

Then came the X-T1 and it has become my main camera with the X100 often tagging along, almost unnoticed, as a backup.

X-T1 performance is fantastic and image quality superb. I shoot JPGs in order to be able to WIFI transfer images to iPad for captioning, post-processing and submitting to agencies in the field and I no longer feel the need to save Raw files. I have found I have more keepers shooting quickly in Single Frame Drive Mode and Single AF Mode as opposed to Continuous Burst Drive modes with focus on either Single AF Mode or Continuous AF Mode, thus forcing the camera to refocus for every frame on quickly moving subjects. I do, once in a while, accidentally press the Focus Assist button with my thumb or the front Fn-1 button with my forefinger. I find the Auto WB perfect in most situations. I switch between Average Metering in most situations to Spot Metering in more difficult lighting conditions and sometimes use AE-L to lock exposure for a specific frame rather than dialing in an Exposure Compensation value, long term, that I later tend to forget to reset.

Nothing in life is perfect and the same goes for the X-T1 but it's good enough for professional work, convenient to carry and a delight to use. Just two days ago it proved itself worthy in extremely dynamic situations during violent rioting following the discovery of the bodies of three Israeli teens murdered in the West Bank (http://www.imagesofmythoughts.com/News/20140701-Protesters-Call-for/)

Keep the X-T1 ;-)

After a couple years with the Em-5 and Em-1, I can "mirror" the comments made about those Olympus offerings. But honestly there is just something a bit more "right" about the XT-1, to the extent that I divested of Olympus. Currently have the 18-55, 55-200, 60 and 27. Awaiting the rumored 16. With a backup XE-1, I am truly cured of GAS for some time. Prefer the files/colors, use Iridient or Lightroom, no annoyances at all for me. But I don't pixel peep or shoot much BIF or sports. When I do, I don't mind relearning those skills from pre-AF days! Speaks well of the current state of offerings that we have an abundance of fantastic choices.

I owned the EM-1 and recently rented the XT-1. I love the lens lineup for the Fuji, but the control pad was so flush with the back that I had a hard time pushing the buttons. It's size is also a bit of a put-off compared to m4/3 cameras.

I know many love the Fuji "look" but to me it looks waxy and very "digital".

I have owned a Fuji XT-1 with Fuji 23,60,18-55,50-200 since very soon after it came out. My only real out and out disappointment is the Fuji 60mm and that only for how slow it is to focus- just hunts too much. Next in line would be something Mike mentioned- the all too easily moved aperture dial on the 23mm. Finding the focus assist button without looking was an issue for me until I glued a rubber bump on it. The autofocus accuracy is excellent but just not fast enough to use this camera& lenses for event photography, let alone sports. I had planned to use manual focus legacy lenses primarily (Nikkor, Olympus, various Leica mount) but I am not as pleased with my ability to focus them quickly on the Fuji. (This may just be a learning issue for me) The problem? with that is that I've been so pleased with the Fuji lenses that I find myself using them to the exclusion of the older lenses!
I cant comment on RAW conversion- I shoot only jpeg large/fine. Since switching to digital a little over 11 years ago I've never found the need to use Raw. (I have tried it) I do photograph primarily with the intention a B&W finished image. I believe that the files I get from the Fuji are as good and probably better than any others I have produced. Their tone and dynamic range are exceptional. While I don't do as much in color, that too is starting to change because of the files/look I get from the Fuji. I am also impressed with files at higher ISO (1600 &up) but just don't have enough varied experience yet to comment more. I use Elements for all my digital processing, including B&W conversion ( and yes I do have Photoshop as well as Nik Silver Efex).
The layout of controls, particularly the ability to access by a dedicated dial or button everything I need is excellent. As an older photographer being able to turn a dial so many "clicks" in one direction or another- without looking- and know what value I'm setting is refreshing.
My eyes are older but I see no issues with the EFV, even comparing it directly to traditional prism/mirror finders.
My gold standard in digital cameras since the first one I owned was the Nikon D700. Because of the auto focus issues it still holds that title! But the size and weight of the Fuji make it my go to camera now (except when those issues could be a concern, events, sports, wildlife). I guess this may be the best way to explain it- My family and I are leaving on a multi-week driving vacation. Photography will be a big component of the trip for me. I have the room to take as much photographic gear as I want to. The Fuji is going as my main camera. The Nikon D700 only because of not owning any really long lenses for the Fuji! I'm not even taking a variety of lenses, except one midrange zoom, for the Nikon!

A couple of other points-
I own or have owned Sony, Leica, Pentax, Olympus, and Panasonic digital cameras of similar quality build and quality as the Fuji.
I am not in the least bit saying that any of my opinions are anything other than that.
I certainly hope I don't get short shrift again :)

These posts are very timely for me. My 9-year-old and 6-year-old Canons need to be replaced. Nothing in the current Canon line-up suits my needs and purse as well as other manufacturer's cameras.

I don't wish to speak for other Canon users, but speaking to my chums in the business, the unthinkable is happening. We're tempted to jump ship after decades of loyalty. And this time, we're not drawn to Nikon. Panasonic, Fuji and Sony have much shinier baubles.

For video, which makes up a substantial part of my income now, the Panasonic GH4 is an obvious choice (given my style, the subjects I film and my client base). I have one eye on the Sony A7s too, of course. But not the Canon 5D3. If I need anything more capable, I rent.

For photography, my head tells me the GH4 will be very good too. I will suit my needs well. It's just that the Fuji X-T1 is such an appealing offering. Much of the Fuji X line-up appeals to me. I held my friend's X-E1 and felt a connection that I hadn't felt since my Canon AE-1.

I'm curious to hear what people like and dislike about the X-T1.

Of course, none of it is really relevant to me. I'll only know once I've held and photographed with one. Doesn't stop me wanting to hear the thoughts of others, mind.

I got one of the first xt1's that B&H shipped. I LOVE the camera. Sometimes I feel guilty leaving my xp1 in my bag, but that's usefully as a second body. The only issues I've had with the camera are 1) the PC terminal cap unscrews too easily (been thru 2so far) and the hot shoe cap comes off too easily, 2)the doors on the sides - one for the SD card and one for the sundry terminals open a little too easily. These are sniggling first-world problems.

I didn't have an issue with the infamous light leak, but had Fuji fix it anyway. Turnaround time was one day - I live twenty minutes from the Fuji headquarters.

After some serious use the internal backup battery wouldn't hold a charge, so my camera reset all its settings when I turned the camera off. Fuji fixed it for me in one day (again) and gave me a spare battery for my trouble. Take that Nikon!

The camera goes through battery power fast, but that incredible EVF is really like a miniature TVscreen so it sucks up a lot of juice. I just got used to carrying several OEM batteries. The one generic replacement battery I bought sucks big time.

Size/handling: sweet! I had no reservations about selling off my D700 and three f2.8 lenses. The fuji is wonerful to handle for an entire day, the menus are easy to navigate, and I really feel at home withthemanual controls.

I generally use to 10-24 and the 18-55 zooms (I'll replace the 18-55 when the 16-55 f2.8 comes out). But I have several prime lenses that I use for specific situations. The 14 and 23 are wonderful lenses.

As for IQ, the APS-C sensor leaves nothing to be desired. Yeah yeah to the FF nuts. Those are the same people who were screaming about how I needed to shoot medium format when I was using my M6.

I process RAW in Lightroom. I don't shoot landscape or nature so I've never noticed the issues that people whine about. I convert my images to B/W witth Silver Efex Pro, and I'm very pleased with the results.

One final note: some months ago I had the M Monochrome itch.i borrowed the camera from a store in NYC to take out on the street for a couple of hours. Used my own 35mm sumicron and my own SD card. At the same time I put the Fuji 23mm on the xt1 and shot with them side by side. Same pics, same settings. When I got home and loaded the two sets of images into LR to compare them without any processing, I was totally and completely underwhelmed by the Leica. A case of the Emporer's new clothes. Saved me 8 grand.

