I've got an X-Pro2 right now...anything you want to know?

[harwellthrasher]

Thanks for answering all these questions. I have a question of my own: The X-T1 has a viewfinder option for EVF that uses the eye sensor to turn the EVF on and off. It's great for wandering around with the camera on without draining the battery, since the EVF only turns on when you bring the camera to your eye. Does the X-Pro2 have a similar viewfinder option?

[wildcart]

Can someone process some raw files with Lightroom? Adobe just released a new version 

[typeronin]

Thanks for answering all these questions. I have a question of my own: The X-T1 has a viewfinder option for EVF that uses the eye sensor to turn the EVF on and off. It's great for wandering around with the camera on without draining the battery, since the EVF only turns on when you bring the camera to your eye. Does the X-Pro2 have a similar viewfinder option?

 

Yes, they have this for the EVF and the OVF.

[wadpl]

Thank you very much for your kind and solid answers, Typeronin !!!   I'll follow your posts.

 

Best regards,

 

Alejandro

[cug]

Quick question: does the viewfinder have the same field distortion (pin cushion) as the X100T? 

 

I had created an order yesterday, then I decided to take another hard look at the viewfinders of my cameras (X-E2, X-T1, Canon D40, and I had an X100T until the beginning of the week) and it took me about three seconds to go to the computer and cancel the order. 

 

There is no way in hell I'm giving up the EVF of the X-T1 for this little view hole ... 

[danwells]

It's not going to charge via USB - the battery is 7.2 (or 7.4 - that's just a marking difference) volts, and USB is 5 volts. I've never seen any non-Sony camera with a built-in voltage boost regulator that lets it charge via USB (not saying no others exist, just that I haven't seen it except on Sonys). The voltage-boosting Sonys are notoriously slow to charge that way (their external chargers are 2-3 times as fast as charging in camera), and there aren't many situations in which you'd want to use a $3200 A7rII as an inferior replacement for a $20 battery charger. While travel may seem an obvious one, the charger isn't very big (Fuji, take a look at Sony's little compact charger, or, better yet, just ask them where they bought it), and there are an awful lot of places with funky power where I'd much rather plug in a $20 object than a $3200 one...

 

Non-Sony compacts that charge via USB are generally using a 3.7 volt battery (single cell, while most interchangeable lens cameras use dual cell batteries at twice the voltage). Like a cell phone (also 3.7 volts), a 3.7 volt camera charges easily from 5 volts...

[adzman808]

It's not going to charge via USB - the battery is 7.2 (or 7.4 - that's just a marking difference) volts, and USB is 5 volts. I've never seen any non-Sony camera with a built-in voltage boost regulator that lets it charge via USB (not saying no others exist, just that I haven't seen it except on Sonys). The voltage-boosting Sonys are notoriously slow to charge that way (their external chargers are 2-3 times as fast as charging in camera), and there aren't many situations in which you'd want to use a $3200 A7rII as an inferior replacement for a $20 battery charger. While travel may seem an obvious one, the charger isn't very big (Fuji, take a look at Sony's little compact charger, or, better yet, just ask them where they bought it), and there are an awful lot of places with funky power where I'd much rather plug in a $20 object than a $3200 one...

 

Non-Sony compacts that charge via USB are generally using a 3.7 volt battery (single cell, while most interchangeable lens cameras use dual cell batteries at twice the voltage). Like a cell phone (also 3.7 volts), a 3.7 volt camera charges easily from 5 volts...

The Fuji X100T has usb charging

[danwells]

That's a 3.6 volt battery... I have to admit I'm surprised that as "big" a camera as an X-100T would use a low-voltage battery, but I looked it up and it's 3.6 volts, making USB charging easy...

[karjar]

The X-Pro2 EVF is much smaller. About a quarter to 30% smaller, I'd estimate.

 

Completely unscientific...I just held both of them to my head at the same time. X-Pro2 with my left eye and X-T1 with my right.

 How would the viewfinder compare size wise to the x100T/s? Are you bale to compare?

[Aswald]

Does anyone know or can confirm Nissin i40 works with X-Pro2 in HSS mode?

