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