Das it!

Mike, I was an early adopter. At the time I had an x e1 and was most happy with the cameras results, handling, and fujifilms readiness to listen to their customers. Along came the x t1, and I gulped down the koolaid. I am even more pleased, as all the lenses I use most have been made available; 18-55, 35, and the exquisite 23mm, the 60mm macro is little used, and will likely be replaced by a 56mm. Fujifilms, has done everything expected, and more to keep me on board. I use LR5, converting to dng as it meets my needs thus far. Having been a dedicated Nikon user, I have found Fuji, to be far more responsive to its customers, and much more responsible.

"I'll have to sell one or the other soon"

Sell both and buy a Sony 24 Mpix A7. We know their lens map is rather poor compared to the excellent choices available in Olympus or Fuji but a bit of patience should cater for that. Good enough is not an option, the best possible is the future.

Mike, here are a few of my blog posts highlighting my thoughts, usage and eventual return of my X-T1. They aren't necessarily listed in order of being written (by date)but rearranged for this blog comment.

After all my writings about this camera, my heart still craves one but my head says wait.

I Really Want a Fujifilm X-T1 but…


Photographing with the Fujifilm X-T1; Wow! Nice!


Took the X-T1 Out All Day Yesterday; What a Pleasure! A Shooter’s Camera but I have Mixed Feelings; Why?


The X-T1 is a “Photographer’s Camera”


Sorry Fuji Fans, the X-T1 is Going Back


Image Comparisons from the X-T1 and E-M1 with Adobe’s Final Version of ACR and Lightroom


Some Thoughts on the X-T1 and Raw Processing


Comments and Comparisons about the Olympus E-M1in comparison to the Fujifilm X-T1


I had a XT-1 which I liked very much but I did return it and purchased a XE-2. The reason was simply the like of the rangefinder style and the lack of need for speed gains of the XT-1 (the price difference of 500+ also helped the swing). Can't tell the images apart from one to the other.

I've had an X-T1 since shortly after the camera was launched, and am enjoying it immensely. In fact, my first camera was stolen when my house was burgled, so I've actually purchased two through your Amazon link. I'd been considering moving into the Fuji system since the X-Pro 1, but none of the rangefinder style Fuji's tempted me enough. The X-T1 finally had everything I wanted, especially the large viewfinder and manual focusing aids.

My main complaint (and I'm sure many will mention this) is the location of the movie-record button. I have big hands and the button is all too easy to press accidentally. I believe the latest firmware for the camera, which I have not yet installed, adds a delay to the start of movie recording to ameliorate this issue. I'm hopeful that Fuji will provide a better solution in the future, and that the present fix is simply something that they did because they could get out the door quickly. I'd like to see a menu setting that adds the option to inactivate the button completely. (It's probably too much to hope that the button could be repurposed completely.)

Changing the location of the focus area could be easier, although I'm not sure how that could be done given the physical controls on the camera. I originally found the setup to be downright annoying, though experience has made it less so.

My favorite feature of the camera is the viewfinder. When I handed the camera to a friend to look through, his response was, "I wish my eyes worked like this." I recently started shooting with my Contact G lenses via adapter. The viewfinder and the available focusing aids make this a breeze.

The most pleasant surprise for me has been the usefulness of the tilting screen. I do a lot of macro shooting from a tripod, and have hardly used the viewfinder for this work. This is the first camera I've owned with a tilting screen, and I hope I never have to go back to a camera without one.

Finally, I like the look of the jpegs. I don't see anything "magical" in them, but the general look of the images is pleasing to me.

Virtually every camera on the market today is good enough for my purposes, but the X-T1 makes me smile every time I pick it up to use it. I know that may not seem important in the grand scheme of things, but I'll gladly trade a bit of functionally here and there for a tool that brings me joy.

I got the X E-1 for the reasons you cite in your article comparing Fuji & Sony and loved it. When the X T-1 arrived, I took one look through the finder and ordered one. I prefer the form of the X E-1 but operationally the X T-1 is superb. I love the X T-1 and all the lenses I have for it, from the 14 through the 55-200 with most of the primes in between. Even manually focusing them is easy. I do focus stacking, HDR, macro, all the things I did with my D800E (which I still have and am unwilling to give up.) I am about to become a first time grandparent and plan to put untold photons through the 56 and its f/1.2. I miss the IBIS from the Oly I had but the high ISO is so good on the Fuji that I just set the auto ISO and make images unless I'm using a tripod, which is less and less. All in all, a wonderful machine.

Forgot to add that I shoot JPG & Raw and use the JPGS more than I ever would have thought. The JPGs are the best I've seen coming straight from any camera I've owned thus far, and I've shot with many! I use Lightroom as my RAW converter, and Photoshop for enhancements.

Hey Mike,

Thanks for showing the two cameras side-by-side. The size difference helps reinforce my good feelings about the Olympus!

Hi Mike, Happy Fourth to you & all the US TOP readers. I have had the X-T1 since it's launch and find it very capable with great files to work with. I tend to photograph slower subjects, such as industrial machinery and landscapes. I also shoot nature such as perched or wading birds. Also some macro, close ups and a few events on the side. I have even successfully shot some youth hockey games with usable results.

What brought me to the X system to start with was the Xpro-1, It however was not my first X series camera, as I was saving up the cash for one & a few lenses, they announced the XE-1 +18-55 kit. I bought that first and kind followed along as lenses and bodies came out.

I actually bought the X-T1 with the improved auto focus to shoot hockey games with as I had sold my DSLR kit many months prior to that. While it works OK for hockey in well lit arenas, If I was being paid to shoot these games I would be using something else. Never the less for my normal photography the X-T1 fits my style nicely. I tend to shoot all manual most days and did so with the DSLR's.

What I like about it is the control layout and the way it handles for me. It seems to meter real nice and like the other Fujifilm cameras I have auto White Balance is more often than not pretty darn good. Autofocus is more than adequate for most of what I shoot. It does sometimes struggle in low light at events, but that is easily overcome by going manual focus and split image screen focus mode.

What I do find annoying is the shooting mode switch and metering switch are easily bumped out of the set position and sometimes can cause me some grief if I forget to look. Battery life could be better I suppose. Recent firmware updates have fixed the few things that were bothersome to me such as the metering scale & not seeing any change when making adjustments with the shutter button half pressed. I would like to see proper rear button focus...but alas, I can live with it as is.

I use Adobe LR for raw processing unless an image will simply not respond well to it. Then I might try to process in Iridient Developer or Capture 1 express to see if I can get better results & export a tiff to Lightroom for further exploitation. I find that the X-T1 files print very nice detailed 16x20 prints at 360PPI on my 3880 printer and that is good enough for me.

I do use flash, usually Nikon SB26's either on manual or sometimes on auto like you would use a Vivitar 285.
Since Fuji has yet to put forth a Telephoto longer than 200mm, I also shoot adapted Canon FD 300 & 500L lenses for birds and wildlife with what I feel are great results as long as they do not move too fast.

I find the XT-1 to be a nice part of a fairly light kit and think I will stay with it for some time. And finally for someone who likes to shoot with adapted alternative lenses, the focus screen options are the cats meow!

I have been using the Fujifilm X-T1 for four months. Great travel camera with the XF 10-24, 18-55 and 55-200. Either the 23 or 35 f/1.4 goes along if needed for low natural light or nighttime use. I am happy with 16 megapixels (Actually, 12 megapixel Canon 5D was all I needed). Typically shoot JPEG's with various film simulation modes, almost no post-processing other that cropping-what a joy! It's a camera that does about everything good enough to leave the DSLR at home. The small detachable flash EF-X8 has been surprising good for fill flash. I hope Fujifilm continues to develop the X system, I don't need the size and weight of full frame lenses.

