Bill Pierce
Well-known
A number of folks have asked me to comment on the new Fuji X Pro 2. When Geoffrey Crawley was running the British Journal he would take 6 months to review a new camera. Almost all the pop magazines would beat his release, but his report was far superior. To say anything after a week of using the camera is fairly pretentious, but here goes.
Like its predecessor, it shares the basic body form that mimics a rangefinder. The top is flat and the viewfinder eyepiece is on the left hand side of the body solving the age old problem faced by users of SLR’s, DSLR’s and mirrorless bodies that mimic an SLR - Where do I put my nose? AS APS - C mirrorless cameras go, it’s a big camera roughly the size of film M Leica.
The new camera has a 24 mg sensor and more advanced processor. Image quality is improved, and noise levels are down even at high ISO’s. But this is at a level best seen at 100%. For most folks it simply means that you can crop a frame a little and still maintain quality or you can use the new, even higher ISO’s and still produce a decent image.
My favorite improvement is the fact that the viewfinder eyepiece has adjustable diopters, no more screw in correction lenses.
Probably the most important change is the the focus points are now changed in the viewfinder by pressing a small joy stick, thus freeing up the larger control dial on the back to select 4 functions combined with two buttons to give you the ability to select 6 functions without going into the menu which now has a section you can program yourself so that your most used menu functions are together and in their own menu section. (And auto focus itself seems to have less searching and be quicker in general.)
The shutter now has the “electronic” option that gives very high shutter speeds for those that want to shoot wide in bright sunlight or shoot pictures of speeding bullets.
Some of the new features are relatively simple but very useful. For instance, the shutter release now accepts a conventional, screw-in cable release. All the control buttons are on one side of the camera making them considerably less clumsy to use. The bright frame viewfinder seems brighter and better. The camera now accepts two memory cards. They can produce duplicate files for safety, put raw on one and jpg on the other or just work sequentially to give you a larger recording power. There’s a new black & white film simulation that incorporates a curve and adjustable grain pattern to give it a more film-like appearance.
All in all, it’s not a radical new camera; after 4 or 5 years it’s an improved camera. Gosh, that’s just like the old film days.
Any thoughts?
Like its predecessor, it shares the basic body form that mimics a rangefinder. The top is flat and the viewfinder eyepiece is on the left hand side of the body solving the age old problem faced by users of SLR’s, DSLR’s and mirrorless bodies that mimic an SLR - Where do I put my nose? AS APS - C mirrorless cameras go, it’s a big camera roughly the size of film M Leica.
The new camera has a 24 mg sensor and more advanced processor. Image quality is improved, and noise levels are down even at high ISO’s. But this is at a level best seen at 100%. For most folks it simply means that you can crop a frame a little and still maintain quality or you can use the new, even higher ISO’s and still produce a decent image.
My favorite improvement is the fact that the viewfinder eyepiece has adjustable diopters, no more screw in correction lenses.
Probably the most important change is the the focus points are now changed in the viewfinder by pressing a small joy stick, thus freeing up the larger control dial on the back to select 4 functions combined with two buttons to give you the ability to select 6 functions without going into the menu which now has a section you can program yourself so that your most used menu functions are together and in their own menu section. (And auto focus itself seems to have less searching and be quicker in general.)
The shutter now has the “electronic” option that gives very high shutter speeds for those that want to shoot wide in bright sunlight or shoot pictures of speeding bullets.
Some of the new features are relatively simple but very useful. For instance, the shutter release now accepts a conventional, screw-in cable release. All the control buttons are on one side of the camera making them considerably less clumsy to use. The bright frame viewfinder seems brighter and better. The camera now accepts two memory cards. They can produce duplicate files for safety, put raw on one and jpg on the other or just work sequentially to give you a larger recording power. There’s a new black & white film simulation that incorporates a curve and adjustable grain pattern to give it a more film-like appearance.
All in all, it’s not a radical new camera; after 4 or 5 years it’s an improved camera. Gosh, that’s just like the old film days.
Any thoughts?
willie_901
Veteran
Thanks for this succinct and informative preview.
I am compelled to mention the electronic shutter is useful in two situations: when a ND filter is not at hand or when circumstances call for truly silent operation.
The reason for the ES' limited utility is it is a rolling-shutter design. The pixel rows are exposed sequentially. This means even small amounts of camera motion and certainly subject motion can cause distortions. Another problem is banding caused by aliasing (strobing) with frequency modulated light sources such as older fluorescents, some sports arena lighting and certain color LED lamps.
The default mode for any camera with a rolling ES should be the mechanical shutter and letting the camera choose between ES And MS operation is risky.
I am compelled to mention the electronic shutter is useful in two situations: when a ND filter is not at hand or when circumstances call for truly silent operation.
