The much discussed blogger and “guru” Ken Rockwell (Click here) posted a short Fuji 35mm f/1.4 X lens preview: “This is as sharp, maybe sharper than the equivalent LEICA 50mm f/1.4 ASPH, and has the same superb bokeh, focuses faster and closer and has the same near zero distortion. Not bad for $600!” The Leica lens costs just a tiny bit more…$5,000 on eBay (Click here)!!! The only thing Ken is not happy with is the sensor size. He would have preferred a Full Frame sensor on the X PRO 1 instead of the current APS-C. In his opinion this would have killed Leica instantly!
More X PRO 1 news: X PRO 1 test at Photoscala (Click here for the translation). New set of pictures by Brandon Remler (Click here). Field Session with the Fujifilm X-Pro1 at Outbackphoto (Click here).
Also the lenses are in Stock! Time to make a short in status check:
Fuji X PRO 1 body is in Stock at Amazon (Click here), Adorama (Click here), Jessops UK (Click here) and Digitalrev (Click here).
Fuji X 18mm f/2.0 in Stock at Amazon (Click here) and Digitalrev (Click here).
Fuji X 35mm f/1.4 in Stock at Amazon (Click here), Adorama (Click here), BHphoto (Click here) and Digitalrev (Click here).
Fuji X 60mm macro f/2.0 in not Stock at Amazon (3-4weeks) but is in Stock at Digitalrev (Click here).
44 Responses
Ken Rockwell trolling Leica again…
Had the X-Pro 1 been full frame, I would have forgotten about the disadvantages and placed a pre-order on it’s announcement.
Had the X-Pro 1 been full frame, it would’ve cost so much people would’ve complained about its price.
Mr. Rockwell is never very subtle. He sees no shades of grey. Either a Leica product is the best photo-thing in the world or it’s a horrible, overpriced mistake that only a rich fool would buy. Now he seems to be on the latter tack.
A $450 Contax G2 lens is pretty darn competitive with the Leica as well. It’s limited to F2.0 but just sayin….
A FF version of the XP1 would have been more of a disaster. Way more expensive for lenses that have old, noisy stepper motor tech in them, dysfunctional manual focus and extremely poor low light auto focus with only 18mm that focuses sort of decent in daylight.
I have the XP1 and its nice but those noted features just seem to cheapen the experience of the camera. With its excellent high ISO it is like building micrometer that can measure precisely but a dial that can’t read to the precision of the instrument. Really poor engineering in that regard.
I can see this site deeply associated with KR..
if Ken Rockwell say it, it must be right. Amen.
Back when I was a photography super newbie I liked Ken Rockwell and read alot of his reviews. But when you read more and more of his review you notice that he contradicts himself. In one review he might say that lens X is great while in another review it’s not that great.
“As sharp, Maybe sharper” – Hey KR, maybe back it up with some examples?
“and has the same superb bokeh” – Subjective
Focuses faster? Euh…. the Leica lens doesn’t have AF and some people can focus super quick with MF lenses.
Take whatever KR says with a grain of salt i’d say.
Admin: A “guru” is a person of great wisdom – in a specific area or in general. Mr Rockwell is neither!
Doesn’t mean he is always wrong, but some of his statements shows very little sign of wisdom.
Luminous Landscape (Michael Reichman is a guru, even he is not always right, he is a man of intelligent discussion i would say)compared the Leica on Leica and on NEX-7: Best results on the NEX-7.
He also compared Zeiss 24/1.8 for NEX and Leica 24/1.4 on NEX-7. A very slight edge to the Leica in resolution and sharpness. The Zeis showed cromatic aberations though.
The Zeiss 24/1.8 vs the Fuji 35/1.4? So far, I would say the Zeiss is slightly better (both are excellent)
Exaggerations are common in mr Rockwell’s writings and my guess is the Leica has the edge.
AND the Fuji X-pro1 may produce better than the Leica M9. According to measures I have seen elsware on internet it is a fact that the Fuji sensor performs better. It’s not the lens – it’s the camera. (-Maybe – I am not a guru 🙂 )
yes, ken’s expertise and reputation is questionable at best, but even the renounced Leica expert erwin puts expresses surprise at the fuji’s performance, here
http://www.imx.nl/photo/page152/page152.html
look under Fuji X Pro 1, or, to quote the man himself;
‘The 1.4/35mm lens is unexpectedly good and is capable of challenging the Leica Summilux-M 1.4/50mm ASPH, the reigning champion of high-speed standard lenses for precision miniature cameras.’
now that’s something to think about.
I’d like to know if there is any major engineering limitations with a FF CSC camera these days. It’s probably because those interested would want the best VF you can get, and EVF tech is only just getting there. But I’m sure fitting a suitable processor with adequate heat dissipation is another issue along with balance/handling if somebody like Sony designed it.
But imagine such a camera being built by Fuji with the same problems faced by the X-Pro 1. It would be disappointment times ten!
