Question for X Pro-1 / X-E2 owners

[Tman]

OK, I think bits and pieces of this topic lie scattered all over this forum, but I'm going to ask again because I'm about to make a big change in gear so I'm a big nervous. After wanting to do this for years, the technology that Fuji has brought to market is leading me to sell off my big DSLR kit and downsize. I've got a couple of Fuji lenses on the shopping list... but am only getting one body.

I've handled both the X Pro-1 and X-E2. The Pro fits a bit better in my big hands, and I like the hybrid viewfinder, at least with the little I've been able to play with it. (I'm also just a bit put off by the EVF in the X-E2, but maybe that's just something I'd adjust to with practice).

But... I keep reading blogs/reviews by a lot of pros, including some on the Fuji "X" team. There is always hesitation surrounding what they have to say about the Pro-1. "The resulting images are beautiful, but......" So, what's the "but" with this this camera? Is the camera still laggy? Are there still problems with focus despite the firmware upgrades? Are there performance issues that are still notably irritating despite the Fuji firmware fixes?

I've also seen comments where some pros say they prefer the X-E2 over the Pro. I suspect it has to do with bugginess or laggy-ness in the Pro, but they don't really articulate what exactly it is about the X-E2 that they like more.

If any Pro owner has strong feelings about it one way or the other, I'd love to hear. I'd REALLY like to hear from anyone who owns both and you can speak fairly about the pros/cons of each body.

FWIW, I will be traveling quite a bit with the camera, doing a fair amount of street stuff and portraiture, a little landscape, maybe some studio stuff at home with monoblock lights. For the near future, I'm going to stick with primes only. (14, 23, and 60 ... or 56 if I can get one. . Yes, I know about the X100s, but I want lens options.

Thanks in advance. Whatever body I decide on is probably going to be it for some time to come, so I'm hoping to make an informed decision.

 

[baobob]

I only own a X Pro1 and a X100

The advantages I see with XP1 is a bigger body especailly with a L bracket which is welcome with 55-200 and my Nikkor 300mm handheld

Also the OVF is much appreciated for street shots with 18mm and 35mm where you can see your subject entering the frame

After many FW upgrades the camera now is reasonably fast in most situations

 

[mplkn]

The hybrid finder, for me, trumps everything. I find no substitute for being able to view the framing area "in context", yet appreciate the flexibility of being able to switch to EVF when needed. The form factor of the X-Pro1 also fits my hands more comfortably than the X-e bodies.

I am not troubled by hardware lag - the camera's responsiveness is a non-issue for me and the way I work. I'm much slower than any camera body I've ever used.

I can tell when I'm relying on technological speed rather than good practices and attentiveness when my shooting speed starts to climb. Once I approach motor drive speed, it's time for me to slow down and pay attention to what's in my viewfinder.

Consider: say you're shooting at multiple frames per second as a flock of birds flies through a scene, or your kid is running around the yard, or a guy goes up to dunk a basketball. Even at, say, six frames per second, the shutter is closed for most of that second. If you get what you want, it's because you've spun the roulette wheel, and in the meantime, you've taken a lot of shots - shots to download, shots to examine, shots to make decisions about.

My preferred approach is to reduce the number of shots, speed up my thinking and "intentionality", and then be ready to get what I'm going for.

It's the sniper's approach, rather than that of one who employs a machine gun or a shotgun.

But that's just me. There's no way I'll criticize what a person does to handle the picture making challenges he or she tackles...

Best wishes,

Michael

mplkn

 

[nearly-an-old-codger]

The hybrid finder, for me, trumps everything. I find no substitute for being able to view the framing area "in context", yet appreciate the flexibility of being able to switch to EVF when needed. The form factor of the X-Pro1 also fits my hands more comfortably than the X-e bodies.

I am not troubled by hardware lag - the camera's responsiveness is a non-issue for me and the way I work. I'm much slower than any camera body I've ever used.

I can tell when I'm relying on technological speed rather than good practices and attentiveness when my shooting speed starts to climb. Once I approach motor drive speed, it's time for me to slow down and pay attention to what's in my viewfinder.

