Fujifilm X-PRO2 rumors

[johant]

I expect industrie leading IQ and super fast AF in January. 

 

Agreed ... but actually I am quite a bit frustrated with the direction the industry is going ... 16MP RAW files are already insanely big, and now we all have to go to 24MP?

 

For many people (including me), 12MP would provide more than enough resolution, and would put an end to the crazy MP-race. All I care about is low noise and high dynamic range.

[Yellerz]

Personally, I couldn`t give a monkies if they dropped video altogether.

[Larry Bolch]

I have to wonder, what lens lineup would people use for 4K video if in fact it were available.

The existing and future line. While 4k video has four times the information of HD, the sensor remains the same size. An HD image is only two megapixels, and 4k is eight. However, both are generated by the full 16-24MP sensor. No change whatever is needed in the line-up of lenses.

[Tikcus]

Personally, unless I can video until memory card is full and charge the camera whilst filming (no 15 minute limits) I could not care less about video on a camera.

 

I can understand why it is a must have "feature" to sell cameras, like other features that the majority will not use.

 

If video is an important feature, in body stabalisation would also be needed (or fast lenses with stabalisation)

[Larry Bolch]

Personally, unless I can video until memory card is full and charge the camera whilst filming (no 15 minute limits) I could not care less about video on a camera.

 

I can understand why it is a must have "feature" to sell cameras, like other features that the majority will not use.

 

If video is an important feature, in body stabalisation would also be needed (or fast lenses with stabalisation)

For nearly a decade, there has been a very significant tax by the EU on any camera that could record more than 30 minutes. Rather than raising the price on all still cameras with LiveView, camera makers limited recording time. The EU has not been particularly interested in adjusting the tax even though they don't seem clear why the tax should exist. However, heat generated by the electronics also presented a serious problem as well as another reason to limit recording times. 

 

This has not been a problem with video producers, since almost all shows are done with takes of only seconds, allowing the point of view and field of view to be changed to enhance storytelling and avoid the boredom of long shots. While such information is obvious to anyone watching TV or movies, somehow this seems to not get through to amateurs—along with using suitable camera support.

[gordonrussell76]

This old chestnut again

 

You don't want video, fine don't use it, but why ruin the party for the rest of us, and its not going to mess with your lauded IQ and AF in fact it may improve it. The main impact of 4K on a camera is in terms of processor speed and firmware. Basically the firmware needs to have good codecs, good compression and ideally avoid line binning all of the above cost in processor speed. So you need a really really fast processor. How does this impact Stills, it doesn't because its not like you take video and stills at the same time, so the processor is just over powered for stills. No negative impact to you and in fact a positive one if you process raw to JPEG in camera as that will be quicker, if you are  JPeg shooter or JPEG+RAW shooter the write speed to card will be quicker so that will also help with burst shooting. Oh an interestingly the processor will help with AF speed. So having a bitching processor in your camera is good for stills, if you have to have 4k in there to justify it then just deal, you will be getting the IQ and AF, just faster.

 

The only negative that video potentially brings to stills cameras comes from IBIS in my opinion, video recording generates heat on the sensor, this is easily dealt with a heat sink, however an effective heat sink is hard to implement at the same time as IBIS. All of this is academic as we currently have no IBIS in the Fuji line up they have decided to go lens based for this, which I actually agree with. It means the stabilization can be optimized to the lens in question.

 

In terms of lens for video, I have the 10-24mm which is my primary video lens as its gives a fabulous 15-35mm range which is perfect for most of what I shoot in terms of video, its a constant aperture across the zoom and it has fantastic OIS that so far on HD usage with my X-T1 has given great results with due care. The only thing missing from this zoom is true manual focus, but for my purposes which is to lock focus its workable. I grant you if you want to do repeatable pull focus your hosed, however if your doing that, you probably have a dedicated rig for video. It also has a massive advantage over the Pany and Oly equivalent Wide Angle fixed aperture zooms in that it has a Filter thread so you can put filters on it without faffing around with a Lee mount. It ironically in my opinion the best all round zoom for video for mirrorless, the irony being that the camera's it works on don't have the codec or bitrate to do it justice.

