43 replies to this topic

[flysurfer]

Since pre-production samples of the X-Pro1 keep getting better, we can finally say a bit more about its image quality.

As I have been in possession of such a camera and a lens kit for almost a week, I was happy for the opportunity so test the X-Pro1 on a professional set in Poland: the Railroad Museum in Warsaw.

However, we are still talking pre-production with several known and documented hard- and software problems that will be corrected in the final for-sale cameras and lenses.

These samples are OOC JPEGs that I uploaded on Flickr via iPhoto. Except for some cropping, angle leveling and very minor brightness adjustments, there was no JPEG post processing. The color settings remained entirely untouched.

The Railway Museum is obviously located next to some railroad tracks. So there was an opportunity to take a snapshot from the bridge with Velvia film simulation:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

35mm, ISO 800 (DR400), f16, 1/420

As you can see from the Auto-ISO values, the camera chose DR400 dynamic range expansion for this shot.

On the set, I had several opportunities to test the skin tone reproduction of the X-Pro1. IMHO, the new negative film simulations come in handy here, especially "Pro Neg. Hi".

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

60 mm, ISO 400 (DR200), f3.6, 1/1400, +0.3 EV

As you can see, there's no moiré, even though the camera lacks a low pass filter. Resolution and sharpness are pretty impressive.

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

60 mm, ISO 400 (DR200), f3.6, 1/1500, +0.7 EV

Dynamic range is quite terrific, as illustrated by the following shot that also featured critical white balance. Lighting was 5500 K outside and 3300 K inside, so I manually set the X-Pro1 to 4000 K when developing the JPEG in-camera.

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

18 mm, ISO 800 (DR400), f5.6, 1/150

Here are a few portrait shots with the 35/52 mm standard lens, slightly stopped down to f1.8:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

35 mm, ISO 800 (DR400), f1.8, 1/1000, -0.3 EV

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

35 mm, ISO 800 (DR400), f1.8, 1/1200, -0.3 EV

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

35 mm, ISO 800, (DR400), f1.8, 1/1400, -0.7 EV

Last but not least a shot with the 60 mm portrait/macro lens:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

60 mm, ISO 400 (DR200), f3.6, 1/140, -0.3 EV

[flysurfer]

Let's continue with some close-ups of railway miniatures. For these shot, I resorted back to my proven Astia film simulation:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

35 mm, ISO 200 (DR100), f1.8, 1/160, -0.7 EV

Manually forced DR100 renders saturated colors, but also shows burned-out lights. In this case, this is quite tolerable, though.

Here's the same motive shot with the 60 mm macro lens:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

60 mm, ISO 800 (DR400), f3.2, 1/140

Again the 35 mm prime:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

35 mm, ISO 800 (DR400), f3.2, 1/80, -0.3 EV

Here are a few details from this motive shot with the 60 mm lens. The first shot is stopped a bit more, but needs ISO 3200 in return:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

60 mm, ISO 3200 (DR400), f6.4, 1/40

As you can see, a barely managed to hold 1/40s w/o IS.

Here's the same train with open aperture:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

60 mm, ISO 800 (DR400), f2.4, 1/160

Let's conclude with a snapshot of the miniature railway:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

60 mm, ISO 2000 (DR200), f.2.4, 1/90

[robertj]

Really like the 60mm rendering...Zeiss-like. Impressive performance and DR.

[hunz]

Why no f1.4 shots from the 35MM? c'mon post some up!

[LincolnLogs]

Really like the 60mm rendering...Zeiss-like. Impressive performance and DR.

I really like the results from the 60mm too! Colors are amazing! I can see a lot of possibilities with bokeh with that lens!

[milosz]

The 35 and 60 look like outstanding lenses. I've been worried about the 18mm, but that one f/5.6 shot looks better than similar-aperture shots I've seen elsewhere - I hope that means it's sharper at f/2 and 2.8 than we've seen in other photos.

[hunz]

the 18mm has too much distortion of the periphery - whether this will be fixed with software in-camera or not, has yet to be seen, but from the photos i've seen from it to date - its not stellar

[TheRoadWarrior]

Congrats on the images, there are some fantastic shots there! Were you using studio flash for the early headshots of the guy ?

[disign]

Nice photos, I see that You had some good time with the camera. Share some more on handling, what impressed You, and what not?
As far as lenses go, the 35 and 60, are really top class. 35 is a true must have lens. The 18 mm definitely is a lens with soul, needs to be worked out. More like the older standard 28/2.8 lenses, rather than the heavy wide-angle "landscape" zooms. It's a small pancacke "do it all" lens, not a resolution monster like the zeiss 21/2.8.

[jknights]

Nice images FlySurfer.Love the 60mm portrait and also the detail macro. The pictures with the 35mm f1.4 also look very sharp.Need to look at them on something with a screen larger than my ipad so I can assess properly but images look good for pre-production firmware with issues.I guess they need to get everything ready for release in next month.

