Help out a photo jong: Fujifilm X-series any good?

[BaconskiWhiskey]

Hey guys, I'm looking to get a new camera, and I really like the look and size of the Fujifilm X-series cameras, like the XT1, X-pro1, and XE2. However, are the picture quality from the mirrorless cameras as good as pictures from a DSLR? I've never owned anything more than a simple point and shoot, and I probably use my iphone as my main camera mostly. However, given the costs of these Fujifilm cameras, am I better off getting a DSLR instead? Are there any DSLRs that are similar in size to the Fujifilm X series cameras?

[lepistoir]

4 years as a pro photog and I still don't really know, but my friend was a Nikon rep and says mirrorless still doesn't have the quality or speed of DSLR. FWIW, I ditched my well-featured D200 a year ago and went back to a D40. Plenty of megapixels and about half the weight and bulk. It's usually paired with the 18-200mm VR That said, like you, most of my photography is done with my phone (Galaxy S3).

Of course, with skill, you can do some great work with a mirrorless system:


You don't say anything at all about what kind of photography you like to do and you obviously need to start there. Saying you have only shot p&s until now and asking whether you should get mirrorless or DSLR is like saying you've only skied straight skis and asking whether you should get a race ski or a shaped ski without saying anything about what you like to ski. That's a JONG move for sure.

Good luck.

[BaconskiWhiskey]

Most pictures I have on my phone are just scenery shots of mountains and nature, those are most likely the pictures I will be taking with the new camera as well.

[mickymikey]

the fuji x series are great cameras, the xt1 would be the one i would go for or maybe the xe2. I've got a sony a7 mirrorless camera, I got it for the bigger sensor but looked seriously at the fuji xt1. mirrorless cameras have come a long way in the last few years and easily match dslrs in nearly all ways. The only real advantages dslrs still have over mirrorless cameras is autofocus, the top dslrs are a bit quicker and autofocus tracking works better but won't be long till mirrorless match them as well. some people dont like the electronic viewfinders found on mirrorless cameras but they have come a long way recently as well and I have no problem with them. Obviously the huge benefit is the size and weight difference, dslrs are massive comparatively. They all use basically the same image sensors so image quality is very comparable between the two, image quality mostly depends on the lenses you use though and fuji lenses are really highly regarded.

[Benny Profane]

I bought an XE1 last October and went to Tuscany with it. I published a thread with some pictures I took in the Padded Room, but search sucks on the phone, so I can't find it right now. Anyway, it is my first "serious"digital camera after owning just a little Canon point and shoot. I have to admit that I bought it after some research on the web because B&H was discounting it to make room for the XE2. I'm happy, but do not own a DLSR, so I can't do a personal comparison for you. Much smaller and more portable than a larger camera, especially if you get the flat 27mm fixed lens (equates to about 35mm on a full frame camera). Very good lenses, awesome sensor, very good jpeg conversion inside camera, although I shoot raw. Auto focus can be shaky in difficult conditions, but, big whoop, really. Just a small portion of your shooting.
I currently am looking at two prints on my wall that are about 20x24, and they look great, after a little post process enhancement.

So, if you want a high quality camera you can take most anywhere, you cannot go wrong with the Fuji. Here's an excellent review by a photographer / blogger who loves the thing. Watch the video.

http://strobist.blogspot.com/2013/03...ilm-x100s.html

He's talking about the X100s, which is basically the same as the XE1 and 2, but it has a leaf shutter and fixed lens. Same sensor.

[MontuckyFried]

^^Good review, Benny!

I've been thinking about these new Fuji cameras for some time now. I know people have complained about the auto-focus not being very good when compared to other brands, but from what I've seen, in the right hands it's an amazing camera! I've seen lots of outstanding photos online using them, and totally convinced that it would be more than perfect for me as opposed to a bigger SLR that I would probably not end up toting around with me as much in all likelihood. I'm a novice with pretty much no photo skills, so would definitely have to learn a lot more about photography to take advantage of one of these cameras. Don't see why it couldn't be done, though. I'm sick of my point and shoots, and supposedly good cell phone camera thinking WAY too much for me. Thus, why all the manual controls on these X-series cameras really appeals to me. Glad they seem to cater to that sort of user.

I have missed out on shooting a crapton of great pictures due to my reluctance to settle for anything less than one of these. They're pricey, but seem totally worth it. Saving my pennies now.

[Benny Profane]

Well, the quality of your final images will be so much better if you don't spend a ton of money on a camera (I classify the Fujis as "mid priced"), and spend the money you saved on Light room and Photoshop. Then, shoot RAW, and learn to make your photos after the fact.

[BaconskiWhiskey]

Thanks Benny and Mickey for your input. I think I'm leaning towards getting the XE2 mostly due to its smaller size and price. The XT1 definitely looks like the best they have at the moment, but it is about $450 more than the XE2, and I want to get at least one or two additional lenses for the XE2.

[Benny Profane]

Yeah, good choice. Maybe down the line you will get something bigger, but, for now, it's the best compromise for quality and portability. Very intuitive controls, too. Love how this camera works in my hands.

Hell, in five years they'll be selling a full frame 40 megapixel that may be even smaller.

[Supermoon]

One thing to think about with any camera system you're buying into is the glass you can get. The camera is almost the least important part to getting good images.

Mirrorless cameras don't have the range or quality at the moment that Nikon or Canon lenses have. They also don't have any of the cheap-but-nice manual lenses that you can find at garage sales, etc. It sucks to buy into a system, then having to sell it off and start from scratch if/when you grow out of it. The same can be said when you change sensor size, even if you don't change systems if your current lenses don't cover the new sensor.

If you want something for now, and you're ok gambling on the future of the systems, then go mirroless. If you think you'll want to add to your quiver of glass quickly, I would go for DSLR personally.

Size, convenience and features are all really personal decisions, but as someone with fat hands I like larger form factors. I'm also not too worried about weight. That makes DSLR better for me there as well.

Just playing devil's advocate here Any modern camera is going to be great, especially as JONG.

[jon gaper]

http://www.photographyblog.com/revie...m_x_t1_review/

[Benny Profane]

Here's my pictures of Tuscany.

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...ought+a+camera

[MarcusBrody]

One thing to think about with any camera system you're buying into is the glass you can get. The camera is almost the least important part to getting good images.

Mirrorless cameras don't have the range or quality at the moment that Nikon or Canon lenses have. They also don't have any of the cheap-but-nice manual lenses that you can find at garage sales, etc. It sucks to buy into a system, then having to sell it off and start from scratch if/when you grow out of it. The same can be said when you change sensor size, even if you don't change systems if your current lenses don't cover the new sensor.

This part isn't really true. It's technically true in that there aren't old lenses made for mirrorless, but the great part about mirrorless cameras is that you can mount basically any old manual lens ever with an inexpensive adapter. I have a micro 4/3 camera and I use an old Canon FD 55mm f1.2 on it all the time. I've used a good number of Minolta lenses as well, though now I have similar native lenses so I don't worry about it. But really, you can mount almost anything. Any Nikon (modern or old)? Sure. Find an old Soviet screwmount lens? Spend $20 more bucks and shoot with it. Manual lenses are great fun on mirrorless. Really the only lenses that don't work well are those where you can only control the aperture electronically from the camera body. Canon EF lenses are the most notable example. Everything else you can mount and focus manually.

The importance of a system's lenses is a good thing to bring up though. I don't own a Fuji, but from everything I've read, the lenses for the system are great. They aren't super cheap though, so don't expect to find $150 entry level but alright 50mm f1.8s like you will for Canon/Nikon. (though if you shoot manual, just get the Nikon lens and stick it on).