X-Pro2 Review by DPreview

[Aswald]

I found this review useful and accurate.

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-pro2

[Formbox]

Interesting review, as they come to the same conclusion the video review of  "The Camerastore", which we had a talk about the other day ..

 

That is, that the sensor is equal to the sensor of a Nikon D5500 in therms of noise and that you have to compare them at a full stop difference, as Fujis ISO200 equals Nikons ISO100.

 

Fuji X-Pro1 @ ISO200 compared to Nikon D5500 @ ISO 100 - equal shutter speeds, here is what they say:

 

"It's widely assumed that Fujifilm's X-Trans sensors use low-noise Sony silicon behind their unusual color filter arrays, and the performance of the X-Pro2 is certainly up to that standard. Compared here with the Nikon D5500 (using the same shutter speeds so that they are working with the same amount of light), you can see very similar amounts of noise up to a 4EV push, and possibly a fraction more after a 5 stop push, though the difference may simply be one of grain structure, caused by the different demosaicing processes."

 

link:http://www.dpreview....jifilm-x-pro2/6

 

So the X-Pro2 has no "magical" X-trans sensor, but one of the best APS-C sensors. Regarding the X-Trans array, I fail to see a "better" noise structure in the RAW files than a conventional sensor, but there seem to be some benefitts regarding moire.

 

That said, I very happy with my X-Pro1 and it´s noise performance, but I would love it just as much with a conventional sensor I guess.

Edited March 15, 2016 by Formbox

[gordonrussell76]

I just don't get all the people so chained to Bayer sensors. I have nothing against Bayer at all, have had and enjoyed a lot of cameras with them.

 

However I love the Fuji cameras and the X-Trans is part of the individual parts that sum to create a great whole. Changing the X-Trans to Bayer could and probably would compromize that.

 

Its like buying a Ford and then wishing it had a Opel engine. 

 

The only reason for the X-Trans hate is Lightroom, and again why are people so attached to it. Everything we use is just a tool if you are willing to switch camera system you should be willing to switch all your tools.

 

Back to the car analogy, I have family who work in the auto trade and nowadays with cars being so computerized you have to buy different software and peripherals to allow you to service different makes of car. If you decide to become a ford dealer you will have to change add to your tools. 

 

I used LR till I got a Fuji, then I switched to Capture 1 it is what it is. I play a lot of music, over the years I have switched software many times depending on what best served my needs at the time. Is it expensive yes, but what cost more some additional software or a loss of productivity and quality in your output?

[Formbox]

Well, I still prefer Apple Aperture and it renders Bayer and X-Trans beautiful - so I did not have to change my whole workflow, but I am not seeing much benefit.

 

I guess that X-Trans marketing hype thing left me feeling a little disappointed. But I think as an analogy, its not a ford with an opel engine but more like a single car brand that uses a total different kind of wheels than all other car brands - if that is a good or bad thing depends on your personal time to get it to work. And if the "Pros" of this different wheels are quite minimal my position on it is, that it might be 75% marketing and 25% benefit.

 

I am very interested in the new Sigma SD Quattro - because I see a huge difference in the RAW files.

 

Still some claim, the X-Pro2 has "the best" APS-C Sensor right now and I was surprised to read that its sensor is basically performing on a level of the entry camera Nikon 5500 (490 €). Less moire but also less detail in the grass tiles. No offence.

 

But I don´t want to sound to disappointed - it is great and much needed, that Fuji and Sigma push the borders of sensor tech and they should be applauded for their constant effords to push photografy further with it.

Edited March 15, 2016 by Formbox

[ShutterNot]

DPR review was fair.

I love the PRO 2 coming from an E-1. It's a huge improvement for me. I suspect that folks who upgrade with every new FUJI body released may not see as big a difference and not find their purchase as satisfying.

For me ... love the fast tack sharp accurate focus and the higher resolution. That resolution makes images pop.

[Tom H.]

DPreview is right on the money. This is THE rangefinder camera, for people who are looking for a rangefinder camera. Fuji does with the X-Pro 2 what Leica did for rangefinders in previous century. Affordable(ish), good looking, awesome picture quality, pleasantly compact and rugged build quality.

 

This isn't and never will be the only camera for everyone's needs. It doesn't need to be either.

[umad?]

Omg what did they do in the AF test?

 

Testing outside of the PDAF area on the one hand and forcing the camera into it (pdaf only) on others.

 

 

This mainly shows, that the tester had not much idea of what he is doing. 

 

(On the other hand we have to say: cameras are getting so complex, are we blaming the testers for not knowing everything). But at least it's the same with most cameras - there were some mistakes in the Pen F test too. 

But if I had to guess I'd say: they will nail the Sony A6300 test  

[flysurfer]

Omg what did they do in the AF test?

 

Testing outside of the PDAF area on the one hand and forcing the camera into it (pdaf only) on others.

 

 

This mainly shows, that the tester had not much idea of what he is doing. 

 

They could have read one of my books to avoid incompetent camera settings (or to try and compare different/counterintuitive setting and be surprised by their superior performance), but I understand that the $10.00 for an eBook may have overextended DPR's budget. Then again, DPR receives free review copies. There are several other mistakes that illustrate a lack of professionalism, but to be fair, most (all?) other review sites and magazines are even worse, so DPR may be considered the lesser of many evils. They also offer decent studio tests and allow us to download the original RAW files, so it's not all bad.