And would it work in wireless mode?

Thanks!

 

It will probably need a FW update on the Nissin i40.

[typeronin]

Quick question: does the viewfinder have the same field distortion (pin cushion) as the X100T? 

 

I had created an order yesterday, then I decided to take another hard look at the viewfinders of my cameras (X-E2, X-T1, Canon D40, and I had an X100T until the beginning of the week) and it took me about three seconds to go to the computer and cancel the order. 

 

There is no way in hell I'm giving up the EVF of the X-T1 for this little view hole ... 

 

When I mounted my 16mm onto the camera, I noticed that the OVF's edges have a more pronounced curve than it did with the 35mm. I can't say for sure but that's my impression of the OVF shape in terms of distortion. I'll see if I can find a picture.

[typeronin]

It's not going to charge via USB - the battery is 7.2 (or 7.4 - that's just a marking difference) volts, and USB is 5 volts. I've never seen any non-Sony camera with a built-in voltage boost regulator that lets it charge via USB (not saying no others exist, just that I haven't seen it except on Sonys). The voltage-boosting Sonys are notoriously slow to charge that way (their external chargers are 2-3 times as fast as charging in camera), and there aren't many situations in which you'd want to use a $3200 A7rII as an inferior replacement for a $20 battery charger. While travel may seem an obvious one, the charger isn't very big (Fuji, take a look at Sony's little compact charger, or, better yet, just ask them where they bought it), and there are an awful lot of places with funky power where I'd much rather plug in a $20 object than a $3200 one...

 

Non-Sony compacts that charge via USB are generally using a 3.7 volt battery (single cell, while most interchangeable lens cameras use dual cell batteries at twice the voltage). Like a cell phone (also 3.7 volts), a 3.7 volt camera charges easily from 5 volts...

 

I bought a USB battery charger off Amazon for $8 or something. I run it off USB batteries when I'm out and about and need a recharge. works great.

 

It says OAproda on the front. Looks like the Wasabi charger but thinner and has a USB port.

[typeronin]

Does anyone know or can confirm Nissin i40 works with X-Pro2 in HSS mode?

And would it work in wireless mode?

Thanks!

 

Can't. Don't have an i40.

 

 

 How would the viewfinder compare size wise to the x100T/s? Are you bale to compare?

 

 

Batman doesn't know. He would have to have both of these cameras at the same time.

[danwells]

On the battery charger, that's a VERY interesting contraption... I've seen plenty of camera chargers with a USB OUT port - plug the charger into 120v (or 12v), and it'll charge a camera battery and a cell phone (or whatever else that charges via USB) simultaneously. I think I've even seen a few that will power their out port FROM a camera battery (your iPhone's out, but you have three camera batteries left - use one of them to charge the iPhone). What I haven't seen is one with USB IN.

 

It's theoretically possible - it just needs the same voltage boost circuit the Sony A7 series use to charge from USB directly - but I didn't think it actually existed until you mentioned having such a device. Depending on efficiency, it could be very interesting, because it opens USB cell phone packs and solar panels as sources of charge for Fuji batteries. It takes a decent-sized solar panel to have a 12v output (bigger than anything one would want to bavkpack with for multiple days, for example). If a USB-equipped solar panel could charge a Fuji battery in reasonable time, that opens a route to charging the darned things on the trail!.Since the solar panel's output fluctuates, and the boost circuit might not like that, the actual route would probably be to charge a cell phone booster pack, then use that to charge the Fuji battery.

 

Dan

[typeronin]

The problem is that USB ports are not created equal, nor are USB cables so how fast a battery charges fluctuates depending on the battery you're using. Plugged into a wall or my Macbook, a battery takes like...45 minutes to charge. Plugged into a random generic USB battery, it's probably double that.

 

But LOL I don't care about that. There's no simpler portable battery charging solution for Fuji. 

