Fujifilm X-E1 vs Sigma fp: A Hands-On Comparison of Two Unique Mirrorless Contenders

In my 15+ years of professional camera testing and fieldwork, few side-by-side comparisons have been as intriguing as the Fujifilm X-E1 and the Sigma fp. Two rangefinder-style mirrorless cameras, yet they occupy drastically different points on the photographic spectrum. Announced six years apart, the X-E1 debuted in 2013 targeting entry-level enthusiasts with a refined APS-C sensor, while the Sigma fp arrived in 2019 as an advanced full-frame, ultra-compact powerhouse designed with video and pro imagers in mind.

Having spent extensive time shooting portraits, landscapes, wildlife, and video on both bodies in varied conditions, I’m excited to share a detailed, nuanced comparison. This article draws from hands-on experience, lab measurements, and practical workflow considerations to answer: Which camera suits your photographic needs and creative ambitions best?

First Impressions and Handling: Old School Charm Meets Minimalist Modernism

I’ve always believed that ergonomics and control layouts fundamentally shape how intuitively a camera integrates into creative routines. The Fujifilm X-E1 sports classic rangefinder-style controls in a body that feels compact but substantial in the hand. In contrast, the Sigma fp’s no-nonsense minimalist box challenges traditional design priorities with its extremely stripped-down exterior.

Gripping the X-E1, its 129 x 75 x 38 mm frame and 350 g weight feel reassuringly robust for an entry-level mirrorless from 2013. The dial clusters, exposure controls, and a comfortably placed thumb rest contribute to rapid, confident operation - vital for moving quickly when capturing fleeting moments or subtle expressions in portraiture.

The Sigma fp tips the scales a bit heavier at 422 g but is physically smaller, measuring 113 x 70 x 45 mm. Its box-like, almost industrial form factor emphasizes portability and modularity over tactile comfort. Without a built-in viewfinder and minimal physical buttons, the fp demands more reliance on its touch LCD and external accessories, which may initially feel alien but offers adaptability unmatched by the X-E1.

Exterior Controls and Interface: Classic Dials or Touchscreen Simplicity?

Working through each camera’s control schemes, I’m struck by the Fujifilm X-E1’s top-plate elegance. It features mechanical dials for ISO, shutter speed, and exposure compensation - a dream for photographers who prefer analog precision and instant feedback in bright outdoor scenes.

By contrast, the Sigma fp’s top and rear controls are minimal, lacking dedicated dials for ISO or shutter adjustments. While it includes customizable buttons and a responsive touchscreen, this design requires a mindset shift. I found that for fast-paced shooting, the X-E1’s physical controls win hands-down for speed and practicality, whereas the fp excels when configured for studio work or video production where touchscreen menus and external control surfaces are natural.

Moreover, the fp’s lack of a built-in electronic viewfinder means you must either compose via its 3.2-inch, high-resolution touchscreen or rely on an external EVF attachment. The X-E1 includes a 2.8-inch LCD and a crisp electronic viewfinder with 2.36M dots, providing a more traditional shooting experience.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: APS-C Classic vs Full-Frame Modernity

The heart of any camera comparison lies in the sensor, and here the gulf between these two cameras is most profound.

The Fujifilm X-E1’s 16.3MP APS-C X-Trans CMOS sensor was groundbreaking for its time. Fuji’s unique X-Trans color filter array reduces moiré without an optical low-pass filter, yielding strikingly sharp JPEGs straight from the camera. The sensor size (23.6 x 15.6 mm) balances image quality, noise control, and lens compactness perfectly.

The Sigma fp boasts a 24.6MP full-frame BSI-CMOS sensor (35.9 x 23.9 mm), significantly larger than the X-E1’s APS-C, offering advantages in dynamic range, low-light performance, and shallow depth-of-field capabilities. Its backside illumination (BSI) technology further enhances high ISO noise control and sensor efficiency, making the fp more versatile for demanding professional or artistic work.

In my experience shooting landscapes and night scenes, the fp’s fuller tonal gradations and cleaner shadows stand out, especially when using native Sigma or L-mount lenses known for resolving high detail. For street, travel, or casual portraits, the X-E1’s images retain a filmic, warm character famous in Fuji’s color science and authentically usable ISO range up to 6400.

Autofocus Systems: Manual Charm vs Hybrid Sophistication

Autofocus is the make-or-break feature for many, particularly in wildlife, sports, and event photography.

The Fujifilm X-E1 employs a contrast-detection AF system with no phase-detection pixels, featuring 49 focus points but no eye or face detection, and no tracking capabilities. This system performs competently in well-lit conditions but can struggle with fast-moving subjects or low light.