I have one: absolutely love it (and the XPro1).

I usually use it paired with the XF 16-55. I also have the 55-200 as I shoot sport as well. Also have the 18, 35 and 60mm primes but the XT1 often has a zoom on the front.

Love the dials. As a result of the excellent EVF, I often shoot manually. All the dials and buttons are in the right place for me. Feels a bit small without the vertical battery grip.

Fuji really have amazing cameras at the moment and I don't regret selling my Canon system and buying completely into the Fuji X system.

Coming from the X-Pro, which I loved but left because I used the EVF more and more, especially when using lenses outside the 23-35mm range, I finally chose the X-E2 over the X-T1. Handled them both for the better part of an hour in a photography shop. Although the quality of the viewfinder of the X-T1 was wonderful, it didn't make such a difference (as I didn't have full view of the widest position of the EVF because of my glasses). And I felt the camera was trying to be something it was not: an SLR. While the E2 was just itself - and less obtrusive as well.

I really like my X-T1 with one exception. I have an early production unit. The D-pad buttons and AE-L, AF-L buttons are nearly impossible to use unless you take the camera down away from your eye. I like my X-E2 better if I have to change focus points quickly. I simply can't do it with the X-T1.

I use Capture One Pro7 and love it for processing RAW. But, many times I just use the Fine jpeg. They are that good. The lens I use the most is the 18-55mm f2.8-4 OIS. But, I am very anxious for the 14-55 f2.8 OIS to be released.

No regrets switching from pro Nikon gear (D3 & D4) to Fuji X cameras. It will be fun to grow with this evolving system.

I have a Nikon D200 and a variety of Nikon full frame and DX lenses. But eight years later, I wanted a camera that was better in low light, and I was very tired of lugging the weight. I also increasingly felt that Nikon ignores both their customers and many technologies changing photography. Three years ago, I purchased a Fuji X100. While it was far from the camera for street photography I hoped for, I was impressed by Fuji's efforts to continually improve it with firmware updates. When the X100s appeared, I bought it.
When the E-1 appeared, I was intrigued by the many positive reviews but hoped that Nikon would produce a competitor and waited. When Fuji produced the XT-1 this spring and Nikon seemed stuck on incremental improvements to their existing lines, I decided to visit my local camera store and compare the E-1 and XT-1 in person. Both cameras seemed terrific, but I found the straightforward operation of the XT-1 more appealing than trying to recall my assignment of functions to the buttons of the E-1. I also gave considerable weight to Fuji's continual updating of their cameras in response to their users. The sale of my Nikon 70-200 VRII paid for it with something left over. I have been very pleased with my choice, although I have found it necessary to carry at least one extra battery.

Well, the autofocus systems in M4/3 and claims are both limited to wide-to-standard zooms. If you test them with telephoto lenses or zooms, there is a noticeable difference to DSLR's which are better in accuracy.This is why the claims of "fastest autofocus" are limited to the wider lenses. If your subject is wildlife, my example is that a deer in tall grass, or a red cardinal flitting from one branch to the other,success with 300mm lens will require a DSLR. If the subject is clean and out in the open, M 4/3 are an excellent choice.

Tough problem, Mike. I spent a couple of months waffling between the two cameras. I ended up with the X-T1. I love the split screen popup window that makes manual focusing easy. I have some old Pentax and Nikon lenses that I like to shoot with.

The Fuji lens I use the most on the X-T1 is the 10-24. I've been really into wide angle for the last couple of years and Fuji makes a great lens for that purpose. I also own the 55-200, the 18-55, the 27 and the 60. The 27 lives on an X-E1, which just fits in my vest pocket. The 60 stays on an X-M1 that I got as a free review unit. I have found myself heading out with the three cameras and switching cameras rather than lenses. That still weighs less than my old Nikon kit. I can carry the weight on in a shoulder bag, just not in my right hand.

I find the auto-focus to be fine for general purpose shooting. I love the adjustment dials on top. Most of all I find the prints I get from the Fuji to have a subtle refinement that I don't see on any other crop sensor camera.

I have owned both the Nikon D700 and D600 and (sensor crud aside) was really happy with the files. Tendonitis in my right arm has forced me to use lighter gear. Fuji comes closest to full frame sensor subtlety of anything other than a Sigma, but I find those too quirky for general use.

i "stumbled" into owning the X-T1 during a visit to osaka. i like the 23mm, but somehow i like the 35mm better at the moment. it is that little bit more compact, that makes the setup so easy to take with you (note, that i grew up on 50/55mm lenses in the old days). the 18-55mm is certainly a good one, but i still prefer primes.
i also use LTM and M mount lenses, as well as M42 (the 135mm f/3.5 super takumar) and a porst 55mm f/1.2 in K-mount (a version of the tomioka design).

i even got me a 0.7x converter (a.k.a. speed booster or lens turbo) for M42, but that's only for the nostalgic moments. the fujinons are just better and easier.

while lightroom is said to have inferior quality for fuji file raw processing, i can't complain. there's nothing i'm missing, and i like convenience of the one-application-workflow. i tried DCraw on my linux machine, and found it a very capable tool. i'll continue to use it, especially when i do not want to boot windows.

the X-T1 has quickly become my favourite colour machine, and it will be the camera to bring on vacations. for B&W however, i prefer film, or the monochrom. i can still imagine to be a very happy owner of the X-T1 only.

cheers, s.

I have an X-T1 and love it. Purchased it after two years with the E-M5 which I also loved.

Current lenses - 35mm 1.4 which does my family/toddler shooting and the 16-50mm which was obtained for a very low price and performs very well for city/landscape shots.

The focus system is really excellent once you adjust to it's quirks. in general I find it more confident than the EM5.

The lenses are certainly larger than m4/3 equivalents, that is a downside.

Another downside is thee lack of stabilization. I have to pay attention to my camera-holding technique when using the 35mm or risk blur on shots that were always tack sharp with the EM5.

As far as the files are concerned, I shoot in RAW then convert the ones I like using the in-camera converter. This would not be practical for a high-volume shooter but for casual family and travel shooting it works just fine.

Lightroom is my developer but it gets used for cataloging these days rather than adjustments.

Th controls and shooting experience are wonderful, it is a really fun camera to carry and shoot with. My wife says 'this camera takes nice pictures"...

Which lens will be next? The 23mm 1.4 is very tempting, but so is the new 18-135mm

I got the X-E2 because I prefer the minimalist control layout. My second shooter uses an X-T1 for her personal work and I've had a lot of opportunity to play with one and hear her thoughts.

We both love the X-T1 but find the controls are far too easy to change (unset?) by accident. I never had that issue with my X-E2 so I guess there's something to be said for a minimalist layout.

She's essentially abandoned her Oly E-M5 for the Fuji and has no regrets. I've been using the Fuji X-E2 more than my own E-M5, but I still find the Oly has a solid place in my bag with the 20mm Panny basically glued to it.

For my own part, I prefer the Fuji for its classic controls; a true shutter speed dial, aperture ring, and no mode dial. I look at the camera. I see the settings. I know what's going on without even turning on the camera.

Looking primarily for a travel camera, my choice came down to the OM-D EM-1 or the X-T1. The Olympus seemed a bit better for automatic settings, the Fuji for working manually. The Fuji fits my big hand a little better. I have a soft spot for Fuji lenses, going back to large format and to the lenses Fuji built for the extraordinary Hasselblad X-Pan (whose loss I still mourn … but not enough to return to film). And lastly Fuji builds their X-trans cameras and top line lenses in Japan, whereas the Olympus equipment is built in China. (I don't like it when companies in my own country export jobs to China, why should I encourage the behaviour in others?)

I haven't had a single moment of regret, but I am feeling a bit of ambivalence about keeping my Canon 5D2 and its lenses. At the moment I'm hanging onto the 5D2 for the sake of Canon close-up, tilt-shift, and telephoto lenses, but when I want to go out and make photographs I reach for the X-T1 every time … with it's size and manual controls it's such a pleasure to use.

