This is a trend I can get behind: weather-resistant interchangeable-lens cameras. ILCs have slowly been crossing out items on the list of dSLR advantages, and the sealed-build- quality trend started by Olympus is a key one for advanced photographers. Fujifilm's next in line with its latest X series entry, the X-T1, a more performance-oriented, weather-sealed redesign of the X-E2 with a beautiful new EVF and built from die-cast magnesium that's cold-resistant down to 14 degrees Fahrenheit. While there are aspects of the camera I like less than others -- like controls that make me feel clumsy -- overall it's a well executed camera that's enjoyable and streamlined to shoot with most of the time.
The X-T1 delivers excellent photo quality. While the innards are similar to the X-E2, there are some differences. New, lower-noise circuitry has allowed Fujifilm to bump the maximum sensitivity to ISO 51200 up from ISO 25600. However, I really didn't see a significant improvement in the X-T1's JPEGs or raw files over the X-E2's at any sensitivity. Interestingly, although I couldn't get better results processing raw with the X-E2, I did find that there were times I could get sharper results and better exposure via the raw files. JPEGs look clean through ISO 800 and remain usable through ISO 3200, and depending upon scene content, ISO 6400. ISO 12800 and ISO 25600 shots might be good scaled down. Unfortunately, beyond ISO 6400 (or for ISO 100) the camera doesn't support raw, so, for example, I couldn't use an ISO 25600 shot which might have been printable had I been able to adjust the good-for-screen-but-not-for-print exposure.
I do find the camera's interface for the expanded high ISO range annoying. You access them via the H1 and H2 options on the ISO dial. But there are three expanded-range options -- ISO 12800, ISO 25600 and ISO 51200 -- which means you have to decide in advance which ones to assign to the slots or periodically dive into the menus to change them. On the bright side, at least the camera switches automatically between raw/raw+JPEG and JPEG when jumping between the expanded options and the "normal" zone.
|Click to download||ISO 200 ||ISO 1600 ||ISO 6400 |
Fujifilm's default color setting renders relatively accurately. You do need to expose on the dark side to get good skies or clouds clip unrecoverably and the blue can look false and flat in the JPEGs -- raws are better. There isn't an extraordinary amount of highlight data to recover in blown-out areas, and as you'd expect you lose quite a bit of shadow detail in dark shots at high ISO sensitivities, but in the main ISO sensitivity range shadow areas can be brought out with practically no noise.
Unfortunately, the video is loaded with the same artifacts that plague the other X-Trans-sensor cameras, most notably bad moire and aliasing.
Fujifilm made news when it announced the X-T1 supported high transfer-rate UHS-II SD cards to facilitate longer bursts and faster burst rates. I tested the X-T1 with two UHS-II cards (the SanDisk 64GB Extreme Pro and a 16GB Toshiba Exercia Pro) as well as my standard UHS-I 8GB SanDisk Extreme Pro and got extremely similar, although not identical, results for UHS-I vs. UHS-II. I also tweaked the methodology in a few ways to see if settings like shutter speed affected the results. (Our testing is currently constrained to shutter speeds of no more than 1/125th second because our digital timer updates in hundredths of a second, but I used a workaround.)
While both raw and JPEG bursts are effectively unlimited, the burst slows noticeably after about 28 shots, give or take a few: it runs at 7.9fps, then drops to about 1.5fps. Raw+JPEG runs at about 7.8fps then drops to about 1.4fps. It does vary, however, from about 7.7fps to 8.2fps with the UHS-II cards (and more with the UHS-I). Shooting at a faster shutter speed does seem to perform a little more consistently. And with both cards it saves pretty quickly at the end of the burst; most important, in never held up other operations. Overall, this is excellent continuous-shooting performance for its class.
However, the rest of the performance isn't quite as stellar -- it's similar overall to the X-E2 -- which leaves the X-T1 lagging the Olympus OM-D E-M1 in many respects. (Though the E-M1's burst speed is pretty good, its processing throughput isn't.) It takes the X-T1 a middling 1.5 seconds to power on and shoot, and around 0.4 to 0.5 second to focus and shoot; that seems more the slightly sluggish response of the lens rather than the autofocus system, though. Two sequential shots run about 0.8 second, which is significantly better than the X-E2.