X-PRO 1 - X-E1 - X-E2, Genuine advice

So, I already own the X-T3 and the X-S10. Two very different lovely cams I use.

the X system is not my primary one but I love fuji's shooting experience and always have fun with my gear.

I happen to have quite a bit of vintage primes and zoom lenses and I would like a genuine advice from long time X users as of which RF styled cam (from title selection) you would recommend me to purchase as a dedicated cam for my legacy primes.

Ideally I would prefer the original X-trans unless the X-E2 experience is soooo much better than her siblings.

I wear spectacles so EVF is a must and needs to boast a good definition.

Other than the above I don't have particular needs..

ALso, I would like to get your opinion of image quality (not technically speaking) between X-trans and X-trans II sensor, as well as general behavior of the newer X-E2 in respect to the X-E1.

Thanks!

thank you.

having owned both can you appreciate any major character difference between the original x-trans and its successor?

ps nice set. thanks for the share

Of the three, the X-Pro1 is easily the worst choice for manual focus, for all its retro charm. The EVF is lower resolution than both the others, very laggy, and LCD rather than OLED which means the colours and contrast are poor, and it washes out badly past a certain brightness. The camera is really designed entirely around the OVF, but the OVF is entirely useless for manual focus - it lacks the “picture in picture” ERF patch found on later X-Pros.

Both the X-Pro1 and XE1 have only one form of focus aid, focus peaking in white, which isn’t always the easiest to see. They are both first gen cameras and it shows, being generally slower and lacking various features from the newer models. They do have the first gen sensor, which is nice in some ways, but I wouldn’t buy one now (although I do still own an XE1 by accident).

Re the differences in rendering between X-Trans I and 2 - the first thing to be clear on is that this only affects the JPEGs out of camera. The raws are near identical because in truth the sensors are too, it’s the processing that changed in the second generation. I also only really notice the difference in Provia - first gen provia is much less contrasty and has much more going on in the shadows. Someone once likened the first gen JPEG’s as matte prints, and the second gen as glossy - the latter have a bit more pop and contrast, but slightly lose some of the subtlety of the first.

There is also an issue with the X-Trans II processing doing weird things with skin tones at ISOs of 1600 and above due to over aggressive noise reduction (common to all the 2nd gen bodies) - but again this is a jpeg only issue, and not a problem if you keep your portraiture to sensible ISOs.

On the plus side the XE2 does include classic chrome on the latest firmware. It’s faster overall which also means there’s a lot less lag in the viewfinder. There are a few extra colour options for the focus peaking which can make it a lot better to use for manual focus - the rear screen is higher resolution than the XE1’s too. It also has a lot more customisable buttons (or rather, the same amount of buttons but a lot more flexibility in how to use them) and has much more useable autofocus if you ever wanted to use it as a backup body with your XF lenses. It would be my pick of the three as the best all rounder.

Downsides of the XE2 - like the others it also lacks a bunch of features that became standard later on, and it’s EVF while best of the three is still a little dim in bright conditions.

Thank you.

Thank you for the insightful information.

I will only be using mf lenses with my purchase si aF performance isn't really a worry.

However i understand that x-e1 requires too many compromises and it is really not worth the comparison against the xe-2, safe for the more film-ish look of the ooc jpeg, perhaps?

As my ageing eyes are less and less performant a better evf, for the intended use, is to be prioritized.

With this being priority 1 i believe the x-e2 is the logical choice amongst the three.

No.  I used an M1 and an E2, now E3 and T2.  The difference is as visible as the magic in the 35/1.4.  In other words it is clear if you know what took the image but invisible if not.

As to old lenses I'd put them on your existing cameras.  There is no rational reason to buy another body.  Your S-10 will be good as it is stabilised.

Thank you Andrew,

I do occasionally use some of my legacy lenses with the T3 but I would like to have a RF body I could assign to this task.

I had read somewhere that the original PRO1 / E1 had an distinguishable character but having not owned neither of the two cameras I actually don't know..

I am fine and delighted with the IV iteration of the X-TRANS sensor but feel I would like to give the ancestor a try..

This is my rationale..

Felice

Then I'd look for an X-E2 or X-E2s, but photographically your existing cameras make most sense.  I'd go for the E-2/s because AF is a lot better so if you do use it on your existing lenses it will be better.  The E series are really nice to handle and make a small package.  I'd not get an X-Pro1 as the viewfinder has no diopteric adjustment.

These fora are full of advice that bits of gear bring undefinable qualities to images.  Usually these qualities are undefinable, indescribable, unmeasurable and subtle to the point of needing to be pointed out by comparison with other gear when both are known to the viewers.  Make of that what you will.

Thanks again.

Will look into e options a d forget about the pro.

The E-1 was my first Fuji to try out the system. I liked the images but i changed it after a short time to the E-2 and updated its Firmware to E2s. So much faster, classic chrome and more responsive than the E1 (but still slow in comparison to the recent cameras of course.) For me the main difference to the E1 was the stronger contrast at default settings but this can easily be adjusted. It's really a nice camera but since i have the T3 ist sits in the closet most of the time to be honest. The much better finder in the T3 is really a benefit especially for manual focus.

With the release of the E4, the E3 can be had for a reasonable price. Slightly smaller then the E2 it would be a nice compact addition to the cameras you own with good performance. My two cents.

MartinEA wrote:

The X-E1 will have the same image quality of the X-Pro 1. It will be good. I have owned and used them all.

Getting the X-E2 will give you the Classic Chrome film simulation that the X-E1/Pro1 doesn't have.

In the hand they feel the same for the most part with the X-E1 being lighter.

The X-Pro 1 is bigger but always felt hollow to me.

The difference between the two X-E cameras for me was the rear LCD screen. The X-E2 LCD is bigger 3in compared to 2.8in. The X-E2 has twice the resolution at 1,040,000 dots.

The autofocus of the X-E1 is contrast detect.

The X-E2 also has phase detect. The X-E2 does faster faster.

Image quality to me was the same. I still own an X-E2. My second in fact.

Both (X-E1 and E2) are a bargain. Both are great cameras still today. I wouldn't get an X-Pro1. Getting a really good condition one will be hard and cost more than an X-E2.

If it were my choice I would get an X-E2. Absolute bargain and can be purchased second hand looking like new.

These photos are lovely.

Thank you. This is a show stopper for me.

Yes i am seeing that too. There are few available in the neighborhood of 400€..

Got it. I have i deed excluded the E1.