Fujifilm X-Pro2 versus X-T2: Seven key differences

There's plenty of smartphones for them!

I shoot with viewfinder most of the time. Joystick is more useful for me....

I'm gonna do the same. Already have the X-Pro2 but with the long zooms it just feels awkward.

Good for Fuji at least they've got a buyer.

I'm sure it wasn't the temperature, but the humidity in a place like Cambodia where they have a monsoon season. I have heard the same troubles with Sony (even weather sealed which won't help against humidity), Panasonic, and I'm sure many other brands suffer as well.

Edit: Not buying your story? Why would you assume he made it up?

I had major issues with my X-T1 in Belize last year. The humidity was so terrible in Belmopan that even the weather sealing wasn't enough to keep the moisture out. I lost shutter function and had to get the top panel replaced (under warranty) once I got back to the States. I've shot with Nikons and Fuji S5s without any issues in worse conditions without fail. Sad. I had high hopes for the little Fuji. I still love it, but I won't be bringing it with me to places with insane humidity. And yes, I let my gear acclimate despite being stored in air conditioned rooms.

Per FUJI self regarding to T1:

"Operating Temperature -10°C - +40°C
Operating Humidity 10 - 80% (no condensation)"

BTW, I bought EM5 with weather sealed 12-50 kit to give it a try. It is not too bad in bad weather such as under light rain for a whole day. So I bought EM5.M2 and added couple more lenses.

But, I always bring a tough cam as backup for years while traveling, and mine currently is Oly-TG2, the one before it Oly too. They are very *rugged* as far as I can see.

Sorry don't buy into this, have a good day.

Just out curiosity, were you using a weather sealed lens? Just wondering if the lens gasket would protect humidity coming in from the front.

I guess humidity in Red Rock Canyon is much lower than in Cambodia.

As I said early that most of the time, service center can tell you if it is caused by humidity/water damage b/c it causes corrosion.

BTW: I'm not sure about FUJI, but SONY's warranty does not cover corrosion/water damage. I'm very careful with my RX100.M3. You can google "RX100 corrosion" to see why.

Moreover, high temperature will speed up corrosion progress if the circuit board is wet.

Arizona is a different story as it is hot, but dry. I do not feel well over there b/c it is too dry, same goes to Nevada too.

"My camera has to be fixt and that cost 488,36 Euro".

Good info, FUJI is really hungry for money. No good.

Yep, my first thought as well.

Oddly though, if they were the same price, I'd probably take the X-Pro 2.

The only feature from the X-T2 I'd miss is the articulating screen. The larger EVF is also nice, but it's not like my life is any worse off with only a "normal" sized EVF.

There's no objective best in something inherently subjective. The Fuji engine is very good at rendering the design goals of the Fuji team. If you really like the "Fuji Colors" then it's absolutely the best. I know of quite a few people who are perfectly fine shooting only jpeg with Fuji. Some people, I've read, always shoot with the film simulation bracketing and get 3 looks each time the shoot. That could help guard against the "I wish I chose another film simulation." It's a lot like shooting film, though. While not immutable it's not as easily changed as a raw file.

I like how you categorize the X100T as a camera for the "budget minded." Are these the same budget minded people who feed their dogs filet mignon for dinner?

Try walking into a photo shoot with a mirror less camera, people will ask why are you here. Now show up with a D500 with a long gold ring lens and people will say "take my money".

When I walk around with my mirrorless DSLR cameras-or ride STP with one around my neck (most likely painful with a huge full frame SLR at twice the weight or more)-I get asked about a half a dozen times a day if I'm a professional photographer.

I'm not, and I'm honest about saying so :-) but I'm not carrying an E-PL1 anymore, either. And mirrorless DSLRs have evolved a whole bunch since then, too.

I have never had a client have an issues with me using a mirrorless camera. My clients hire me because of the end product that I produce. Not because of the tools I use to get there.

The d500 is a great camera but to assume your less of a photographer using mirrorless instead is ridiculous. Someone that uses their gear to show their worth as a photographer may be insecure about their actual abilities as a photographer.

