So I bought a fuji x-e1..

mrjames

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,240
Edit My Images
Yes
...and i'm not sure I like it

I got it because DSLRs are so big, I carry 2 DSLR's and a bag full of lenses- 5d3 and 5d2, I wanted to swap my 5d2 for a 6d to save a bit of size/weight on the 2nd body, but thought I might be better to invest in fuji and make a real size/weight saving on my second camera

here's the thing, it's gorgeous, light, small- everything I ever wanted in a pocket sized camera. I got the 18mm f2, which is really light and tiny

but it doesn't fit in a pocket, not a jeans pocket, not a blazer/jacket pocket- and it's too hot to wear a coat right now although i'm even dubious of it fitting into a coat pocket without making a huge bulge

I tried an x100s and it's slightly more pocketable, if I want a camera to go everywhere and not be a hassle I would definitely trade in my x-e1 for an x100- shutter is much much quieter on the x-100, shutter is quiet on the x-e1 but I still felt self conscious taking photos in the street, maybe that's more because I don't really do street photography- when shooting on assignment I usually have to ask for permission to photograph anyway, so don't usually take photos of people unaware

but I realize now i'm not really looking for a camera to take everywhere. I take enough photos for assignments that I don't want to be in 'photo mode' while walking to the shops, I have no interest in shooting street photos- I would like to, but the reality is I probably won't, although you never know...
but if it's not going to fit in a pocket, then it's on my shoulder, or in a bag, and then may as well have my dslr...


I got the camera with the intention to use on assignments- I always take on jobs my 5d3 with 24-70 and 70-200 zooms, and 5d2 with 16-35, and 35 1.4 which I love to use for environmental portraits with really shallow depth of field, my ultimate idea for the new camera was to:

1) replace the 5d2 as my second body on some assignments, maybe even be my primary camera on less demanding assignments, or for just getting a different feel

2) perhaps replace the 16-35 2.8 by using the 10-24 on the fuji

3) or replace the 35mm by using a wide fast prime on the fuji, meaning i'd have to change lenses less often on the DSLR and just keep zooms on the DSLR's, and use primes on the fuji

4) use a wide angle on the fuji for wide angle coverage even if using 2 longer lenses on the DSLR- like say 70-200 and 85mm so if I need to grab a quick wide shot I can do it with the fuji, also means when shooting with just one dslr I could take the 5d3 with 24-70, and then the fuji with the 10-24 and a fast prime, wouldn't need to bring 16-35 with me

5) so I could have a DSLR on each shoulder and the fuji round my neck, leave the zooms on the cameras and use the prime for 'discrete' shots, shooting with 3 cameras!

6) I love silent shutter on my 5d3, so I was going to upgrade my 5d2 to a 6d to get another camera with silent shutter but thought the x-e1 might be even more discrete


After having shot a job with it the other day I think it's too quirky to use professionally, obviously I need to spend more time with it but it's pretty slow overall, shutter lag is quite noticeable, and especially slow to change focus (you have to first press a button, then scroll through endless focus points, on the 5d3 I have it limited to 15 points, and you just select the one you want by nudging the joystick a few clicks). Could use focus/recompose, like I do with the 5d2...

the 18mm f2 is no replacement for the 35mm, I saw no 'magic' in the fuji shots- they were nice, but they lacked that full frame look, the wide and shallow look you get with the 35mm at f2 (I rarely shoot wider than f2 although I can go to 1.4 if needed)

I shot the 23mm 1.4 and it's a much better lens than the 18mm, shot side by side against the 5d3/35mm I think they were comparable with the canon at f2. but it's so big that then the size difference between the 2 cameras is much reduced, also it's a very very expensive lens

the 18mm f2 gives shots that are equivalent to 28mm f3.2 on full frame, so 'worse' than shooting a 2.8 zoom (although much more portable). The 23 1.4 has an equivalent of 35 f2.2- similar to the 35mm and it has the 'magic' but I lose the ability to open up further and get 'more magic'

check the screen shots below for some samples: the 23 was way more contrasty than the 18mm and the 30mm


i'm not sure whether to 1) keep the x-e1 as a small travel camera, 2) sell the 18mm lens and get the 23mm, having something I can use professionally but maybe making it too big for travel (although if it can't fit in a pocket, the extra couple of inches doesn't take up much room in a bag- but then if I have my bag may as well have my DSLR...)