 

The most important reason to not object to video though is money.

 

Fuji cameras are in a very interesting niche, they can achieve professional and astounding results and yet there are within reach of enthusiasts. 

 

I am an enthusiast, and there is no way on this earth I can afford or justify a Sony A7 Rii or to compliment my Fuji  with a Panasonic GH4, or maintain two lens library's/

 

I love my fuji, and stills are my main endeavor, however I like to record video of my family and more importantly I record gigs and do the occasional youtube video with bands that I am in. I would like to a) only have to spend money on one system to do this I think that some of Fuji's lens are astounding and I would like to see what they can do with a decent video Codec. I will state here that while 4k would be nice. I would happily settle for a rock solid, non line binning high bitrate HD codec and be more than happy.

 

Finally on the competition  front, whilst I tend to agree that my ideal next camera woud be a 16MP not 24MP sensor with upgraded Firmware and 4k and Phase detection pixels over the entirety of the sensor. I don't need the extra resolution and I rather like the rendering of the current sensor thank you. However to remain competitive Fuji have to be seen to innovate otherwize all DPReview lot will be pointing out how superior Sony's are all the time. I think it cobblers, but to the man in the street you have to appear competitive becuase they look at specs not images. I want fuji to be successful becuase I want more cameras and lens please. I rather like them

[Tom]

You don't want video, fine don't use it, but why ruin the party for the rest of us, and its not going to mess with your lauded IQ and AF in fact it may improve it. 

 

Calm down mate. This is just a discussion about an unknown new camera. We discuss rumors. We discuss our favorite features. We're not part of the Fuji marketing decision team for the Pro2. Even if I'm surprised how close the Pro2 will probably match my personal dreams - I can't ruin your party... 

[gordonrussell76]

I am calm about it, but there are two things than continually frustrate me around the Fuji narrative i see here and in forums elsewhere.

 

1) That we don't need video. True some of us don't but the reality is some of us do and there is no mystical impact to still just by having video. I dislike lazy thinking like that.

 

2) The X-Trans sensor is somehow inferior because lightroom can't deal with it. There are many other programs that do but involve a change to your workflow.

 

I guess I am image centric as a photographer and the idea of putting workflow in front of image quality annoys me, I want the best possible IQ from my camera and will utilize everything possible to maximize it. This should give you some insight as to my views on video. I.e if i genuinely though 4k would impact IQ I would be against it.

 

You could ruin my party or more accurately all those who continue the narrative of we don't need 4k. That may already have influenced Fuji if the rumour is to be believed as the X-Pro2 may not have 4k. So that has ruined my party as it means that I am unlikely to buy one. Its also potentially ruining everyones party because if the X series cameras remain niche then Sony and others will continure to maintain and gobble market share and we might see Fuji fail. I grant you both possibilities are an outside chance, but it just seems so stupid to risk it for the sake of ill founded prejudice and what I suspect is a form of reverse snobbery on the part of a lot of the anti video crowd.

 

 

G

[Tom]

So that has ruined my party as it means that I am unlikely to buy one.

 

Don't worry about that. I'll buy two. You can take the T2 with 4k video, mp3 music, gps, instagram & facebook integration and teleskop tilt screen. 

 

And please don't ruin my party. I'm so close to get a real dream camera... 

[milandro]

just as well that this is a petty topic and gets so animated, can’t imagine how ugly it would get if it were something serious involving creeds or human lives at risk because of war, weather changes and disappearing of islands with all their inhabitants.

 

I am sure that then things might need being taken seriously, but all this over a camera?

 

“Surtout, pas trop de zele” – Above all, not too much zeal

Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand-Perigord (1754-1838)

[umad?]