Once Lightroom came out with their Fuji film simulations I quit looking for a better RAW developer. Fuji slide films were my favourites for years, and now I have them back again! Best of all, I can choose my 'film' after the exposure —it's even better than interchangeable film backs!

I bought several primes to experiment with while I wait for the 18-135mm zoom which I assumed would be my chief travel lens, and to my surprise the 23mm lives on the front of the camera almost all the time. 35mm (equivalent) is a focal length I almost never use with zoom lenses, but I find this fast prime 'works' for almost everything I want to do unless there's a specific need for super-wide or long telephoto.

I'm not sure that I'm going to want to print larger than 19 inches wide in the future —that's my self-imposed limit with the X-T1 and its 16mp sensor— but I'd be happier with 24mp just in case the need arises. I'm happy using a tripod and low shutter speeds, but I don't want to lug the lenses that are required for full-frame coverage.

I'm having so much fun with this camera!

I've got the X-E1, with the viewfinder in the rangefinder position, rather than in the hump position, but it's all electronic, all the same. Irritates me that it's so slow to focus ... thinking about switching to the X-E2. Also irritates me that I can only do square ( or other non-3:2 ) formats only in jpg mode, not when shooting RAW

Don't have the X-T1, but I have it on good authority that the X-Trans output is uniform across the line. Certainly holds for my X-E1 and X100s...

In which case I use Lightroom, begrudgingly, for most things. Recently with VSCO Film packs, which I like WAY more than I ever expected to.

I've tested Iridient and found its output to be better. I tested Photo Ninja and liked that even more. I have yet to try Capture One. I have seen the output from Aperture on my files, so I know what Apple is capable of (and I rather like it). I'm going to wait for Apple to release Photos for OSX, see if that is a viable (free) solution for me, then see where I stand and proceed from there.

The thing is, I love Lightroom, but their X-Trans conversions, though improved from a year ago, are awfully lousy. And outclassed by *everyone* else to boot. You know, companies that are vastly smaller than Adobe. So it is clear that they don't care. Which is the sole reason I've not taken their (rather reasonable) $10/month offer on Lightroom and Photoshop. The problem is bad enough that a common response to your "Fuji gets it" post was that the sensor output is terrible. It isn't... Adobe just hasn't bothered to actually try to utilize it well. And those folks may love Lightroom more than Fuji cameras and lenses (a more than valid response), but I don't. Adobe could buy Iridient for the money paid in a single month by Fuji shooters for Creative Cloud subscriptions. They could use Aperture's (actually OS X's) conversion for free on Macs as a system-level resource. Instead they let their conversion fall appallingly behind the less-funded competition, so if it comes to it I'm off to Photo Ninja and Pixelmator in lieu of giving them $120 a year.

In truth, the LR output rarely jumps out as being "bad." When it does, it really does, but it isn't often. I really didn't get so animated about it until I had a beloved shot with plenty of leaves. The lousy output lead me to do some testing, and I discovered the huge discrepancy between LR and everyone else. Not just on those problem shots, but across the board. The X-Trans output is wondrous to behold, and if you've only ever looked at Adobe-handled RAWs, you've never seen it. Here's hoping they fix it, because I love LR. But I really love these cameras and lenses more, and they deserve better.

I use two XT-1 bodies with numerous XF lenses for gigs.

I have one issue with the XT-1; the exposure bracketing should support up to seven frames in 1 stop steps. A minor issue is the maximum shutter speed could be one stop faster. I used the X100 and stil use the X-pro 1 in lieu of a mechanical rangefinder body. So understanding how to get the most from the XT-1 AF system did not take long. I can see a much longer adjustment time would be common for others and also a disadvantage.

I do not use them for action photography. I do not use them for extremely large prints.

Unlike many, I have no issues using Adobe CC (LR 5.5) for rendering XTrans raw. However the m.o. for XTrans rendering can be very different compared to Bayer raw. I tried alternate post-production platforms and each has advantages and disadvtages. I do find the XTrans raw produces excellent results for my work.

The finder is very functional. The dual-screen display mode is a pwerful tool to confirm and adjust AF results and for manual focuse (tuning the lens barrel). I use MF often.

The auto WB is excellent.

I enjoy not carrying two, large,heavy DSLR bodies and lenses. Since I am not interested in extremely shallow DOF, I do not miss the 24 X 36 mm sesnors areas of my DSLRs.

The quality of the XF lenses is an important aspect of the XT-1 system. The lenses are a significant advantage for me.

Good luck with your decision.

Not interested in either. For a pocketable camera, I love my Sony RX100 -very tempted to buy the MarkIII. If I need a higher resolution non DSLR (smaller than DSLR body), I take out my Sony A7R where I have the option of using my various Leica R lenses if needed.

I had a GH3 which I sold to get the XT-1. I sold the GH3 and sort of regret it.
I want to love the XT-1. It feels great in my hands, a pleasure to use, but there is this nagging doubt about the image quality. OK, the JPGs are super but the processed RAWs really are not sharp. It is like there is a thin film of Vaseline coating the lens and causing a blur. IMO, the Fuji X-Trans sensor has caused more problems than it solved. I really can't be bothered to buy another RAW developer to work with Adobe.
As it is, I have borrowed a Sony A7r. Really the IQ of the Sony is leaps and bounds ahead of the Fuji. Smoother colours, much sharper details. The Sony has its quirks too, and I really wish there was a good UWA for the A7r.
This weekend, I have to buy or return the Sony, so it is decision time. At the end of the day, I think it will be goodbye to the XT-1.
I only wish Fuji would release the an alternative to the XT-1 with a conventional 24 MPx APS-C Bayer sensor. That would be my ideal camera :)

I own the X-T1 and one word often comes to mind when I select which of my cameras to use - trust. It works like I think and I consistently capture the image I am after - even the most difficult ones.
I own four Sony bodies including the A99 and one deceased Sony A900 and much of their best Zeiss and G glass. There is little that I have ever complained about with my Sony system except the weight. I bought the Fuji X-E1 with the 18-55 lens and the 55-200 for travel and quickly became a Fuji convert. I added the X-T1 to my harem in March and recently the 10-24 lens. As good as my Sony system is I have to make a very conscious effort to pick it up - it's the weight thing.
The Fuji's have very good stabilization, a fabulous viewfinder, fall perfectly into my hand, have excellent glass and produce wonderful files even at high ISO. While they do have a few minor warts - every camera does, I truly love using the X-T1 and the older X-E1.
My Fuji files on both bodies are superb - only slightly bested by my Sony A99 using Zeiss glass and only up to ISO 640 - it is 24 vs 16 mps. I shoot only raw and process my Fuji files primarily in LR 5.4. When the file is a landscape or has foliage I round trip out to Photo Ninja and back to LR. With a few presets in PN I am very quickly returned a tif file to LR that has better color, is sharper and cleaner and has more presence than I can get out of LR - and no foliage smearing.
I now carry two bodies and three lenses in a moderately small bag and cover everything from a 35mm equivalent of 15-300 with excellent glass. Keep the X-T1 you will never be sorry.

I've owned E-PL1, E-PL5, EP3, EM5, EM1, XE-1, XP1, V1 (and of course Canons and Nikons galore. I did try a few Sony cameras, but the ergonomics were dreadful.)Everything is gone, gone, gone and my kit is the X-T1, 18-55/35/56. One little Domke F5X-B and that's it.

In a word? Superb. Who needs RAW files any more? In my (tiny) mind, they're obselete. The Fuji JPGs are that good. Landscapes, portraits, action, grandkids. Perfect system. Couldn't be happier.

Are the other systems bad? No they're all excellent, but for me, Fuji wins.