Consider: say you're shooting at multiple frames per second as a flock of birds flies through a scene, or your kid is running around the yard, or a guy goes up to dunk a basketball. Even at, say, six frames per second, the shutter is closed for most of that second. If you get what you want, it's because you've spun the roulette wheel, and in the meantime, you've taken a lot of shots - shots to download, shots to examine, shots to make decisions about.

My preferred approach is to reduce the number of shots, speed up my thinking and "intentionality", and then be ready to get what I'm going for.

It's the sniper's approach, rather than that of one who employs a machine gun or a shotgun.

But that's just me. There's no way I'll criticize what a person does to handle the picture making challenges he or she tackles...

Best wishes,

Michael

mplkn

I agree with your machine gun comment with regard to taking multiple shots but that does not preclude having a fast, responsive camera.

You should not conflate fast camera reaction time with the number of frames per second you can shoot at. I have not shot a X-Pro1 but have owned the X-E1 and X-E2. The responsive difference is noticeable and to use your sniper comment, the X-E2 just goes bang when you need it when compared to the X-E1.

There are also times, birds in flight for instance, when machine gun works but then I would use my DSLR for those conditions.

I fully accept that the X-Pro1 works for you in skilled hands, but the extra responsiveness sure helps a lot of people. Me included.

Kind Regards

Brian

 

[mplkn]

Can't disagree with what you say, Brian. Just saying the X-Pro1 is speedier than I am, typically, in my somewhat (maybe ridiculously) deliberate approach to things. I'm certain that others' approaches to things may require greater technological speed.

I'll plead guilty to archaic thinking. That bunch of birds in the scene? If they're flying through at anything more than, say, 15 feet away, I'll mutter at myself for missing them the first time, and then I'll rely on hyperfocal distance (rather than camera responsiveness) if I'm fortunate enough to get a second chance, having reminded myself that if I'd had my wits about me, I'd have been ready the first time.

But your point is well taken. I describe what I do, but I try not to prescribe what others should do. If my post came across that way, I wish I'd have said it differently.

Many thanks, and best wishes,

Michael

mplkn

 

[nearly-an-old-codger]

Can't disagree with what you say, Brian. Just saying the X-Pro1 is speedier than I am, typically, in my somewhat (maybe ridiculously) deliberate approach to things. I'm certain that others' approaches to things may require greater technological speed.

I'll plead guilty to archaic thinking. That bunch of birds in the scene? If they're flying through at anything more than, say, 15 feet away, I'll mutter at myself for missing them the first time, and then I'll rely on hyperfocal distance (rather than camera responsiveness) if I'm fortunate enough to get a second chance, having reminded myself that if I'd had my wits about me, I'd have been ready the first time.

But your point is well taken. I describe what I do, but I try not to prescribe what others should do. If my post came across that way, I wish I'd have said it differently.

Many thanks, and best wishes,

Michael

mplkn

Michael

Thanks for your response,

No apologies needed or wanted. It is difficult having these discussions across a forum when face to face we would probably have a violent agreement over a table. Getting any nuance right in a post would take a very wordy essay.

I take a lot for granted at times and my way of working often reflects itself in my posts. How can it be otherwise.

We can only share our experiences and leave it to others to form a conclusion for their needs.

Brian

 

[justin_time]

Only ever used an X-Pro1 briefly in a shop.
I would not say I have big hands but I find X-E1/X-E2 a little small. But in a half leather case its about perfect.

X-E2 is significantly more responsive than X-E1. Phase detect AF helps in X-E2. But newer processor improves CDAF and makes EVF better (less laggy/jumpy). Of course using X-Pro1 in OVF mode then you would only be limited by the speed of light!

Fuji have continued to develop firmware for both X-E1 & X-Pro1 so I would not worry about bugs as they have been ironed out and very useful new functions added.

 

[bavarius6]

I have a X-Pro 1 and have used my wife's XE1. I've not used an XE2 but doubt it's got anything that would get the Pro out of my bag. I've always found the speed of the Pro good enough that it's never been a limiting factor. The XE2 is no doubt slightly faster but that would never come close to replacing the OVF or the superior LCD on the rear. I'm not saying that the XE2 isn't a great camera and a better one for many users, just not for me.

