Posts: 1,067
Threads: 181
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation:
0
I saw online the photos taken at very high ISO using the new Fuji X Pro1 (or some such). I am not sure if it is better than the performance of any APS-C camera (as Fuji claims), but it surely looks a lot better than the performance of my D300. I would certainly like to play with one of these for a while and perhaps it is an alternative both in terms of size AND low light performance for me. I just want to see how I feel about the viewfinder and the controls. The lens collection is sparse but tolerable. The primes cover 24, 50 and 90 mm (35 equiv) and they are bright enough. Each lens is about 150 g (!).
Please see my photos at
http://mullerpavel.smugmug.com (fewer, better image quality, not updated lately)
or at
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pavel_photophile2008/ (all photos)
Posts: 2,123
Threads: 352
Joined: Aug 2005
Reputation:
1
Exciting time then! I'd love to hear your thoughts and findings as you engage, Pavel. (I'd have thought those 3 focal lengths would be just right).
All my stuff is here:
www.doverow.com
(Just click on the TOP RIGHT buttons to take you to my Image Galleries or Music Rooms!)
My band TRASHVILLE, in which I'm lead guitarist:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6mU6qaNx08
Posts: 3,036
Threads: 253
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation:
3
$1700 â body only. And about $600 per lens after that.
But if it's as good as it could beâ¦
matthewpiers.com • @matthewpiers | robertsonphoto.blogspot.com | @thewsreviews • thewsreviews.com
Posts: 264
Threads: 35
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation:
0
Everyone has different needs, wants and bank accounts.
For me the point of diminoshing returns is well below that for this system.