I had a D700 and a stack of lenses but changed for 3 reasons:
1) Weight. The difference is incredible. Do a 16 hour wedding and the difference in your own well-being is immense.
2) I wanted a camera I would actually take out and about. Increasingly the bulk of the D700 meant it stayed at home.
3) I already had an x100 (now changed to x100s) and I knew the image quality was up to standard.

There are things I miss about the D700, mainly the fantastic flash. But having now shot a wedding with "just" the x-t1 and x100s there is no way on earth I'd go back to the heavy metal.

Lastly there's an emotional tie. My favourite camera is/was the Nikon FE-2 and for years people have been asking for a digital FE-2 or FM-2. This is it. The dimensions are near identical, the handling is very similar (with aperture on the lens, not on a dial etc) and I just love my x-t1 because I feel connected to it.

Having said all that, I don't shoot landscapes much. If I did I'd choose another camera.

There are things I can do with my D800e that I cannot (easily) do with the X-T1: shoot tethered, make extremely large prints, shoot certain types of sports or interior architecture, for example.

For everything else I prefer using the X-T1. The 56mm lens is amazing, the AF is more accurate than the Nikon one; and for some reasons that I cannot really put my finger on, I prefer the look of the files. I process the RAWs with LR and/or C1, and I would claim that the conversion does not hold the images back in any major way (but I shoot people, not trees). My clients seem to agree.

As for EVF vs OVF, I'll take the EVF of the X-T1 over the Nikon OVFs any day.

I will not comment on the XT-1 directly since I don't have one.

But I have a X-Pro1 and I can confirm that the problems of ACR with X-trans files is real, something that made me wander if selling the Canon 5DmkII to get this Fuji was a good idea.

But then I tried Photoninja and the difference was amazing, bought the program in the same day. This RAW software can extract an impressive detail of the X-trans files. It has a fast and simple interface, perfect for what I want from it: to export my images to 16bit TIF, usually without any processing, just the default sharpening (wich by the way looks natural, not the usual harsh and halo-prone sharpen tool) and then continue my usual workflow with Lightroom/Photoshop.

I don't know if you noticed any problem with the RAW conversion Mike (maybe not since I know you're not a pixel-peeper) but this can be one more factor to consider regarding wich camera to keep. The Olympus has a more traditional workflow, with the Fuji you may have to add an extra step but the results are very rewarding.

I was deep in a non-creative funk with photography and finally realised the issue while packing for a vacation... I just didn't want to take my big bulky DSLR with me anymore. It was too intrusive and a pain to carry with a few lenses on longer days. I was always looking for something else to shoot with (which led to a nice diversion through some wonderful film gear, though). And along came the hype for the X-T1...

I did my research into the camera and the Fuji system and was sold. I picked up my X-T1 and 23mm on the day it was released and it's been a joy ever since. I have since relieved myself of all of my DSLR gear, which offset the cost of switching quite nicely, and am not looking back. My output and the quality of that output have increased dramatically in the intervening three-four months. We'll have to see if this is just a honeymoon period, but it honestly feels very strange to leave the house without the X-T1 these days. Something that I haven't said about a camera... maybe ever.

I've since added the 35mm and 56mm Fuji lenses and I would be hard-pressed to sell any of them. This range of 35-85mm-e is such a good home for me. They each have their uses and perform wonderfully, even wide open, which is such a treat. (The 56 at 1.2 is so great at isolating subjects.)

The camera itself is pretty damn close to ergonomic perfection for me. It falls so nicely to hand and feels great. The perfect amount of heft for its size. Everything I need or want to use is pretty much exactly where it should be - apart from maybe the AF-L being too "hidden" above the thumb hump and therefore getting little use from me.

What I think is a real triumph for this camera, though, is that I essentially NEVER have to use the menu or even the Q menu (which I had assumed when reading about the camera would be something I would use often). I can just fiddle with the dials and get what I need by muscle memory. Some complain about the locking of the dials, but it seems to suit me just fine.

Minor physical niggles would be the aforementioned hidden AF-L button and the flush four-way controller. I wish the four-way buttons were just a tad more raised to make it easier to feel your way around while looking in the (wonderful) viewfinder.

The camera's output has been outstanding. I am in love with these files and get that same "need to see these immediately" feeling that I used to get when getting film back from the lab - often sitting in my car outside the lab and looking through the all the negs. I've been using Lightroom so far and it's been good. I need to sit down more seriously and compare output from Photo Ninja et al. to see what everyone is raving about, but I've so far had no reason to complain about Lightroom. It's just so integral to my workflow at this point that it will take some significant differences in the RAW processing from other software to get me to use them. I've heard just as many people decry Lightroom as total crap for X-Trans as I have those that say they see no difference at all.

And while certainly not unique to the X-T1, the simple ability to see the image in my viewfinder in sharp, clear black and white (with red filter!) has been a quiet revolution. Tones upon tones upon tones with none of that yucky colour stuff. (grin)

That was terribly long, but I have to say that I couldn't be happier with the X-T1. It's very well made, light, dependable, and also quite handsome in its own right, as a bonus.

Some recent examples from a gorgeous morning stroll along the waterfront. All shot with the 23mm.

I haven't used the X-T1, but I've been using my wife's new X-E2 quite a lot and it's got a serious limitation that it shares with the X-T1, at least for my specific camera needs: it will only take a spot meter reading from a single point in the middle of the frame. I want a camera that does what my Nikon does, which is take the spot meter reading where I've moved the focus point.

I seriously depend on spot metering. The Fuji's all allow spot metering, as do almost all serious cameras. But I don't know any of them that allow the metering point to follow the focus point as you move it around the viewfinder. And that's how I work all the time.

Here's how I shoot: I move my D800's focus point over my subject's face. Press the AF-ON button to obtain focus and to meter on the face. Shoot the picture. Continue to take frames, hitting the AF-ON as needed to update focus and metering.

With the Fuji, I can get both focus and spot metering simultaneously only in the center of the frame. But if reframe the shot with shallow DOF, I risk losing the focus. And once I've pressed the shutter release, I can't make adjustments to focus and or metering without going back to the center of the frame, getting new focus and metering, and reframing again.

I seriously can't switch away from my Nikons until someone offers a moving spot meter.

I don't have either of these two cameras being discussed, but I'm wondering about the NEX-6 that you've been loving so much, Mike. How does it compare? Is its superior user interface enough to keep you using it in preference to either of these? Or will it be consigned to your shelf of cameras waiting to be sold on E-Bay?

I am always ruled by my heart as long as my head doesn't come up with any major objections. When analysis paralysis sets in, just get the one you actually like. My life experience tells me that I am always happier that way.

Anyone who got a rescue dog would understand that. Humans are emotional creatures, though I am not sure about cat lovers.

After 20 years of boring black SLRs, the Xpro1 was the first camera I actually fell in love with. It was an Alfa Romeo in a world of Fords. Fun, stylish, quirky and full of retro features that didn't look like a cludge (Nikon, take note). The poor man's Leica, with an optical finder that actually worked and lenses that were razor sharp but relatively inexpensive.

Did I say quirky? It was an effort to get the best out of the early cameras, but very rewarding if you did. The combination of good handling and the (considerable) investment in improving my technique re-engaged me with photography again. Easy is no fun, challenges can be if the results are worth it. They were.

My head didn't object because financially and IQ wise there wasn't all that much to object about. Sure, you can pixel peep and bleat about this artefact (largely a product of early LR support which was awful) and that focus problem (fixed with firmware upgrades) and the video truly sucks (but I don't care a jot).

The fact is, the results are (with good sharpening technique) either adequate, or quite wonderful (depending on whether you are a cat person or a dog person). I have the prints to prove it. However, I almost never have to adjust colour, and the shadows are ridiculously clean for an APSC sensor.

But my head has started actively conspiring to keep me in Fuji land for a number of very pragmatic reasons which have little to do with cameras and more to do with Fuji themselves.