Sounds from one of the replies that DSLR's are primarily to satisfy the expectations of people who are not actually really interested in photography. Sounds pretty grim and serious to me to have to base your kit preferences on that. Probably DSLR ownership is one of the burdens of being professional in every use of the word. You have to wonder if the average amateur user really needs to bother about that unless they are a sport photographer.
Fuji cameras are certainly not toys.

my xpro2 is very fast at focusing. As a matter of fact the whole camera is very responsive in everything it does. Nothing it does feels delayed at all. I had an xt10 and x100s. both were noticeably slower than the xpro2. I think you are basing your AF opinions on the previous generations. Except for C AF. It sucks on the xpro2.

RAW is fine. No reason not to use it if you want to.

Why is it only amateurs and semi-pros think the Fuji cameras are up to the task? They're nice for taking pictures of your vacation, but not when money is on the line!

PanchoVilla you are talking mierda mate, I've been paid very handsomely for countless jobs with my Fuji gear, in fact I've shot entire jobs with a little X30 and a couple of speedlights and neither the client nor the models seem to care at all, fastest shoot I've ever shot and highest paid per minute of my time. If you can't make money with any of today's cameras (including compacts and bridge) you just ain't that talented and ttran88 once you are at a client's ready for a shoot the last thing on their mind is what equipment you are carrying, they've already seen your work and that's the reason you are there in the first place.

I am a pro photographer and shoot the XT-1 and have pre-ordered the XT-2. I sold my Canon 1d Mark III and its lenses. I never expected to make this move and had bought the XT-1 as a lighter camera to take with me into cities etc. However, the quality of the images produced by the XT-1 blew me away. I look forward to the faster focusing, but have been shooting wildlife images with the XT-1. This discussion reminds me of the film vs. digital days. I shoot exclusively RAW.

Why is it that Pancho can only call Fuji cameras and people that shoot with them names, instead of coming up with any kind of constructive argument why a Fuji camera can not be used by a pro?

I would love to see your pro work you are producing with your "Pro" Nikon.

Pancho was very clear. You're not a "serious" photographer unless you're shooting with the latest, greatest, Nikon... So anybody out there with a less than $2000 Nikon DSLR body.... get back under that rock and start saving!! : )

chriswilliams10 okay, I'll do a single job with my little x30 and that should be more than enough to buy that Nikon body so I can finally be a 'pro', mind you, the Nikon will gather dust sitting there in the box while I continue to make my living with my non-pro 2/3 inch 12Mp compact ;)

ttran88, I have a tip for you, save yourself 2,500 dollars and get a flipping pocket knife. That will make it easier and cheaper for people to tell you "take my money".

Street photography LOL. More B&W photos of cats at shop's doorway.

No one is discussing your portrait work Peia. :-)

The name on the front of the camera makes it obtrusive for street photography?? Never heard that one before... Hey, get that Fuji outta my face!! : )

I don't think the xpro2 will get any of the AFC presets...

if you compare the XPro and the XT-1, you should have known that there would be similar differences and purposes behind the justification for the bodies. Anyone seeing the changes made to the XPro2 over the Xpro would have envisaged those changes coming to the XT-2 and would have waited. The XPro series was and still is not intended for sports/wildlife. You didn't do your research.

You seriously bought an XPro2 for wildlife photography? ha ha... you guys take it too far sometimes ha ha!

The X-Pro2 is not a slouch either but consider that the rangefinder style camera body lends itself to zone focusing while using the OVF. It's a different style of shooting.

Webber15 so you purchase a rangefinder style camera for wildlife and I'm not clever enough? good one!

It looks like a Leica and you can put a leather half-case on it.

shooter mclens I very much doubt it, the XPro1 kepts it's price long after the introduction of the XE2 which was clearly a superior camera, in fact it was still priced above the XT1 when it launched and for a while after that. Not everybody is interested in specs and AF performance let alone video.

