Wild Rumors Episode 3: Fujifilm X-PRO2 with APS-X sensor (25-27 MP) and compatible with current XF lenses (src – dc.home)


 photo aps-x_zpsd1akyi94.jpg

X-T1 + 18-135  (save $400) at BHphoto / AmazonUS / Adorama / Pictureline
XF 18-135 (save $300) at BHphoto / AmazonUS / Adorama / Pictureline

_ _ _

You might remember dc.home forum member joofei, who shared a bunch of wild rumors about Fuji’s upcoming gear at the Chinese forum (see wild rumors 1 and wild rumors 2).

Well, he just shared some new information here at dc.home. Some sound very weird… but I’ll just report them here and leave any considerations to you.

Joofei says that there could be 2 versions of the X-PRO2.

VERSION 1: This version matches exactly with the rumors shared here on FR over the last months: APS-C sensor, 24MP, Dual Card slot… so nothing new.

VERSION 2: The second X-PRO2 version will have, according to joofei, the following specs:

– 25.6 x 17.3 APS-X sensor
– 25-27 MP
– OLD LENS WITH 1.x FACTOR [admin: if I understand the google translated version correctly, all current XF lenses will be compatible with this new sensor] – BIG OVF + EVF

I have no rumors about an X-PRO2 with a completely new 25.6 x 17.3 APS-X sensor format (that’s between APS-H with 27.9×18.6 and APS-C with 23.6×15.6). For now I give to this rumor a very low rating. I’ll just note that, if you look closely at the April’s Fool Joke made up by an official Fujifilm X-photographer here, you’ll see that some of his “fake” features match with those of joofei. Here are the X-photographer specs:

– Sensor 10% bigger than the previous one, so that you can use the “old” lenses, with a crop factor of 1.2x [admin: FR-reader David calculated a drop factor of 1.4] – 27 MP
– Hybrid viewfinder (as X100T, but with X-T1 dimensions)

As the X-photographer himself said in the comments about his joke: “Who knows how many of these features will be in the next Fuji?”

Now, either both are just having fun and posted similar fake specs, or there is something worth to investigate behind these very wild rumors.

FUJI X-SHIRTS available here in USA and here in Europe & CO.
Learn more about the 100% Fair Trade Charity X-shirts here.

stay tuned,
facebook, google+, RSS-feed and twitter

 photo spreasirt_zpsgiue4jmb.png

  • Starsailor

    Any bigger sensor and OVF would be great, but two versions seem unnecessary. Getting one model right seems enough challenge for Fuji.

    Now if they could only come up with a 35mm with distance scales (APS-H would make it a sweet 42mm lens, finally something close to human vision).

    • nzswedespeed

      The current 27mm is pretty much bang on what you want then (40.5mm)

      • brian

        Very true. I think the 27mm is one of the best kept secrets in Fuji’s lens lineup. Besides being a perfect normal (40.5mm equivalent as you point out), it’s also one of the sharpest lenses in the lineup, is small enough that the camera with lens fits in a jacket pocket, and is the cheapest lens in the lineup. Biggest drawback is that it doesn’t have the aperture ring.

        • I’m not even sure if missing aperture ring is a drawback. :) It’s my most used lens these days, and:
          – portraits: you have a nice DoF, very pleasing;
          – landscapes/streed: when focused in a distance the DoF of 2.8 covers large area also giving pleasing results.
          So even when I have other lenses, I just don’t feel the need to switch them, as working with the 27mm is just quicker and nicer.

      • Starsailor

        I’d prefer 42-45mm equivalent, but the XF27 doesn’t have an aperture ring, never mind distance scales.

  • APS-Y

    Developing sensor sized between APS-C and APS-H doesn’t make any sense. Thus highly improbable.

  • umad?!

    Can someone do the math if sensor size, format, crop factor even add up? personally I find it highly unlikely that Fuji would introduce a new sensor size, but who knows

  • Brian

    If this is true, it’s very interesting.

