Photography Gear News

I have been DSLR free for about two months and all is well. During the past two months I’ve been to Cuba, New York (x2), and Arizona. I feel I have hit just about every type, and kind, of job I do and my little Fujis have performed flawlessly.

This should be a fun comparison.  I have the pleasure of having three of the best mirrorless cameras around in my possession right now: a newly acquired Fuji X-E1 with 35mm f/1.4, my trusty Olympus OM-D E-M5 and the Panasonic GH3, fresh into my hands for review.  Expect full reviews of the Fuji X-E1 and Panasonic GH3 in the coming weeks. Anyway, I thought it would be fun to pop the Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4 on the two Micro 4/3 cameras and do a controlled studio shot against the Fuji X-E1 with its Fujinon 35mm f/1.4.  Due to the different sized sensors, these setups result in an almost identical field of view, with the 4:3 aspect ratio of the m4/3 cameras allowing for a little wider field of view in the vertical direction. The 35mm on the X-E1 is slightly narrower than the 25mm on Micro 4/3, however (equivalent to the field of view of a 53mm lens on full frame vs the equivalent field of view of 50mm for the Leica). As a result of this minor difference in aspect ratio and field of view, the crops you’re about to see will make the Fuji look like it is rendering things slightly larger.  All images were taken on a tripod with 2 second timer, and all were taken from the same position......

 

Conclusion

Well, the X-E1 is a camera with fantastic image quality, that much is certain.  Not surprisingly, it produces cleaner images throughout the ISO range and retains great detail.  Is the Fuji the best of these three cameras then?  In pure image quality from the sensor?  Yes.  In other ways?  Not so fast….  Wait for my full review of the X-E1 for more detailed discussion, but both the GH3 and OM-D are much more responsive machines when it comes to autofocus.  Still, Fuji has a winner on their hands.  It’s also great to see Panasonic put out a body with very high image quality to match the OM-D on the stills side.

Via Thomas Menk

Final Words

I liked the X-Pro1. I like the X-E1 just a tiny bit more, mostly because of the slightly smaller size and diopter on the EVF. In shooting with the X-Pro1 I found that, over time, I relied upon the optical side of the hybrid viewfinder less and less. Lenses poke into the frame in the optical view, and getting precise framing with the optical view is not possible. Given my personal preference for getting framing dead on in camera, if possible, I flipped the switch to the EVF an awful lot on my X-Pro1. With the X-E1 I'm not really missing the optical viewfinder; I don't find myself trying to flip out of the EVF view. Given that we now have a very capable zoom lens in the XF mount (the 18-55mm f/2.8-4), the reliance on an EVF goes up a little more. I do wish the EVF had a higher refresh rate, but I can live with what Fujifilm gave us, especially at the price point. Since I try not to keep cameras around that I'm not using, I can also speak to the ultimate decider: I've decided to sell my X-Pro1. I don't need two XF bodies, and I value the compactness of the X-E1 more than the hybrid viewfinder of the X-Pro1, so it's an easy decision. Aside: I'd guess that Fujifilm will update the X-Pro1 in 2013. In so doing, I also suspect that they would try to add a few features to differentiate that model from the X-E1. There aren't a lot of obvious such features, but a positionable LCD might be one. Both are good cameras, and you need to make sure that none of the small list of differences tilts you one way or the other, but in terms of performance, they're essentially equal. The great JPEG quality Fujifilm is known for is present equally in both cameras. The handling is the same, though slightly miniaturized in a couple of places on the X-E1. The raw files are the same. The build quality is in the same league with both. In short, near identical twins, with only a couple of small feature differences differentiating them. The lower price helps tilt things the X-E1's way, too. At the US$1000 body price, it's going up against the NEX-6 and NEX-7, the Olympus OM-D E-M5, and not much else. And it holds its own on the image quality side. Indeed, the X-E1 would be the best low light camera of that group. It would also be the slowest focusing camera of that group. The X-E1 has the most straightforward and understandable controls and menus of that group. The OM-D E-M5 has a wider range of lenses and accessories, but the existing Fujifilm lenses are all quite good—there's not a truly weak performer in the bunch (at least so far). Note that the X-Pro1, at US$400 more, has only the hybrid viewfinder to further stand out against those competitors. So kudos to Fujifilm. They took a fine camera, did some careful liposuction and one feature cut, and didn't harm the patient at all. If anything, they created a slightly more compelling product due to the lower price point. One last point: if you're into Leica lenses, the X-E1 is like the X-Pro1: with the Fujifilm M-mount adapter and the built-in lens corrections, these X-Trans cameras are the best crop sensor Leica M-mount option out there.

 

Via Thomas Menk

A couple of weeks ago I posted my impressions of the Zeiss 32mm Touit lens for NEX cameras, based on a copy loaned to me by Zeiss, USA. Now that we have our own copies I can be, shall we say, a bit more aggressive in examining the lens. Not to mention getting an opportunity to continue my string of aggressively bad pun titles (which Drew absolutely hates). But, hey, don’t blame me. I didn’t pick the name. I just do what has to be done. I have yet begun to pun. Anyway, given that a lens with electronic autofocus and aperture control was something new in the Zeiss consumer lineup, Aaron and I couldn’t wait to take a look inside and see how things were put together. Once we got a look inside, we found there was more Touit than we expected (don’t say I didn’t warn you). The lens is put together solidly in typical Zeiss fashion....

Via Thomas Menk

Following the recent public release of Adobe Camera Raw 7.4, we've updated our studio comparison database with new raw conversions of files from the Fujifilm X-Pro 1, X-E1 and X100S. We've been using the release candidate version of ACR 7.4 for some time, which contained significant improvements to Adobe's treatment of files from Fujifilm's X-TRANS sensors. The official public release version of ACR 7.4 brings some further (very minor) tweaks.

I am loving the new 14mm lens!!  This is a winner and with it's smooth focusing in both manual and auto-focus modes it has a great feel. I am going to try and pump a bunch of images out this weekend and show off the performance of the lens. 

Via Thomas Menk