A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Casual Photo Conversations > d7000 vs fuji x-pro1...?

Featured Equipment Deals

Photo.net Prints for Sale! Read More

Photo.net Prints for Sale!

These are just some of the exceptional images you can buy from the photographers on photo.net and have printed by CanvasPop!

Latest Learning Articles

Featured Member: Katarzyna Gritzmann Read More

Featured Member: Katarzyna Gritzmann

Photo.net featured member Katarzyna Gritzmann talks about photography and portfolio of images.

d7000 vs fuji x-pro1...?

pawel baranski , Jan 24, 2012; 06:54 a.m.

I'm going to upgrade my camera from pentax in near future and there is this fight between d7000 and x-pro1 in my head. I was confident about d7000 but since i heard about those compact dslr i'm really not sure what should i buy.
I want to try to become pro and it will be hard with fuji,
but on the other hand what i really love is intimate photojournalism, and damn, fuji seems to be one intimate camera.
(i know that x-pro1 is not on the market yet, so we might just consider its older brother - x100).
I can't figure out what to do myself, so there i am, asking you for advice.


    1   |   2     Next    Last

Ilkka Nissila , Jan 24, 2012; 07:54 a.m.

The Fuji seems very expensive and there will initially only be three lenses available (with full functionality). Yes it seems very intimate but a key factor between subject-photographer interaction is how the photographer behaves rather than what size the camera is. Of course the camera's small size and relatively quietness does play a role but I would not make the Fuji a first choice. When you have a DSLR with the usual lenses you can then buy the Fuji (or another camera such as the Panasonic GX1 or Sony NEX 5/7) as a compact high quality camera for situations where DSLRs are not so well fit.

Wouter Willemse , Jan 24, 2012; 09:33 a.m.

I want to try to become pro and it will be hard with fuji

Consider that there are quite a lot of Magnum photographers using other gear than Nikon and Canon DSLRs. In this respect, I would not worry too much on the brandname.
The fuji X-Pro may maybe work very well - but before putting down the money it requires, I would want to get a better idea on its reliability - if it's to be your workhorse camera.

Hugh Sakols , Jan 24, 2012; 09:41 a.m.

There are so many flavors coming out that are mighty enticing. As a nikon user, I want to avoid buying into multiple systems unless I absolutely have to. Nikon will be around for a while while with a plethora of lenses to choose from. And if mirrorless takes off, I'm sure nikon will eventually be there. The Fuji will always be a niche camera.

Steve T. , Jan 24, 2012; 09:42 a.m.

Reading this thread prompted me to look into the X-Pro 1 for the first time, so I read up on the marketing verbage at the B&H website.

Why would the X-Pro 1 make it difficult for professional photography? Heck, with those three initial lenses (18 F/2, 35 F/1.4, and 60mm F/3.4, giving 35mm camera equiv. of roughly 27, 53, and 91mm lenses, per the spec.) and the technological claims of the sensor, I see no reason at all why a photographer with journalistic ability and talent (it's the photographer, not the camera) wouldn't be able to capture wonderful, money-making images with this camera. And the same can be said for the D7000 as well. Keep in mind that both of these cameras are light years ahead of the digital cameras professionals were using in the early days of digital SLR's.

I realize that I beat upon a dead horse when saying this, but it's not the camera that makes the pro, it's the photographer that makes the pro. There are photographers out there selling photos shot with I-phones (not exclusively, but I'm just making a point).

Get the camera that lights a fire inside of you, then use it to the best of your potential. Sounds like you're falling in love with the Fuji. Maybe your question is already answered...

pawel baranski , Jan 24, 2012; 09:50 a.m.

I don't think proffesional market is very romantic place for beginners. Once i get reasonable camera i'll try to get any job possible, and i know that size of my camera may matter to some of my future clients.

Zach Ritter , Jan 24, 2012; 09:56 a.m.

First, what's wrong with the Pentax? You can easily do pro work on a Pentax (and if you are considering a D7000, it won't offer much advantage over, is it a K5?). And for records sake, I shoot Nikon and Oly, so yeah.

Second, exactly what kind of pro work? Different types of work will need different gear. If I was doing street, portrait, or even studio/still life, that Fuji would do great. Maybe even PJ work. But, for weddings or sports, I would say that a DSLR is a better choice. Not that you couldn't do it, just that it would work better. That said, the camera you like using the best is generally the best choice.

pawel baranski , Jan 24, 2012; 10:02 a.m.

I'm not happy with pentax primes - these are too slow.
Also, future of pentax dslrs is rather misty.

Zach Ritter , Jan 24, 2012; 10:21 a.m.

Oh, and it isn't the size of the camera, it's the showiness. It's the same thing with video, if you show up with all the gear, it's neatly organized, and well kept, people take you seriously. If you show up with a DSLR sans grip, a couple of lenses, people will think you are still an amateur.

Steve T. , Jan 24, 2012; 11:58 a.m.

Zach- before showing up with any equipment, wouldn't a paying customer be more likely to base a decision to use the services of any photographer based on their portfolio of prior work? Maybe this is where Pawel needs to concentrate his labor- a portfolio of examples of his work to share with potential clients, be it the neighborhood newspaper, a major daily, or Time magazine. He needs to demonstrate that he captures professional level images, which is the job of the person, not the machine. If he's making images that meet or exceed the expectations of the customer's needs, the brand/type of equipment becomes almost moot.

Pawel, I'm not sure where you get the notion that Pentax has a doubtful future in the DSLR business, unless it is just a gut feeling you have (not a bad idea to follow your gut). Also, the Pentax FA primes are all faster than F/2 (1.4 to 1.9) and will work with APS-C and full-frame. The DA Limited primes (F/2.8 to F/4) are well compensated for by the incredible high ISO/low light capability of the K-5, so unless you need F/1.4 bokeh... Have you had experience with the K-5 and a couple FA or DA primes? Oh, it is a great pleasure! (K-5 and three DA Limited lenses in my kit.)

    1   |   2     Next    Last

Back to top

Notify me of Responses