(@ peiasdf)Than maybe you don't know that many Fuji (xpro)shooters at all?
Or Fuji camera's for that matter? " The XE is the budget XT " ....????
(still no "dislike"buttons here)

The X-T10 and X-T1 both have center viewfinders in a hump with SLR style; while the X-E2S and X-Pro2 have left side viewfinders and rangefinder style.

Peiasdf...who at home give you internet access so you can impinge your daft comments on us...I think they should be held accountable!!

colors and contrast can indeed be altered to some digree but with icky fuji's skin tones it's impossible. In certain situations fuji's colors are just plain awful compared to canikons colors.

webber15: yes but it's hard to beat Fuji colors straight out of the camera. Also, it's hard to match Fuji colors in post processing from other brands (I used to shoot with an Oly E-M5).

PRohmer...no we don't all have the same taste...I'm saying that in camera settings or in post you can alter images to your hearts content...
M4/3 doesn't make any sense to me...actually it does...I do like M4/3 but just because I own Fuji now I don't go around saying other makes/models make no sense...you could easily be mistaken for a troll simply because the Xpro2 is one of the BEST mirrorless cameras (for me) out there and certainly one of the most original...

Simply put...I'm not at all convinced by you and you do not make any sense to me (perhaps anyone??)

I'm a portrait photographer. I know colour is subjective, but IMHO Fuji has the best skin tones out of any cameras I have shot with in the past - Canon, Nikon, Olympus. Canon in particular I really used to struggle with in post. I used to shoot weddings with Canon.

Fuji also has WAY better dynamic range than my Canon 5DmkIII and 7D ever had. The Fuji files are much more flexible.

Auto white balance is another thing - way better on the Fuji than the Canons. More accurate and more consistent.

Just to add, the JPEG files were good on the X-T1/X-T10, but they have stepped up a gear on the X-Pro2. so much so that I would happily consider shooting just JPEG on some occasions. There are lots of lovely colour profiles to choose from now.

Marksphoto - what are you talking about? I don't shoot JPEG. I have shot RAW almost exclusively for 10 + years. Although with Fuji shooting RAW+JPEG in camera means that I can zoom in to 100% on the LCD to check on focus accuracy and means I can use the JPEG as a colour marker. For post production the JPEGs get ditched and for the RAW I use the Lightroom Fuji colour profiles as a starting point and I have tweaked them to match the JPEG colour output more closely and created my own presets with my own personal tone curve and sharpening recipe. It's fairly easy because the Adobe colour files for Fuji are already pretty close, although they often overdo the blacks and shadows for my taste.

Does this mean, based on your mistaken assumption that I shoot JPEG, that you are only using the default Adobe colour profiles? This explains your comments and why you are seeing things differently.

Marksphoto - I'm sorry, but you are wrong.

If you don't use Adobe default colour profiles and you don't use the Fuji profiles, what do you use? Your answer is nonsensical.

Fuji has vast experience when it comes to colour rendition due to their years making film emulsions. They aren't new to the game at all.

By the way, just to prove the point about the wonderful skin tones to the Fuji files, go check out Damien Lovegrove's galleries. He is a world-renowned professional wedding and portrait photographer making a living out of Fuji cameras and the Fuji colour profiles built into Lightroom (his main post production tool of choice).

Marksphoto - I have looked at the galleries on your website. You are wrong. Not only are the skin tones NOT "better", some of your subjects look a little jaundiced or ill.

I am not sure if you have some sort of agenda here, or you are colour blind, or are just suffering sour grapes. Either way I am done with this rather silly conversation.

Tbh...if I was loaded I'd buy cams and lenses across all systems...something different to play with everyday!!
Alas...I'm not "minted" so just one system for me - and Fuji puts a smile on my face...

If I were loaded, I'd buy one camera system. And then I'd buy a motorcycle.

buy a truck - it works better for hauling more stuff.

Hybrid viewfinder

hipster tax

I must be a hipster then, Although I don't have a beard or man-bun.

