Jump to content

Fujifilm X-PRO2 rumors


Patrick FR

Recommended Posts

The specifications of the X-Pro 2 sound exceptional - pretty much everything any of us have asked for. I'm a tiny bit disappointed in the price, even knowing it was going to be expensive, I had hoped for around $1500, maybe $1600. Close to $2000 is territory no standard APS-C camera has inhabited in years, more expensive than the X-Pro 1 at launch, and we really haven't seen a relatively broad market  APS-C model that expensive since the early days of the D300 in 2007 (I suspect the Canon 7D was in the same range at launch), although Nikon is now trying to get $2000 for the new D500. Even at $1500, the X-Pro 2 would have been among the most expensive APS-C cameras around (other than Leica and the Hasselblad-rebadged Sonys). At $1799-$1899, it will be well above anything else except the D500 and a few real oddities.

 

Looking at non-full frame interchangeable lens cameras above $1000 (there is no question the X-Pro 2 was going to be well above $1000), and ignoring Leica and Hasselblad, there are only a few models presently on the market. The only models above $1500 are the not yet available D500, astronomical variants of cameras that are otherwise less expensive, and the Samsung NX1 and Sigma SD1, both of which have lens mounts so odd that you never see them. I teach photography at the college level (I only have time to post consistently because I'm both on semester break and have had lousy shooting weather), and have been to PhotoPlus and various other events over the years where people wear every imaginable camera, including Phase One systems. I have NEVER seen a Sigma SLR "in the wild" and the only Samsung NX camera I've ever seen in use is one of the very low end models a student brought to class a few years ago. I suspect that Leica outsells both Samsung and Sigma interchangeable lens cameras handily (at least in the US - the Samsungs may be more common in Asia), and they may actually be less common than medium format systems or astronomical variants of common cameras, given that I occasionally see Leicas and medium format systems at workshops or in use at events. I think that everything currently available above $1500 (other than full-frame, of course) can be dismissed as extremely limited market oddities pretty easily.

 

Between $1000 and $1500, we run into a few relatively common cameras, although they all turn up under $1000 in bundles from time to time. There are two common APS-C cameras, two high-end Micro 4/3 models, and the questionable case of the Canon 7D mkII, which is consistently right around $1000 after rebate, and generally includes a free printer. The two APS-C models are Nikon's D7200 and Fuji's own X-T1, both of which turn up in $1500 bundles with upper-end travel zooms that sell for $500 or more, although it's rare to find the bodies for $999 alone. The Panasonic GH4 and Olympus E-M1 also crack the $1000 barrier, although the GH4 is really a video camera more than anything.

 

The other question that affects how  reasonable Fuji's price looks is Sony's A6100, which may have a 36 MP sensor. Sony's almost certainly going to aim over $1000, and one rumor said it might even be in X-Pro 2 territory. I find Sony getting over $1500 for an APS-C camera hard to fathom, almost no matter what the sensor is. They have too few decent lenses (apart from a few FF lenses that will be odd focal lengths on APS-C, many of them slow, bulky or expensive (or more than one of the above)), and they face too much competition from their own full-frame bodies, with the original A7 around $1000, and the A7II, A7r and A7s all clustered between $1500 and $1900. Sony has never built a truly pro-quality APS-C body, and even the original A7 series are fragile by the standards of expensive APS-C bodies (D7200 class build quality for sure, but NOT built and sealed like an E-M1 or even an X-T1).

 

I'm guessing they'll aim right around the launch price of the NEX-7 ($1199), and getting more would require a really nice body (probably weathersealed with IBIS) AND a real commitment to top-end APS-C lenses. While I'd be unsurprised to see IBIS, I'd be a bit surprised by real weathersealing, and pretty shocked to see the lenses, with Sony's history of switching mounts and their current emphasis on FE lenses.They may aim for $1399 or even $1499, especially if it has IBIS and weathersealing, but I suspect they won't sell very many, due to lens availability. If the Sony is a "sensor in a box" with a lousy kit lens, relatively poor controls and less than stellar build quality, it almost doesn't matter how good that sensor is (until Nikon gets their hands on it and throws it in a (possibly mirrorless) D7200 successor, or Pentax sticks it in a sub-$1000 DSLR with several very interesting features that nobody has lenses for). On the other hand, if the sensor is spectacular AND Sony gets their act together on the body and lenses, it may put a lot of pressure on Fuji.

