First impression - A Revolution

Have used in recent days along with the 35mm lens camera, and am thrilled simply gone. I indoors or at dusk / dark Most Photos - ISO to 6400 - shot. The image quality -Rauscharmut, detail rendition, white balance, exposure, color reproduction - is fantastic. And without RAW post but directly in JPEG format from the camera.

I photographed (mostly static subjects, roads scenes) in front with Nikon APS-C cameras (D5000, D5100, D3200) and quite "good" lenses such as the Nikon 24-120 F4 or Nikon AF-S 1.4 50 / G. Such images as with the X-Trans sensor of the X-E1 are me rarely or never succeeded. Even ISO 6400 at X-E1 is useful, at Nikon (or at Sony D3200) APS-C sensor perfect for "tonne".

Of course, one has slower in X-E1 autofocus, video functionality lower than the above Nikons. Also, the display on the back is smaller and not so high resolution. The battery lasts significantly shorter. The electronic viewfinder is very good in daylight, indoors, twilight, barely delay, noise, etc. However, in night scenes a distinct noise. Reducing / increasing the flash output is unfortunately very well hidden in the menu, no direct key. Self-timer can only be set for a recording. The current choice of lenses is very low. The benefits of the RAW format is currently not really optimally implemented (since become considerably better, see Update 05.04.2013 below). Also not, or not just by Adobe. The supplied RAW converter is suboptimal, which use terms.

Decisive for me however is what "comes out the back". Fantastic pixels material. But I like to take the above-mentioned disadvantages in purchasing. The pictures are much better (and not just in the 100% view :)) as APS-C material of the Nikon / Sony sensors, especially at high ISO speeds. In the future hopefully offered, optimum RAW support, it will be a pleasure the last ounce rauszuholen to detail.

I look at the ISO comparison with full-frame sensors on dpreview.com, I notice no difference. The results are the same or better. In retrospect, I'm glad that D (ust & Oil) 600 (they had only 1 day tested) have not bought.

Positive I feel the time saved for the image post-processing and the significantly reduced amount of data compared to the D3200. The Fuji RAW -> JPEG engine makes a really good job. The Panorama function in the camera knows how to please. For a perspective quick freehand recording ideal. Better I have my panoramas not hinbekommen in PS.

I compare the "feel to the touch" between Nikon consumer class (Made in Thailand) and Fuji X-E1 (Made in Japan), so I make a much better solid at the Fuji camera, Nikon no plastic feeling. Also, the 35mm lens is very finely processed, the aperture can be adjusted very well, the zoom ring is going very dosed. The planned Fujifilm lenses range (for XF LENS Roadmap googling) makes the heart beat faster amateur rap :). Certainly missing the powerful zoom with a continuous shutter (I'm thinking of the fantastic 70-200mm F2.8 and 300mm F4), however, this would not in any case for me as an amateur photographer at Nikon affordable. Unlike Nikon products (Autofocus problems, dust / oil stains on the sensor) are known to me no defects.

Of course, the fun factor is also important. I now stand before the election time just to take some pictures, so always comes the X-E1. Discreet, unobtrusive, excellent image quality. The Nikon equipment is always at home or will soon be sold on eBay.

Conclusion: Finally new sensor technology, which is visible for me a revolution in low light represents Photography.

Update 21:11:12:

Am still fascinated by the camera. Also worth mentioning is the small pop-up flash, which is given as a guide number 7. At Close Range quite usable. The peculiarity of the little ones is the ability to flash indirectly. You can use the flash with your finger continuously directed towards the ceiling, and so avoid harsh shadows or not to flash directly into the eyes. My cat has thanked me with a test photo session :).

Meanwhile, the Fuji zoom lens is 18-55mm been added. In comparison with the 35mm FB of the AF is significantly faster. The image stabilization is very effective and allows me at 55mm and F4.0 shutter speeds of 1/15. The lens is very well made. The sun visor is indeed made of plastic but valent than Nikon lenses. The aperture ring snaps better than the 35mm FB. The zoom ring is running very smoothly, without too easy to run. The focus ring is running a little heavier than the 35mm FB, I feel as though better because meterable in manual focus. All in one it feels even better, than the 35mm FB. The resolution at the corners is very good at all focal lengths. It is a relatively expensive lens, it gives very good tactile - it rattles, shakes, crunches nothing - and optical quality. Aperture 2.8 at 18mm and 55mm in 4 is at a Zommobjektiv also exceptional and makes itself felt even in low light shots.