    It makes a lot of sense, if you think about this:

    A 25.6×17.3 sensor is obviously not about changing the crop factor for 3:2 aspect ratio images in any way, but about providing a multi-aspect ratio sensor.

    Let me explain:

    If you do the math, you’ll see that 25.6×17.3 is within 0.1mm of the exact the size they’d need to support multiple aspect ratios (4:3, 3:2, 16:9, 2:1) inside the image circle of the current lenses (minimum diameter of 29.26mm).

    On the current X bodies, if you choose another aspect ratio like 16:9, you’re just cropping pixels from the 3:2 sensor and not making use of the full image circle of the lens. So you’re giving up quality and getting a smaller angle of view.

    But with a multi-aspect sensor, you use the full image circle for each aspect ratio, and so your diagonal angle of view is the same when switching aspect ratios.

    Why would they do this?

    First, you’re interested in video, this could be desirable for 16:9 aspect ratio.

    If you’re interested in still photography, people have long argued that the 3:2 ratio inherited from 35mm is unnaturally long and skinny, and 4:3 is a more natural feeling that better matches the aspect ratio of human vision. (Or, for fans of large format 4×5 and 8×10 cameras, their aspect ratio is also closer to 4:3 than 3:2).

    So, whether you personally prefer 3:2 or 4:3, it could be a huge win for Fujifilm if the gave photographers the choice of either aspect ratio in this way, rather than just cropping from a native 3:2 sensor.

  • brian

    If this is true, it’s very interesting.

    It makes a lot of sense, if you think about this:

    A 25.6×17.3 sensor is obviously not about changing the crop factor for 3:2 aspect ratio images in any way, but about providing a multi-aspect ratio sensor.

    Let me explain:

    If you do the math, you’ll see that 25.6×17.3 is within 0.1mm of the exact the size they’d need to support multiple aspect ratios (4:3, 3:2, 16:9, 2:1) inside the image circle of the current lenses (minimum diameter of 29.26mm).

    On the current X bodies, if you choose another aspect ratio like 16:9, you’re just cropping pixels from the 3:2 sensor and not making use of the full image circle of the lens. So you’re giving up quality and getting a smaller angle of view.

    But with a multi-aspect sensor, you use the full image circle for each aspect ratio, and so your diagonal angle of view is the same when switching aspect ratios.

    Why would they do this?

    First, you’re interested in video, this could be desirable for 16:9 aspect ratio.

    If you’re interested in still photography, people have long argued that the 3:2 ratio inherited from 35mm is unnaturally long and skinny, and 4:3 is a more natural feeling that better matches the aspect ratio of human vision. (Or, for fans of large format 4×5 and 8×10 cameras, their aspect ratio is also closer to 4:3 than 3:2).

    So, whether you personally prefer 3:2 or 4:3, it could be a huge win for Fujifilm if the gave photographers the choice of either aspect ratio in this way, rather than just cropping from a native 3:2 sensor.

    Lastly, I don’t think they would offer two versions of X-Pro2 with these two different sensor sizes. If there’s any truth to this rumor it all, it is probably just an indication that Fujifilm is currently experimenting with both sensor sizes (multi aspect or not) and hasn’t yet decided which one to ship with.

    • Jonasbg

      Maybe that could explain the mpx range from 25-27mpx, cause wouldn’t this vary depending on how your crop ratio would be?

      • umad?!

        yes it would. it would fit a ~32MP sensor (25,6×17,3) with 4:3 3:2 and 16:9 aspects, resulting in ~24-27MP

    • ph

      a multi aspect sensor as described above would be nice, but i rather see fuji use a 23,6 x 23,6 square sensor. and i don’t mind the occasional vignetting or loss of sharpness in the (extreme) corners.

    • umad?!

      I did the math (see newest post) and come to the same conclusion. This is pointing toward a multi aspect ratio sensor.
      This would also fit with another rumor (from 43rumors) that Panasonic is working on a new sensor

    • Starsailor

      A multiple aspect ratio-sensor would follow Fuji’s XPan-tradition.

