Amateur upgrading from X-E1, T1 users please

[KirstyL]

I'm new and would be very grateful for advice. I have LOVED my x-e1, used with the 35mm 1.4 lens and absolutely no knowledge whatsoever it has produced beautiful images.

 

I am planning to upgrade and am unsure whether to go for the X-T20 or the X-T1.

 

If you are a current T1 user, are you still satisfied with your camera, is there anything you are really missing out on? I have read other threads and looked at reviews until cross-eyed. I would be glad of first hand feedback. 

[milandro]

I have owned  or used:

 

X-E1, X-M1, XE-2 

 

Currently own and use a X-T1 for over 3 years and counting.

 

I haven’t seen any reason to upgrade until now and probably will only buy a new camera if and when my X-T1 will cease to work.

 

If you buy a X-T 1 don’t buy a new one and buy one lightly used, there must be plenty out there.

 

You can print huge prints with 16Mp though most people never print anything anyway. Your 5 year old computer will not need any new software to process (I still use Aperture and NIK and LIghtroom 5 and Silkypix 2.0 ) the images and you won’t clog its memory banks with unnecessarily big files that only offer a marginal gain over the 16Mb files.

 

I don’t film, if I do, HD is more than enough for me, I don’t have any use for 4K and I don’t even own software (or a computer) that could deal with it properly, so, I don’t miss it.

 

I have taken decent pictures with it but have seen many very much worst pictures shot with X-T2 and X-Pro 2.

 

 

I know this is a spiny point of view shared by very few people who look for chops in boxes.

 

 

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[johant]

For me, the X-T1 is more than capable. In fact, today I used my X-Pro1 with the 35/1.4. To be fair, I only use that one in MF mode. But the AF of the X-T1 does everything I need. The same for 16MP; more than enough for me.

[konzy]

I have an X-T1. I'm a happy photographer! It has more features and muscles than the X-E1, some are very important to me like weather sealing and tilt screen. 

 

The X-T20 is also a great camera, one step below in the product range, but newer than the X-T1. 

 

I agree with milandro, most of the newest features of the X-T20/X-T2/X-Pro2 aren't that useful, if you don't have heavy autofocus and cropping needs. The X-T1 is still a very capable camera!

[milandro]

cropping encourages sloppiness , one of the Magnum rules of the olden days was that cropping was highly discouraged ( which is the origin of showing the black frame around the negative to show the fact that you haven’t cropped and that the image was composed in camera) but even with 12Mp you can produce images that can be printed extremely lare.

 

Again, sometimes I see people whose accomplishments in the pictures they take have take absolutely no advantage for having bought the latest camera ( and the most expensive lenses ) that they could buy.

 

It is like buying a Lamborghini to commute in heavy traffic to go to work, pointless, beside letting the world know that you have a Lambo of course.

[konzy]

Yeah, I hear that often, like "if you ave to crop, you weren't close enough" or "you're photo wasn't good enough"... This is, IMO, a statement from another time, that doesn't apply anymore today. Point a camera to someone 50 years ago, and you obtain a nice Magnum-like candid street portrait. Point a camera at someone today, and most likely you'll have a macro shot of his hand and a "Go away, you creep" thrown at you. I have the feeling that only the poorest countries of this world still have the curiosity of the camera. Most of street candids I see on the Internet are from poor countries in Asia or Africa, often children. Here in Germany, I think people would call the police if you try to take their portrait...

 

Anyway, I noticed this statement about cropping often comes from photographers who mainly do street photography in a very orthodox way. When you do macro or landscape, you can't always get closer or reframe the way you want, because the insect would be gone, or because a tree is blocking the view, or because there's a cliff. Even when you do street, sometimes you take what you see, and then you analyse your picture and wish that car wasn't here. 

 

Cropping isn't a bad thing to me, just like increasing the contrast or switching to black and white. It's just reframing the picture afterwards, because you change your mind, notice something else that wasn't worth being shown in the frame, or because the cropped scene just looks better to you. Who cares if it's cropped? The photo itself is a crop from the real world. Would it be a better photo to frame in 35mm, change your mind, put a 50mm on your camera, and take the picture?

 

That's an advantage of 24mpix cameras over 16 or 12. If you crop, you'll have enough room for printing. I personally don't print anything bigger than a paper sheet, but some people might need it.

 

I agree with what you said about better cameras. I saw a lot of people with expansive gear, producing not so great pictures. That's why I do more and more film: the cameras are certainly not the latest, so you need to move your butt and get a nice picture by yourself. Technology won't save you!

[Guest Him]

Konzy, well argued points. I sort of agree with you on the "Technology won't save you" bit - even though I now have the latest offerings from Fujifilm. I also confirm that it is possible still to take a bad image with the latest of the gear. However that's where that argument falls flat on its face! It was always possible to take a bad image with ANY camera gear.