 

There was a 0.8A version of the same charger available too but it disappeared off Amazon before I bought it. This one that I have is 0.4A

 

http://www.amazon.com/OAproda%C2%AE-Replacement-NP-W126-Portable-FUJIFILM/dp/B00PA2ABES

[MayaTlab]

Thanks a lot for your answers. I too, have a series of (sometimes weird) questions :

 

1) When you press the lock on the shutter speed dial, does it fully sink below the dial's top plate, or does it remain, even when pressed, a little bit above the top plate ? I know, that question must look weird, but I'm just trying to work out the feasibility of putting a transparent hard sticker on it to disable the lock (any other suggestion to permanently disable the lock is welcome). 

 

2) When you set one of the Fn buttons to auto ISO, how does the button work ? Does it work similarly to a toggle (i.e., you can cycle through the three auto ISO memories by repeatedly pressing the Fn button), or does it bring up a menu where you then have to use the wheels or the D-pad, or the joystick, to select the memory you want ?

 

3) Is the auto ISO memory you've chosen displayed in the EVF/OVF, or does the camera simply tell you that you're using auto ISO, without specifying which auto ISO memory you're using ?

 

4) Can you specify which dial can be used for exposure compensation when the exposure compensation dial is set to "C" ? Is the exposure compensation value saved when switching the camera ON or OFF or when it goes to sleep or not ? 

 

5) How would you evaluate the clickiness, positiveness of the front and rear programable dials ? Are the detents clear, noticeable, even when operating them blindly, without looking at them or at any info screen ?

 

My last Fuji camera was an X100s, a dinosaur by current Fuji standard, with lots of annoying usabilities issues, and I'd like to know if a number of things I disliked about it are now solved in Fuji-land :

 

6) Does the histogram disappear when you half-press the shutter release or when you lock focus ?

 

7) Do the OVF frame lines move to avoid parallax errors when locking AF (on the X100s, they move when you half-press the shutter release, but don't when you lock AF with the rear button) ?

 

8) Do the OVF frame lines move to avoid parallax errors in MF mode during manual focusing, or only after you've pressed half-way on the shutter release ?

 

9) Are the auto aperture and shutter speed values displayed and refreshed, in real time, in the EVF / OVF while you move the camera around ? In the X100s, they only appear when you press the shutter release half-way (and lock the exposure), meaning that when applying exposure compensation before locking the exposure, you can't see how it's going to affect the automatically selected exposure values.

 

10) It's been a while I've used the X100s, so maybe that question is based on an inexact memory, but I believe there wasn't a way to focus and recompose without locking exposure on the X100s. What I'd like to is to focus, lock focus either by pressing the shutter release half-way or the rear AF-on button, but NOT lock exposure. Is that possible ?

 

11) If you've locked the exposure, and, after, apply some exposure compensation, does it effectively change the exposure values, or do you have to unlock and re-lock exposure for it to take into account the newly set exposure compensation value ?

 

Thanks a lot !

[milandro]

@typeronin have you made a large print for a X-pro 2 file ? If you did, have you compared the same enlargement to one the same print made from a X-T1 ( or X-E2).

 

I am interested in a comparison between the two sensor in order to understand if, next to the advancements in AF and firmware, there is a real advantage between the new 24Mp sensor images (in printing) as opposed to the older 16Mp.

 

I have read all the reason why it should be advantageous, but I am really interested in finding out whether in real life, in a real situation one cal look at the same picture, shot with the two cameras and printed very large (A2-1-0) and SEE the difference and make one  want to buy the newer camera, with the newer sensor if one wants to make better large prints.

 

If the printing quality is the same or thereabouts, the advantage of the new sensor and software might be still useful for some but completely pointless for others.

[cug]

Maybe we can put this to rest: 80% of the people we showed prints in 24x36 inches couldn't tell whether a photo was shot with a 5MP iPhone or a  ~12MP Canon 5D. I think it's totally ridiculous to assume they could tell the difference between a 16 and a 24MP x-trans sensor. 

 

So, stop bothering. It's nor worth it.

[milandro]

Well, it might be worth for me to place my question to @typeronin, whom has offered, in this thread, to give information and perhaps make comparisons for all of those who haven’t the X pro 2.

 

My question was specifically directed to him, the initiator of this thread called” I’ve got a X-Pro 2 right now... anything you want to know?

 

Yes, has anyone done a comparative large print between the X-Pro2 and the X-T1?