 

Nikon's reasoning for asking $2000 for the D500 comes down to speed, high ISOs and durability. The D500 has a brand-new AF system that is supposed to blow anything else (except the D5) out of the water, calibrated ISOs as high as 51,200 (with a HI-range capability over "1.5 million"), 10 FPS, and is supposed to be built to the standards of the D810, which would be superior to any crop sensor camera currently manufactured with the possible exception of the E-M1. The speed-optimized sensor may or may not deliver optimum image quality at lower ISOs, and I'd be very surprised if it was as good as the X-Pro 2 below ISO 3200 or 6400. They are so confident in the appeal of the speed and durability for a specific market that they have actually priced the D500 above a couple of their own full-frame bodies.

 

Can Fuji really get $1800 or more for the X-Pro 2 with this competition (and a lot of nice cameras at or below $1000)? I think so, but it has to be pretty close to perfect at what it is (and it may well be). It is a completely different, even opposite camera from the D500, although I hope for build quality of a true pro standard, as claimed for the D500 - at a price this high, it should be REALLY beautifully and ruggedly built, with excellent sealing. Its real competitors are NOT other APS-C cameras at all, but the various ~24 MP full-frame bodies from Sony, Nikon and Canon, which are clustered right around its price. The X-Pro 2 will actually be more significantly expensive than the original A7, D610 and EOS 6D, directly competitive with the A7II and D750, and somewhat cheaper than the aging 5D mkIII.  The 24 MP Sony full-frame sensor (as used by all of these bodies except the Canons) is really excellent, but the APS-C sensor assisted by X-Trans may give it a run for its money, and needs to to justify the price. It needs to be right in there in terms of image quality with 24 MP full frame, and only a little bit behind the generally more expensive high-pixel full-frame bodies in overall IQ - no, a 24 MP sensor isn't going to compete with the 42 MP A7rII sensor, but it needs to make truly top quality 24x36" prints, leaving the differences to serious pixel-peepers and owners of 44" printers!

 

I think Fuji has a significant lens advantage over Sony, and even Canon and Nikon are arguable (the very best Canon and Nikon full-frame lenses are as good as most of the Fujinons, but they are much heavier, bulkier and costlier, while the lenses of comparable price and weight are not as good). A 24 MP full-frame body is an unlikely pairing with the very exotic lenses where Fuji can't compete - most of the big telephotos will either end up on an ultra-high pixel count body, a high-speed body, or perhaps an APS-C body for extended reach (the D500 will probably be popular for big glass). The X-Pro 2 will be much smaller and lighter than a full-frame Canon or Nikon with lenses of comparable quality, and even than an A7 or A7II  except with very carefully selected lenses.

 

The choice of hybrid "rangefinder", pure EVF or SLR is up to the individual photographer, but that hybrid finder needs to be excellent in both modes, because the viewfinders on the competition are close to the best in the business. Similarly, the autofocus and metering need to be truly superb, because the X-Pro 2 is competing with the very best.

 

Especially with the quality of the lens range, the X-Pro 2 has a good chance of justifying its audacious price tag, but everything needs to work just right to get it in that rarefied company. Fuji has set themselves a tough target by pricing the X-Pro 2 well above all other crop-sensor cameras except the superfast D500, and right in the middle of the current range of 24 mp full-frame bodies. They are really saying "compare our crop sensor camera to an A7II or a D750, and we think you'll prefer the experience, image quality and build quality" - a tough, but possible assignment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Price doesn't matter. The Pro2 will start at $2000 and will end at $500 in 3 years. So you can wait for the price you want to pay.

 

Except in 3 years the PRO 3 will be discussed with all it's goodies. How far down the road do you push this envelope before you buy ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What were the first quarter markdowns on the T-1?  Seems like it was around $2-300 (w/kit lens).  If the Pro 1 is launched at 1799 (is this as a kit, or body only?), and they start their markdowns that would put it around 1599 worst case? Or am I way off here?

 

Too many questions yet to be answered....As Milandro says, all questions will be answered on the 15th...

Link to post
Share on other sites

And, when it comes to pricing, a lot of things will depend upon local situations.

 

The X-T1 was €1,199 when introduced in the NL and now after 2 years it is... €1,199 !

 

Slow market around here, only occasional cash backs ( not like the UK and we cannot buy those because they are only for residents)  and no price fighting among the shops here.

 

Look, there is only ONE shop (never heard of them, they do not appear to have a physical shop and they are not “ official dealer” which doesn’t make me want to rush sending them my hard earned cash ) among 20 ( many have chains with many shops around the country) which sells the X-T1 at a different, lower, price.

 

http://www.kieskeurig.nl/systeemcamera/product/1850572-fujifilm-x-t1/prijzen

 

 

Different kettle of fish elsewhere in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hard launches are always better than paper launches.

 

But TBH i'm more interested in when the XF 100-400 will ship.

 

My next camera upgrade (unless a lottery win happens) will most likely be to the XT-3(0) generation.