What is strange is that the X-Pro 1 doesn’t have both focus peaking AND inertial focus-by-wire that can be sped up even more by holding a designated button. The Ricoh GXR has both features that I consider the bare minimum for useable manual focus. There should also be distance scaling on the lens. I really don’t undertand why more CSC prime lenses aren’t like the 12mm Zuiko. This issue, along with AF, would drive me even crazier with an FF camera that’d have so much potential. I’ve handled the X-Pro 1 and I’m sure months down the line my love of the amazing IQ would be overridden by performance niggles.
There are no engineering problems that should prevent someone from making a EVIL full frame model. Leica M9 is FF already, and making a model FF camera with AF and liveview woudln’t be more difficult, probably less difficult actually with less mechanical parts.
EVIL’s strong side so far has been compactness though with the eception of X-Pro1 which are more high end and the Pentax K-01 (which don’t have any strong sides at all).
I’d expect the focus on small and light to continue for several more years until EVIL’s can compete with dSLRs in focus tracking and viewfinder usability. The exception at the moment being Sonys which kind of solves these problems with their SLT models and is expected to launch a full frame model this year.
Actually there are difficulties making a large sensor for lenses being very close to it as sensors have more problems handling light coming from steep angles.
For M4/3 starting the mirrorless revolution problems are less as the sensor is not that big.
Sony’s NEX cameras have more problems with corner sharpness because of their APS-C sensor. That’s why most of their lenses are quite long too keep the distance between lens and sensor.
Using Leica and other rangefinder wideangle lenses made for film is simply a hard test for any APS-C and larger sensor.
So far Sony NEX 5N seem the best option for use with wideangle lenses. NEX-7 not only have red corner issue but also cannot display the full sharpness in corners as Reichmanns comparision between the Sony Zeiss 24 mm and Leica 24/1.4 showed. At wider aperatures the Leica lens was worse in the corners as it was not built for that sensor like the Sony Zeiss lens. Stopped down Leica was better though.
Fuji when constructing the X-Pro 1 rightly made the choice to use an APS-C sensor as they knew the IQ of their own sensor is good enough for most use. Keeping the sensor size to APS-C avoided all the costs and troubles with a full frame sensor. Starting from scratch Fuji could build a system where all parts, body, sensor and lenses matched each other.
Sure we are many who would love be able to buy an affordable (about half price of Leica M9), modern mirrorless camera with a short mount full frame sensor so that we with adapter can use not only lenses for Leica but other digitally obsolete lenses as well.
But the only cameramakers I can see producing such a camera is Sony who could make a NEX-9 for use with mainly their DSLR-lenses (Somebody know if the 24/1.8 and 50/1.8 lenses for NEX cover full frame?) as a compact alternative to the expected A99 full frame camera and Leica who could surprise us with a modern camera taking M-lenses having no rangefinder but instead a live-view EVF with some kind of focushelp that works well.
The last alternative will of course not be cheap but could be worth it as it could be the Frankencamera mounting practically any full frame lens.
If you read this white paper about Depth of Field and Bokeh by Zeiss, you can find a hint why some modern AF lenses don’t have DOF scales anymore.
http://www.zeiss.com/c12567a8003b8b6f/embedtitelintern/cln_35_bokeh_en/$file/cln35_bokeh_en.pdf
Discussing DOF scales on lenses:
“…The intervals between the individual scale markings are of course also dependent upon the specification of the acceptable circle of confusion and the thread pitch of the focusing ring. That is why such scales are no longer useful on many modern AF lenses if they have extremely steep focusing…”
Thanks Sergio!
Pretty interesting that. Still, I hope a firmware update can increase AF to a desirable point, add focus peaking and tweak the MF so that it doesn’t take a million turns. These should be easy to add, and Fuji is quite receptive to update requests, much like Sony and Ricoh.
That would solve most qualms I have. I have said before on a forum that it’d be great if they release a sort of “heritage” lens lineup. The same as they have now, but all-metal construction and purely MF. I know there is a lot of legacy options out there, but others and myself included wouldn’t mind some fresh MF primes that have a build similar to the actual body. I mean Voigtlander seems to be doing well.
The X-pro1 is the first camera in a system that will grow and mature. I too would have preferred the by-wire manual focus à la Oly 12mm among others and focus peaking like Sony and Ricoh.
Focus peaking is a software thing that can be added. I met people from Fuji Sweden and they hinted about improved AF speed with upcoming firmware upgrade.
To me, my Pana G3 is really too small to allow good ergonomy. The Fuji X-pro is designed for good, button-based ergonomy and suits me very well (average hand-size). What I like is that I can control all I need during shooting while the VF at my eye. Very much intuitive at that level. The more complex settings you normally don’t touch at that moment.
Weight is just 25 g more than Oly EM5
AF speed reminds me about the first Oly E-P1.
It also reminds me about the Contax G1: It had slow AF and the G2 fast AF. The later being too expensive for me, I learned to handle the G1. The work around was to use C-AF when you needed fast AF. It helped a lot + drained the battery.
I more than any other would like to see Fuji improve the focus by firmware. But I wonder if it will be like the X100 as just an incremental improvement. If the underlying focus mechanize is only contrast detection, how much better can it be in low light where that system is weakest?