16MP RAW files are already insanely big, and now we all have to go to 24MP?

 

Fuji will most likely go for a compressed RAW. (lossless not the Sony shit) 

 

 

About 4K: I don't need it. Hell I don't even need 1080p or video at all. Still - I hoped that 4 would make it into the camera because of "what comes with it".

4K needs a very fast sensor read out and also a strong processor, both of which would be important for fast autofocusing and a viewfinder without blackout. 

 

Again: 4K isn't all about 4K, it's about the sensor (and processor). 

 

 

But let's wait and see - I am hoping that the hardware is 4K capable but it's just not there with software. 

[Tikcus]

For nearly a decade, there has been a very significant tax by the EU on any camera that could record more than 30 minutes. Rather than raising the price on all still cameras with LiveView, camera makers limited recording time. The EU has not been particularly interested in adjusting the tax even though they don't seem clear why the tax should exist. However, heat generated by the electronics also presented a serious problem as well as another reason to limit recording times. 

 

This has not been a problem with video producers, since almost all shows are done with takes of only seconds, allowing the point of view and field of view to be changed to enhance storytelling and avoid the boredom of long shots. While such information is obvious to anyone watching TV or movies, somehow this seems to not get through to amateurs—along with using suitable camera support.

 

Unless you've deep pockets and can afford a multi camera setup (and have the space and personnel to operate them), recording live events requires a camera (luckily video camera do not have this issue) to record more than a few minutes.

[johant]

Fuji will most likely go for a compressed RAW. (lossless not the Sony shit) 

 

 

 

That would be great!

[ShutterNot]

There is the element of "at what cost" to incorporate video in a camera.

Does it make the camera MORE expensive by adding video capability ?

Does it compromise or weaken the capabilities of the other featuresd of the camera in order to suppport video ?

 

Nothing is for free. The more things a "box" does, the more things can break.

[umad?]

That would be great!

 

(lossless Compression) - from what I have heard, this is very, very likely. That's one reason why I am more than okay with 24MP.  

[umad?]

Does it make the camera MORE expensive by adding video capability ?

 

That's true but not really the point. Thing is: if they had a chance, Fuji would most likely go for a fast sensor. This would benefit them in multiple ways. Same goes for the processor. 

So the costs for 4K would probably be a hardware encoder, probably some licenses and a bit of software work (ok, probably a lot of software work).

[ShutterNot]

That's true but not really the point.

 

Really now. How very condescending and dismissive.

[danwells]

Video of some sort is almost a "free" feature - if you have the sensor reading out continuously anyway (and the only cameras that don't are those with optical viewfinders ONLY), you have the raw materials. 4k video means you have to have the sensor reading out a higher resolution signal - 4k is ~8 mp, and even the highest resolution viewfinders aren't close to that, and you have to have a very powerful processor to compress the signal.

 

I can see three possible reasons why the X-Pro2 doesn't have 4k, only one of which is a problem (assuming you don't care about 4k itself, but only about what else it means for the camera).

 

1.) It's in fact capable of it (sensor, processor and card write speed are all fast enough), but the software isn't ready or Fuji doesn't want to pay to license the right codec, especially on a camera that is rarely used for video anyway. Knowing Fuji, they wouldn't want to throw in terrible 4k with a poor-quality codec just to check a box. Licensing a decent 4k codec probably isn't cheap. If this is the case, they could add 4k with a (possibly paid) firmware update, or just save it for the X-T2 with essentially the same hardware (X-Pro2 and X-T2 for around the same price, same sensor, similar features, but one has hybrid VF and the other has 4k and maybe a couple of other extra tech features). The X-Pro2 is already going to be expensive, and they don't want to make it worse with a license fee for a 4k codec that could add $50-$100 to the price. I suspect Fuji wants to keep the price under the $1700 of the A7II (leaving only the older A7 as a full-frame option that's actually cheaper than the APS-C Fuji).