I thought about getting a speed booster to let me use canon lenses on the fuji system- but no aperture ring on my lenses so would have to shoot everything wide open :(

I read the sony nex adapter can communicate electronically with canon lenses- giving you full electronic aperture control from the camera- meaning I can use my canon prime lenses as if they were native mount! Very tempted by the idea of using my 35mm on the nex

or I could keep the fuji and use a speed booster with a manual focus/manual aperture lens- but then would lose AF, which might not be so bad, as I didn't really get on well with the AF system... and although manual focus lenses are cheap it would mean i'd have to buy new lenses, although a set of primes + the adapter would still be cheaper than the fuji 23mm



on another note I'm predominantly a stills guy, but got asked to do a video shoot and finding myself doing more video work now- the sony is leagues better in video mode, haven't compared the 5d3 against the fuji but the lack of manual control on the fuji is infuriating, totally unusable even as a B roll camera




I would push the boat out and get a RX1 if it had a viewfinder, but alas it does not- i'm tempted by the a7 too, but it seems to only be slightly smaller than the 6d- I think there is no solution to this problem and i'll just have to use DSLR's for my work, and keep the fuji as a fun camera or sell it
 
Interesting review. I'm a complete amateur with photography and have an X-E1 and a Nikon D90 with 17-55G lens. Bought the X-E1 to possibly replace the D90 but I don't think it will at the moment. Main issue for me is the AF being slow for taking pics of the kids!

Keen to find an CSC that does the business for me though as the weight saving is nice, particularly now with 2 young kids/babies!

I agree with the video, pretty useless!

Saying all that, I enjoy using the X-E1 a lot and if it had top notch focus speed I'd love it.
 
If you want a small setup with pancake lenses you should be looking at M43 not APSC CSC.
 
Last edited:
Interesting review. I'm a complete amateur with photography and have an X-E1 and a Nikon D90 with 17-55G lens. Bought the X-E1 to possibly replace the D90 but I don't think it will at the moment. Main issue for me is the AF being slow for taking pics of the kids!

Keen to find an CSC that does the business for me though as the weight saving is nice, particularly now with 2 young kids/babies!

I agree with the video, pretty useless!

Saying all that, I enjoy using the X-E1 a lot and if it had top notch focus speed I'd love it.

i've been using it some more, I think I wasn't liking it because I was expecting it to have something and it didn't have it- hence I felt cheated somehow, but if I consider what it does have then I can see it's merits and exploit them

i'm convinced EVFs are the future, in the dark, when the optical finder is pitch black, the EVF (although laggy) gives a clear composition- I have to engage live view on the SLR for the same experience, and I found that focus was more accurate and quicker on the x-e1 compared to the 5dmk3! at least with slower moving targets, with motion it struggled


I love the handling of the x-e1, I use it in Av mode with auto aperture too, with a minimum shutter speed set, and then if I want to go faster or slower I just turn the shutter speed dial from A to whatever I want the shutter speed to be and the iso adjusts to maintain good exposure- excellent! it doesn't work this well on a canon DSLR, as when you go from AV/TV to manual it reverts to the last used settings

i'm still tempted to try out the 35 1.4 as a replacement for the 50mm, i use the 50mm so infrequently(prefer the 35mm) that I never switch to it, and as I only ever shoot it at f2, the fuji shot at 1.4 will have a similar look to shooting the 50 at 2.2, so pretty similar and less intrusive for party shots- although with a 50mm i'm not usually right in someone's face so...

I realize there is no replacement for the 35mm 1.4 on full frame, no APS-C lens is going to give that same wide and shallow look, that's a full frame exclusive aesthetic

I love to shoot wide, and although I have a super lightweight and small tripod I would rather not bring it, so the optically stabilized 10-24 really interests me- but then so does the 16-35 f4 IS from cano, and the 10-24 seems large- too large for the camera to fit in a pocket as my 'third camera'


I have been very spoilt by the EVF, and the size/weight- I'm used to shooting monster 1d cameras and all of a sudden even my 5d's seem heavy and big, and I feel conscious sticking them in someone's face- i've experienced first hand the terror that an SLR induces, and the joy and curiosity that the fuji induces- for this reason alone the fuji will always stay with me for the times I need to photograph someone who doesn't like being photographed. Also i've noticed people coming up to me in the street to ask about the camera, it's a camera that inspires people


