X-Pro 2: any news?

[Dante_Stella]

I wonder (if it is indeed a Sony sensor) if this is the reason the X-Pro2 was delayed beyond what people are thinking was necessary. I understand that if a camera company wants to use a Sony sensor, then they have to wait for some period of time before Sony will let them go to market with their camera... to give Sony a head start with their own camera(s) using the same sensor.

This is exactly the problem when you are not big enough in volume to make your own chips (and who is these days?) or at least get out from under head-start licensing. Fuji gets a warmed-over A6000 chip with a new color array. They then have to buy x thousand of them. This is very likely why the X-Trans II has hung around so long (and is why it’s still going into new models). The 4K video thing may well be an artifact of the same licensing arrangement.

It's not the type of camera that wows on spec sheets and techno geekery. It's a pure photographers tool. It's a specifically honed camera. To those that like what it is, it's pretty much ideal. To those who need features and bleeding edge specs, there's always the XT-1 or.. well.. pretty much every other mirrorless camera on the market fighting for spec superiority in a murky haze of clumsy ergonomics and video recording buttons taking up precious space on the top plate.

This is a circular argument: for people who are satisfied with the feature set, it is great. No kidding. But the rest of the argument is not very convincing. One, there is no camera that is more or less of a “photographer’s tool” than another. Two, if you subscribe to the idea that certain things are more photographer’s tools because they are more on the minimalist side, you could make the same argument about a Leica being a pure photographer’s tool and any Fuji being techno geekery. Finally, is there anything more techno geeky than an optical finder with an electronic overlay on an autofocus digital camera? I love this to death on my X100T (as I did on my X-Pro1), but I have never been convinced that aside from being incredibly cool, that it really adds anything truly functional (except maybe seeing outside the framelines). And let’s stop pretending that the Fuji X line is not trying to compete in the feature area – the only reason it isn’t completely cutting edge is being hobbled by Sony’s licensing. There are plenty of things on the X-Pro1 that are pure spec-chasing, not the least of which is dual SD slots (273 AF points is not that far behind - pro Nikon film SLRs never had more than five). It’s just that Fuji is running more slowly.

The reason I'm thinking that the M8 is better fit for an m-mount photographer wanting a digital body is that the cost of the X-Pro2 and the M-adapter is almost 2K (new, ofc) and you can get a M8 from B&H for $1500.

According to the head bartender here, you can get a used M240 for $3,500, which is $1,200 more than the minimum buy-in for an X-Pro2 at $2,300 with a good lens. Fuji is not the most compelling from an economic standpoint to change systems if you have a lot of M lenses. If you’re a wide fiend, 24x36 Leica bodies give you a lot more choices, and the newer digital Ms have 2-dimensional digital levels (Fujis have typically had just roll sensors) and the ability to mount an articulated EVF.

D

 

[Hsg]

BH Photo:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...oCFZIWHwodZI4MQw&Q=&ap=y&m=Y&is=REG&A=details

I think this is news . . . isn't it?
That seems very attractive.

$500 for a jpg camera without a lens is still a lot of money.

 

[GaryLH]

This is exactly the problem when you are not big enough in volume to make your own chips (and who is these days?) or at least get out from under head-start licensing. Fuji gets a warmed-over A6000 chip with a new color array. They then have to buy x thousand of them. This is very likely why the X-Trans II has hung around so long (and is why it’s still going into new models). The 4K video thing may well be an artifact of the same licensing
D

Outside of Canon, I am not sure if there are any other camera makers that aren't using at least one third party sensor.. Even Panasonic/Olympus m43 alliance is using the 20mp m43 sensor from Sony. Nikon uses a lot of different vendors sensors.

As of less then two months ago, there is one less independent sensor maker, Toshiba now owned by Sony.

Gary

 

[GoodPhotos]

I've been professionally ALL IN with Fuji for more than a year now.

I bought an X-Pro1, but I sold it. I found the OVF mostly superfluous to my needs and the body was far too slow, large and brick-like. Not in comparison to my former Nikons and certainly not my former Blads or Mamiyas of course, but more 'large' in the way my M5 was compared to the my M-4p. I'm vested in Fuji primarily because they are so small, fast and still offer phenomenal image quality. The new body looks faster, but it is even larger. Lots of folks don't seem to mind that and like the size and are amazed by the OVF, but it's not of interest to me. The X-E bodies are a far better fit to my 'for fun' shooting.

All that I really wanted from this announcement was an X-E body with a 16MP (even XTransII) sensor with the latest 4.2 firmware that the X-T1 has and a flip LCD. I mostly shoot Architecture these days and I do that at waist level so the flip LCD is a must for any new camera that I buy. There is honestly no reason for them to release any new camera without one. For those who don't want it it is out of the way and they've got a flip LCD in so many cameras that the cost of adding it would be fairly negligible I would assume.

 

[GaryLH]

Over at mirrorless lessons..it looks like they went thru a lot of the initial reviews and came up w/ what they thought were the 10 best to read...as always grain of salt time...

http://bestmirrorlessblogs.com/reviews/10-fujifilm-x-pro2-reviews-that-are-absolutely-worth-reading/

Gary

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

If you have and like Fuji lenses (and they are terrific), and you want an optical viewfinder to shoot them with, this camera looks freaking spectacular. That's the only reasonable use case for it, and this will cover most of its users, I suspect.

 

[jsrockit]

$500 for a jpg camera without a lens is still a lot of money.

Sorry for being harsh, but this is nonsense.

 

[FranZ]

Maybe overdue and a bit expensive (in Holland even €1799!) but it is a very nice upgrade covering most of the remaining painpoints after the many firmware upgrades. What I still mis is another magnification level for the OVF. I use the XP1 on the OVF just from the 14 to the 35 and for any lens with a longer FL (like the 56 or 60) I use my XT1. IMHO the OVF is unusable with a 56 or longer lens.
If I will upgrade will depend very much on the quality of the EVF. On the XP1 the EVF is mediocre compared to the XT1 and only useful for emergency situations.

 

[GaryLH]

More details

More details

http://www.fujirumors.com/first-look-fujifilm-x-pro2/

Very interesting read fro Fuji rumor site

Gary

 

[coelacanth]

I have one pre-ordered (done so minutes after the announcement) JUST in case I want it, but most likely will cancel the order and wait for a while. Not because I don't like it, but because I don't need the latest and the greatest and I can play with bunch of native/legacy lenses on X-E1 for now. I'll probably fetch an X-Pro2 after a year or two. I'm sure I'll enjoy it a lot when I get it, but would be great to do so at lower price point. I got my X-E1 for $175 a couple years ago. I'm a cheaper guy nowadays...

 

[Trius]

Sorry for being harsh, but this is nonsense.

Thank you for saying it more kindly than what I was thinking. 😉

Maybe I got lucky; my X-Pro1 produces RAW files. And the JPGs can be very nice.

 

[daveleo]

^ yeh, that's for me too.
The "jpg camera" comment just felt like baiting.

$499 for that camera is a deal, compared to other prices.
We all weigh the pluses and minuses of a camera differently, and then we argue about the weighting factors.
People - drive me nuts.

 

[Lss]

http://www.fujirumors.com/first-look-fujifilm-x-pro2/

Very interesting read fro Fuji rumor site

I particularly liked "100% faster sensor readout". 😀 In all seriousness, given the different number of pixels this is a completely useless piece of propaganda when no definition is given.