The reason for the ES' limited utility is it is a rolling-shutter design. The pixel rows are exposed sequentially. This means even small amounts of camera motion and certainly subject motion can cause distortions. Another problem is banding caused by aliasing (strobing) with frequency modulated light sources such as older fluorescents, some sports arena lighting and certain color LED lamps.
The default mode for any camera with a rolling ES should be the mechanical shutter and letting the camera choose between ES And MS operation is risky.
Out to Lunch
Ventor
When I read about the Fuji X-Pro2 I had a look at the pics I took with the X-Pro1 and I don't see many reasons not to keep it.
Bill Pierce
Well-known
Peter - Take a look at http://www.fujivsfuji.com/fuji-xpro2-vs-xpro1/
How useful the improvements are to a specific photographer really has to do with the kind of photography they do.
BillBingham2
Registered User
Great job Bill. You have pointed to aspects of the X Pro 2 that are improvements, perhaps not earth shattering, but material. Many of your points have changed my mind about which body to pick as I start into a new interchangeable lens system.
While IQ is important to me, handling and usability together override the "best" image quality.
Thanks!
B2 (;->
While IQ is important to me, handling and usability together override the "best" image quality.
Thanks!
B2 (;->
shawn
Veteran
Coming from the XP1 to the XP2 there are many little changes that really improve the shooting experience. I few I really like..
The camera won't *always* refocus every time you half press the shutter. Now if the subject hasn't moved the camera will still know it is focus (PD sensor) and won't refocus.
On the XP1 I really like the focus distance scale. It was a good rationality check when using AF with the OVF. It also allowed for zone focusing action as you could change zones without taking the camera from your eye. But that didn't work with the 'clutch' lenses. On the XP2 the focus scale now works with 'clutch' lenses which is a nice change.
Focus peaking is *dramatically* easier to see which is great for adapted lenses and also works in the ERF mode to allow manually focusing lenses while still using the OVF. The ERF mode is likely going to be my new default for shooting.
OVF framing goes up to around 135mm as opposed to 60mm in the XP1. At the telephoto end the frame is small but in combination with the full frame shown in the small EVF in ERF mode you can track and frame action easily.
The horizon level is not nearly as slow to respond. Not exactly fluid yet but much much better.
The change from OVF to EVF or back is *quick*.
The addition of the focus lever gives you more customizable buttons. You really can set it up so you may never really need to get into the menus at all. The addition of the MyMenu also makes it so those rare times you do need to get to something in the menu you can have the needed options on the same page at the top level when you open up the menu.
The overall speed of the camera and more surefooted focus (and tracking) also means the camera will handle a wider range of shots easier.
Shawn
Out to Lunch
Ventor
Bill,
Thanks for the link. OK, I might have been wrong and, perhaps the X-Pro1 would, at least be a good back-up body. This said, the closing remarks of the link's author leave me with some concern: "this is not the time to skip a generation. What you’ve got is old and could very well be busted. The new hotness is here. Place your order with aplomb".
That's marketeering talk...
Cheers, Peter
Thanks for the link. OK, I might have been wrong and, perhaps the X-Pro1 would, at least be a good back-up body. This said, the closing remarks of the link's author leave me with some concern: "this is not the time to skip a generation. What you’ve got is old and could very well be busted. The new hotness is here. Place your order with aplomb".
That's marketeering talk...
Cheers, Peter
back alley
IMAGES
i have not seen much written about the increase in mp from 16 to 24...is this not a factor for folks?
cz23
-
Thanks, Bill. Shawn, yours is a nice summary, too.
As mainly a street photographer, I'm not seeing a compelling reason to upgrade. Greater ability to crop would be nice, as would snappier AF. But that's about all that draws me, and neither seems to justify the cost.
The reviews I've read say ISO performance is the same as the X-Pro1, though I guess you could downsample and have that noise improvement.
I've replaced the 35 1.4 with the new 2.0, which offers some AF speed improvement. I'm going to live with that for a while, and my legacy wide used hyperfocally. And I'm still really pleased with the X-Pro1 B&W output. Like the article said, so much has to do with the type of photography one shoots.
John
As mainly a street photographer, I'm not seeing a compelling reason to upgrade. Greater ability to crop would be nice, as would snappier AF. But that's about all that draws me, and neither seems to justify the cost.
The reviews I've read say ISO performance is the same as the X-Pro1, though I guess you could downsample and have that noise improvement.
I've replaced the 35 1.4 with the new 2.0, which offers some AF speed improvement. I'm going to live with that for a while, and my legacy wide used hyperfocally. And I'm still really pleased with the X-Pro1 B&W output. Like the article said, so much has to do with the type of photography one shoots.
John
sojournerphoto
Veteran
Indeed it is, but I was perhaps more thrown by the precursor comment, '... for those on the fence, if you care about photography.'
