GaryLH
Veteran
What I was saying is that the 35f1.4 optical design is already a winner for them..I do not think adding better af motor to the 35 is not going to increase the overall size by much, but changing the optical design as well for a larger image circle while keeping a f1.4 aperture could.
A 35f2.8 pancake lens can be pretty small given it does not need to let in as much light as a f1.4, plus the optical correction of the Fuji 35 IMHO is much better.
Gary
I'll admit it... I'm jonzing for the X-Pro2. Trying not to build it up too much though, I don;t want to have unrealistic expectations.
bhop73
Well-known
I got an X100 when they first came out and loved it, so naturally I'd wanted an X-pro1 when it came out, but the AF is pretty much the only thing that's been keeping me from getting it. Considering that every new fuji camera has improved af, it seems to me that they'll fix that in the next version of the X-Pro.
Now that the X100T has been announced with the new improved hybrid viewfinder with the little focus window, which I assume they'll put on the X-Pro2 as well as well as a better resolution evf, it makes no sense to me NOT to wait.
Now that the X100T has been announced with the new improved hybrid viewfinder with the little focus window, which I assume they'll put on the X-Pro2 as well as well as a better resolution evf, it makes no sense to me NOT to wait.
f16sunshine
Moderator
Unless saving money and or shooting an Xpro now makes sense.
I don't see a reason to wait at current prices. The Xpro1 is a joy and a killer image maker.
The Xpro2 will likely improve in many ways over the Xpro1 but, I doubt it will make the Xpro1 completely obsolete.. plus... It's a whole year out if you believe reports and rumors!
It's always later than we think....The astroid is coming !
Bike Tourist
Well-known
I gave some thought to the possibility of an X-Pro2 . . . for about five minutes. Then, I ordered a replacement for the X-Pro1 I traded for a D610. Now I have a Fuji and a Nikon, both vying for my attention. So it all depends on the job at hand and how I feel that day. DSLR with zoom or the RF kind of experience.
If the X-Pro2 turns out to hit all my marks, I might consider abandoning the D610 altogether. I didn't like the performance of my first X-Pro used with a zoom lens. I couldn't see the VF image in bright sunshine. If this is fixed and the mp boosted to about 24 then it would be very tempting.
If the X-Pro2 turns out to hit all my marks, I might consider abandoning the D610 altogether. I didn't like the performance of my first X-Pro used with a zoom lens. I couldn't see the VF image in bright sunshine. If this is fixed and the mp boosted to about 24 then it would be very tempting.
willie_901
Veteran
Unless you are using adapted lenses or shooting sports or other action photography, the X-Pro 1 AF system does not need to be fixed. The XT-1 and (I assume) X100T focus system is better when you focus Fujinon XF lenses using the lens barrel (no AF).
For me, my focus keeper rate is at least as high as I achieved with a Zeiss Ikon M body. Perhaps I was just inept using the ZI M.
Some Fujinon XF lenses – such as the 35/1.4 – focus via AF a bit slower compared to the XT-1 with the same lenses. For others there is very little difference.
Perhaps the X-Pro2 will have a higher APS-C pixel density so there could be numerous phase-detection AF regions or even some alternate AF technology so phase-detection AF can be abandoned. Otherwise the AF improvements will be incremental based on faster CPU speeds and improved AF firmware algorithms.
For me, my focus keeper rate is at least as high as I achieved with a Zeiss Ikon M body. Perhaps I was just inept using the ZI M.
Some Fujinon XF lenses – such as the 35/1.4 – focus via AF a bit slower compared to the XT-1 with the same lenses. For others there is very little difference.
Perhaps the X-Pro2 will have a higher APS-C pixel density so there could be numerous phase-detection AF regions or even some alternate AF technology so phase-detection AF can be abandoned. Otherwise the AF improvements will be incremental based on faster CPU speeds and improved AF firmware algorithms.
CliveC
Well-known
I think the X-Pro1's AF system is pretty poor in low light (using the 35/1.4 combo, yes). I know it's a bit apples and oranges, but even a low end DSLR (err, DSLT?) like the Sony A37 using legacy Minolta glass bests the X-Pro1 in autofocus speed and accuracy.
I'm glad you are not speaking for all of us... it certainly is the slowest AF of any current mirrorless camera that I have used. I have missed shots on the streets with it that I routinely get with my Ricoh GR and the Sony A7r. We do not all photograph the same way. The AF is slow...
gavinlg
Veteran
I'm not sure if it's just situational differences or the way we use our cameras that differ, but I've seriously had the opposite experience. In near dark I find the AF more reliable and about the same speed as the high end DSLR systems. I'm a generational 1d/5d user too.
willie_901
Veteran
It is hard to reconcile exact opposite experiences.
There are two situations where phase-detectioon AF becomes slow or unreliable
o The focus target has insufficient contrast; this becomes more problematic as the light level decreases
o There is an object near the desired focus object with higher contrast and focus locks on the unintended object
o The battery level is low
Otherwise using different focus techniques in different situations improves the AF success of the X-Pro 1. With the XT-1 the spit screen minimizes the chance for being unaware the focus target is inaccurate (second case). Unfortunately it seems the X-Pro 1 CPU is too slow and/or the EVF resolution is too low to support a spit-screen display.
In any case the spit-screen display becomes less valuable in situations where time is of the essence.
Manually moving the focus region to overlay a focus target is more cumbersome compared to the XT-1. This also limits the AF performance when spontaneity is required.
There are two situations where phase-detectioon AF becomes slow or unreliable
o The focus target has insufficient contrast; this becomes more problematic as the light level decreases
o There is an object near the desired focus object with higher contrast and focus locks on the unintended object
o The battery level is low
Otherwise using different focus techniques in different situations improves the AF success of the X-Pro 1. With the XT-1 the spit screen minimizes the chance for being unaware the focus target is inaccurate (second case). Unfortunately it seems the X-Pro 1 CPU is too slow and/or the EVF resolution is too low to support a spit-screen display.
In any case the spit-screen display becomes less valuable in situations where time is of the essence.
Manually moving the focus region to overlay a focus target is more cumbersome compared to the XT-1. This also limits the AF performance when spontaneity is required.