The Fujifilm X-Pro 1
Story by Andrew Fildes 20 Jan 2012
If Fujifilm is becoming known as something of a maverick manufacturer, its latest product announcement will do little to dispel the reputation. Fujifilm’s show-stealing unveiling at this year’s CES trade show in Las Vegas was the X-Pro1, the first mirrorless interchangeable-lens camera body directly aimed at the pro market.
If Fujifilm does not leap to mind as a manufacturer of professional equipment, then you’ve missed a lot of history. Fujifilm made a series of highly regarded big rangefinders for 120 rollfilm in the 1990s dubbed ‘Texas Leicas’ – some even had interchangeable lenses. They also helped build the remarkable Hasselblad X-Pan panoramic 35mm and other Hassleblad models.Then, last year Fujifilm had an unexpected success last year with the X100, a fixed (28mm) lens rangefinder with a unique hybrid finder, old-school manual controls and an APS-C sensor. A gorgeous thing and while some couldn’t cope with its quirks, many loved it for the image quality. The X-Pro1 takes the X100 to the next level.
So what is the X-Pro1 – another mirrorless compact? Oh no. It is a Leica M killer. The first autofocus rangefinder since the brilliant Contax G-series in the 1990s. Key features are a unique 16-megapixel Fujifilm APS-C sized CMOS sensor with no no anti-aliasing filter and the same style hybrid-optical electronic viewfinder as the X100. There’s also a three-inch LCD with 1.23 million dots of resolution and Live View.
Three lenses will be available for the camera initially – and none of them are zooms. An 18mm f2 pancake wide, a 35mm f1.4 standard and a 60mm f2.4 macro (or portrait) – that’s 27mm, 53mm and 90mm equivalent. It is expected Fujifilm will release a further six lenses over the next two years. In 2012 we’ll see a 14mm f2.8 wide (21mm equiv.) and an 18-72mm f4 stabilised zoom (27-108mm). In 2013 there will be a 23mm f2 (35mm), a 28mm f2.8 pancake (42mm), a stabiised 72-200mm f4 (108-300mm) and a 12-24mm wide zoom (18-36mm). Zooms on a rangefinder? Fujifilm says the hybrid viewfinder remains fully functional with both zoom and fixed focal length lenses. The Fujinon lenses are likely to be extremely good. There is a long tradition there too.
The back focus distance is a wafer-thin 17.7mm which means that just about any brand of manual lens can be fitted with an adapter – we understand that Fujifilm will offer a Leica M adapter at some point.
Leica killer? – it’s about the same size and shape as a Leica M, offers live view, autofocus, finder info and other refinements – oh, and look at that lens logo on the top. Very retro Leica! And the X-Pro1 is a quarter of the price of the M. Expect around $1700 for the body and $2,200 with the standard lens.
More lenses will follow, as will a cheaper version of this model, or so the rumours go. Local stores, such as Camera Electronics in Perth, are taking pre-orders.
The only question left is, when are they going to drop the ‘film’ from their name?
Note: Originally published in Australian Photography
Ethics, hubris, Jack Picone, Masterclass, Photographs, Photography, Photojournalist, social commentary, Street Photography, Workshop News
Drowning In Their Own Hubris?
In Ethics on January 29, 2012 at 2:33 PMI agree with much of what Greene says in this interview with PHOTO RAW but I think his vitriol about some forms of digital technology is rather extreme. Does using film, digital or even apps (clearly my personal bias is B+W film) in post production really matter? With post production and using apps, the norm is that if the image (if used within a journalism context) is manipulated to a point of altering the content/composition then this needs to be stated clearly in the credit e.g. Photo Illustration by….
Cameras are just tools, it is about a photographers vision – is it not? Whether a photographer uses a disposable camera (yes, you can still buy them) or a state of the art high-end digital camera is not the issue.
There is enough room in the world for shooting on an iPhone or on a 10×8 Polaroid camera or any other camera you can dream up. Such is the richness and diversity of photography. Genre fascists reduce the world we work in – creatively.
The ugly argument going on in most of this FB dialogue (read it if you are game) is negative and unconstructive.
Are the participants (apart from the few who have made reasonable comments ) in this FB dialogue drowning in their own hubris?
Do they have a one dimensional view of photography and themselves?
Whatever happened to the notion that photography is about the subject, social issues and story telling?
JP