But I am thinking about it seriously; thinking of fujifilm x-pro1, [x10 or x100], olympus omd-em5, or something comparable. But still uncertain because I may end up [most probably] with another -bleh, fuck photography- period like I have regularly [see my participation here, huge gaps]. I like the idea of the tilted screen on the olympus because you can hold the camera like a hasselblad and look down on it and feel less like a serial dirtbag shooting pretty girls on the streets [which I avoid now just because of that ;p]
I have a nikon d300 so I'm not really looking for a new, big dslr and even then I'd prolly go for nikon again for obvious reasons. But I truly love old school look and feel camera's with nowadays technology. Basically a small, digital rangefinder with 2-3 lenses.
I think you could go for the X-E1 instead and save some money. The camera plus the 18-55 zoom with stabilization costs $400 less than the X-Pro1 body only. Same sensor, and almost everything else except the viewfinder.
I'm also strongly considering that, but I'm waiting to see what they do for a wide lens. I also want to see if the reports of "slow focus" are truly resolved (some say it's improved through the last firmware, but I'm still curious how it compares, for example to the NEX-7, which is another option.
I never used to like Sony, but I loves me my RX100. At ISO 125, the pictures are as good as, or better than, my D7000 as far as sharpness and detail. A good 20mp sensor, combined with a fantastic Zeiss lens, is the key. That's what has made me think more about going mirrorless: the possibility of buying more Zeiss glass.
I think it also depends on whether you want to stretch the ISO bounds. I did a side by side of the Fuji E1 and the D600 in the Imaging Resource comparometer. The Fuji looked as good at ISO 6400. But the Sony and Oly also look excellent. So I think it's a matter of glass. Fuji has some nice glass planned, but it's not available yet. Same with Sony. There's definitely more for the Oly and other Micro 4/3s, including the very good Panny 7-14 (14-28 equivalent).
That being said, I was tempted by the recent markdowns for the holidays and just bought a D600. Not sure if I still want to lug a big camera with since the little ones are getting such good results. But before downsizing, I thought I'd try the sensor upsizing for a year. Especially since I bought a 24-70 F2.8 and 70-200 F2.8 when I bought my D7000, and haven't been able to fully utilize their talents yet. Still I may end up selling all the big guns in favor of a nice sized camera.
Finally, another option...if you'd be happy in the 28-100mm range, you should consider the RX100. For $650, you're getting a fantastic camera with a $1000 lens built in (about what the Zeiss lenses go for!)
Canon 60d or one of the newer rebels have tilt screens and are fantastic cameras.
I love my rebel 550D/KISS X4... my friends got the newer 650D and as well as the tilt screen it has inbuilt wireless flash sync for studio and the new digic 5 processor and i swear the images are cleaner and quicker than my 550D... so if you want an aps-c that is awesome for HD video too (Magic Lantern software update and all) get the 650D and price is great..
I just bought the Olympus OM-D E-M5, love it.
It was a toss up between that and the X-Pro 1. In the end, it came down to size. I was tired of using my D700 for street photography, eventually that thing wears the fingers down.
I think you could go for the X-E1 instead and save some money. The camera plus the 18-55 zoom with stabilization costs $400 less than the X-Pro1 body only. Same sensor, and almost everything else except the viewfinder.
I'm also strongly considering that, but I'm waiting to see what they do for a wide lens. I also want to see if the reports of "slow focus" are truly resolved (some say it's improved through the last firmware, but I'm still curious how it compares, for example to the NEX-7, which is another option.
I never used to like Sony, but I loves me my RX100. At ISO 125, the pictures are as good as, or better than, my D7000 as far as sharpness and detail. A good 20mp sensor, combined with a fantastic Zeiss lens, is the key. That's what has made me think more about going mirrorless: the possibility of buying more Zeiss glass.
I think it also depends on whether you want to stretch the ISO bounds. I did a side by side of the Fuji E1 and the D600 in the Imaging Resource comparometer. The Fuji looked as good at ISO 6400. But the Sony and Oly also look excellent. So I think it's a matter of glass. Fuji has some nice glass planned, but it's not available yet. Same with Sony. There's definitely more for the Oly and other Micro 4/3s, including the very good Panny 7-14 (14-28 equivalent).
That being said, I was tempted by the recent markdowns for the holidays and just bought a D600. Not sure if I still want to lug a big camera with since the little ones are getting such good results. But before downsizing, I thought I'd try the sensor upsizing for a year. Especially since I bought a 24-70 F2.8 and 70-200 F2.8 when I bought my D7000, and haven't been able to fully utilize their talents yet. Still I may end up selling all the big guns in favor of a nice sized camera.
Finally, another option...if you'd be happy in the 28-100mm range, you should consider the RX100. For $650, you're getting a fantastic camera with a $1000 lens built in (about what the Zeiss lenses go for!)
Hjalmar,
Just be aware that Fuji's sensor is a proprietary non-Bayer filter array so there is no Adobe RAW support. If you shoot jpegs you'll be fine as the Fuji's have got a very good jpeg engine. If you want to shoot RAW you'll have to develop in their proprietary software that comes with the camera. No telling when this will be resolved, if ever, as I've heard Fuji is not eager to share their tech design with another party. Some X-Pro-1 and X-E1 shooters are not investing in anymore glass until they see where this goes.
Hjalmar,
Just be aware that Fuji's sensor is a proprietary non-Bayer filter array so there is no Adobe RAW support. If you shoot jpegs you'll be fine as the Fuji's have got a very good jpeg engine. If you want to shoot RAW you'll have to develop in their proprietary software that comes with the camera. No telling when this will be resolved, if ever, as I've heard Fuji is not eager to share their tech design with another party. Some X-Pro-1 and X-E1 shooters are not investing in anymore glass until they see where this goes.
Not sure what you mean here,I am shooting RAW and processing in Photoshop ??
I am now also looking at the FUJIFILM X-E1, which is basically the same camera as pro1 without the optical viewfinder. It does have a electronic viewfinder tho in the top left corner so the handling stays the same. Tough choices to be made.
I adore my X-Pro 1,only have the one lens at present(35mm).
The IQ is superb and it is a dream to use.
I'm still figuring out what I want; for even less money than the x-e1 I can also go for the x100 which seems to be a perfect camera but with a fixed 35mm lens....
I adore my X-Pro 1,only have the one lens at present(35mm).
The IQ is superb and it is a dream to use.
I'm still figuring out what I want; for even less money than the x-e1 I can also go for the x100 which seems to be a perfect camera but with a fixed 35mm lens....
In that case you should also look again at the RX100!
I looked at some recent evals of the Fujis and was pixel peeping the samples...gave me some second thoughts about the Fujis. Could have been a bad set of photos though! (If you're interested, will have to find the review and post links later...I'm going out soon.)
Fuji really discounts the 18-55mm lens if you buy it with a camera, I'm glad I bought the kit but I would love to also have the 35mm, 56mm and 10-24 someday.