 

Answering is not compulsory.

 

If this is not a question to your interest or liking, cug, please, disregard it.

 

I won’t be upset if nobody answers.

 

As for this being a question worth asking , please, let me decide what is worth, for me, to ask or not. Much obliged.

 

I am not assuming anything, I am asking a question and I am not talking to just anybody walking  in the street, but I am addressing people who, like the distinguished photographers here who own expensive cameras and take excellent photographs, and are certainly able to discern between an Iphone print and a good camera print.

[cug]

Yeah, sure. I think you should consider what you're asking. Go rent the darn camera when it's out, do a print test yourself. From all I've read you don't believe other peoples opinion anyways. At least you never have here ...

[milandro]

 ...

[Jürgen Heger]

@cug:

Did the people you were asking had same expertise in digital imaging or were most of them just phone shooters that you asked if they are happy with the print that you made from their file?

This is a honest question because my own expectation is that it will be extremely difficult to tell the difference between a 16mp and a 24mp image regardless of the print size. But I am a little bit surprised that most did not see a difference to a 5mp phone image. There, I would expect that more people see a difference not just in spatial resolution but also in dynamic range.

[cug]

It was within the photos department of a very large tech company. So, they did have quite some interest. 

 

We did tests to determine which pixel dimensions are okay to use for a certain product and printed in 24x36 about half the people couldn't tell between a print from a 3MP JPEG and a 12MP JPEG. Then we had a few shots that were iPhone vs. 5D. About 80% couldn't tell the difference again, given that the photo was not using any of the advantages the 5D has - like shallow depth of field or low light abilities. 

 

The photos were mainly environmental and people outdoors in great light and then a bunch of studio shots. All were set up professionally, the main reason to do this comparison wasn't to show whether people could tell between phone and camera, it was to find out what the pixel dimensions need to get image quality that exceeds the typical viewers ability to see quality differences in typical photos for the target group.

 

3MP is what you can easily get away with for smaller prints, from 12MP onwards nobody could tell reliably which photo was actually a better quality print/resolution/camera at typical viewing distances for a photo like that – and a little closer as everybody was eager to show that they can tell the difference. Some people could in some prints, but mostly it was impossible to tell on professionally done prints.

 

Higher resolutions really only make sense when you do something other than direct printing with it. Like excessive cropping (think wildlife, birds, ...), multi-media presentations with extreme zooms, prints that go REALLY big but you get close to to view details. 

 

Classic printing, the difference between 16 and 24MP is 136 vs. 166 dpi, completely irrelevant at a viewing distance typical for a shot. Our eyes don't resolve the difference beyond a viewing distance of 25 inches (16MP) or 21 inches (24MP). To start obsessing over that is ridiculous. You gain 4 inches of viewing distance at something you wouldn't normally look at from anything closer than 40 or 50 inches.

[danwells]

I can reliably tell between 16 MP Micro 43, 16 MP XTrans II and 36 MP D800 looking closely at a print in the 24x36 inch range. The Micro 43 image just seems to "fall apart a little in areas of fine detail. The XTrans II mostly holds up, but what gives the D800 away is looking at patterned surfaces on rocks and the like. The other thing that is visible is shadow detail - Micro 43 just loses enough in deep shadows that it's visible if there are any shadow areas below about Zone II. The 36 MP sensor has an amazing ability to hold detail in near-black areas. I'm hoping that the combination of extra resolution and increased per-pixel image quality will bring X-Trans III from "almost there" at 24x36 to "there").

 

As for the iPhone? I can tell a phone image from a camera image in a web JPEG (unless there are no highlights or shadows in the image). It is possible that cug's test was set up in such a way that scene fit within the iPhone's 5 or so stops of dynamic range (people outdoors on an overcast day, or using fill flash, certainly could have). The signature of a phone is not the resolution, it's unnaturally blown highlights and black shadows that shouldn't be black.

[flysurfer]

My iPhone offers more DR SOOC  than an X-T1 at DR100%. It's all about the natural looking HDR processing that normal cameras are lacking (and can't really offer as they still have mechanical shutters).