Bought an X pro 2.
Feel bad after reading this: I'm a stills hipster with a bad taste in color. Thanks guys :P

@darngooddesign, "No limit on record time with the grip or external power source." from where do you have this info?

@darngooddesign, This is what I also read everywhere including in Fuji Brochure: "The grip takes a further 2 batteries. Interestingly this increases the length of video recording time, which increases from 10mins, using the camera battery, to the maximum 30mins with the battery grip. Similarly Full HD recording time is 15mins or the maximum 30mins with the battery. We’ve been told that the reason for these times is to prevent the camera overheating, which presumably affects not just the sensor, but also the batteries."
There is nowhere specified that after 30 min you can immediately resume the 4K recording. :(

The 30 minute limit (29:59 min actually) is due to import tariffs in a number of countries that classify the camera differently and trigger larger import tariffs.

I hope that's the case but I fear it also overheats after 30 min of continuous recording. If not I'm sure they've been promoting it!

The newer lenses are fast and silent. I've just given my X-Pro1 a new lease of life with the 35/2 WR. It's an absolutely fantastic normal lens, probably the best I've used in many respects!

Plus Capture one pro does a fantastic job with Fujifilm raw files. No excuse for not using it.

Does Capture One support filters like the free Nik filters ? if not then there is a pretty big reason NOT to use it.

LR is fine for the majority of subject matter. Hardly what I consider poor.

I agree, the latest version of LR does a decent enough job, and I'm not buying another converter for my second camera.

My x Pro2 with 18-55 are pretty much pretty silent....

Sorry - not sure why I would need LR in a C1/Photoshop workflow? As it happens, Photoshop CC and Lightroom are bundled together anyway, so it's there if I need it, though I rarely open it up.

For me (and especially with X-Trans) C1 is fast and I'd throw in user friendly into that mix too.
I run pretty full-on libraries and catalogues averaging over 60,000 images, mostly RAF and NEF Raw files. I've not had any problems with speed/rendering. In particular it's fairly nice not having to swap between modules in the way that lightroom does, but that's the way my workflow goes.

DXO, Photo Ninja, etc. are about as useless as it gets for workflow.

Don't get me wrong - I've liked using Lightroom when I've had to, but the bottom line for X-Trans, from an image quality to workflow ratio point of view, kind of leaves LR for dust (When working with RAF files at least).

Just my opinion, but one based on pretty extensive testing.

Exactly my thoughts.

Do you want some cheese with your whine? If a company takes a longer time to update their cameras, people complain that they are asleep at the wheel. If a company updates at shorter intervals, people complain that updates are coming too often! It just goes to show that people love to complain, no matter what. I don't think the problem is with the camera companies or their update cycles. The real issue is that we live in a society of whiner, complainers, and cry-babies who throw tantrums every time something doesn't happen exactly the way they want it to.

Maybe you should spend less time tracking every new camera introduction, and spend more time taking pictures. Unfortunately, ogling new cameras has become somewhat of a sport now. A sport of the idle. When a new camera comes out, I take a quick look at it; if it's something I'm in the market for at the moment, I'll take a closer look. Otherwise, I just get on with my life.

We could always start by getting rid of Nikon to make more room for others...

Dear T3, sorry to disappoint you. I don't spend my time "spotting" news or new cameras. I simply follow this website (like seems you equally do). This site is one of my few references for good reviews and good information about photography as has been for many years. For sports, I go the gym regularly 3 times a week. And sorry to disappoint you again, but I have had the same gear from many years, only recently starting to switch from Nikon to Sony, simply because I believe Sony has in recent years become the most innovative name in the field. My cameras last for very long time & I have 2. My Nikon is a D3x I have had for 7 years since 2009, and still love it like the day I bought it. And very recently I've purchased a Sony A7RII and some lenses, that's it. As per your suggestion of spending more time taking pictures, sure, I try do that as much as I can within the time I have avaliable. Photography is my passion since child. And YES, I do love some cheese with my wine!.. red only:)

I always get a kick out of people complaining "there is too much choice available to me."

