Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

With so many impressive firmware updates, how does the upgraded X-Pro 2 compare with a new X-Pro 3 

in terms of image quality and auto focus usability ? (yes, subjective question)

There seem to be a lot of XP2's around looking for a home at attractive prices but I haven't seen a comparison.

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Auto focus definitely better.

Image quality should not be visible on real life images.

No B&W in camera fine tweaking on the Pro2 nor the latest film simulations.

If you shoot RAW and don't need advanced focus modes and fine tuning, Pro2 should be fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my friend just got the xpro 3 i own two xpro2s.. did not notice a diff in raw files what so ever... better focus by a little. get the xpro 2! save money buy lenses !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm coming from canon and get the xpro 3 two weeks now I don't know the difference between xpro 2 

But I'm very surprised the image quality deliver from the xpro 3.

What I saw the images from xpro 2 they are almost ,maybe the same quality as the xpro3 

If I owned the xpro 2 or xt 3 I will probably not upgrade to xpro 3 

If you are going for a new camera just one camera I will definitely go for the xpro 3 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, one frame said:

I'm coming from canon and get the xpro 3 two weeks now I don't know the difference between xpro 2 

But I'm very surprised the image quality deliver from the xpro 3.

What I saw the images from xpro 2 they are almost ,maybe the same quality as the xpro3 

If I owned the xpro 2 or xt 3 I will probably not upgrade to xpro 3 

If you are going for a new camera just one camera I will definitely go for the xpro 3 

i totally agree!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/3/2020 at 6:12 PM, one frame said:

I'm coming from Canon and get the X-Pro3 two weeks now, I don't know the difference to the X-Pro2, but I'm very surprised by the image quality delivered from the X-Pro3. What I saw on the images from the X-Pro2, they are almost maybe the same quality as the X-Pro3. If I owned the X-Pro2 or X-T3, I would probably not upgrade to the X-Pro3. If you are going for a new camera, just one camera, I will definitely go for the X-Pro3.

I can only agree too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

There's a lot of misconception re. the sensor generations Fuji uses. In essence there's no visible image quality difference between the 24Mp X-TransIII/Processor and the 26Mp X-TransIV/Processor. The 2Mp are negligible. There's virtually no visible difference in low-light performance as well. The BSI (back-side illuminated) technology of the 26Mp sensor has a theoretical advantage here because the metal wiring layer is not on top of the photocells, but beneath them. However, the photocells of the 24Mp are larger and therefor the yield of the 26Mp BSI-sensor is lower than the 24Mp FSI sensor (front-side illuminated). That glitches out almost all advantages here.

What does make a difference is the number of AF pixels on the 26Mp sensor (much higher) and the shorter circuits due to the BSI technology of the 26Mp sensor. That allows for greater throughput capacity and quicker AF. Top that with a more powerful processor in the 26Mp camera's and you have snappier AF and higher video bit rates (up to 400 Mbps).

The main differences between the x-pro2 (I'm a long-time owner) and the x-pro3 (tried it extensively) are the LCD screen and the viewfinder. The hidden LCD screen could be very beneficial to a street shooter (from the hip). However, imo it sucks to have to open it for menu access and menu access through the EVF is cumbersome when you wear glasses (and have thumbprints all over them). I prefer a screen like the X100V were the user has options to choose how to use it and which is nicely integrated in the body. The sub monitor is imo a useless gadget as there's not backlighting button like on the X-H1/GFX50S. 

The viewfinder for me is the real dealbreaker on the X-Pro3. Though it is larger and brighter, in OVF mode (which is why I bought the X-Pro) there's only one magnification left (x0.50) rather than the 2 magnification levels of the X-Pro2. That renders the X-Pro3 in OVF mode useless for lenses shorter than 23mm and longer than 35mm. I can't use my 16/18mm and my beloved 50mm anymore on the X-Pro3 in OVF unless I settle with a very tiny frame or frame lines outside my OVF. For now I'm sticking to the X-Pro2.

Edited by Herco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Herco said:

However, the photocells of the 24 MP are larger and therefor the yield of the 26 MP BSI-sensor is lower than the 24 MP FSI-sensor (front-side illuminated). That glitches out almost all advantages here.

This is not true, the values achieved by the BSI-sensor clearly exceed those of the FSI-sensor. The size of the individual photocells only plays a marginal role, since the size difference is not so eminently large. The gain in light utilization therefore exceeds the loss in size difference. But the higher resolution brings with it other advantages that should be well known by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Photonics said:

This is not true, the values achieved by the BSI-sensor clearly exceed those of the FSI-sensor. The size of the individual photocells only plays a marginal role, since the size difference is not so eminently large. The gain in light utilization therefore exceeds the loss in size difference. But the higher resolution brings with it other advantages that should be well known by now.

The size of the photocells in the 24Mp sensor is approx. 8% larger than in the 26Mp. The gain differs about 20% so there is certainly an advantage for the 26Mp sensor. However, with higher gain there's also slightly higher noise. To correct that, the NR profile of the 26Mp is slightly different. The end result is barely visible in real live low light RAWs (in Capture One). That coincides with the Sony specs for the sensors. Both 24Mp and 26Mp sensor are from Sony and the 26Mp in Fuji is the same sensor as the 61Mp in the A7RIV and in the GFX100. Only cut to a different size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Herco said:

Both 24 MP and 26 MP sensor are from Sony and the 26 MP in Fuji is the same sensor as the 61 MP in the A7RIV and in the GFX100. Only cut to a different size.

It may be true that the noise reduction profile of the two cameras differs, but it should not be overlooked that the susceptibility to noise of a BSI-sensor is generally lower, so there is a clear advantage here as well. Also, the technologies of various sensors should not be confused with each other. Although the sensors are actually manufactured by Sony, there is no Fujifilm X-Trans sensor in the Sony α7R IV, which is developed by Fujifilm and only used for Fuji cameras. The Sony α7R IV therefore works with a BSI-CMOS Bayer sensor!

Share this post


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...

×
×
  • Create New...