Pat

 

[Jim King]

As you have not used the X-E2, you may not be aware that it has a large rear LCD which is the same size as the one on your XPro. In addition, its EVF is much better than the one on your XPro and the X-E1.

 

[justinwonnacott]

I do not use the Xpro 1 optical viewfinder that often, even with the firmware update the framing is not really accurate . The EVF on the pro 1 is okay (I started using evf with the Canon Pro-1) but it is not a substitute for a pentaprism SLR design. The X-e2 sounds a lot better , but I have decided not to buy another x trans sensor camera so I will wait and see what comes down the pipe.

 

[bavarius6]

As you have not used the X-E2, you may not be aware that it has a large rear LCD which is the same size as the one on your XPro. In addition, its EVF is much better than the one on your XPro and the X-E1.

 

[Simon Elwell]

I'm in the X-Pro 1 camp. Use the OVF extensively with my 14mm and 35mm lenses. Recent firmware updates have addressed the laggy nature of the focus system. The XE2 has the latest implementations of Fuji features as it's the newer camera - but if like me it's all about the feel in the hand then the XPro will see you right...

 

[fluxism]

I recently added the X-E2 to my x-pro because I found that I never used the OVF with the zooms, and the better EVF and focus speed made the X-E2 ideal for that use. I keep the 35, which I did often use with the OVF, on the x-pro. Although I love the 35, I have found myself using it much less often since I got the zooms

 

[Bill Robb]

But... I keep reading blogs/reviews by a lot of pros, including some on the Fuji "X" team. There is always hesitation surrounding what they have to say about the Pro-1. "The resulting images are beautiful, but......" So, what's the "but" with this this camera?

If you aren't able to glean that from the blogs, perhaps there is nothing to glean.

Your example sentence says it all, "The resulting images are beautiful, but......". All you need to do is read the end of the sentences you are quoting. If there is nothing there, then then there is nothing, is there?

 

[Paul Farace]

The IQ from my Xpro1 is the best of all my gear which includes FF Canons as well as aps Nikons.

 

[melon]

I decided to move to the Fuji X system only recently. I tried out both the X-Pro1 and the X-E2 in store. The X-E2's EVF is stunning and overall the camera felt more responsive. On the other hand, the X-Pro1 fits better in my rather large hands and, like stated before, the hybrid viewfinder is great. I went with the X-Pro1 and will shoot with fixed lens most of the time.

The EVF in the X-Pro1 is adequate but the OVF is exceptional and it's great. I don't mind the somewhat incorrect framing, it's not a big issue for me. I can see subjects entering the frame before they actually do and it allows me to do IR work. The display on the back is really good, bright and resolution is superb. The lack of a built in flash is also a plus for me, I don't need one. I like the layout of controls on the body (and on the fixed lenses) so it all suits me great for my work. Both cameras produce stunning images, and it's really a joy to shoot with.

Now for the "buts". Autofocus is clearly not for subject tracking, single focus speed is okay, accuracy is great. I don't mind the speed, it's still better than on my previous camera. Manual focus is finally possible with focus peaking after the firmware update and it's working great.

It takes a bit of a time for the camera to write to the memory card, even with the fastest cards available, this can be a drawback especially when shooting RAW+JPEG pairs or when shooting 6 fps. The optional grip I have blocks access to battery/memory compartment, this is a nonsense.

Video capability is at least not on par with the competition, which, again, I don't really care about.

Maybe all the but's above would be mitigated by using an X-E2, but for me these can't beat the pro's. Of course your mileage may vary but these were the factors I weighed when I made my decision.

 

[FBoneOne]

I am a recent comer to the XP-1 and I also shoot a Canon 1D mkIV (just for context, I know what a reactive camera is).