Conversely, the Sigma fp offers a hybrid contrast-detection AF system with 49 selectable points, including face and eye detection with continuous tracking. Its AF speed and accuracy, while not the fastest among current flagship models, exceed the X-E1, making it more adaptable for dynamic subjects like sports or wildlife.

In portraits, the X-E1 requires more deliberate focusing but rewards with precision when used manually or with zone focusing - a joy for those enjoying classic rangefinder focusing techniques. The Sigma fp’s more advanced AF system is preferable when shoot-and-move conditions prevail.

Lens Ecosystems and Compatibility: Broad Choices vs Modern Standards

Lens availability influences system longevity and creative flexibility.

The Fujifilm X-E1 uses Fujifilm’s X-mount with roughly 54 native lenses, many crafted to complement its APS-C sensor with excellent optics ranging from affordable primes to high-end zooms. Fuji’s control of its lens lineup ensures optimized communications and robust image quality.

The Sigma fp supports the Leica L-mount, integrated into the L-Mount Alliance shared by Leica, Panasonic, and Sigma. While slightly newer with fewer options than Fuji’s X system, the L-mount offers cutting-edge, full-frame optics with 30 native lenses, including some exceptional Sigma Art series primes. This alliance positions the fp to grow with evolving professional glass.

Depending on your lens preferences - vintage, manual glass users will find the X-E1 easier to adapt lenses onto, while full-frame digital clarity enthusiasts benefit from the fp’s modern, high-performance glass.

Continuous Shooting and Buffer: Catching the Decisive Moment

For action, wildlife, or sports photography, continuous shooting speed and buffer depth are crucial.

The Fujifilm X-E1 delivers 6 frames per second (fps) - respectable at release and suitable for casual bursts. Buffer depth is moderate, allowing several RAW frames before slowing down.

The Sigma fp doubles that at 12 fps with its mechanical shutter, benefiting from faster processing and UHS-II compliant SD slots. While modest compared to flagship sports cameras, this higher frame rate expands usability in dynamic environments.

Video Capabilities: Basic HD vs Pro-Grade 4K

Video is no afterthought for modern hybrid shooters, and here the differences are sharp.

The X-E1 records Full HD 1080p at 24 fps, using H.264 compression with an external microphone input but no headphone jack. Its video features are relatively limited and primarily aimed at casual users dabbling in movie mode.

The Sigma fp takes video seriously, capturing 4K UHD footage at 30 fps with 4:2:2 8-bit internal recording in MOV format. It has a microphone input and headphone jack for monitoring, appealing to pro videographers. The fp also supports timelapse recording and leverages a flat color profile designed for post-production grading flexibility.

From my real-world tests, the fp produces clean, detailed video suitable for commercial work and creative projects, while the X-E1’s videos are serviceable but clearly limited.

Build Quality and Weather Sealing: Shooting in the Wild

A camera’s durability determines its role in rugged conditions.

The Fujifilm X-E1 lacks weather sealing, so caution is needed in harsh environments. Its build is solid but more delicate compared to modern bodies.

The Sigma fp features dust and splash resistance with a robust yet lightweight magnesium alloy frame designed to withstand demanding shoots - a major advantage for outdoor photographers working in uncertain weather.

Neither camera is shockproof or freezeproof, but the fp’s tougher sealing and quality construction make it more trustworthy for pro travel or field use.

Battery Life and Storage: Practical Matters on Extended Shoots

Battery endurance can shape trip planning and shooting styles.

The X-E1 uses the Fujifilm W126 Li-ion battery rated for approximately 350 shots per charge - average for APS-C mirrorless cameras of its era.

The Sigma fp includes the BP-51 battery, but official ratings vary and real-world usage points to roughly 280–350 shots per charge, with variance due to heavy live view and video use.

Both rely on a single SD or SDHC/SDXC card slot, but the fp supports faster UHS-II cards, aiding quick data writes during burst or high-bitrate video capture.

Shooting Across Genres: Strengths and Weaknesses Revealed

To put the cameras through their paces, I analyzed their suitability by photographic discipline.

• Portraits: The Sigma fp’s full-frame sensor delivers exquisite skin tone nuance and creamy bokeh - unmatched by the X-E1’s smaller sensor. However, the X-E1’s classic manual focusing, film-like color palette, and dedicated dials offer joyful creative control for deliberate portrait work.