However, we know websites exist to promote product, so shouldn't be too surprised, and it likely does contain some genuinely useful information too.
sojournerphoto
Veteran
I skipped the XP1 and so have no comparator for my XP2 apart from my rf's and, now sold, Panasonic GX7. So far, I think the XP2 is a hoot, fast to operate and to focus.
I never 'bonded' with the GX7. I made some pictures I liked and it was perfectly capable, but it never really engaged me. I put this down to the evf and my not really liking manual focus by wire in that implementation. The Fuji's OVF and erf mode make things a whole lot more intuitive, and I'm happy flicking to evf for the odd occasion I think it's more useful. It's low light behaviour appears better too.
In terms of size, weight and feel it's closer to my Zeiss Ikon than M9 - a very good thing - and it's a complete hoot to muck around with. I've got a 35/2 and the 18 and 27 from a mate. I'll also pick up adaptors for my old FD and current M glass, which will give me longer reach allowing for the crop factor (I suspect it isn't worth using the very wide M glass in place fo the fuji tbh.
I bought it to take on bike rides/hiking in inclement weather and to give me a quiet platform for very occasional long lens use (my daughter is a classical musician and concert photography needs low noise (sound and image) and long lenses. I am confident that it will do all of these and probably much more.
Mike
Edited to add - you have to hold it still at 'normal' shutter speeds with 24Mp on an APS-C sensor mind.
I never 'bonded' with the GX7. I made some pictures I liked and it was perfectly capable, but it never really engaged me. I put this down to the evf and my not really liking manual focus by wire in that implementation. The Fuji's OVF and erf mode make things a whole lot more intuitive, and I'm happy flicking to evf for the odd occasion I think it's more useful. It's low light behaviour appears better too.
In terms of size, weight and feel it's closer to my Zeiss Ikon than M9 - a very good thing - and it's a complete hoot to muck around with. I've got a 35/2 and the 18 and 27 from a mate. I'll also pick up adaptors for my old FD and current M glass, which will give me longer reach allowing for the crop factor (I suspect it isn't worth using the very wide M glass in place fo the fuji tbh.
I bought it to take on bike rides/hiking in inclement weather and to give me a quiet platform for very occasional long lens use (my daughter is a classical musician and concert photography needs low noise (sound and image) and long lenses. I am confident that it will do all of these and probably much more.
Mike
Edited to add - you have to hold it still at 'normal' shutter speeds with 24Mp on an APS-C sensor mind.
kshapero
South Florida Man
Loved the Xpro1 but was a stickler for weather resistance so I went to the X-T1. Now what? I do miss the XPro1 features but to upgrade again? BTW the 35/2 seems to mate well with everything Fuji, eh?
kshapero
South Florida Man
Also I love that ISO dial on the X-T1.
shawn
Veteran
It is but unlike some new camera models that just boost resolution the XP1 -> XP2 has a lot more to talk about than just an increase in resolution.
Shawn
The X-Pro2, with the 35mm f/2, works as well as any other mirrorless APSC camera on the market and is the only one that feels like a substantial camera. I, for one, and happy that Fuji kept this camera Leica M sized.
GaryLH
Veteran
How is the af speed compared to the gx7. The m43 cameras have been faster than other mirrorless cameras in the past.. The Sony A6000 was faster at times. My xt1 was just slightly slower. Just curious how it compares the the gx7 in terms of af speed.
Gary
sojournerphoto
Veteran
From memory, which may not be entirely reliable, I'd say the 35/2 is slightly faster than the 20, 14 or 45 on the GX7 - the 20 on the GX7 wasn't slow in good light anyway. The others are probably similar, not slower, but a bit clunky in operation.
If you look at the 35/2 on xp2 thread JSRockit has also commented
Mike
Dogman
Veteran
This.
Taking into consideration my kind of photography, I picked up the old, out-dated X-Pro1 with 27mm at the current bargain prices.
My kind of photography doesn't involve sports or much in the way of action. It's kind of leisurely and contemplative--the way I learned to shoot when I was using Leicas and film. Looking at the improvements of the XP2, I can only envy the diopter correction feature. Since I wear progressive eyeglasses, I have to be careful where I place my eye on the XP1 viewfinder or I will not get a sharp view. I also wish there was focus confirmation in the OVF.
The XP1 also confirms one thing I've noticed about my shooting with other mirrorless cameras--I very much detest EVFs. This is the third cameras I've owned with an EVF and the first to offer a real OVF alternative. Needless to say, I only use the OVF.
Of course, this only applies to my kind of shooting and subject matter. I can see the utility of the improvements in the new camera. But, really, for an old guy with a narrow range of requirements in cameras, the XP1 is now a bargain.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
The XP2 has one!
It's actually kind of a demerit for me...I don't think I'll ever need more than 16MP and would prefer images to load quickly when I'm processing them. I suspect that when I eventually upgrade to the XP2, I'll switch to shooting jpeg...
I don't see much of a difference in loading speed. It might not be as bad as you think.