Unless the current gear breaks it is unlikely it will be upgraded any time soon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Price doesn't matter. The Pro2 will start at $2000 and will end at $500 in 3 years. So you can wait for the price you want to pay.

 

This one is easy. We knew that sooner or later Pro2/XT2 would come. And we started deposit. So now, if you got that money just buy it. Remember, we live only once (very likely)...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Except in 3 years the PRO 3 will be discussed with all it's goodies. How far down the road do you push this envelope before you buy ?

Generally four to five years, in my case.

 

So I'm perfectly happy to snatch up a X-Pro2 when the shops dump them to make room for the X-Pro3.

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to know what the kits will be like on the X-Pro 2. If I were Fuji, I'd go for a "buy body and lens together for instant savings" strategy, rather than defined kits. I don't think very many photographers will choose a nearly $2000 mirrorless body with an exotic finder as their first X-mount camera (perhaps a few who have been thinking about switching or adding Fuji, may have borrowed or rented one, or even own an X100 of one variety or another, but haven't taken the plunge). Most X-Pro 2 buyers will probably own an X-Pro 1, X-T1 or X-E body and a few lenses already, so any kit lens choice risks duplication for a lot of people. Nikon (perhaps others as well) has often run promotions on higher-end bodies where they have a list of lens savings ranging from $50 to $400 or so when purchased with a body, sometimes with extra savings for buying more than one lens (every time I've seen it, multiple lenses are eligible, but there is sometimes a bonus of $100 or so on top of the individual rebates for two lenses, and I think I once even saw a three lens bonus). Since Fuji has few cheap lenses, they might start the savings at $100 (unless they put the teleconverter at $50), and they might or might not reach $400 on any lens, since the largest numbers are sometimes on 300 f2.8s and such.

Link to post
Share on other sites

“ Bigger and heavier" is going to disappoint quite a few, certainly among the plethora of of those who asked for the exact opposite.

 

I suppose that it is the unavoidable trade-off which is the price that one has to pay (well along with a serious premium in extra shekels) for adding things of dubious utility ( of course indispensable to some!) such as a doble SD cad slot or the weather sealing which the great majority of week-end warriors are never going to even remotely challenge because the rain forest is very far from their back garden.

 

I think I like bigger and heavier and in itself is not the main problem. I have more of a problem with the extra shekels which I ain’t likely to shed since I am not seeing any thing which is gonna make this radically better then my X-T1.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this will definitely suit me for the summer time when I look at adding a second camera to my kit. The X-100T is most definitely a go every where camera with me - but sometimes I just want a little bit extra. Of course it will also need a lens but in this case will probably go for a zoom.

 

So waiting will give me time to see that it will fulfil my needs and also work out which lens combination I need to go with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another 45g or so is pretty negligible, wouldn't worry me. Very slight increase in size wouldn't either - sometimes it makes it easier to hold.

 

Must say I'm more excited about this cam than any other I have been in a long while. I'd like more details on the sensor itself before committing to whether I'd buy or not, but if dynamic range is nearer the state of the art, I'd definitely be interested.

 

I'm also quietly hoping that part of the delay might have been in working with Adobe to fix LR issues, but that's probably just dreaming.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Posts

    • Thank you for checking, I have just observed the same behavior with the 35mm f/2 - X-S10 with v2.10 chooses 1/100s. I guess I will use the specific minimum shutter speed or simply force myself to use the M mode more. 
    • Can I ask, what type of audio are you looking to capture?
    • Hi All, This is my first post. Hope this hasn't been covered before. I have something I'm trying to figure out on my x100v. I typically have my camera in natural live view with "Preview Exposure" off because I don't like seeing my exposure settings reflected in the image in the EVF. However, it seems that, in this setup, the live histogram no longer adjusts based on my exposure settings... Is there any way to get the histogram to show results based on what the resulting image will be without having the EVF brighten/darken based on exposure settings? With "preview exposure" on, I find it hard to compose-- especially in certain situations when trying to protect the HL's. Thanks very much! Collin
    • Hi all,Second post here would appreciate the input. I just purchased an X-T3 and X-H1.The EVFs on paper are meant to be the same with same refresh rates when in boost mode.The sizes are also meant to be almost exactly the same at 0.50 inches X-T3 and 0.48 inches X-H1 with the same resolution.However the X-H1 EVF feels smaller (bigger black border around the edges) and not as clear. It also gives me eye strain after just a few minutes. (I have adjusted diopter). It feels like its further away if that makes sense?Has anyone else noticed a difference between the EVFs when using them side by side because on paper they are meant to be the same. Perhaps its just this particular X-H1.Thanks,
    • I must have activated the wrong setting because now when I switch to the OVF the white windows stays for a second and then completely disappears. Any idea how to get it back? Thank you all so much. 🙂
×
×
  • Create New...