Jump to content

X-Pro 1 vs X-Pro 2 Pro Neg Std Skin Render

Chris95
 Share

Recommended Posts

Chris95 Newbie

Chris95

Posted
Posted

Hello team, long time reader first time poster.

 

I am an enthusiast user with only 6 years of experience and mostly Nikon gear.

 

Have been shooting X-Pro 1 since May 2012, really like the skin tone rendering of Pro Neg, always use OOC JPEG.

 

Was wondering if I should upgrade to X-Pro 2 - mainly because my wife complains about the Fuji always taking too long to focus.

 

Been reading up on the reviews but still not clear how the JPEG engine / X-Trans of the new batch (XT1, XT10, XE2 and not XP2) compares to the old X-Pro 1? Can you approximate X-Pro 1 output by playing with the H/S settings? Has anybody seen a side-by-side review of photos of same subject done by both cameras?

 

I got myself the X100S back in the day but sold it after 3 months for the XF23mm as the photos had weird contrast..

 

Many thanks in advance for the info, promise to be more active from now on...

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites
fordfanjpn Enthusiast

fordfanjpn

Posted
Posted

I have both the X-Pro1 and X-Pro2, and while I certainly intend to do some comparisons, I haven't had time to do so yet. Also, I unfortunately don't have access to a beautiful model like you do, so I'm not sure if or when I'll ever have a chance to do that Pro Neg comparison of skin tones. But I'll definitely keep that in mind should the opportunity ever present itself. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
SithTracy Apprentice

SithTracy

Posted
Posted

The X-Pro2 is faster to acquire focus; no doubt about it.  That said, I have had three units that I would not consider using for a paid job and have finally taken a refund.  I really like the image quality I got from it and will come back to it in time when the camera and firmware matures.  In the meantime, I picked up an X-Pro1.  It is something I always avoided as it was said to be too slow (and it is compared to other things; a Canon 5D Mark III, and X-T1).  I was very frustrated with the X-Pro2 and the issues I had as a foolish early adopter and the foolish decisions I made in buying into the advertisement non-sense.  I still come back to the X100T as one of my favorite cameras to shoot.  Well, I decided @ $499 U.S., why not the X-Pro1 while I wait.  I know it is slow, I compared it to an X-T1 some years back, but I like the experience with the X100T and I liked the X-Pro2 most of the time.  Turn off chimping (Image Disp = Off / on the second wrench menu) on the X-Pro1, and it performs quite well.  Image quality is still second to none.  I still shoot with Canon gear and the 5D Mark III is a better camera, but I love shooting with the Fujifilm gear and the X-Pro1 is my new favorite over the X100T (that and my 17year old daughter stole the X-T1 from her old man).

 

As far as image quality goes, I need to do some prints, but I think it is a wash.

X-Pro2 OOC ACROS JPEG - XF35 F1.4 @ F1.8

25594190754_c192c41a8f_b.jpg

 

X-Pro1 processed in Lightroom from RAW, XF35 F2 @ F2.0

26558976631_db2375475d_b.jpg

 

 

With the problems I encountered with the X-Pro2, I say hold on to that X-Pro1 a while.  Wait a few months for the X-Pro2 to mature and give her a go.  I don't think it will make you a better photographer.  You'll do that yourself if you enjoy your gear and learn how to use it (and your image above tells me you got it working for you).

Link to post
Share on other sites
adzman808 Proficient

adzman808

Posted
Posted

Fuji vs fuji have a side by comparison between X-Trans 1 and 2 (and X-Trans "3" seems a lot like 2 to my eye, from shots I've seen)

 

I've also blogged about the differences!

 

IMO no, you can't get the SOOC jpeg look (via SOOC jpeg anyway) of X-Trans 1 from X-Trans 2.

 

X-Trans 2 makes a harsher cut to black and has punchier colour/shadows and more contrast. You can drop shadow tones to -2 but it's not the same

 

In a "no really Adam, it's clearly not at all, what are you talking about*" sort of way, Pro N S from X-Trans1 has its closest match in classic chrome from the later bodies

 

*because the colour is different, but overall the image is not soooo dissimilar in terms of punch

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • thelostkiwi
      Looking for Full Frame lenses to adapt to GFX

      By thelostkiwi · Posted

      I also use a Nikon to GFX Fringer and it works very well.  24mm f/1.8 vignettes so best used on 35mm mode.  50mm f/1.8 covers the entire frame very well with no issues and is a superb little lens. 105mm Sigma vignettes slightly but is perfectly usable. 300 f/4 likewise the 105.  I have a 70-200 f/20+.8 incoming to test so will report back but I'm expecting a little vignetting.  Even in 35mm mode the image is still 60MP and if you're prepared to manually crop and correct you can get 80-90 MP images.  I also have a C/Y to GFX adapter.  The 24mm Sigma Superwide vignettes strongly. Ditto 28-80 Zeiss Sonnar. 80-200 f/4 Sonnar is perfectly usable. All work fine as 35mm mode lenses.  I also have an M42 adapter which I tried with the Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f/3.5 with good results. 
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Thank you. I will research it.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Jerry Thank you very much. That is extremely helpful. It seems that the camera and the lens have the latest firmware update, so it appears that the corrections should be applied automatically. The lens arrived this afternoon and I took some quick test shots, in which the correct lens information appeared in the EXIF files, so that sounds good. I used Adobe DNG converter to convert the Raw (RAF) files, and then opened the DNG files and saved them in PSD format. However, with a beautiful, clear, cloudless blue sky, there were no lines near the edges to check if distortion had been corrected. Another day I plan to photograph a brick wall. Thank you for your help.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Typically you need to make sure the lens is compatible with the camera, i.e. check the lens compatibility charts for your camera, then make sure the respective firmwares are updated so older issues are resolved. After that, each lens has a manufacturer’s profile which will be embedded into the raw file meta data for the images captured using that lens. From there, it is up to the raw conversion software to apply the lens correction to the image. Different converters do that differently, some automatically, some only if a setting is turned on. For in-camera jpegs, the on-board converter does the corrections automatically, assuming the camera recognizes the lens, it applies a generic profile otherwise. I do not know if that can be turned off or not.
×
×
  • Create New...