1. Their service and support has been unfailingly excellent, not that I have had to use them much (1 fault fixed for free outside warranty).

2. They shipped firmware updates that fixed most of the flaws in my Xpro1 and made it a far more responsive camera.

3. They built sensible lenses of exceptional quality that showed a very precise understanding of photographers real needs and desires.

4. Every iteration has shown improvement. All they need now is a new sensor, and they are working with Panasonic on a new organic sensor which should provide exceptional DR.

5. They are the only company that had the courage to do retro without creating a pastiche. The controls on the Xpro1 are close to perfect (I actually think they took a step or two backwards with the XT1).

6. They are investing heavily in an area where everyone else is scaling back. They are not trying to be #3, or #2. I think they make cameras because they are an imaging company and want to showcase their sensor and lens technology (they make Hassy MF lenses and many professional video and cinema lenses).

Fuji seem to have a target market rather than a marketing target. I like that. They would probably never have even got started if the X100 had not been such a runaway success (which surprised the hell out of them, apparently) but I'm glad they did.

In effect, I am confident that Fuji are going places. Their pace of investment in stills is increasing at a time when everyone else is grinding to a halt. It's all about video these days, or full frame. Sorry Sony fans, I don't see the point in a full frame camera with slow lenses.

My heart loves the cameras, even if I can't really justify that objectively - if you like it, you like it. I happen to like it. If you don't, buy a Ford. At least the air-con and cup-holders will work.

But my head is now saying "stick around kid, life is about to get interesting". Fuji is clearly on a mission and I am fairly confident that my eye-watering lens investment will not be in vain.

The Xpro2 will be an interesting camera, even if I have to sell the D800 to get one.

I have both the EM5 and the XT1 and I love each of them. The XT1 is better at controlling ISO where some of my documentary shots have been pretty noisy if I leave the ISO setting on auto. I'm still getting used to using the control on the XT1 but even with the dials, the EM5 allows for faster changes in settings on the fly. I love the picture quality that I'm getting from the 23, 35, 56 lenses and recently purchased the 27 for a slim, easy to carry profile. I use my EM1 as a complete system kit with several MF3 lenses and flashes where the XT1 is my about town camera and a second shooter with the EM1 when I'm doing events or other paid shoots. If the next gen XT1 has a touch screen and a few dial and button improvements (lockable dial options via button press like the EM1 and better feeling directional arrows, it will be a killer.

I went through a lot of systems, digital and film. Some time ago I settled on Mamiya 7 (for landscape), Leica M6 (for street and reportage) and a mix of RZ67 or Large Format for portraits. So, as you see, I'm kind of a film guy. If you want to check the type of output I'm into, here's my Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/przemur

Nevertheless, I always kept a digital system - mostly for some professional work that required quick results (or high iso) but also for family snapshots. About a year ago I found X-E1. It was the first digital camera that had the output that (sometimes) could match the output I get from film (it is impossible to precisely define what does it means - being more a feeling one gets - or not - when looking at the final image).

Over the next year I collected some more lenses (incl. 23 - which I find too bulky) and eventually - X-T1. The viewfinder and form factor totally sold it to me. The control layout is quite decent too (but I would still remove a couple of buttons, if I could). The only practical downsides is that extreme highlight rendition is still nothing like on a negative film (but I haven't yet seen a digital that can compete with that) and AF, while vastly improved, is still not as quick as that of e.g. D700.

It's ages ahead of any DSLR I can think of though. I'm actually surprised they still sell them so well. I personally hated their bulkiness and issues with AF calibration (which contrast-detect systems are pretty much free of).

I guess I could be happy with E-M1 too. At the time I went Fuji though, there was only E-M5 available - terribly overpriced in Poland in comparison to Fuji (and now it's the case with E-M1 as well).

I've been really impressed by these two "user impressions" threads (first on the Olympus and then the Fuji). I assumed there'd be quite a bit of "I spent a lot of money on this camera, so [needless to say] I'm going to say only good things about it," but actually most of the users have been both candid and specific about what works for them and what doesn't. It's very helpful to know even about the niggling little things that can make or break one's affinity with a camera: each reader can decide which of the "little things" are immaterial to them and which are deal-breakers.

Seems to me that one can use a dpreview.com camera review like an owners' manual, explaining the various controls and menus (with a helpful "Conclusions" summary); to get a better sense of shutter sound, handling, and size, one can go to YouTube; and to compare noise and smearing of images from any two cameras at any ISO, one can go to imaging-resource.com. But for long-term-use reports--including using just the camera in question for daily shooting over several months or more--these kinds of threads are hard to "top." Let's have more, please!

Was it Karsh or Ansel or Winogrand who said, "One should only select a camera/lens/film combination based on how it renders grass and leaves. That is all that matters." But when I decided to buck the master's advice and began to shoot photos that contained no grass or leaves whatsoever (horses for courses) with my X-trans sensor camera, I discovered that all of my photographs improved immensely. My visual awareness of everything around me just blossomed, as it were. My advice to all photographers - avoid grass and leaves at all times. They will ruin your pictures!


Not really addressing your question here.

However, I sometimes think about the X-T1, simply because I fancy the 56mm (85mme) f1.2 lens for portraits, which I seem to be doing a lot of recently, and the X-T1 would be the logical choice.

The thing is, I don't think about it seriously, as I have the X100s and I find myself in the odd and unusual position of no longer having GAS.

I'm not even sure I really want or need the TCL-X100 teleconverter, which I bought for the extra reach, as the X100s on it's own satisfies so well.

Anyway, living in Japan, I have access to many camera stores and have played around with the cameras you mention in this post and all the other similar offerings quite a lot. If I really needed an interchangeable lens camera, I'd buy the X-T1 in a heartbeat.

I may be an oddity, or an outlier, but I only really care about what's happening when I lift a camera to my eye. That's the make or break part of photography for me, not what's happening in pixel land. Assuming exposure and focus are nailed down, the rest is all composition, and that's where the X-T1 is king.

I posted on the Oly E-M1 blog that I have one and really like it (I do).

I also have a Fuji X-T1 and I really *love* it. It's hands-on, traditional dial-based interface slows me down just that little bit and forces a level of engagement with the camera that is well suited for making the images for me, rather than for "assignment". I really like that traditional way of working; it's very satisfying to move away from the ubiquitous DSLR operational mode. I find the EVF to be superb, with a much more neutral color temperature than the E-M1, but it can be overly contrasty in bright sunlight. I've found that setting the EVF brightness to +2 (which you can only adjust with the camera held to your eye), and the putting the camera in Astia shooting mode with the highlight and shadow settings to -2 creates a much more accurate view of the scene through the EVF than the default settings. I've shot everything from still life on single mode to go-kart and NASCAR Pro racing with the continuous high-speed predictive AF mode (I find using the back AF-L button to be very useful to provide "back-button AF" when tracking moving subjects), something I could not do on other mirrorless cameras.

I find the image quality from the X-T1 (and my X-Pro1) to be the best of any camera system I've ever shot with (and I've shot with quite a few), and the lenses to be as good or superior than anything I've shot with as well. The biggest surprise for me was discovering just how superb the Fuji XF lenses are.

The Fuji X-files look more natural, cleaner, crisper, with beautiful color and skin tones, and dynamic range and noise performance superior to anything in my experience, and that includes the Canon 1Dx. I shoot RAW and use Iridient Developer as a plug-in within LR, or with Capture One for portfolio images.

The X-T1 is also a delight to travel with; I'm presently in Dresden for work as I write this, and I brought my X-T1 with me along with the incredibly versatile and optically excellent 18-55 zoom (which should not be dismissed as it is truly an excellent lens) and the 14mm/2.8 wide-angle. I have all the coverage I need from shooting the beautiful architecture here to having the reach of a standard zoom with a complete photographic kit that fits in a small ThinkTank Mirrorless Mover 20. I carried this kit around with me all day exploring the city and didn't feel the weight at all. Shot images this evening at ISO3200 that look absolutely gorgeous.

