Compared to Fujifilm X-M1 with XC 16-50mm lens excluding EVF, how much of a difference it would make in terms of the auto focus and picture quality?
1263424
I also have the X-M1. The IQ is about the same, but the 18-55 is a bit better. Focus speed is also about same between the two cameras.
1867003
It's fine if you're not too far from the subject, or using a high ASA setting. It's not very powerful.Fuji also makes a very nice Fujifilm EF42 flash which is relatively inexpensive at about $160, but of course, much larger than the ex-f8.
916482
I personally think that he'd benefit more from purchasing the nifty fifty (50mm f1.8) to cover that range, and then also buy the 100mm f2.8. Honestly there is not a huge difference in terms of image quality between the 50mm f1.8 and the f1.4. The f1.8 does have trouble focusing in dark conditions, but for the price (and for a beginner) it is a great option and it leaves your budget open to get another lens.
883522
Cant really answer this as I have not seen images from FZ70. I did read reviews and to my recall the image quality was not up to snuff. However, it all depends on how you will use it. I have been getting great quality photos for the X-S1. Here is a link to my images (mainly from X-S1) http://www.flickr.com/photos/110260652@N04/ . I did look at the FZ 200 which again has the smaller zoom, but is much higher rated for image quality.
1717527
A6000 is 24MP sensor, not 16MP, so it is 50% more. Obviously it will show the advantage in resolution. Auto focus is much faster and more reliable with more coverage area for Phase detect. Check imaging resource details review, they compare and show the differences. http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-a6000/sony-a6000A.HTM
1820413
The 50mm does produce focus noise and is constructed of plastic. But these two things are not an issue for me. Who cares if the lens is constructed of plastic. My $600 xsi is constructed of plastic! I haven't taken the 50mm of my camera since i have purchased it. It's the best $80 i've ever spent on photo gear.
606473
I would recommend a 50mm lens that is faster. Say an F1.8 or so. F 3.5 is a bit slow for low light. You can ramp up the ISO sensitivity to compensate, but you increase noise too. The trade off so to speak.
2109068
I prefer my XE-2 although I also own a Nikon D610 with 28-300 mm. The Fuji focuses faster, sharper better color.
949130
The GM1 is excellent for its size and paired with a fast tele-zoom should deliver adequate results. The auto-focus is pretty good, in good light it should do fine. If you're planning on shooting a lot of low light sports/action (and it doesn't look like you will) I'd look elsewhere.
1015987
The x10 is a great compact camera, nodoubt. For me though it boils down to this: I have a "better" camera than the Fuji X10 and the Canon S100 and it sits on a shelf due to it's size. What I need is a full manual capable camera with a good lens and decent sensor that fits in my shirt pocket. The X10, while a very nice camera, has a protruding lens rather than a fully recessed one while off. This makes is not shirt pocket friendly, but only jacket pocket friendly. I have gone that route in the past and those sit on the shelf too. To me the primary advantage of the S100 is that it is shirt pocket friendly, has a useful (though certainly not great) zoom ability, full auto to full manual and everything between, a great lens, a solid sensor and reasonably good speed and ease of use. It's just a solid camera in a compact P&S body. Many other cameras qualify as 'solid cameras', but very few can get that qualification and still qualify as shirt pocket friendly.
2109069
I am using it with my X-E1. I do not have any problems with the speed thus far for my uses (enthusiast photography, architectural and stills). I do like the quality, very sharp and great colors. I am not sure what kind of speed you are looking for and unfortunately I have not used the Canon lens you mention. If speed is desired, F2.8 is desirable, but as far as performance and price point is concerned; this is the sweet spot for me. Also, read some of the reviews on the purchase page. Very good info there as well. Good luck!
2120274
Well, "Mind Blowing" would be accurate to some. In reality, the sharpness is easily twice as good across the range, and more than that at the ends of the range than the "kit lens". The clarity or contrast is much improved over the "kit lens" too. It is much faster to focus. It is a solid unit. It has a snap focus ring that allows you to quickly switch from auto to manual focus (use the ring as a distance guide). Pull the ring back and push forward. If you have the money, this is worth it. But it will make you want a newer camera body too.