[flysurfer]

Congrats on the images, there are some fantastic shots there! Were you using studio flash for the early headshots of the guy ?

No, I just made sure his head exactly covered the large tungsten backlight. So I got my own sun on this not so sunny day.

[flysurfer]

Nice photos, I see that You had some good time with the camera. Share some more on handling, what impressed You, and what not?

Sure having a good time, it's always nice to have your own set with your own personal settings, fast SD card and tailored Zeiss diopter. So obviously my pics look a bit different from those of others who had to use generic equipment with generic settings (or even worse: settings changed by the guy who used it a few minutes earlier). So I feel lucky.

As for handling, it's very much like a X100. MF is much better, of course. AF is okay, too, its real-life performance depends on several factors, one being the skills of the photographer.

[whtchocla7e]

As for handling, it's very much like a X100. MF is much better, of course. AF is okay, too, its real-life performance depends on several factors, one being the skills of the photographer.

Great photos.
Tells us more about MF though. Most people are probably dying to know.

[robertj]

It's pre production, and Fujifilm may have limitations on what info can be shared.

Thanks very much for posting these images!

[LincolnLogs]

It's pre production, and Fujifilm may have limitations on what info can be shared.

Thanks very much for posting these images!

Flysurfer,

You mentioned image stabilization. What's the story on the IS(image stabilization)? Did you set to auto in your custom setting? You probably didn't need any IS with the 18 or 35mm, but with lower light and the 60mm, I imagine it was helpful.

I didn't realize that many of those images were taken at really high ISO-amazing results, considering. I looked hard for moire or digi noise, but couldn't really find any. The bokeh possible with the 60mm makes me think of some of the special Leica lenses. People will be taking portraits with the eyeball in focus and the nose looking like a fuzzball! :-) I'm still trying to figure out how the MF works for the macro on that lens? Did you find it difficult to do macro? Because of the focal length, my first choice in lenses would be the 18mm, but the 60mm is looking pretty impressive.

You are one of the few early users, did you get any impression as to when the production models will be(really) available for us mortals? I'm hoping they are geared up for real production and not letting the camera out in dribs and drabs. I think there will be plenty time to save up for this beast! :-)

[JSRockit]

the 18mm has too much distortion of the periphery - whether this will be fixed with software in-camera or not, has yet to be seen, but from the photos i've seen from it to date - its not stellar

Which 18mm lenses, priced at $600 or less on the market, don't have distortion?

[robertj]

There is one 18mm pic in this thread, and nothing in that photo is out of the ordinary with regards to distortion.

[hunz]

i can see it. take another look.

and where are shots taken @ f1.4 on the 35mm? - one doesn't buy an f1.4 lens b/c they want to use it at f1.8 or f2.0. or is it just not that good? just like the X100. the lens is great at f2.8. but at f2.0 - it ain't that great. just telling like it is.

[robertj]

To me, looks like any 28mm wide angle would look.

[hunz]

I just found some shots taken at 1.4 on the 35mm. looks like same photoshoot event as flysurfer was at..

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

the 35mm isn't too bad wide open..

and killer high ISO performance. that 6400 train shot looks like 3200 or even 1600 on the X100. so, at least a 2-stop advantage

[robertj]

There are a few more pics on flysurfer's flickr - since they are posted there for anyone to see, I hope its ok to link here, if not, let me know.

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

[wchutt]

While the performance of the 18 mm lens remains an open question, I don't see how anyone could evaluate distortion from the coach compartment photo. In that photo the lens was not square to the room. This means there are converging lines in all three axis. Every day I work I have to make minor corrections for converging lines in every photo I deliver. It is difficult to see distortion when the lens is not square to the subject in all three axis: vertical, horizontal and rotational. It is possible my visual/spatial skills are inferior to others'. Some may be able to evaluate barrel distortion in any circumstance. After all the X100 23 mm lens has a small amount of barrel distortion. It is more difficult to produce a high-quality lens as the focal length and the minimum aperture number decrease. If the 18 mm lens distortion does not have significant second order components (mustache distortion), the penalty for post-processing distortion correction should be trivial.

I am more concerned about the sharpness in the 18 mm examples. Eventually the lens will be evaluated quantitatively and we will not be forced to speculate about it's performance.

[robertj]

To be fair, none of these samples from any of the three lenses should be used for objective evaluations. There will be plenty of lens testing at the appropriate time. Personally, I find lens tests rather tedious but that's just me.

[flysurfer]

The 18mm still has issues on Fujis's "excuse list", so I don't bother to test it, as the real lens will be different with a probability of 100.00%. How different? I don't know, we'll see when the lenses are available in March. I will definitely use my pre-production lens until I get a final one, especially since I think mine ain't that bad after all, but I won't waste my time to "review" a lens that won't ever be available for sale to anyone. I'm writing a book, I have a publisher (both in Europe and in the U.S.), and I'm certainly not paid by Fuji or anybody else to post any pictures or "reviews". I'm just sharing my personal experiences in my free time, probably hurting my own book business by doing so.