Cowardly attitude. Be ashamed of yourself. The other posters are right. This is pathetic. If you are afraid of choice, don't buy anything. If you are afraid you won't own the latest and greatest, buy and sell/trade. You can own everything available for very little loss. Or just rent.

But don't complain about options and choice. So very very Lame Nikonandmore.

I'll bite. I believe what was stated was an opinion which we all know is taboo on the internet...right? I really did not get a complaining vibe from the OP just their particular view. Perhaps its the tone, albeit he uses some interesting correlations to the market I do see the logic in recognizing that the digital camera market is very saturated with an ever condensing product life cycle.

To someone that is uneducated there can be confusion when presented with many models with similar spec sheets etc. this can be off-putting. More is not always better (this is my opinion but I'd like to think its a fact). I think the original OP's point is that the release of the XT-2 was very close to that of the XPro, not that it shouldn't exist. Complaining? Not really. Observant? Yes. Cowardly? What? Don't read between the lines that aren't there. We are all spoiled anyway.

@Nikonandmore - hope you're right about the X-Pro2. If the price drops as fast as it did on the previous version I shall be very happy! I got my X-Pro1 for a song and will buy the new version once the price is sensible.

@T3 + 1 and then some

The advancements the X-Pro2 has over the X-Pro1 are huge. I hadn't even considered the X system until the Pro2 came out. One thing is for sure, reflex mirrors are dying.

The point is T3 tried to make was, imo: Don't bother to complain, there'll be always complaints, no matter how company behaves. This kind of issue was brought over and over again and never reaches a consensus.

IMO, it is better to have many many products released, although it comes with a cost: gear depreciation. Nevertheless, innovation, even if it is just incremental, is not a bad thing. Yin.

At the same time, though, it is important to take you gear out and enjoy what you've got. Afterall, those gears are so excelent nowadays, hardly it will be a real obstacle to your photography needs. I've got a EM10, already few years old, but it can do fantastic shots. Yang.

So, my sincere advice is to enjoy photography in a Yin and Yang way. You'll be always happy with it :)

@T3: So what are you doing here instead of "going on with your life"?

To me all Fujis seem outdated when they appear. They usually lack features compared to the competition (4K without touch screen, really?) and they take a year or two to be patched up to the hardwares potential. However they have a special appeal because of their different user interface which is especially true for the pro. Not everybody needs the latest to have fun. Some just prefer the different or lets say old school approach and that is perfectly fine.

Short product lifecycles are required for nearly every new product class and mirrorless is just one of them. DSLRs have been refined for decades but the quick progress of the mirrorless cameras forces C&N to move forward again which is great. Just have a look a what a D500 can do.

Ernest M Aquilio, thank you. At least someone got the point. I was merely making a personal comment after reading the article on the new Fuji on this site. People seem all so angry and it's funny they tell me to get a life and don't waste my time whinning when the fact is, I almost never post here or whine about anything while the folks that so viciously attack me, post endlessly on a daily basis & attack just about everyone that writes anything. And it's me that needs to better use of my time? Maybe.. starting by not coming to this website might be a good start since it's frequented by so much royalty & real geniuses from above. Some people have way too much free time on their hands & hypocrisy in their brains (or what's left of them). I guess the lesson learned here is that there is little to learn among useless attack-dogs that contribute positively nothing in life to anyone.. must be sad. No wonder they are mad at the world and everyone. What a sad life.. emptiness is bummer.

@NikonandTroll the only thing we have learned is that you trolled, you complained, you wined, and you couldn't back up anything you said.

Be happy, stay positive, and don't bother posting in the future if you and going to behave like that.

You got caught and I am hoping people flag your account for abuse.

Please don't post any more.

@Thematic & al
Let the man speak - he's not trolling - YOU ARE!

He had is chance. He blew it.

Controls, controls, controls.

Lenses

Out of camera JPEG colors and that unique tonal quality. It's not for everyone, but I love it.

Controls and lenses...

Lenses, controls, build quality, pro grade features, better rendition of the same 24mp, better colors and no horrible rolling shutter in video.