Whereas the E-M1 is the camera I pick up when I have work to do, the X-T1 one is the camera I pick up when I go out to shoot for me.

at least for me, convenience/weight is only a very small part of why I like the Fuji. The main reason is the quality of the file, which I like more than what I get with my D800e, due mainly to the colors and dimensionality of the image. Of course, one has to be very clear: the resolution of the Nikon is far superior; and for jobs where large prints are required, I would not use the Fuji. Noise is not a problem for me, but then I like to add noise in post anyway.

"I was totally and completely underwhelmed by the Leica. A case of the Emporer's new clothes. Saved me 8 grand" ---- Gene, you should have moved to the develop module and drawn out of the raw 'negative' the thousand tonalities hidden in that flat-looking file... Having said that in favor of the Monochrom, I also own and love an X100S and that sensor produces some incredibly rich files to work out of!
I don't know about the XT1, it reminds me of my good old Nikon FM in size. I only wish the lenses were more compact. Smaller than SLR monsters, but still far from incospicuous! I'll stick with the X100S and the Leicas for a good while I suppose....

After ten satisfying years with Nikon gear i slowly got more and more fed up with the weight and bulkyness of my equipment. Finally, after thinking and rethinking over it again and again for quite some time, i sold my D800 and all the glass to go for an X-T1 plus the 23 and 56 primes.

So, there came good news and not so good news with this decision. I never expected the IQ to rival that of an D800 with good glass. I even wondered if APS-C would be able to satisfy my expectations in this respect, since i have been shooting "full frame" only since the happy D700 days quite a while ago. The good news is: I like the image quality of the X-T1 files! I also like the glass, indeed its better than quite a few of the nikon lenses i had. No regrets so long.

What i do not like so much is some of the cameras ergonomics. This came as a surprise, because i am heavily into that "all manual and analog controls" thing. What alienates me is more on the software side of things. Maybe it is something just to get used to, but it feels like some operations are just too cumbersome compared to what i was used from Nikon.

Take for instance the fact, that reviewing the menu screen on the back lcd is not possible when you are in EVF sensor mode. Oddly enough it is possible to watch your recorded files on the back screen in the same mode! Changing the active autofocus field is kind of quirky, too, because you have to press a button before the 4-way controller forgets about its "function keys" and goes to change autofocus fields.

However, i think the X-T1 is enough of a photographers camera for me to take the time to get over these few oddities and get used to them. The look and feel of it is great and it fits my small hands and fingers just perfectly.

I've been pondering the same questions and doing very similar comparisons. A while back I stopped doing restaurant photography on the side to attend to some family matters, and I divested of most of my camera gear, save for a Panasonic GX7 and the faithful 20mm lens.

I enjoyed that camera a lot for almost 10 months, but in the end, I sold it because I had an import GX7 that only had Japanese menus, and I don't read Japanese. I actually got along well enough, but having to refer to a cheat sheet for the time lapse function was too much.

Then began a long period of searching and dabbling. I want to get back into the resteraunt photography game and needed to build a kit back up. The natural thing was to head back to M4/3. But then I saw the X-T1 and on impulse bought one. Then I briefly tried the 18mm and 60mm lenses, both of which were lovely, though the 18 was replicated by the kit zoom and the 60 was very slow to focus. Sent those back. Picked up the 35mm and then the 56mm. And an X-Pro 1 for a steal.

I thought I would love the X-T1, and instead I liked it. I think I have been spoiled or ruined by Oly's JPEG engine however...I didn't find the X jpegs so great. Noisier than I had hoped (the DR function seemed to contribute to this) and kinda mushy. I actually started to have better luck witht the maligned raw processing of lightroom.

But I missed smaller form factor of m4/3, and while the Fuji's seem nicely built, they didn't feel as solid or as responsive to me. I loved a lot of things about the X-T1, but I just had trouble getting the results I wanted out of it, and I wasn't impressed with the AF speed.

The nits added up and I decided to get an E-M1. That camera has all the responsiveness I could need or want. And as much as I love the look of the X-T1 and respect the homage to analog controls, the E-M1's controls are just faster for me. I had to send my E-M1 back early however for repair...the sensor had a black line running across it, and it's on it's way back.

Along with the E-M1 I picked up the 17 and 25mm primes. Thought they are plastic, they actually feel a little more sturdy than the Fuji lenses. Maybe it's a size thing.

I just sold the X-T1, and returned the 56mm, which I thought I would love but didn't. I kept the X-Pro1 and 35 for now...considering keeping that as a limited second system.

I did a foolish thing and bought the 42.5. Gulp. But oh my it is wonderful. And the irony is for my current cross-country trip (I'm in Gunnison, Colorado now) I picked up a cheap m4/3 body...a Panasonic GX7, this time with english menus. And you know what, I love that little camera. Everything is good enough but the whole package just works for me.

In the end, I may keep the GX7 and X-pro1, or maybe the E-M1 will win me over when it gets back. That 42.5 is just superb. And it focuses silly fast on the GX7, which isn't the fastest of the m4/3 line.

And I like that my skies appear blue again, instead of cyan.

re: weight and size

I used a D700 for years. Favorite camera ever. I'd take the body and one or two lenses + sometimes a flash. I could get it all into a Domke 803 case.

A couple of years ago I took a two week trip to Hong Kong and Singapore. Brought the camera along ... and it just started to get to be too much. Schelping the bag and all the trip stuff was just a chore, especially in the heat.

So I looked into the m4/3 stuff. Here is what I noticed

1. An E-M5 with the (say) 12mm, 17mm and 45mm lenses weighs about as much as much as a D700 body without a battery in it.

2. If you replace the primes with the a pair of "big" 2.8 zooms, I don't think you gain too much weight. You'd have to take 6 or 7 lenses along to get near the weight of a D700 + 24-85 kit zoom.

3. The kit fits into a bag half the size of the Domke.

4. For me the image quality, even in low light, is around 80-90% as good as the D700 most of the time. You only lose out if you need continuous AF or if you are really shooting in the dark.

This is a tradeoff that I'll take.

Here's an album of stuff from Paris:


I am true amateur, and not capable of performing and/or providing technical analysis of digital files, beyond determining what looks pleasing to me. A blessing?

I owned an XT1 and just about every Fuji lens. I rented, and ultimately bought a GH4 and the 42.5 1.2. The Fuji gear is now gone.

At the RAW level, I was not overwhelmed by superior performance from the X-trans sensor. The performance of the M43 sensor in the GH4 (possibly the same sensor as the EM1)seemed comparable and very good/pleasing. Additionally, it appeared to me that the Fuji gear consistently required higher IS0 and slower shutter speeds to expose at the same level as m43 gear,using lenses of similar focal length set at the same aperture.

Initially, I was excited by the XT1's manual controls for ISO, shutter speed, and aperture. I found, in practice, aside from the fact that you can visually verify your camera settings before you turn it on, the neat, "retro" controls had little value outside of the aesthetic.

I also own an A7. I was interested in also having a crop frame camera.......But only one.

With both cameras before me (the GH4 and the XT1) I finally concluded: all of the pull toward the Fuji was based on emotion....Kind of like the thing that might make me choose a Harley over a Honda Goldwing.

I hope my comments do not seem too disparaging of the Fuji system. Any deep technical superiority of the Fuji images might be completely unrecognized by a guy like me. I am not, nor do I aspire to be, big on PP. I like to take photos, look at them, and then take more.

I've already remarked elsewhere that I very much like Fuji's X system and, in particular, my X-T1. It may be the best all-around hobbyist/enthusiast camera system out there today. Personal nits:

a. I don't care for the ISO dial. That's one setting I'd much rather have on an electronic dial, such as the way ISO adjustments are implemented on the Sony A7, et.al.

b. The 4-way buttons are also a bit too flush and hard to fiddle blindly.