Small tip to pimp the X-E1 something: Original GGS Screen Protector LCD glass protector REAL GLASS for 3.0 inch display 3.0 inch universal (protects, fits snugly into) and Fujifilm HG-XE1 handle (makes the X-E1 "durable"; - )).

Buy for 11,90 To "extend" the occasionally criticized battery life to simply "* Battery for Fujifilm NP-W126 with Info Chip Bundle Star". Good and cheap, I have found no performance differences from the original. My 3 are to me when filming a meaningful support.

PS In my now verscherbelten Ebay Nikon equipment I weep no tears :)

Update 05.04.2013

Meanwhile, the X-E1 has more than 8000 times "snapped," I still feel no desire for a change of system :). Theater, music hall, circus, zoo, landscapes, architecture, street life she has mastered brilliantly. Only the casing color (black for me) seem to be sensitive. Therefore, to avoid a small tip to chafing of loop rings: Be sure to use the supplied by Fuji leather patches, otherwise inevitably emerges one way or another abrasive spot on.

Most of my photos I did not develop an external RAW converter, am still of the camera's internal engine (especially of the Fuji color matching) fascinated. Who wants from his photos have made the camera brutally sharp finish, is at low ISO speeds, the sharpness and the noise reduction +2 -2 a-camera. At the telephoto end (in older manual telephoto lenses) from 150mm helps before the film simulation Velvia (Contrast) and shadow set -1 or -2. I generally recommend JPG + RAW to photograph because of the in-camera RAW conversion engine yet in most cases, although simple, but perfectly adequate, if necessary to improve the look of the photos later.

However, in high-contrast shooting situations (eg in backlight, cloud cover, fine-tune the noise reduction, shadow enhancement, etc.), an external RAW converter is still the first choice. Adobe has done it with Lightroom 4.4 and Camera Raw 7.4 and finally to publish a good RAW support for the X-E1. A very good compromise between ease of use, performance and quickly recoverable very good results. I'm excited.

Although SILKYPIX still rausholt minimally more information from the Fuji RAW`s, ​​so it is second-rate compared to the Adobe product regarding user friendliness, performance, manageability. Capture One Pro 7 I angetestet short, with this program I get the details out best, the noise reduction I find, however suboptimal (if I did not understand it to use them optimally).

X-E1 and foreign lenses

Focusing manually work with the OLED viewfinder and foreign super lenses. Without enlargement and in 3-fold magnification, the picture is quiet, does not flicker, the image can be assessed very well and adjust the focus quickly. In the 10x magnification it can sometimes be at long focal lengths or flicker restlessly. I do not know how to assess on a DSLR sharpness as well, unless you are using the Live View and built on it a 2.5 and 3-fold display magnifier. However, one has then a rather flashy, bulky trailer (:) itself tested), and is viewed with curiosity to critical. I had my Nikon DSLR's (D5100, D3200) occasionally with the Nikon AF 50 / 1.4 D used. Since these DSLR's have no AF motor in the housing, I had to work with manual focus. Therefore, I know the difference between the manual focusing there and at the X-E1. With the X-E1, it is much more comfortable and also more efficient. I create by far not as much Committee, as the DSLR.

In contrast scenes (such as cat fur) some light on the edges silver, once they are in the focal plane. It is not a "Focus Peaking" as the NEX'en of Sony, but quite useful effect if it is to go fast. The knob for 3 or 10x magnifying glass is ergonomically very well placed. One can very well select the right thumb the magnifier, "turn" the desired magnification and trigger with your right index finger. The pressure point is very well adjusted by Fuji.

Exposure to work properly if I pretend the exposure and aperture. The results are identical to the Fuji lenses. If one adds the ISO Auto (eg to ISO6400 - which is actually still very well be used) to one is quite flexible. When moving objects nor the right fleet continuous shooting (6 frames / sec) comes into play well. I was recently able to test my manual lenses at the zoo and Ballet on Ice, am very pleased with the results.

Aperture priority, so pretend aperture and shutter speed set to automatic - also works, but not if you have put in ISO Auto. I have tested my X-E1 with the following lenses, as a reference for the imaging performance (Details, contrast) has served me the Fuji 35mm F1.4.

Nikon F Mount

Nikon Nikkor-S * C Auto 1: 1.2 f = 55mm - visually at F1.2 very bad, until F5.6 well, was sold again. Haptic but a piece of cake.

