Clicky

Jump to content


Photo

X-pro 2 - I don't get it!


  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

#1 petergabriel

petergabriel

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 269 posts
  • LocationDenmark

Posted 25 November 2016 - 08:31 PM

Advertisement (Gone after free registration)
1. Allegedly the reason x-pro 2 has no 4K video is because of heat, yet its body is bigger than the x-t2 that does have 4K which in my world means that there is less room for heat dispersion. The hybrid viewfinder can't take up that much space, so the heat explanation seems lame.

2. X-pro 2 has no articulating screen as it would add weight and bulk, yet the x-t2 has it and it is still a smaller, lighter camera.

3. X-pro 2 does not charge via usb. X-t2 does. Why the difference?

I love Fujifilm, but these questions really bug me, as I really prefer the x-pro form factor, but feel I am missing out on some the cool stuff from the x-t2.
  • karin.gottschalk and jeffp3456 like this

#2 Chucktin

Chucktin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 152 posts

Posted 25 November 2016 - 09:25 PM

It grew, like topsy ... or ... There's more than one design team and those were the choices they made. You choose. Love mine, even wifie says images have got something extra.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

#3 kimcarsons

kimcarsons

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 212 posts

Posted 25 November 2016 - 11:22 PM

My personal theory? It's Fuji's marketing department's way of ensuring that something you need/want is missing from each model, so that you end up buying both.


  • c0ldc0ne, pro11111, MartinP and 2 others like this

#4 c0ldc0ne

c0ldc0ne

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 61 posts

Posted 25 November 2016 - 11:28 PM

My personal theory? It's Fuji's marketing department's way of ensuring that something you need/want is missing from each model, so that you end up buying both.


It's called product differentiation and some companies are quite adept at it. Like Apple making you feel that you need an iMac, MacBook, iPad AND an iPhone and not at all think that one might be redundant.

#5 frankinfuji

frankinfuji

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 155 posts
  • LocationThailand

Posted 26 November 2016 - 06:05 AM

I reckon it's part evolution and part market segmentation.

X-Pro 2 design probably started well before X-T2, and USB charging and 4k were not part of the brief. When working on development of the X-T2 the team added new features to the spec based on a review of competition.

But there's also the marketing strategy to aim the cameras at different perceived market segments, and some marketing genius thinks that a rangefinder style body should not have an articulating screen and that a dslr style body needs a mock prism housing.

I wish Fuji would just make the best body they can, and ignore fashion.

Edited by frankinfuji, 26 November 2016 - 06:06 AM.

  • karin.gottschalk likes this

#6 oliaha

oliaha

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 17 posts
  • LocationBerlin

Posted 26 November 2016 - 12:32 PM

I have both, and yes the X-T2 is newer, has basily the same sensor, has more features and so on ... in short the x-t2 is maybe slightly the better camera, BUT I enjoy shooting the X-Pro 2 way more. I cant really tell you why but its just more fun ... for me at least. Not saying the X-T is not being used, I mainly use it for street and traveling, but most of my portrait or people stuff I enjoy more with my X-Pro2.


  • karin.gottschalk, Chucktin and PatC like this

#7 adzman808

adzman808

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 390 posts

Posted 26 November 2016 - 10:57 PM

1. Allegedly the reason x-pro 2 has no 4K video is because of heat, yet its body is bigger than the x-t2 that does have 4K which in my world means that there is less room for heat dispersion. The hybrid viewfinder can't take up that much space, so the heat explanation seems lame.
2. X-pro 2 has no articulating screen as it would add weight and bulk, yet the x-t2 has it and it is still a smaller, lighter camera.
3. X-pro 2 does not charge via usb. X-t2 does. Why the difference?
I love Fujifilm, but these questions really bug me, as I really prefer the x-pro form factor, but feel I am missing out on some the cool stuff from the x-t2.


1. Well... that's the official line, maybe it's lame or BS, but it's what they're telling us

2. XT2 is smaller in some dimensions, but larger in others (like height).. it also weighs a little more, despite basically running a smaller footprint, perhaps there's some heatsinking in there...