85339
The biggest difference is the new X-Trans sensor which removes the optical low pass filter (OLPF)... making pics much sharper than they were in the x10. Here's more from dpreview's review (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x20/): At first glance, the X20 looks just like its predecessor (the X10), although it's now available in a very pretty silver-and-black finish, alongside the conventional all-black. But inside it offers a couple of very significant differences. The first is a brand-new sensor, a 2/3" type 'X-Trans CMOS' design that uses the same novel color filter array as Fujifilm's recent APS-C cameras. This sensor also has phase detect autofocus built right into it - not new to Fuji cameras, but a change from the X10. The second big change is an updated 'Advanced Optical Viewfinder' that includes a detailed information overlay, showing key exposure data and focus confirmation. This isn't the same as the hybrid viewfinder found in the company's X100/X100S and X-Pro1 models - there's no electronic viewfinder - but it's never been done before on a compact camera. The X20 is available in silver/black and all-black bodies Aside from this, the X20 retains most of the same features that made the X10 so appealing. It uses the same fast zoom lens, with a 28-112mm equivalent angle of view and F2.0-2.8 maximum aperture, which is operated by a mechanically-coupled zoom ring that also retracts the lens and turns the camera on and off. It has plenty of external controls, including an exposure compensation dial and two rear dials, and a hot shoe for external flash. One feature notable by its absence is a direct movie record button - the X20 is clearly designed for still photography first, and video second.
1341751
No, it isn't. For similar money you can get the fabulous Fujifilm XS-1, or the Fujifilm HS30exr is cheaper but has a smaller sensor. Both have full auto modes, and both have large zooms so you c\n get close to the action. They also have image stabilisation built in. If you decide to take a tripod as well, whatever camera you take make sure image stabilisation is turned off whenever you use it, or if you take a shot with the camera resting on a surface, or even if you use a monopod. Remember hat, and you can stick to auto for all else.
1089792
Technically it has incredible Image Quality, so not just a good 1st, it's a keeper. It is more a question of preferences: If you like menus to control your camera, there are many others you could look at, however if you prefer dedicated dials like on film cameras for shutter speed, aperture and focus, it is Leica or Fuji X... I started with a Nikon F2, it went with me to every corner of the world. When digital came about I couldn't warm up to menus, did have a G10 that was quite good, but now with the X-E2 I am truly enjoying photography again. Keep in mind, it is not about the technology, it is about what you do with it, which also means once you find a camera you really like you can stay with it for a very long time, it should become an extension of your eyesight...
1820411
I have a question along these lines. The two big criticisms of this lens tend to be the construction and the focus noise. Many people with these criticisms seem to tend to own $800 lenses, so I don't know what these are in comparison to.How do the focus noise and construction compare to the XSi kit lens - the 18-55 IS 3.5-5.6 lens? As far as I can tell that lens is made of plastic and it isn't USM, but I wouldn't consider it slow at focus or loud or poor construction, but I can see how it could be better. Is the 50mm 1.8 lens comparable to the 18-55 IS, or is it of inferior quality? I have a question along these lines. The two big criticisms of this lens tend to be the construction and the focus noise. Many people with these criticisms seem to tend to own $800 lenses, so I don't know what these are in comparison to.How do the focus noise and construction compare to the XSi kit lens - the 18-55 IS 3.5-5.6 lens? As far as I can tell that lens is made of plastic and it isn't USM, but I wouldn't consider it slow at focus or loud or poor construction, but I can see how it could be better. Is the 50mm 1.8 lens comparable to the 18-55 IS, or is it of inferior... » Read More I have a question along these lines. The two big criticisms of this lens tend to be the construction and the focus noise. Many people with these criticisms seem to tend to own $800 lenses, so I don't know what these are in comparison to.How do the focus noise and construction compare to the XSi kit lens - the 18-55 IS 3.5-5.6 lens? As far as I can tell that lens is made of plastic and it isn't USM, but I wouldn't consider it slow at focus or loud or poor construction, but I can see how it could be better. Is the 50mm 1.8 lens comparable to the 18-55 IS, or is it of inferior quality? « Show Less
18315
I purchased the 56/1.2. What an amazing lens! I have a blast with the portraits now I am able to take. Another great prime lens would be the 23/1.4. I don't have it since I have the X100s as well. My last Fuji lens is the 55-200. Very sharp, well built lens. Took it on an air show and was able to take great, sharp photos on fast moving jets and airplanes. Can't go wrong with it.