 

Cropping is a very useful thing to have in the toolbox, I use it a lot and as the MP goes up, the ability to do severe crops also rises. However, I prefer to avoid severe cropping.

 

To my mind there is no 'better cameras', they are all excellent pieces of equipment, that can be used well or badly. It is up to us to squeese the most out of them and that is the challenge for me. I strive to take the best picture I can, in camera.

[konzy]

Yes, I believe that's why photography is an awesome hobby: the artistic possibilities are endless, and the technical aspects can also be a challenge. Some people like to shoot automatic, some don't; some people spend hours on post-production, some shoot in JPEG. Some crop, some move their butt. I guess there's no bad or good thing, but endless possibilities and, finally, the freedom to enjoy photography!

 

I can't help but wonder how the greatest photographers of the past century would react and what they'd think today, seeing how the technology evolved, what we can achieve and how popular photography has become  

[Guest Him]

I can't help but wonder how the greatest photographers of the past century would react and what they'd think today, seeing how the technology evolved, what we can achieve and how popular photography has become

 

 

I think at first sight they would say it is too easy, but I believe they would be fascinated like I am.

[DonDouglas]

I'm also looking to add a body and have been considering those two in particular. I've settled on the X-T1 and agree with above comments. Also consider the 0.77 versus 0.62 viewfinder magnification. Despite its SLR hump, the X-T20 offers no better magnification than the X-E1. (I'm keeping my X-E1 bodies, by the way, since they're handy to use and I don't care to change lenses in the field.)

[takasphoto.com]

I upgraded from X-E1 to X-T1 and honestly I'm not missing out anything of X-E1.  
 
OK, the weight of X-E1 was slightly lighter than X-T1 but that maybe about it.  
 
X-T1 focuses much faster than X-E1 - when you get X-T1 you will perhaps realize that X-E1 really was one of the first generation mirrorless cameras, hence super slow focus.  I kept updating the firmware but it didn't help too much.  X-E1's slowness was killing me.  
 
And I know it's not quite related to the topic here, but Fuji X-Series cameras all take great photos in my opinion, even the lowest ranked model like X-A1.  The lenses do matter much more, so I second milandro's opinion, that it's better to buy X-T1 used instead of new.  You can get the deal like $450 USD or so nowadays.  
 
Save yourself some money by buying used X-T1 if you haven't, and get another lens with the money you saved...  X-T1 is definitely a great camera, which used to be the flaghship model of Fuji X-Series.  I especially love the ISO dial where you can manually expose and preview your slightly overexposed/underexposed images, this is quite inspiring, I must say! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[rsn48]

I just bought a used X T1 about a month ago and three used lenses.  You can't tell from looking at the gear that anything was purchased used.  Most amateurs don't use their gear that much so don't hesitate to purchase "previously owned" items. The only thing I do that many don't is I purchase used locally so I can inspect the items (in a well peopled area like McDonald's) to ensure they indeed work. I have two full frame Canon cameras which I use for certain situations.  My Fuji camera is more my kick around tool, meaning it is used more than my other gear.

 

I bought the Original Digital Rebel (Canon) with its 6 megapixels which were enough until it came to cropping. I'm on the "lets crop" side of the argument, taking any photograph is a crop of reality, so a crop of a photography is really a  crop of a crop. My next camera was the Rebel XSi with 12 megapixels, crops held up much better with this number of pixels.  I would have died for 16 megapixels back in the day.  Don't sweat the 16 megapixels, more than adequate.  My Canon 5D 4 has 30 megapixels but also a larger sensor.

 

I've read this but don't know how accurate it is, but the author noted that for increases in megapixels to count, they needed to be doubled.  So to really make a difference from 16 megapixels, 30 - 32 megapixels would make a difference.  24 megapixels is only an increase of 50 %. As others have noted, unless you are blowing up and printing large images, you'll be well served with 16 megapixels. The X T1 doesn't have anti-aliasing which renders a sharper image than some sensors with more pixels.

 

Spend the money you saved purchasing a used camera to buy glass as well, preferably used glass. I have recently bought the 14 mm f2.8, 35 mm f2 WR  and the 50 mm f2 WR, all used, all looking brand new.  And extra "stuff" is added to used items, with one lens I also received its filter, and the Fuji grip for the X T1, another lens threw in some extra batteries.  The camera came with the protective glass added and a better strap.

[johant]

I am very satisfied with my X-T1. I cannot think of anything really that I would need really of the X-T20. Okay, Acros would be nice, but I don't like the X-T20 ergonomics. So overall I would be losing.

[rsn48]

And if you do buy an X T1, make sure the updates are.... well, up to date.  The latest update is 5.xx and you definitely want your camera to be updated to version 4 or better, not a big deal technically to do it.

[DavidPT]

I just won an ebay auction for an X-T1 as an upgrade and addition to my X-M1, and I can't wait to start shooting with it! Should have it next week. Woot!