If you want a small setup with pancake lenses you should be looking at M43 not APSC CSC.


it's the depth of field though (or lack of), i'm actually tempted by m43 for a wide angle prime set-up where I want deep depth of field

I can actually imagine myself with a m43 and a wide prime, an rx1
 
...I realize there is no replacement for the 35mm 1.4 on full frame, no APS-C lens is going to give that same wide and shallow look, that's a full frame exclusive aesthetic

...it's the depth of field though (or lack of), i'm actually tempted by m43 for a wide angle prime set-up where I want deep depth of field

I read this sort of thing (first point) time after time on the net and even though I do like a shallow DoF look myself I think mostly this shows a lack of understanding and thought.

With FF mostly I find myself fighting for more DoF and when shooting at wide apertures it's often difficult to get enough of the subject in focus. What to shoot a FF portrait at f1.4? Sure you can and the bokeh will be lovely and MFT and Aps-c can't match that but you'll have one eye in the DoF and one out... or something like that... and if that's what you wanted it's great but mostly it isn't what I want and I usually find myself stopping down from f1.4 and once you do start stopping FF down the DoF can be matched by APS-C and even MFT.

Have a look at this as it says it all better than I could and in pictures too...

http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/micro-four-thirds-vs-full-frame/

http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/full-frame-v-micro-four-thirds/

If you can look at those portraits and think that you need shallower DoF and even less in the DoF then maybe FF is the minimum you need.

As for the advantage of deeper DoF with MFT, it gives advantages when shooting handheld and for me the sweet spot for handheld shooting is possibly nearer MFT and APS-C than FF with the latter being for me more towards the extreme of what's acceptable for hand held shooting.
 
I read this sort of thing (first point) time after time on the net and even though I do like a shallow DoF look myself I think mostly this shows a lack of understanding and thought.

With FF mostly I find myself fighting for more DoF and when shooting at wide apertures it's often difficult to get enough of the subject in focus. What to shoot a FF portrait at f1.4? Sure you can and the bokeh will be lovely and MFT and Aps-c can't match that but you'll have one eye in the DoF and one out... or something like that... and if that's what you wanted it's great but mostly it isn't what I want and I usually find myself stopping down from f1.4 and once you do start stopping FF down the DoF can be matched by APS-C and even MFT.

Have a look at this as it says it all better than I could and in pictures too...

http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/micro-four-thirds-vs-full-frame/

http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/full-frame-v-micro-four-thirds/

If you can look at those portraits and think that you need shallower DoF and even less in the DoF then maybe FF is the minimum you need.

As for the advantage of deeper DoF with MFT, it gives advantages when shooting handheld and for me the sweet spot for handheld shooting is possibly nearer MFT and APS-C than FF with the latter being for me more towards the extreme of what's acceptable for hand held shooting.


yeah, as I said I usually shoot the 35 1.4 at f2, and the 50mm at f2- but sometimes it's nice to have that extra stop to open up to...
I'll drop to 1.8, or 1.6- especially with the 35mm. With the fuji lens there's just nowhere to go, i'd be super interested in the SLR magic 35mm 0.95, but if it was smaller, cheaper and had Af...

I would buy an a7, if they were cheaper- I could sell my 5d2 and use an a7 as my second camera, but not sure i'm ready to ditch the workhorse SLR's yet- perhaps one day soon I will be shooting an a7...perhaps an rx1

2 weeks ago I was contemplating stepping up to medium format, now i'm thinking of going the total opposite direction ha ha


I guess the issue is that I have a look, a style that I like and possibly I get hired for it, it revolves around shallow depth of field, essentially i'd like to do the same work, and get that same look- with lighter, and smaller equipment- but unfortunately for me it's just not happening- i trialled a fuji system as a replacement, and so far it's not doing that, but it brings some benefits too so i'm definitely keeping the camera- but now i'm carrying 3 cameras to work, more weight and bulk when I actually wanted to bring less bulk!



regarding depth of field


it's easy to get shallow depth of field on any sized sensor- longish focal length and get close to the subject with a big distance to the background- but what i'm looking for is 2 things:

