Threaded

Thought I'd chip in, a few months later to note that in the search for perfection and new features (and horror at the design changes on the X-Pro3) I did sell on my two year old X-Pro2 while it still had some value and picked up an XT3. In line with the theme of this thread, overall, I preferred the images from my X-Pro2! There wasn't a big difference but the XP2 edged it, and I know exactly why - because that was the image style I was used to. Same reason most people are favouring the XP1 in this thread. I also confirmed to myself that I much preferred the X-Pro layout and hybrid finder, and wasn't that impressed with the technological/speed improvements in the XT3 (it's good, just not that good) so I'm now selling my XT3 and have picked up a brand new X-Pro2 in the sales. It just hits the sweet spot for me - more than good enough performance (far in advance of the XP1), great IQ, and great form factor, unspoilt by the excesses of the XP3...

The answer is in your question, this is the effect the clarity setting has as extra processing is required when that’s enabled. Have seen many reports on this on forums by confused early adopters so it’s obviously not communicated very well in the manual. Unfortunately clarity comes at a price!

This is the same locking mechanism carried over from the X-Pro1 and X-Pro2 so existing X-Pro owners won’t be so confused by it (in fact the XT1 worked this way too). The lock is *only* used to lock the dial in A position, engages automatically when the dial is set to A, and must then be pressed to release before setting any other speed. I agree the later XT style lock is probably more useful, but I wonder whether it was just too complicated to try and implement that as well as the combined ISO dial the X-Pro uses.

I’ve seen a few early adopters mention this already - apparently it happens if you’re using the clarity function and is just a side effect of the extra processing going on. It doesn’t happen in continuous as the clarity function is automatically disabled in that setting.

The XP2 is ever so slightly bigger in every dimension so the answer is probably, but it might be a little loose, especially around the grip area. Bear in mind the tripod sockets are in different places (offset on the 1, properly centred on the 2) so don't buy one of the many third party cases that attach via the tripod mount. The official Fuji case or ones like it which go over the strap eyelets should be ok.

If you genuinely think these batteries are sizzling or popping I would definitely not ignore it, that's absolutely not normal and if they are shorting out in some way it could ultimately turn out to be very dangerous, for the camera and also for you! Do the batteries feel hot when you remove them? It's normal for them to be warm if you've used the camera for a while, but not uncomfortable to touch. Do the pins in the battery compartment look straight? Do you know anyone else with an XP2 or other Fuji camera which you could compare yours with, perhaps a camera store nearby? Are you absolutely sure the noises are coming from the battery compartment? You mention a pop when the camera goes off - you couldn't be mistaking this for the click of the EVF curtain moving in and out in the viewfinder?

I'm looking forward to the XP3 release almost just to see the effect it has on the other cameras. I think you might be right about the XP2 being forgotten, but at the same time, I suspect a lot of the love and interest in the XP1 comes from those who only came to it later in the product cycle when it became a much more affordable camera, either new or used. I was one of them - I lusted after but hadn't a hope of ever owning it when it was new, but years later paid literally nothing for it as part of a black friday deal a few months before the XP2 came out, and for the past few years now it's been very cheap to buy and try used. The XP2 hasn't had that moment yet - even now, well into its third year and with the XP3 breathing down its neck, it's still an expensive camera. It hasn't really gotten into the hands of the tinkerers and the hobbyists who might like to try it out as a second or third camera but can't justify the cost. That'll change soon, so it'll be interesting to see whether it does just disappear without a trace or whether a new generation picks it up and runs with it as a budget marvel or new "classic". Personally I'm all in with the XP2 still. I went through my agonising over the IQ differences but concluded that it really is very subjective and even my opinion varies wildly over which is "best" in different scenarios. What's less subjective is how much more capable and complete an overall camera the XP2 is in many other ways. I've owned it longer than the XP1 now, taken many more pictures, and amongst them many more of my own favourites too.