But those are just my personal nits.

Mike, you're already invested in the M43 system, yes? And you've already expressed your affinity for that E-M1. So if you really cannot afford to keep both systems sell the X-T1. It's that simple. For your purposes as an occasional photographer the cameras are equivalents. The steam of opinions aside, you're more likely to score a better pictures from the camera that melts into your hand, which your comments suggest as the E-M1, yes? So don't be seduced into prematurely abandoning your investment. Just push away from the computer this summer and work a photo project with that E-M1!

Love the X-T1. It was an evolution, albeit a short one.

I've been a Nikon guy for, well, almost ever. Purchased an original X100 when it came it. Not sure why. Just loved the concept and ease of use, form factor, portability vs. lugging around even the most minimal Nikon setup. I wanted to try it. Found myself shooting a 3-week trip through Canada and the Pacific Northwest with it. Absolutely loved the results I could achieve. Same with the X-Pro1. Loved it - thanks to the Fuji lenses that started to roll out. Shot a trip through France with just the X-Pro1 & a couple of the Fuji lenses.

I started shooting less and less with my Nikon gear.

When the X-T1 was announced, I really didn't think I would like it. From the pictures & images of it, it looked like Fuji was moving the X-factor back toward a DSLR form, look and functionality. Not being able to resist however, I ordered one. Why not, right? I already had the lineup of Fuji lenses & accessories, so it became one of the easier rationalizations I've made in quite some time.

Truly expecting to not like what Fuji had done, I was immediately happy and impressed with the functionality, form, size, useability and feel. I have to admit that thus far it's my favorite Fuji X-camera. I also upgraded to an X100S and love it as well. The X-T1 & the X100S have replaced 95% of all my shooting (these days mostly people, landscape & some fine art).

My 3 favorite features are:

1. Works well the Fuji lens lineup, with which I feel I can get stunning results.

2. External dials & manually controlled settings. At a glance, I can quickly see and/or change the settings that are most important me. I'm pretty expert at the Fuji X menu systems by now, but with the X-T1 (and well-implemented programmable function buttons) I rarely have to go into the menu system.

3. Size & form factor.

I've made some of my best photographs with the Fuji X gear (and now the X-T1) since the launch of the original X100. Perhaps because I think we shoot better, compose better, think better when we like the gear we're shooting with and have confidence with it.

It's simply easier to carry the Fuji gear with me almost anywhere I may go. Rarely do I have to load up the Pelican case with all the Nikon stuff.

In the end, I think the best gear is that which allows us to feel confident that we can get the shot we want - and keeps it fun along the way.

I think it’s not so much X-T1-ness but Fujifilm-X-ness that’s interesting; a particular approach to controls (no mode dial), plus an awfully nice lens line-up. I was an early adopter of the X-E1 and find the Fuji-X thing makes me happy and relaxed; can’t imagine going back to a mode dial. It’s painfully obvious that the X-T1 is the class of the line-up: EVF, auto-focus, weather-sealing. I do NOT buy into the X-trans sensor mystique; it’s a good APS-C, high-ISO competitive, no magic.

Worst thing about Fuji-X: Lens prices. Ouch!

Of probable interest to the TOP demographic: Pentax lenses work great with a cheap adapter (including in my case an ancient 400mm F5.6 Tokina), partly because the manual focus aids are so awesome.

Is it too late to weigh in? I've owned one of these (along with five lenses!) since mid-April.

New cameras and I don't have honeymoons. More like trials-by-anxiety as I come to terms with the product's quirks, peccadillos and outright annoyances. So it was with the X-T1: an apparent apotheosis of mirrorless technology when it was announced, yet still so far from design perfection. In the sense that perfection can only be imagined, never realized.

I won't list the goods and bads here; most of that has been covered above. It doesn't really matter. This is an excellent camera. Even as it resisted my desire for ease of use and instant gratification, it was forcing me to shoot pictures a certain way. A good way, it seems. Whatever doubts and dismay I was feeling were decidedly erased after returning from an extended holiday through the western states and parts of Mexico and finally checking my output on a proper display.

That old cliche, "the photographer's camera"? The X-T1 instead wants you to be the camera's photographer.

Nir Alon: I use the Olympus E-M5 with various lenses including the 14-150mm f4-5.6 that you have. I can understand why you are not so satified using that camera/lens combo in low light. Using such a slow lens is far from ideal. One of the f2.8 zooms or a fast prime would be world's better. I am afraid that if you shoot low light using the X-T1 with an f5.6 or f6.3 lens you are going to be disappointed again.

Sorry to ask a question. Is XM1 good enough to test run the "film" side of the Fujifilm system?


It is now very cheap to go into the Fujifilm system via, well, XM1 (for the film). (I just got the Dp1/2/3M, no evf and have to treat it like 4x5; I got my Nikon for other purpose.) In fact, I hold myself not to get the 2 Zeiss Lens deal as I am not sure I should keep Nex or get into Fujifilm.

May I ask if I do not care about the handling (e.g. evf, focusing speed etc.) but purely treat it just like a test run of the film. Is XM1 good enough to see what Fujifilm is offering. I think XM1 is the first generation chip and miss some film emulation. Is that important?

BTW, I do not get into fujifilm so far as it is too big and heavy to my liking. May be strange but XM1 is what I am looking at as it seems to be plastic and small/lightweight, on top of being very cheap now (. If I have to go into the system, x-t1 is it as it got flip screen. To be honest, I like looking down more than looking through. Still think that EVF may increase eye deterioration due to its shining a torch to your eye.

Is it too late to post an opinion?

I like the concept of the X-T1. The EVF is great. The sensor is great. Using it... I'm not too fond. I much prefer the current modeless command dial system of modern cameras, like what the E-M1 uses. Not being able to change the AF point without pressing a button is bad. Those sunken in buttons that pass off for a d-pad just make it worse. AF still not being particularly hot despite Fujifilm's claim of fast AF. It's better sure, but then you use something like the E-M1 or a GH4, and it pales next to them. So, not really in love with it.

Actually, there you have it. That's the spoiler to our X-T1 review (at least from my side).

In my view both the EM-1 and the X-T1 are exceptional cameras within exceptional systems. You could almost flip a coin, really. So which to buy was a bit of a dilemma for me, too.

In the end I went for the X-T1 and fully committed to it. The lens lineup, the build quality, the thoughtful design touches, and just the overall gestalt of the thing were what won me over. I haven't enjoyed using a camera this much since the Nikon F3HP.

I've been shooting with the X-T1 for about six weeks, and have finally settled on the 14mm/2.8 and 27mm/2.8 as my primary lenses. And though I am still getting to know the camera, using it is consistently a pleasant surprise. I view this as the beginning of a beautiful relationship.

I have wanted to buy nearly every one of the Fuji releases -- the XT-1 most of all. But just cannot get good results out of the X-Trans sensor and know I would not be able to "trust" it (to call on the theme emerging from this thread.

Reading through the posts I am amazed that others are pleased / impressed with the IQ they get. Maybe it is the PP, maybe we are just looking for different things in a photograph.

I had a XT1 reserved, but pulled out of it and went with the XE2 instead. The deal Adorama had was too good. (Free extra Fuji battery! +more)
I made the jump from M43 to Fuji for a few reasons, one was image quality and low light quality. And I personally feel the Fuji sensor delivers a better depth to the pictures. As for color, who's better? -well, that's debatable.
Fuji also seems to do that most camera companies dont, LISTEN. Sure, companies may listen, but they don't do anything. Fuji does though.
Besides, M43 can no longer use size as a crutch, just look at the header pic, and lenses aren't that much bigger than M43 lenses, but they're smaller than DSLR ones.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007