 

2.)The sensor is capable of it, but the processor isn't fast enough to do it right, or the card write speed can't handle it. This might well be a battery-saving decision instead of a money-saving one. The faster you drive the electronics, the faster they eat the battery (and the NP-W126 isn't a very big battery). The same problem would arise with the X-T2, but the X-T1 is often used with a battery grip, and I'd imagine its successor might be as well. Nobody uses a bottom battery grip on an X-Pro (the balance is similar to putting a motor drive on a Leica, which is to say not good!).

 

3.) (here's the worrisome one). The sensor can't do it. This means we're either getting an older 24 MP sensor (which could still be really nice when combined with XTrans) or the same old IMX071 we've had for years. The only REAL evidence I've seen that we're finally moving on is the Magnum images - none of the solid rumors have mentioned the sensor either way. This would also mean that NO Fuji of this sensor generation will have 4k, including the X-T2.

 

From what little one can tell from sensor specs, I really liked the specs of the IMX271 someone posted a few days ago. That didn't explicitly say it does 4k, either; but its read speed is so fast that it almost has to, no? Hoping it IS the '271, but 4k got left out to save licensing costs or batteries (I'd support either decision - who wants to use a rangefinder for video, anyway)!

[milandro]

one more month and all will be revealed

[umad?]

@milandro

 

I am with you on this one, but I would change the different scenarios a bit:

1. Sensor is 4K ready, but rest of hardware not (for example no 4k encoder) 

2. Sensor is 4K ready, so is the rest of the Hardware, but Software is not there yet (or they are still working on it, using it as an USP for the X-T2 and then, a few weeks later, add it on the X-Pro2) 

3. the Sensor is not 4K ready. 

here comes the thing: I listed 4 possible sensor. Out of those we know that one (IMX193) can't do it.

We don't know about the A6000 sensor (IMX210 - maybe someone else got this infos), but if I had to guess I'd say it's not 4K ready. 

the IMX271 would probably be the most interesting, but it is hard to tell since this isn't used in any product yet. However, 19fps full sensor and SLVS-EC (which is Sony saying: this sensor is reading out incredibly fast) would suggest that it is probably capable of. The move to BSI (and stacked BSI) could mean that a completely new sensor is coming too, but I would not count on it.

 

The A6000s sensor would probably be the most likely and would suggest no 4K coming. Probably a good sensor, but not the big thing many were hoping for

[Larry Bolch]

A number of months back the rumor was that the a7000 sensor was the hold-up. It was said that Sony was willing to sell the sensor to Fuji, but only after they had first crack at it for their own camera for six months. My guess is that the sensor presented problems. This may indicate that the sensor had to be bypassed, or that Fuji was able to negotiate away the six month period of grace. We will find out fairly soon.

[Tikcus]

A number of months back the rumor was that the a7000 sensor was the hold-up. It was said that Sony was willing to sell the sensor to Fuji, but only after they had first crack at it for their own camera for six months. My guess is that the sensor presented problems. This may indicate that the sensor had to be bypassed, or that Fuji was able to negotiate away the six month period of grace. We will find out fairly soon.

 

Sony then separated their sensor business from their camera business, which will have probably removed this clause.

with the prices of Sonys Full Frame A7 cameras starting at sub £800, there is not a lot of room in Sonys lineup for a new APS-C camera (and no new glass on sonys roadmap for APS-C) 

[milandro]

I don’t have any scenarios to play in my imagination. At this point in time it is just plain and simple waiting.

[benjaminthomson]

I got a couple tidbits today from a very reliable source in a local camera shop.

 

#1 - Fuji was very much aiming for December 15, with Jan 15 as the backup date if they couldn't meet the schedule.

 

#2 - he seemed adamant that Fuji is pursuing full frame options, but possibly just a ff x100 to start off with.

 

He got his information directly from a member of the Fuji design team.

[benjaminthomson]

-