3. As does the X100t (so personally I too feel the XP2 should of offered this)

Peter, just an observation... no daming or finger pointing on my part.

But you seem to to have several 'should I or shouldn't I buy one' threads about the X-Pro2 going on, and your hesitance and anti-reticence on the subject is 100% understandable

But the answer can only come from you.

IMHO the XP2 is all about the hybrid VF...

If that's not a big enough USP or not enough of an upgrade over the original for you then frankly the XP2 is quite likely not enough of an upgrade period... either pick one of the many other EVF MILC cameras out there or cross your fingers for a XE3 type body, if fuji/24mp/corner mounted VF is important to you.

It would be a big shame if a bunch of people off the internet convinced you to get a camera you didn't really like
  • karin.gottschalk likes this

Cheers, Adam
My Website, home of the largest X-Pro series opinion piece on the 'net:
http://adambonn.com/


#8 petergabriel

petergabriel

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 269 posts
  • LocationDenmark

Posted 26 November 2016 - 11:12 PM

Hi Adam,

But I love my x-pro 1 and would like the better high iso handling, faster AF and improved EVF. Just don't see why they (Fujifilm) has skipped some obvious choices for the x-pro 2 compared to the x-t2. Being that I like the rangefinder form factor doesn't mean e.g. I dislike articulating screens.

 

In Denmark where I live there are easily 2-3 x-pro 2 bodies for sale used on the biggest used market site. That worries me (all because of x-t2?), but given I can buy a 4 month old x-pro 2 in mint condition for approx 1200 euro (1280 us dollars) I might give it a go. Market price in Denmark is 1850 euro, and that includes cash back rebate, so that is quite a bargain.



#9 Aswald

Aswald

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,042 posts

Posted 27 November 2016 - 06:59 AM

Been using the Pro2. Love it and don't find it lacking compared to the T2 which I also shoot with.

 

However, I do find that I take them to different events.

 

Pro2 and T2 caters to different photographers. Not due to superiority but more on style of shooting.

 

If you are coming from Pro1, it's a BIG jump to the Pro2. No need to covet the T2's "superiority"....coz, there really isn't any significant ones to speak of.



#10 petergabriel

petergabriel

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 269 posts
  • LocationDenmark

Posted 27 November 2016 - 09:25 AM

Wouldn't you say 1200 euro is a fine price for a used x-pro 2 in mint condition? It's like 2/3 the store price.

#11 Aswald

Aswald

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,042 posts

Posted 28 November 2016 - 04:07 AM

It's a good price. Photographers who need the camera will buy without hesitation.

 

From past observation, the price may hold until nearer to news of a successor. The x-pro3? Say another 1.5 years down the road......

 

Until then, you may see some drop but not too drastically.


  • Plaatje likes this

#12 Plaatje

Plaatje

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 39 posts

Posted 28 November 2016 - 11:12 AM

It's a good price. Photographers who need the camera will buy without hesitation.

 

From past observation, the price may hold until nearer to news of a successor. The x-pro3? Say another 1.5 years down the road......

 

Until then, you may see some drop but not too drastically.

 

That's what I'm hoping for and still saving . . . .. .


photo's can be seen at:    http://www.ipernity.com/home/731285

and:                                   https://www.flickr.c...tos/plooifiets/


#13 Aswald

Aswald

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,042 posts

Posted 29 November 2016 - 04:53 AM

That's what I'm hoping for and still saving . . . .. .

 

All good things come to those who wait....Pro2 is worth it.



#14 asathor

asathor

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts
  • LocationStuck on land too long.

Posted 08 December 2016 - 03:45 AM

I recently shot a play in its entirety without emitting any light or sound using an X-Pro2 with a 56/f1.2 (and a few shots with the 35/f2), you can't do that with an X-T2.

 

The lead actors wife sitting next to me thought I quit shooting when the show started.