I shot with Sony for the last ten years. I switched to fuji because of the lenses, handling of the camera, and image colors. I know all about Sony lenses (FF and Crop), fuji lenses are better and more consistent. Sony's lens quality is all over the place. Most importantly I get the shot right in camera easier than I did with Sony. So I have less post to do. Build quality is better as well in my opinion.

In the end though some of this is opinion and preference and we don't always agree. So the 6300 certainly can be a better option for others, but it doesn't mean since you think it is better, it must be for everyone else.

If your a prime lens kinda guy, these fuji lenses are something beautiful.

Simply saying that you disagree with the facts about lens selection and quality does not invalidate it as a reason. The weather sealing details of the 6300 are still sort of... vague. Not that all weather sealing details aren't vague(how can anyone really quantify that, though?). It just happens to be several degrees more vague with the 6300. Also... support. Fuji has proven their dedication to continued support for previous models. Sony has proven it's not at all interested in doing so. Once they get their money, they're done with you until they want to sell you something else.

Those aspects are worth money to a lot of people.

Also if someone is buying a 4K video camera with the intention of actually shooting 4K video they might prefer one that doesn't randomly overheat and shut down (as the Camerastore found when they recently tried to shoot an XT-2 review with an A6300)

Different strokes for different folks. Believe it or not, people have different preferences. Why buy a Rolex when you can get a Casio that tells the time just as well, or better? Sometimes it comes down to how a camera looks and feels and handles. It's not always just about specs and price.

I have a Sony A6000 and a Fuji X-E1. Functionally, the Sony is a great camera. In many ways, it's better than the Fuji. But I still love the Fuji. I love how it handles and feels and looks. Is one necessarily better than the other? In some ways yes, in some ways no. Both have their pros and cons. In other words, there are plenty of reasons why someone might choose Sony over Fuji, and vice versa. I chose to use both.

I feel the same way. I was ready to jump the ship from Canon to Fuji because I like the selection of fast primes and the plethora of controls on the Fujis (especially that AF joystick which was rumoured long before the release). I already sold of two of my Canon lenses. When the X-Pro 2 was released I was really disappointed about the price. 1.800 Euro is more than I paid for my FF 6D three years ago and is way to much for my taste. But this system is really appealing anyway.

@Jefftan: As far as I can see on the Sony website, their lenses designed specifically for APSC are slower than the Fuji offerings (with a few exceptions of course). eg sony 35/1.8, 16/2.8, & 24/1.8, 50/1.8 compared to fuji 35/1.4, 16/1.4, 23/1.4, 56/1.2. Even fuji's kit zoom is faster...Sony 18-55 f3.5-5.6 compared to Fuji 18-55 f2.8-4
There are slower and cheaper fuji lenses on the way but I'm struggling to find faster sony equivalents unless you go to the ones made by Zeiss which are much more expensive, or sony's full frame offerings and then you loose the size advantage of choosing apsc.
This is what people talk about when they say Fuji have better lens selection.

I think whichever way you slice it the new X-Fujis are overpriced. They're very nice and I would be willing to pay a bit more to buy one rather than a competing Sony camera, but not THAT much more. The problem for me is the price difference between these and a D7200. I like to have a small discreet 'street' camera as an alternative to my D810 - in my case an X-Pro1 - but these new Fujis are about as good as a camera costing circa £700. Which will cause me not to buy one!

Why would you buy a Sony 6300, I ask you, I had Sony A7 ii while a good camera never liked the Souny system, sold it along with 16 35, 55 1.8 and 70 200.
Now useing two XE2 till XT2 come out.
I am very happy not having Sony. Fuji system os controls and results of photos make the difference .
So I ask who would want Sony 6300 ? Not many reading this article.

