![]() I couldn't agree more - the G series was a similar shot across Leica's bow which, but for the impending digital revolution at the time, would have had a greater effect on the non-reflex camera market. This would made the X-Pro 1 a real "digital G2" I'm waiting for the 14mm to find if it is at least close to the masterpiece, the Biogon 21mm. Lenses are very good, I have only 18mm and the amazing 35mm, last one is pretty close to the Zeiss lenses for the Contax G. Fuji X-Pro 1 has only passive AF so while it has the same G2 performances in day light, it is slower in dim light.Īnyway if you have a G2 solid experience you can manage it, finding the right spot to get focus fast (vertical contrasted lines). G2 had both passive (contrast) and active (IR sensors) AF systems, where the passive was weak (dim light condition) the active came out. ![]() ![]() ![]() I moved to digital just once I was able to spot a camera that, at list by the specs, could give me the same pleasure taking pictues.Īfter 3 month with my X-Pro 1 I can say that I was correct, from my point of view, it is actually the digital G2, from all the point of view you described.Ĭoncerning quirks I think there is a difference in the AF speed in dim lights. I've been shooting many years with my beloved G2. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |