Fuji X PRO price and release announced in Japan (+ one more ISO test!).

Finally Fuji Japan announced the price of the new Fuji X PRo 1 and X lenses (via Fujirumors). It’s in yen, we still don’t know what’s the price in Euro or Dollar for example:
1) The X PRo 1 camera will be released on February 18 and cost 150.000 Yen. By using the current conversion rate this means 1475 Euro or 1930 Dollars. But I am sure the price will be less in USA (probably $1799) and a bit more in Europe (almost 1.600 Euro).
2) The 18mm f/2.0 lens and the 35mm f/1.4 will cost 55.oo0 Yen each (540 Euro or 708 Dollars).
3) The 60mm f/2.4 macro will cost 60.000 Yen (590 Euro or 773 Dollars).

Just my two cent. It’s an expensive camera, so I am going to wait to see real tests before to decide if I buy it or not. Right now no big website posted any preview or test of the camera. Only Romanian photographers are doing that job right now! :)  Look at the latest ISO test by F64 (Click here).They compared the X PRO 1 with the Fuji X100 and Nikon D3. His conclusions in short:
1) At high ISO the X PRO 1 beats both the e X100 and D3 cameras.
2) Shutter noise is similar to that of the .
3) The 18mm lens suffers from some purple fringing (but Fuji could add an automatic lens correction once finalized the firmware).
4) manual focusing has been improved over the X100 but the reviewer is still not completely satisfied with the performance. Also auto-focus isn’t really fast.
5) What matters: Image quality is spectacular.

Fuji X PRO 1 preorders and notification services:
Preorder: Expansys USA (Click here), Expansys Canada (Click here), Henrys Canada (Click here) .
Notification:  Amazon US (Click here), BHphoto (Click here) and Adorama (Click here).

  • Bobby

    Too big, too expensive. I’ll wait for a next iteration or the OM-D if it’s good enough.

    • Eric

      I’m okay with the size, but I agree, that is simply too expensive considering the OM-D will be so much cheaper. If the prices were say, $1100 for the OM-D vs $1300 for the Fuji then I would have a tough choice to make, but at $1800 body only I’m not going to lose sleep over it, I will just go with the Olympus.

      Besides, I can’t quite understand why the X-Pro1 should cost more than the X100. They remove the lens, then charge more for it? Seems like the camera with the lens built in should be more than the one without.

      • IHUR

        It’s not just removing the lens, X-Pro1 has a quite ‘ground breaking’ new 16.3-megapixel X-trans sensor which uses a different pattern for its color filter array. And why would you compare it with a 4/3 sensor camera such as OM-D which will be priced over $1K? Will the IQ be better than APS-C sensor in NEX-5 or 7 or the X-pro 1 is yet to be seen. But I’m sceptical

      • camerageek

        Good it wasn’t meant for pathetic peasants like you! The Fuji is meant for the Photographic Elite who appreciate and know that quality is not inexpensive, not those who would settle for poor IQ and the limited DR of Micro Four Turds

        • Eric

          Why do you post this same comment on every single Fuji thread? Are you hoping that if you repeat it enough times that people will start to believe it as if we are living in an Orwellian 1984 world?

  • Vivek

    That is a nice test link.

    The price isn’t too much if there is performance. Just because the camera is small does not mean it could be a slouch. As long as it delivers…

  • Julien M.

    Is that me, or is that Fuji X pro the second best hish-iso camera behind the Nikon D3S? Impressive!

  • Hexx

    Also please read the comments on the Romanian website, D3’s NR was set to off and on Fijifilm cameras NR was set to normal.

    • Julien M.

      That’s not true. This is what the tester wrote:

      “I can assure you the D3 was set at ‘normal’.”

      • matgay

        f1.4 lens on fuji, f/8.0 reflex lens on d3

        • Esa Tuunanen

          Rigged as North Korean elections…

      • hexx

        @ Julien M – could you please read comments section on that blog before you say that something isn’t true? here’s direct link to author’s reply to one of the comments:

        comment 1: http://www.f64.ro/blog/2012/01/20/test-fuji-x-pro1/#comment-1887

        comment 2: http://www.f64.ro/blog/2012/01/20/test-fuji-x-pro1/#comment-1888

        • Julien M.

          Ok, sorry hexx, but then the guy doesn’t know what he is doing, as he writes “the D3 was set at ‘normal’” in a facebook comment on the same page you linked. Have a look.

          • hexx

            no worries, I guess it could be related to google translate, you can clearly see from images that NR was either off or very low on D3.

            All Fuji images are of course JPGs as there’s no support for X-Pro1 RAW yet in RAW conversion SW (aperture, lightroom/ACR…)

            I’m not saying though that Fuji can’t outperform D3 in high ISO, but at this stage we can’t say that.

  • 123

    but you have to admit the D3 looks bad…. and i wonder why.

    the image quality of the fuji is good.
    will be a nice street camera.

    thought nothing for me i need long tele and UWW.

    and it´s to expensiv for what it offers.

    • 123

      i mean come on… 1600 euro + the lenses.
      if i spend so much i rather put some more money in it and buy a Leica M9.

      i have not reget buying my leica.

      • hexx

        and how would you use long tele and ultra wide angle lenses on M9??? could you elaborate a bit more on this?

        • shigzeo

          Or how much more money the author intends on investing in order to purchase a Leica. I assume my LTM lenses will work fine on a Fujifilm XPro-1 with the proper adapter. Do I have the dosh to get one? No, and if there is no faux-rangefinder in the thing for focusing, it ain’t in my sites, but cool, nevertheless.

      • mat

        ‘Put some more money in’? As in put in over twice as much for the body and at least five times as much for the lenses (assuming buying new)? Strange sense of finances you have there IMHO.

    • Richard_K

      Agree. X-pro1 is much superior to D3 in every aspect. I think Xpro1 will blow away every top full frame camera too. This is the end of DSLR.

  • Sylwiusz

    You can download sample pictures at various ISO from Romanian site and check EXIF. All shots from X-Pro at the same ISO as D3 has much longer shutter time. This means that just as in case of X100 higher ISOs are somewhat cheated. In practice we must compare photos from X100 taken at AT LEAST 1EV higher ISO than equivalent D3 shots – for example iso6400 from X-Pro1 compare to iso3200 from D3. X100 measured and real ISO you can see here:
    http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Database/Fujifilm/FinePix-X100#tabs-2

  • Kylberg

    I am one of those considering this camera going from Pana G3. The later producing very good images though the DR is too limited. I also would like a slightly better built and bigger (for ergonomy) camera. The photography I do would benefit from IQ like the Canon 5D MkII (too much bulk and weight).
    Waiting for more reviews is a very good advice from admin. Admin – are you thinking of putting the ig Mayia on the shelf for the Fuji?
    The X Pro 1 is not a beginners camera. One can learn a lot from the evaluation of the x100 by Read Reviews (paysite). The analysis is booth broad and deep and gives a very good insight what is required from YOU to make the most of a camera like this. The logic of X Pro 1 (don’t like that name) is similar to X100, but further developed.

  • asd

    I think the noise reduction of Fuji’s is stronger than D3. From the D3 images, I can see more details on the leaves than from Fuji’s.

    Would love to see the tests where the NR is off. OR Raw images comparisons.

    XPro1 is a very nice camera, the current lenses are nice too. Too expensive though. A bit disappointed with fringing of the 18mm though. :(

    • Antoine

      Do you have a link to the Read Reviews paysite ?

    • camerageek

      Bingo! The Fuji X series isn’t for the “Oh look I went to Best Buy bought a GX1 and now I’m HCB” crowd who believe that the camera should do all the work (i.e. the vast majority of unclean peasant who populate such board as these), but for the true Godlike Photographic Elite who understand in a pure and nearly genetically hardwired manner how to actually take a Photograph!

      Weep oh ye Micro Four Turdists! This is not the camera for you for you are all too lazy wishing for zooms, tilt screens. and of a button on your camera that says “Pulitzer Prize” rather than actually shooting with impunity as we the Godlike Elite do!

  • Richard_K

    This is a camera that will blow away every top full frame camera in the market. Let’see.

  • Gianluca

    here in Italy , my local store told me the the camera + 35mm f1,4 will be around €1700..,I think it’s a very reasonable price.

    • Camaman

      Maybe Fuji thinks like NASA… And still live in the D3 era?
      😛

  • Jean-Michel

    I like very much this camera. I’ve big paws and can’t go with any Nex. Just the 18mm really not good. Not just CA (purple fringe), but a strong barrel distorsion. Even there’s an automatic correction, as announced by Fuji, this correction will work only on Jpeg and probably not in Raw. We must know what will be the result with M-Mount lenses and then, the choice will be much better.

    • mat

      Re: Applied only to JPG not RAW. Not the case; at least not necessarily. With the X100 in Lightroom, correction can be automatically and very handily deals with some distorition and vignetting in the corners of the that lense. Also LR 4 beta has CA correction that can be applied automatically as well.

      Plus, from the samples on the Fuji sight, the 18 seems a good bit better than in the test linked here. Perhaps they excluded situations that would really push the lens, but from those samples I’m personally not worried about that lenses performance.

      • Jean-Michel

        Ok, you’re right, just it’s pity that with the possibilities given by a short flange distance, they could make symmetrical design which avoid such distorsions. Even there is vigneting, which can be easily corrected since the high ISO performance, I prefer it than distorsions. I understand that Fuji’s priority is to give high sharpness performance on all the field, but, I can’t help to think that to correct distorsion with a software is just make square pixels rectangular in some way…. I would be curious to compare a 100% crop of an original and the distorsions corrected one, just to see the effect of such an automatic distorsion correction. Did you try it ?

        • hexx

          pixel is pixel, you can’t stretch a pixel. you can stretch a photo/image and it will result in filling the gap with more pixels.

        • mat

          “I can’t help to think that to correct distorsion with a software is just make square pixels rectangular in some way” Yeah, I go back and forth worrying about digital correction of lens issues. Shouldn’t they just design the lens to not have characteristics that need correction after the fact? But then I just look at the prints (we all know digital display sizes forgive a multitude of technical errors) and they look great so I stop worrying about whether it was all in the lens or it was all in software correction.

          All that said, have not done comparisons between corrected and un-corrected X100 files.

  • Ranger 9

    “4) manual focusing has been improved over the X100 but the reviewer is still not completely satisfied with the performance. Also auto-focus isn’t really fast.
    5) What matters: Image quality is spectacular.”

    If the lens isn’t in focus, image quality will be lousy no matter how good the lens and sensor are.

    • hexx

      read the original article please – it’s got nothing to do with your comment but with the focus-by-wire and how it feels

    • Vivek

      Problem is with people with incomplete grasp of English typing away these impressions (both the quoted “reviewer” and the Admin here).

      It is comical and keeps the whole affair mildly interesting in the face of all the hype from every camera manufacturer (Fuji, Olympous, etc). :)

      • Antoine

        You should thank the admin and other foreigners for typing in YOUR language…

        • Vivek

          I did. I said it keeps it interesting. That is the whole point of these rumor blogs, is it not? :)

  • Steve

    The x100 was release at 128,000 yen. The would suggest a price of $1400US for the X-PRO1 body.

    • Antoine

      yes

  • Fants

    $1699 was bad enough – $1799 officially makes it a no-go for me. But man, do I want one! Hopefully the US price is significantly lower than the direct exchange-rate conversion.

  • Kylberg

    The x100 has come down in price – maybe not hurry to among the first to purchase. Wait until more reviews are published and maybe price gone down a little.

  • Miserere

    Admin, put a little effort into this post and do the following:

    * Look up the price of the Fuji X100 in Japan, US and Europe.
    * Now use the same ratio (conversion rate) that was applied to those prices to guesstimate the price of the X-Pro 1 in the US and Europe.

    You already have people here complaining about prices that are probably wrong; be responsible and give us prices that are probably correct instead.

    Thanks.

    —Miserere

    • Steve

      +1. Why do people keep using the exchange rate to calculate pricing from Japan Prices. This is proven to be always wrong. Just use previous model release prices (ie. x100 in this case) to determine US and Euro pricing. This goes for all Japanese camera pricing.

      Hopefully this is not repeated for the OM-D pricing.

  • Miserere

    Comparing the prices at launch of the X100 in Japan and the US (128,000 Yen vs $1,200) would gives us an approximate price for the X-Pro 1 of $1,400.

    Doing the same for the UK: 1,055 GBP.

    Doing the same for Europe: 1,170 Euros.

    Doing the same for Australia: AU$1,525.

  • andrea
    • hexx

      nope, they’re not

  • Sergio

    I think Fuji missed the boat on auto focus speed. Even though they say “…it’s not that kind of camera” they miss an important consumer point. It is an expensive camera and it depends on auto focus. And naturally we would expect that ALL its systems should be good for that price in a “quality” camera.

    It doesn’t have to be the fastest focus speed but rather a respectable speed to match the price.

  • Mya

    Just a small question…

    The AF seems to be rubbish…
    The MF seems to be rubbish…

    How are we suppose to take photos with this camera?

    Does it have a lytro kind of system where you focus afterwards?

  • Rich Rich

    1. Price:
    $1200 for the body, $1500-$1600 for one body + lens is a reasonable price for Fuji. Above $1500 for the body, $2000+ for one body and one lens then it would have much smaller market. Just think of Olympus E5, a great camera, should have priced at $1200-$1400 for the body, instead priced at $1799 that turned off by the market. Most potential E5 buyers are still on the sideline or have defected to the Canon Nikon offerings.

    2. Size
    People love the Fuji X100 size, so the cute factor has made X100 a success. However, the X-pro size will turn off a lot of potential buyers. Just think of Leica M5.

    3. Do you really want a RF camera when it it not small? Fuji should go for DSLR if it is a real Pro grade.
    People go for RF camera

    is for portability. Those count on taking photos for money would go for DSLR.
    Optical finder is still the best. Otherwise Nikon F would not defeat Leica M3 Rollei 2.8F Canon-7 of early 1960’s.

    Just my thought

    Rich

    • mat

      Not small? It’s bigger than the X100 for sure, and bigger than m43 cameras, but it’s no bigger than the M8 or M9.

  • Antoine

    It’s called the “X-PRO 1”. This camera size is just right for work. Small enough for the Pro, big enough in the eyes of his clients.

  • Cyclopedia Brown

    Happy to hear the release is right around the corner. Hope the U.S. price isn’t a killer. I dont know where the Japanese price is coming from. I have looked at the press release from Fuji and in the column under price it says “OPEN” (http://www.fujifilm.co.jp/corporate/news/articleffnr_0606.html use google to translate). To me that says that they still havent even settled on a price for the Japanese market. So until I see it from Fuji, all these numbers are speculative…

    As far as the size is concerned. If you got to CameraSize.com you will see that the X-Pro1 is only slightly larger than the X100 in height and length. Where it really shows is in the width which is shown in the lenses. Without the lenses the width is basically the same or less actually. However, if one were so inclined they could use a pancake lens either coming soon from Fuji or using old M-mount glass. That would make the camera similar in width to the X100.

  • Will

    I don’t want to go backwards with my autofocus speed, what a complete pity, it has everything but the essential ability to feel in control of focus.

    I’ll wait 2 years for the next model, not like my current cam can’t take pics, or the OM-D might be a good stop gap.

  • RK

    Interesting – I can’t read Japanese, but Amazon.jp appears to list the X-Pro 1 for ¥ 135,000…

    Credit to the following site that came up on Google News
    http://myona.com/2012/01/27/fuji-xpro-1-price-announced/

  • kk

    Looks like a toy camera; Holga. Quality may be good, but not digging the look.

  • hugo

    Looking at prices listed on kakaku.com, a price aggregator for online shops in Japan, the cheapest body is 135000円 currently.
    Lenses are at 49000円 + 4000円 for the 60mm.
    http://kakaku.com/item/K0000336431/
    http://kakaku.com/item/K0000336432/
    http://kakaku.com/item/K0000336433/
    http://kakaku.com/item/K0000336434/

  • Vlad

    What are you even talking about?

  • Vlad

    +1

  • fh

    It’s 150,000yen MSRP (open price). That basically means that the price is “set”, but retail stores are free to sell at a higher or lower price as they want.

  • hexx

    “unclean peasant who populate such board as these” – welcome, we’re happy you share your thoughts with us on such boards like this.

    Now, what really happened to you? Having a bad day?

  • Jean-Michel

    ok, in anyway, the sharpness is, I guess, enough good on XP-1 that we don’t need to enlarge as much as we can see the correction.
    RE: “pixel is pixel, you can’t stretch a pixel. you can stretch a photo/image and it will result in filling the gap with more pixels”. I don’t really understand that. You can’t create pixel where there is not. We can’t stretch on the sensor, but you can do it on the enlargement. The image recorded by the sensor is distorted but it’s corrected on the corresponding JPEG file, not directly in the sensor. It seems to be physically not feasable. I will check using a fisheye picture to find if my thinking is right or not.

  • Gringo

    in fact it is same size as M8/M9 which is basically quite large comparing to mirror less offering.

  • Richard_K

    It is the same size as M9

  • Gringo

    Do you think a Pro need a camera like this? no.

    There is no fast zoom.
    AF is slow.
    There is no flash.

    What Pro would need that?

  • Richard_K

    and MF is useless.

  • Richard_K

    Yeas I’m very disapppointed with its focus ability (both AF and MF). Really disappointed.

  • pancanikonpusamy

    that is reality in today imaging device! i yet see 1st camera in each cetegories which is never complaint by consumer. i unsure who will be the 1st of these camera.. sony? panasonic? nikon? canon? fuji? samsung? pentax? olympus? ricoh?

    -price-fullproof features-iq-iso 😀

  • Yaz

    I bet my Konica Hexar AF has a faster autofocus. But dammit not digital!

  • Eric

    Why would I compare it to the upcoming OM-D? Oh I don’t know, perhaps because they are going to be direct competitors to each other?

    Overall image quality will almost certainly go to the Fuji, but up to ISO1600 I doubt there be a real noticeable real world difference. Seeing as how I do the vast majority of my shooting under ISO1600 that is almost a wash for me. Fuji also has the hybrid VF, which some love. Aside from that pretty much everything else is in Olympus’ favor:

    -Much much faster autofocus
    -Weather sealed (that’s a huge bonus IMO)
    -Better lens selection
    -Smaller
    -Has built in-body image stabilization
    -Built-in wireless control over strobes
    -Better movie controls (not important to me, but it is to some)
    -Tilting OLED screen

    I love what I see out of the XPro-1, and if Olympus weren’t about to announce the OMD I’d probably buy it. However, I simply can’t understand why it is $700 more expensive than the Olympus is rumored to be. Not even full frame sensors cost that much to produce. That 16mp APS-C sensor is great, no doubt, but $700 great? I’m not so sure about that.