1) depth of field with a wide look. I like cinema, I trained as a cinematographer before becoming a professional photographer. I love love love the look of anamorphic lenses as they take a 'normal' field of view on super 35mm film (aps-c size) and provide extra width (a wider field of view but with the same depth of field), that wide and shallow look is also a full frame speciality, the 24 1.4 and 35 1.4 are great for that, nothing on aps-c or MFT can match that- I thought that it might be able to come close but it really didn't, take a look at the attached screen shot comparing the 18mm f2 and the 35mm at f2- same angle of view but the DOF difference is huge, sure I could step back and shoot the scene with the longer lens on the fuji but A) i couldn't move back any further, and B) I like the perspective of shooting close to something, it would be an entirely different shot if made with a 50mm (equivalent) lens from further back, it's not my style, it wouldn't have been as nice. If someone brought out a 23mm 0.95 i'd get it. But if I used the speed booster on the fuji, with say a 35mm f2 then i'd actually get closer to my 'look' than I would with the 23mm 1.4 fuji lens, and size/price would be comparable- although without AF. Would have liked to shot the same scene with the 23mm 1.4 to see how much 'worse' it was but I don't have that lens, and testing things in jessops isn't easy- I need to try things on real commercial jobs, shoot 100's of frames and then make conclusions.

2) depth of field at a distance- where even when you're quite far away you can still get that 'slice' of focus, leaving a huge 'bokeh frame' around the subject- typically this shot from further away with a longer lens, so the working depth of field is relatively generous, i.e. both eyes are easily in focus, but the background is way-y-y-y-y-y-y-y out of focus, shooting closer with a 1.4 lens wide open does not give this effect, the 'working depth of field' is narrow, meaning only one eye is in focus
like this (not my picture) http://neilvn.com/tangents/images/canon-200mm-f2/3NVN2767-900.jpg
shot with a 200mm f2 (serious glass I know, but it has all the qualities i'm looking for...)
I doubt they're going to make a fast telephoto lens as it just doesn't make sense on the system, so this shot is out too


i guess the issue is that I'm looking for specialist lenses- that aren't ever likely to exist on the system as they would be expensive, big and go against the idea of a small mirrorless camera




but i'm still really tempted by the 10-24 on the fuji system- I think even at f4/5.6 you'd have front to back focus at 10mm, which would mean i'd have to use a lot less flash power to cover a scene, or could handhold with IS. I'd really like to try it out on my next job, but it's an expensive lens to 'try out'

I need to experiment and figure out whether the fuji system is just my pocket-travel camera and I use only SLR's for work, or whether the fuji becomes my wide angle camera, or whether I use the camera as a prime replacement (either 35mm, 50mm, 85mm or all 3), I could easily own 2 x-e1's they are certainly cheap enough- ha ha maybe I could run with 4 cameras! 2 slr's and 2 fuji's


in short this is just me trying to figure out how my camera system fits together- I like to figure things out by using them but I can't really afford to do that with such expensive camera equipment! I'm not sure anyone can actually give me a useful reply to this
 
Last edited:
the blog made for interesting reading by the way, good find
 
Mr James, stick a Voigtlander f0.95 on a u4/3 body and I suspect you will be in your element (no pun intended).

There is always a balancing act with weight, lens choices, and performance. For example a DSLR offers heavy weight and good performance. u4/3 now offers light weight and good performance - and sensational lenses to suit most purposes. Be aware there is only 2/3 stop DOF difference from a crop sensor camera to u4/3 so I doubt you would notice the difference from your XE1 (I used to have an XE1 - it still gives me nightmares). The PL25 f1.4 Summilux is sensational on any of the Oly or Panasonic bodies, likewise the Leica Nocticron 42.5 f1.2.
 
There is always a balancing act with weight, lens choices, and performance.

The PL25 f1.4 Summilux is sensational on any of the Oly or Panasonic bodies, likewise the Leica Nocticron 42.5 f1.2.

Very true!

Ive just received the Oly 25 1.8 for my EM10, the size was very important when choosing between that or the PL and I like the way Olympus lenses render and look on the camera (imo Panasonic lenses suit Panasonics but not Olympus styling). The DOF difference is minimal and the Oly is meant to be sharper across the frame and have less CA. Tough choice though.

Id love the Nocticron but I have a FF with F1.4 primes for shallow DOF and that lens alone would pay for my EM10 and 2 most used primes.

After many switches Ive learnt one camera can't offer all I require so Ive settled on two systems.
 
Back
Top