Nikon Nikkor 1.8 / 105mm - visually satisfying at F1.8 - violent chromatic aberration, until F2.8 well, was sold again. Haptic also a piece of cake.

Nikon Nikkor AIS 2.0 / 135mm - satisfying visually at F2.0 to good, at F4.0 very good. Haptic behind the 105mm F1.8 and heavy. Was sold again.

Nikon Nikkor AIS 180 mm / 2.8 ED - visually at F2.8 well, at F5.6 very good. Haptic (although not IF) very well. Do I retain in any case.

Nikon ED AF NIKKOR 180mm / f2.8 - not optically better than the manual Nikon AIS 180 ED, so very good. Haptic inferior to the purely manual 180s, however far. The focus can not be so quickly and accurately manually set. The focus ring has an easy game. Was sold again.
Nikon Nikkor 300mm f AIS / 4.5 IF-ED - visually satisfying at F4.5, from 5.6 well - I missed the fine details, tactile good (super compact lens). Definitely not as brilliant as Canon FD 300mm f / 4.0 L. was sold again.

Nikon Nikkor AF 300mm f / 4 ED IF - visually at F4.0 good (not better than the Canon FD 300mm f / 4.0 L), with manual focusing sufficiently, can not keep up with the manual lenses. No compact lens. Was sold again.

The Nikon lenses I'll buy any more without ED lenses. The picture quality is just too bad. A last attempt might be the Nikon 105mm or 135mm F2.0 DC. It is said that this would be absolutely sublime ...

The lenses I've been using the "Quenox lens adapter (adapter, adapter ring) Nikon F - 1 Fujifilm X-Pro Mount bayonet eg X-Pro1 X-Pro" tested. A little shaky on the housing, and fixed on the lens. Only conditionally recommendable. Now have a Novoflex FUX / NIK adapter with Blendenmitnehmer, very tidy, play free quality for a high price. '(Will allow the Tokina, Sigma, Nikon Super wide angle zoom lenses test without an aperture ring.
My test with Novoflex FUX / NIK adapter and the Sigma, Nikon Super wide angle zoom lenses without aperture ring has not thrilled me. The image quality was not enough to the 18mm of the Fuji Zoom 18-55mm zoom. The approximate aperture opening provision to the adapter I was also not impressed. 4 - 5 Fuji Zoom 18mm vertical shooting, followed by joining together to landscape view brings me more and save on additional lens.

Canon FD Mount

Canon FD 85mm f / 1.2 L - visually at F1.2 well, at F2.0 as good as the 35er at F1.4 - best optical performance of the tested manual lenses. Haptic also a piece of cake. Do I retain in any case.

Canon FDn 200mm f / 2.8 - visually sufficient to satisfactory at F2.8 - significant chromatic aberration (not as severe as in Nikon Nikkor 1.8 / 105mm), with 5.6 good. Haptic very well thanks IF (see below). Was sold again.

Canon 300mm f FDn / 4 - visually at F4.0 satisfactory to good, with 5.6 good. Haptic very good, is easy thanks to IF, to focus quickly and accurately. Was sold again, because it showed fierce CA's and poor sharpness when using 2x extender.

Canon FD 80-200 f / 4.0 L - visually already from F4.0 good to very good, very good tactile, remarkable macro capability (minimum focusing distance throughout to 200mm only 95cm!). In my copy unfortunately fungus formation. Looking for a good copy. Definitely a super lens.

Canon FD 300mm f / 4.0 L - visually at F4.0 good haptic very good. At my be inside the felt cover peeled off. Search also for a good copy. Significantly better optical performance than with Nikon Nikkor 300mm f AIS / 4.5 IF-ED.

Canon FD 300mm f / 2.8 L - optical, optical super corrected already at F2.8 an insanely good lens, no chromatic aberration (is still highly appreciated by Astrophotographers), haptically a dream. So far, the only objective, where a 2-fold Extender acceptable results (in KB converted to 900mm focal length of a tripod is mandatory) supplies. Superb visual and tactile quality, which unfortunately is also reflected in the weight :(. Will probably sold.
The lenses I tested with the "Orig. Leinox FD Fuji X Lens adapter for Canon FD lenses on Fuji X-Pro1 system camera, bayonet adapter with infinity setting". A recommended, good and inexpensive adapter.