I'm totally open to suggestions and questions, but I can only answer stuff I know about due to its relevance to my project. I'm definitely not dpreview, I'm just a guy who knows a lot about Fuji's X cameras, mostly from my own experience. In the end, I'm just a user like anybody else. The only difference is that my project requires me to use the X-Pro1 asap, and I'm glad that Fujifilm made that happen. Of course, there are no limits whatsoever on what I can or can't write, this has never even remotely been a topic of discussion with Fuji. After 25 years in the media business, I pretty much know what to disclose and not to disclose, anyway. Unfortunately, many of my colleagues don't, that's why we got a bunch of so-called "reviews" from places like Romania or Portugal that didn't deal with the finished product. Sometimes it wasn't even half-finished. Well, I guess they did it to create a scoop and traffic to their blogs and sites. I don't blog and I don't have a site.

In case you didn't know, those sample cameras and lenses are treated terribly by journalists and other people. As an example, I saw the 60 mm with the lens hood of the 35 or 18 mm in Poland, of course the lens collided with the hood, resulting in a mechanical error. God knows what else they do to these poor cameras on trade shows and other demonstrations. Luckily, I got my set fresh out of the box, and nobody else than me is using it. I think that's a big advantage.

[TheRoadWarrior]

The guy has put up some great sample images and all you can say is where are the f1.4 samples??!

Those shots, at the distances the photographer is from the model- if they'd been taken at 1.4 there would have been a tiny depth of field- stopping down a little gets you a bit more sharpness and a workable dof.

Thanks again for sharing those

[aquaCA]

The 18mm still has issues on Fujis's "excuse list", so I don't bother to test it, as the real lens will be different with a probability of 100.00%. How different? I don't know, we'll see when the lenses are available in March. I will definitely use my pre-production lens until I get a final one, especially since I think mine ain't that bad after all, but I won't waste my time to "review" a lens that won't ever be available for sale to anyone. I'm writing a book, I have a publisher (both in Europe and in the U.S.), and I'm certainly not paid by Fuji or anybody else to post any pictures or "reviews". I'm just sharing my personal experiences in my free time, probably hurting my own book business by doing so.

I'm totally open to suggestions and questions, but I can only answer stuff I know about due to its relevance to my project. I'm definitely not dpreview, I'm just a guy who knows a lot about Fuji's X cameras, mostly from my own experience. In the end, I'm just a user like anybody else. The only difference is that my project requires me to use the X-Pro1 asap, and I'm glad that Fujifilm made that happen. Of course, there are no limits whatsoever on what I can or can't write, this has never even remotely been a topic of discussion with Fuji. After 25 years in the media business, I pretty much know what to disclose and not to disclose, anyway. Unfortunately, many of my colleagues don't, that's why we got a bunch of so-called "reviews" from places like Romania or Portugal that didn't deal with the finished product. Sometimes it wasn't even half-finished. Well, I guess they did it to create a scoop and traffic to their blogs and sites. I don't blog and I don't have a site.

In case you didn't know, those sample cameras and lenses are treated terribly by journalists and other people. As an example, I saw the 60 mm with the lens hood of the 35 or 18 mm in Poland, of course the lens collided with the hood, resulting in a mechanical error. God knows what else they do to these poor cameras on trade shows and other demonstrations. Luckily, I got my set fresh out of the box, and nobody else than me is using it. I think that's a big advantage.

Thanks, flysurfer. Your explanation is very enlightening. I'm appalled at some of the discussions and hasted conclusions going on in dpreview: cancel/no-cancel pre-orders, images are soft, images are oversharpened, moire, orb "apparitions", shutter lag, slow AF, and what-not, considering that all we have are images made with pre-production equipment and reflections (not real reviews) of people using that same equipment sometimes for as long as 5 minutes!

[hunz]

The guy has put up some great sample images and all you can say is where are the f1.4 samples??!

Those shots, at the distances the photographer is from the model- if they'd been taken at 1.4 there would have been a tiny depth of field- stopping down a little gets you a bit more sharpness and a workable dof.

Thanks again for sharing those

It's a f1.4 lens. So people would definitely be interested in performance at its fastest aperture. Nothing out of the ordinary.

[robertj]

Some shots at f/1.4, as well as more 18mm @ f/2

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

. Lookin' good.

[flysurfer]

Here's a full-size JPEG I created from the RAW file using the enclosed Raw File Converter EX beta version:

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

35 mm, ISO 800, f1.8, 1/1000, -0.3 EV

[fearofhummingbird]

Some shots at f/1.4, as well as more 18mm @ f/2

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

. Lookin' good.

Yes. And to quote the Yodobashi site via Google-Translate "If you want to take take and uptake, to face the subject thoroughly, is the camera you want to recommend." He seems to like the XPro1 quite much!