A comment on the manual focus of the Xpro 1. People are complaining that it takes “a million turns” to get sharp focus. Not at all. The system is designed to be used as follows. (a) hit the af-l button while in manual (this will get you close; (b) use manual focus (with or without the focus zoom) to get exact focus. I have found that the ‘focus zoom’ feature works very well. I don’t know if focus peaking would provide greater accuracy.
This is an OUTRAGE I’m telling ya!…Leica fanboy, er no i mean “aficionados” are not gonna tolerate this blatant smearing of the good name that is the Leica Summilux!!!
X Pro 1 is over priced, it accessories are over priced.
Fuji has a GN 20 flash already on sale and that is lower priced than the new GN 20 flash- only reason- retro looks.
I am waiting for the plastic, non retro version of the X Pro 1 that will match the lenses. 😉
Price will go down within a few months i hope/believe. There are speculations in media about a lower spec version as well.
I’d take the metal, very nice to use X-pro1, anytime after some price drop – but what about AF speed and some other quirks…….
If they update the FW so that there is little flicker in the EVF, it is fine by me. I really do not care much about the OVF (stupid concept with the future lens line up including zooms), the AF, video and such.
Give me a box with that sensor, decent EVF and with the minimal requirements to be a camera.
please don’t quote KR, he’s a big joke. It’ll lower this website’s reputation if you quote him again in the future, no reputable website would quote his review/comments
He can review products by just using it for a few minutes.. or sometime just reading the spec online..
Rockwell is like a magical item in a Fantasy Role Playing game. Any camera which is equipped with a Rockwell behind it, gets +15 to every attribute. Thus enabling any translucent thing you can mount onto a sensor becoming better than a 5000$ Leica and will grant you award winning JPEGS out of camera.
Leica should come out with special edition product line, called The Rockwelux. Sharper than anything he writes on his website.
The disclaimer on the site includes “2: a statement or report current without known authority for its truth” under the definition of rumor. Without known authority sounds like Rockwell to me so it is appropriate his reviews of mirrorless cameras be included. Since this is a rumor site I do not expect every source to be one I agree with or have respect for.
Maybe the admin should add a rating system like he does for his m43 site. He could have MR1-MR5 for regular rumors and MRKR to warn us when Rockwell is the source of a review.
Ken wrote about the lens and not about the X Pro 1.
But to “compare” a lens’s bokeh at F5.6 to the Leica Summilux without showing results of the Summilux in the same setup is unreliable. That, what makes the Leica Summilux 35/1.4 ASPH to one of the best lenses is it’s performance at open aperture on a fullframe sensor.
Ken Rockwell is bluffing (reason: Fuji generosity?). Up to Leica performance, Fujifilm has long way.
No doubt, Fuji X Pro1 is a very good camera, with great performance, but what is doing Ken Rockwell is not fair and is far from reality.
Who is curious can check in Flickr.com performance with Fuji lens and with Voigtlander lens. It is easy to see the difference!
Take care for 10th May: new generation of Leica will be shown!
For sure, new standard it is coming!
To be able to say that one lens “beats” another in some area both have to be compared on the same body/sensor. Otherwise the systems (glass, filters, sensor, electronics, algorithms) are compared, not lenses.
Ken Rockwell is, and always has been an arrogant, borderline offensive (ask him about “Oriental” vs “Asian”) idiot. Of course comparing two lenses on two different bodies is not exactly good science but Luminous Landscape (a site a respect more because it is run by an actual working photographer) did come to the same conclusion, stating that the Leica combo had slightly better micro-contrast and that was about it. Of course, this is comparing a 3yo camera body and a 8yo lens to something released a couple of weeks ago.
I’m taking a wait-and-see approach as I’m still pretty happy with my M9 but pretty much hate my X100 because of it’s soft lens, crappy auto-focus, even more horrible manual-focus (I can live with one or the other, not both) and lack of punch in the files. I’m going to wait until I can get my hands on a copy to try out before I decide to buy one or not.
In the meantime I’m looking at the Olympus e-m5 as my casual camera, even though I know the file quality will be below that of the X-Pro1. At least it can reliably and quickly auto-focus.
I am with everyone who says LETS SEE SOME PICS! That is, comparisons of the Fuji X Pro with a Leica 1.4 lens against the M9. But, I have been shooting cameras alll my life ~60 + years and I can tell you all right now that the X Pro 1 does not beat the M9. The M9’s sensor which is 2 years old is not quite as sharp as the Fuji sensor but it takes shots that are about equally as sharp but smoother in appearence. This is because the M9’s sensor is slightly better made. The Leica glass is the same way. Yes the Fuji lens is very close and very sharp but Leica will win with contrast and color battle by a hair, giving a more realistic looking shot, with smoother bokeh, again by a hair. But that is what you get when you par 6k for a body/sensor and 5k for a lens. For any person whom always wanted an M9 but could not afford it the X Pro is great. My heart says buy the X Pro. My head says wait 2 years for the full frame version to come out and my wallet says I definetly will never own an M9 at least for 5 or 10 years until they come down in price by about half. The Fuji is great but again, I WANT TO SEE IT WITH THE LEICA 1.4 compared against the M9 full shots and cropped…