I spent the first 2 weeks and 1,000 frames on the XP-1 with the Firmware 2.0 that the body shipped with (I was not in a place where I could easily download updates). And in all fairness, the focusing although accurate was slow and at times needed a couple attempts to nail anything. It forced me to go back to my Hexar shooting days, which is why I wanted the XP-1 in the first place.

Prefocusing, hyperforcale and a slower, more holistic way of shooting were what I was after and the OVF made is a joy to do with primes.

Since then I have updated camera and lenses to 3.0 and focusing speed has improved dramatically, to the point that I can still do my low speed, old style shooting but if need can nail a child's eye quite reliably on the 35/1.4 which was the slowest of them all initially.

I think the "buts" and other reserves you hear are from people that wish the XP1 were a fully modern SLR-type camera of D4 or 1D-X pedigree. I don't think that's what Fuji was after and that's setting the expectations in the wrong place. I can't do street photography with my 1D mkIV and 16-35/2.8 without scaring everybody away (and if I set it to 10fps they think I am firing a machine gun) but the XP-1 has yet to get anybody to turn their head when I shoot or get startled. Yet image quality is simply superb. I can get to the same quality on portraits with the Canon but it takes a ton more post-processing and candid shots are impossible - people see me coming from far.

Flip-side, I can do birds in flight with the 1D mkIV which I would not try with the XP1 even if I had the same type of glass available.

So the bottom line is that the perfect do it all camera is still elusive, and until then each camera will have its strengths and its weaknesses. The only buts you'll hear about the XP1 is when the expectations are unrealistic for this type of camera. But for street shooting and portrait, even of moving kids, hard to beat the XP1 unless again you want the camera to do it all for you - but if that's the case, an iPhone works just fine.

Similarly, if you want accurate viewfinder framing, don't bother with an XP1,no rangefinder type was ever able to give you that and you'd end up paying for an OVF you'd never use. Flipside, if you want to see what's around your picture to more easily reframe on the fly based on context, then OVF is the only way to go and now you don't have to drop 8 grand for a Leica to get it. Again, the XP1 is not the camera for everybody, but what t does, it does uniquely.

I hope that helps. Know what your tye of photography is, the rest will follow naturally.

 

[Jim King]

Thanks for the education Jim.

:-D

Just for your information the X-Pro1 has a 1.2 million dot LCD which is higher res than the screen in the XE2 and also has additional white pixels which the XE2 screen doesn't have.

I wasn't aware of the higher pixel count; only that they were both 3" screens. Do you find that the added white pixels improve the quality significantly? I've only used the X-Pro 1 in a shop and didn't particularly notice a difference.

The EVF in the XE2 has a higher refresh rate than in the XE1 because of the new processor used but is identical apart from that. The slower refresh rate is mostly noticed in darker environments, not normal daytime use. As an aside I actually prefer the 1.4m dot EVF in the X-Pro 1 anyway as I think it has a more realistic colour balance than the 2.4m dot EVF in the XE1 but that's purely a personal preference of course. Obviously neither comes anywhere close to the OVF though.

The faster processor really helps speed up many of the X-E2's functions in addition to the EVF refresh rate, and significantly improves the overall user experience IMO. The higher refresh rate is certainly noticeable to me most of the time, having had the X-E1 previously. But then, I do mostly indoor shooting this time of the year; maybe when it warms up and I get outside more I will not notice as much of an improvement. I agree that neither EVF comes close to an OVF, but when that is important I use my Leica M9.

I was giving a personal opinion to the OP, as asked for. Hopefully you now know a little more about the actual differences in spec between the X-Pro1, XE1 and the XE2.

I do, and thanks for the info.

Pat

 

[Barugon]

... that the improved AF is a big selling point for "pros". It certainly is with me. I also feel that the OVF is little more than a novelty with limited actual value in real shorting situations. Of course that's just my opinion.

 

[Tman]

Thanks for all the input. I think the comment about comparing these to DSLRs is important... I'm coming from a 5DIII and am, unconsciously at least, expecting that kind of performance. But the sheer size poses very practical problems for the kind of photography I want to do, particularly when traveling. I'm probably springing for an XP1, knowing that in another 2 years or so there's going to be dramatic improvements by Fuji.