Fujifilm will tell you that the process involved in making the XT2 and X-Pro2 Graphite/Silver is a modern mettarlurgical miracle involving forms of alchemy that our forefathers could only dream of, hence the slightly higher price. In fairness it is a different and seemingly more durable finish than the basic silver paint they spray on parts of the X-E and XT*0. Bear in mind the "silver" X-E2 for one is almost half plastic.

I don't think there's any haze, they're both flagships, just like the XP1 and XT1 before them. Not sure where you're getting the idea either that the XT2 "does so much more" or is getting "more kaizen love", since they both just recently got very significant and near identical updates, despite the XP2 being the older model. Is this just about the 4K? Like it or not the XT SLR-style form factor makes sense for a big expansive EVF, so that's where they put it. The X-Pro meanwhile takes the term "rangefinder style" very literally and to nth degree, striving to be something not just similar looking but in many ways better than a Leica. The division makes sense, but the hybrid you're suggesting less so imo.

I can't see a place for this between the more affordable X-E line for the masses, and the X-Pro for the premium enthusiast - too small of a niche. Obviously the X-T2 is there to serve if a large EVF is your must have feature.

The silver X-Pro1 was a very limited edition - https://ivanjoshualoh.com/2016/06/12/silver-x-pro1/

I don't have any immediate plans to get an X-P2 yet, but as an X-P1 user - 1. Could not care less. If I wanted video I'd buy a different camera but I don't. Incidentally, apparently the reason the XT20 can shoot 4K is it uses a cropped sensor version which generates less heat but is less optimal than the XT2's; perhaps this will be brought to the XP2, but I doubt it at this stage. 2. One of the reasons I'm in the process of switching back from an XT1 to an XP1 was the tilt screen. I just didn't like it. I used it very rarely, and whenever I did, I was usually thinking "well..I could probably have seen the XP's screen from this angle anyway.." - and all the rest of the time it just felt fragile, and vulnerable, and like I was going to accidentally twist it off any minute. It gave the back of the camera a springy feeling that i found really offputting. Much, much happier to go with a camera where the screen's solidly attached where it needs to be. 3. I have two batteries, one gets charged every night, it's never occurred to me to ever charge on the go and I don't ever connect to a pc (I use a wifi card for transfers). They could take the USB socket away entirely and it would make literally no difference to me.

The X-M1 has a faster processor (the EXR Processor II usually found in X-Trans II cameras) but I'm not aware of it being significantly faster to focus, probably because for that you really need phase detection on the sensor - introduced of course with X-Trans II.

If i hadn't just sent my X-Pro1 in for a minor repair I'd absolutely do a controlled comparison - I have many, many examples but nothing that a nitpicker couldn't put down to differences in lens, lighting, wind speed etc. I need my children to sit still one evening while I bore them with test shots. In the meantime here's a SOOC jpeg from the XP1 taken at a ridiculous 12800 ISO and lit only by a distant bonfire - I don't consider it "unusable" or waxy, what do you think? https://flic.kr/p/PbEyeo

Sorry but I have to challenge this - it's nonsense on a couple of levels. I have both an X-Pro1 and an X-E2, shoot exclusively in JPEG, and find the difference between immense in low light. Far from being "unusable" 6400 on the X-Pro1 is excellent IMO - of course it loses some detail but people and things still look perfectly natural, at the default NR setting. The X-E2 with its X-Trans II setup is a very different story. At anything over 1600 people start to look decidedly unnatural, progressively developing anything between a weird sheen, false texture, to the full on, classic waxwork. I see this all the time in pictures of my children at home when the lighting's not good - I have a pretty good idea of what my own children look like, the X-Pro1 gives me that, whereas some of the output from the X-E2 in the exact same circumstances is just plain bizarre in comparison. The point you're missing when you talk about NR settings is that there is something else going on in these X-Trans II cameras with regards to skintones to which the NR setting simply doesn't apply. Turning NR all the way down on the X-E2 will have little or no effect in the situations I'm talking about, and I don't believe that making the dial go to -4 would do anything either other than increase the noise elsewhere in the image. The X-Pro1 is a different beast altogether and suffers none of these issues. I sincerely hope (from what I've read) that the X-Pro2 is similar.