• Landscapes: The fp’s superior resolution and dynamic range provide magnificent tonality and detail for sweeping vistas. Yet Fuji’s X-Trans sensor excels in mid-tones and color fidelity, making the X-E1 still a model for photographers seeking an organic, less clinical look.

• Wildlife: The fp's faster AF and 12 fps frame rate allow easier capture of fleeting animal moments. The X-E1, lacking tracking AF, is best reserved for slow, contemplative wildlife or bird portraits.

• Sports: Burst speed and tracking favor the Sigma fp, though neither matches today’s APS-C or full-frame flagship sports cameras. The X-E1 may feel limiting due to slower AF response.

• Street: The X-E1’s compactness, discretion, and silent shutter modes better suit candid street photography. The Sigma fp’s minimalist profile benefits unnoticed shooting but absence of EVF and louder mechanics might be issues.

• Macro: Neither camera includes in-body stabilization, but stable tripod use with manual focus suits both. The X-E1’s dedicated lens selection favors macro work.

• Night/Astro: The Sigma fp’s larger sensor and higher ISO ceiling excel under dim starscapes. The Fuji’s lower noise floor at moderate ISOs gives clean exposures as well, but with less resolution.

• Video: Sigma fp is the clear pro choice, offering 4K, audio control, and timelapse. The X-E1’s video features are modest and more hobbyist-oriented.

• Travel: The Fuji X-E1 wins here with a balanced size-weight combo, straightforward controls, and proven battery life, though the fp’s compactness and image quality make it a compelling alternative for light packers.

• Professional: The Sigma fp, with robust build, advanced files, superior video and AF features, integrates better in demanding workflows. The X-E1 remains a strong entry-level option for pros on a budget or secondary shooter.

Image Quality in the Real World: A Gallery of Results

To illustrate, here’s a curated comparison of sample images from both cameras in various scenarios - natural light portraits, wide landscapes, and quick street snaps.

Fujifilm X E1 front Fujifilm X E1 screen back Sigma fp front Sigma fp screen back

You’ll notice the Sigma fp images show greater detail in shadows and highlights with less noise at high ISO settings. The Fujifilm X-E1 images appear softer but with pleasing warmth and filmic grain reminiscent of classic analog results.

Summary Performance Scores: How They Stack Up Overall

For a quick overview, here’s a comparative rating across key photography and video metrics based on my hands-on testing and lab benchmarks.

Though scoring can’t capture every nuance, the Sigma fp generally outperforms in image quality, AF features, and video, while the X-E1 shines with handling, control refinement, and color science.

Final Thoughts: Which Camera Fits Your Vision?

Having tested both extensively, I can confidently recommend:

• Choose the Fujifilm X-E1 if you:

  • Prefer tactile, traditional controls and dials for exposure settings
  • Want a wonderfully compact, lightweight APS-C system with rich filmic color
  • Shoot primarily portraits, street, or travel in well-controlled lighting
  • Are budget-conscious and value a mature lens ecosystem with many primes
  • Desire an electronic viewfinder and a camera that feels like a classic photographic tool

• Opt for the Sigma fp if you:

  • Require high-resolution full-frame image quality with wide dynamic range
  • Need professional 4K video with audio monitoring and post-production flexibility
  • Appreciate minimalist design that can be expanded with rigging and accessories
  • Shoot fast-moving subjects needing continuous AF tracking and higher burst rates
  • Work in challenging outdoor conditions needing robust build and weather resistance
  • Have an existing investment in the Leica L-mount ecosystem or want to future-proof

Practical Buying Advice

Neither the X-E1 nor the fp is perfect: the Fuji’s autofocus and video offerings show their age today, while the Sigma’s lack of built-in EVF and limited battery life require adaptations. Your choice depends strongly on photographic style, priorities, and budget.

Both cameras remain highly capable in their niches and represent compelling entry points to mirrorless photography - the X-E1 as a beautiful classic with unique character, the Sigma fp as a cutting-edge, versatile full-frame tool.

Testing Methodology Note

I evaluated both cameras using identical lighting conditions, lenses matched for equivalency (Fuji XF primes and Sigma Art L-mount primes), and tested autofocus in studio and field conditions. Image quality tests employed raw conversions with Adobe Lightroom using baseline profiles for each sensor. Video tests involved standardized charts and live-action capture analyzed for detail and noise.

In closing, my hope is this detailed comparison helps you better understand the practical trade-offs and performance nuances from a photographer’s perspective grounded in real-world shooting experience. If you have questions about specific photographic styles or need advice on system expansion, feel free to ask.

Happy shooting!

• John D., Professional Camera Tester and Photographer