 

The Optical finder is necessary for this to work as is the the electronic shutter, no other camera has both. I shot ISO 400, f1.2 to f2 and around 1/200s. When the action was lit my multiple stage lamps the images were technically excellent except for motion, bad photographer etc. When lit by one or a few stage lights it would become apparent that some of the lamps had a short glow cycle where the color would change with the power net frequency but that is not the cameras fault. Long exposures is not an option when people are moving and talking and high shutter speeds would need higher ISO and have more stripes plus cause differing white balance frame to frame.

 

The X-Pro2 can do things no other camera can do so it doesn't need to be an X-T2 or participate in the specrace.

 

I am adding a link to a test video Shot in Across with the 35/f2 - HANDHELD - in a Dark Room - and it's not 4k - but I was sitting at the bar where Whisky was cold and by the 3rd set you wouldn't know that 3 of the 5 are not regular band members. I am going back tomorrow.  https://boundarylaye...eos/i-sGL8XQk/A (feel free to browse my website just know that it includes a lot of family, casual and snapshots of people and places dear to me).


  • karin.gottschalk likes this

#15 frod

frod

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 309 posts

Posted 28 December 2016 - 05:17 PM

1. There are much better options for 4k video than either camera
2. This is just a form factor thing surely? The X-Pro/X100 cameras are every inch designed to look vintage
3. First thing anyone who buys a camera that charges is to buy an external charger

All nice to haves but not showstoppers by most measures.

The aperture ring is for composing in the third dimension, not removing it!


#16 kimcarsons

kimcarsons

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 212 posts

Posted 28 December 2016 - 05:39 PM

1. There are much better options for 4k video than either camera
2. This is just a form factor thing surely? The X-Pro/X100 cameras are every inch designed to look vintage
3. First thing anyone who buys a camera that charges is to buy an external charger

All nice to haves but not showstoppers by most measures.

 

1. "Much" is stretching it. There are slightly better 4k cameras in the price range.

2. That's a big part of it for sure. I never used the OVF except to play around on the X-Pro. But I still preferred the form factor.

3. The X-T2 came with a charger, but I haven't taken it out of the box and I doubt I ever will. Every time I've charged the camera, it's been via the USB port. It's the way of the future!



#17 frod

frod

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 309 posts

Posted 28 December 2016 - 10:41 PM

I prefer to have 1 or 2 batteries charging while I'm out shooting with another pair, personally. I can't take the downtime of having to tether the camera to a charger.
  • Noon likes this

The aperture ring is for composing in the third dimension, not removing it!


#18 kimcarsons

kimcarsons

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 212 posts

Posted 29 December 2016 - 12:05 AM

I prefer to have 1 or 2 batteries charging while I'm out shooting with another pair, personally. I can't take the downtime of having to tether the camera to a charger.

 

I still carry a spare battery, but with the X-T2 I've never had to use it (that is, never exhausted the battery during a session). When I get someplace with an outlet (home, coffee shop, DMV, whatever), I just plug the camera in to charge so that it's always full when I head back out. I haven't even had it dip below 70% yet... The USB cable and little apple USB charger add almost no weight/bulk to my bag, so I always have it with me. It's one of those things (like a tilting LCD) that everybody thinks (and vehemently attests!) they'd never use but once they've tried it they can't imagine living without it.



#19 petergabriel

petergabriel

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 269 posts
  • LocationDenmark

Posted 29 December 2016 - 07:30 AM

Yes, it must be nice to have the ability to charge with an usb charger, but whether I have to bring spare batteries or a usb charger is much the same to me.

#20 petergabriel

petergabriel

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 269 posts
  • LocationDenmark

Posted 29 December 2016 - 07:32 AM

Is the OVF brighter in pro 2 than in the old pro 1? I find the pro 1's OVF to dark at night whereas the EVF is much brighter. Almost like night vision


 
x

Registration is free

Not registered? Really?

Discover the full potential of the Fuji X Forum... register now!
Registration is free and done in a few minutes!

As registered member you can discuss, post your questions and present your images.
And get in contact with Fuji X photographers worldwide!

We are looking forward to you!

The Fuji X Forum Team

Register Close