Lenses for me

Man, I have never used Fuji nor Sony.
But if I was to choose, Fuji system seems to be way appealing for traditional camera user. The controls and dials seem to be far better than Sony, and believe me, this do make a huge difference.
Of course, Sony seems to have a better hardware and tech, but a6300 just appears to be an augmented point and shoot. Which is not bad, but for camera people that care for careful control and enjoy the picture taking in a traditional way, Sony is not exactly there.
And although you dismissed it, Fuji lens selection is still broader, deeper and most of all, better in terms of optics, IMO.
Does all of it make up for US$600-700 difference? Consider this: Market does not work as you think it should. Otherwise, Leica wouldn't exist and Mac wouldn't be a go-to computer for many photographers. For me, though, no, it wouldn't. But I wouldn't choose Sony either.

the price differential between Fuji and Sony goes away as soon as you realize the A6300's kit lens is el garbagio and you have to upgrade to get the most out of the sensor. But even if you do upgrade, Sony's APS-C native lenses aren't as good as Fuji's, and the selection isn't as wide. Fuji's also have better build quality, ergonomics, and haptics.

And the a6300 is limited to 30 minutes. However, with the T2's battery grip or an external power source there is no 4k record limit.

I'm not a video person so my question may sound ignorant or innocent, not sure which, but how many scenes are shot that last more than 10 minutes?

Glen Barrington "Im not a video person so my question may sound ignorant or innocent, not sure which, but how many scenes are shot that last more than 10 minutes?"

Glen its not so much use for scenes in movies/cinema. But having longer then 10 minutes is great for shooting things like extended B roll, or shooting events/sports/concerts where you have multiple stationary cameras that you don't have remote SDI controls or quick access to the cameras.

Ten minutes is almost four times the length of a 50' super 8mm film cart at 18fps.. are you really gonna shoot, edit, and make people watch an uninterrupted ten plus minute scene in the movie you're shooting in 4K? What with brevity being the soul of wit and all ;-)

For something longer like a video of a political rally, I'd still use a camcorder that I could set on a tripod and let it roll, while shooting stills with the real camera.

Other way round for me mate!!

Luckily Fuji makes an SLR style and rangefinder style camera for those who prefer one over the other.

Well quite. The X-T2 doesn't actually do anything a D7200 or even D5500 can't - indeed, the Nikons probably have the edge in terms of image quality, raw support, and probably AF performance. And they cost a damn sight less, so if you want a small DSLR-type camera with a 24MP Sony sensor, there's a case to be made for simply buying a Nikon. At least the X-Pro2 brings something new to the table, although I'm still not paying £1,349.99 for it!!

I've used both the X-Pro2 and X-T1 for street photography. I decided to order an X-T2 for the following personal reasons:

- X-T is more comfortable for me to hold and use, because of the larger grip and good shutter placement
- I use back focus function and X-Pro2's shutter and AF-L button placements are absolutely terrible for me - it feels insecure in my hand, so you should try both cameras and judge for yourself
- X-Pro2's EVF blacks out when I wear polarizing sunglasses
- I found X-Pro2's OVF is not good for fast accurate framing, because of parallax error and faint frame lines, esp. under bright lights - this always reminded me of the viewfinder on 35mm compact cameras back in the day.
- X-Pro2 ISO dial feels cheap to me and a tad awkward, with no tactile feedback when turning, and it sure doesn't feel like a switch belonging to a $1700 camera
- I like exploring unusual creative viewpoints on the streets - X-T's tilt flip screen is very handy for this

oh how I wish that my camera has tilt flip screen. At times I want to shoot something from the ground pointing up, what can I do ? tilting screen to the rescue

Just a note: my experience with the Leica M3 is that having a 0.92x magnification viewfinder the 135mm lenses are easily and accurately focussed and do not intrude into the viewfinder. Personally, I find the 'tunnel' vision of the EVF/SLR TTL viewfinders inferior to the 'see outside the frame' viewfinders of rangefinders and X-Pro type OVF's. Strangely to some I'm sure, this seems particularly true to me for fast moving subjects as it is easier to keep track of them (and 0-lag/blackout) with the Leica/X-Pro viewfinders!!

105012...common sense shines through...I actually use mine for "bif" as per learnt from Mathieu over at Mirrorless Lessons...