  • Adam

    The problem with changing the crop factor is the lenses will then have a different effective 35mm focal length. That could be a problem for many photographers of the Fuji system. I would be very surprised if Fuji did that. I’m a commercial photographer for 1/2 the year where it is my primary income and personally I would not purchase a body that would change my lens focal lengths (mostly in the primes). Just my 2 cents …

    • umad?!

      I think this could be a multi aspect ratio, so it would allow you to take different image ratios, without loosing too much pixels

      So the focal distance would not change (and there would be no crop factor – even if the rumor says so)

      btw. 1.2 crop factor does NOT fit the dimensions given!!

  • Alex

    Someting is wrong – APS-H is 1.3x, so if the new sensor sits between APS-H and APS-C it would be 1.4x, not 1.2x. Am i right?

    • umad?!

      they were talking: APS-C to APS-X crop factor I guess. Still the calculations seems to be off: I am getting a crop factor of 1.1 to APS-C, putting it at 1.4 at APS-X to FF.

      But if it is a multi aspect sensor like I think, this doesn’t matter :)

  • Max_Elmar

    Yeah, just a little too far out for me. I can see advantages to the multi-aspect sensor, but unless they were going to deploy it across every line, the unit cost would be insane. Just a current, state-of-the-art 24mp APS-C with an XTrans CFA would be fine by me. And Fuji – how about a compressed RAW option. Lossless, of course. Those files are too fat.

    • brian

      I expect that whatever new sensor the X-Pro2 gets, it will eventually be used across the entire line over the following year or so. So either the whole line eventually gets multi-aspect sensor, or the whole line just gets 24 MP at the current sensor size.

  • umad?!

    I think brian (comments) is right: if this is true, we are looking at a Multiaspect Ratio Sensor.

    Fuji is developing the organic sensor together with Panasonic.

    Panasonic had a multiaspect ratio Sensor in the GH1 and GH2 (the one in the LX100 I don’t count, since it’s just a castrated µFT sensor).

    That Pana sensor had an aspect ratio of ~3:2 while µFT normally uses a 4:3 ratio

    You were able to choice from 3:2, 4:3, 16:9 – all fitting the image circle nearly perfectly (take a look here: http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5047/5259897150_75b3b7fa9e.jpg)

    On other rumor sites we hear, that Panasonic is working on a 18MP sensor (which is said to deliver outstanding dynamic range and color reproduction – to me that sounds like the organic sensor).
    Scale this 18MP µFT sensor to APS-C size and we end up with roughly ~32MP

    From those aspect ratios (3:2 , 4:3 , 16:9) 4:3 is the most “efficient”. If we have a ~32MP 3:2 multiaspect ratio sensor and use the 4:3 ratio, we end up with about a bit over 27MP.
    The 3:2 ratio would end up with about ~26MP and the 16:9 ratio with about ~24,3MP (maybe the calculations are a bit off or we see rounding errors)

    Anyway: 27MP in 4:3 and ~24/25MP in 16:9 mode from a 32MP multiaspect sensor
    24-27MP sounds familiar?

    Hope that anyone could follow and I am not completely off with my math :)

    • Antonio

      Sorry for the question but using a m4/3 sensor what’s the difference between what you call the Panasonic’s multi aspect sensor and the several aspect ratios offered by the Olympus OM-D EM-1, as both brands use the same sensor’s type and allow the very same choices there?
      And, the same for the comparison to other manufacturers’ (APS-C or FF) cameras that also offer more than one aspect ratio.

      • umad?!

        Olympus at the moment uses 2 different sensors. One from Sony (EM5, EM10) and one from Panasonic (EM1). Both are “typical” µFT sensors – 17.3x13mm

        What the EM1 (and nearly every other camera right now) does, is, cropping that image to the form factor. Problem: you loose resolution and change the angle of view. This is most dramatic in video mode, when for example a 14mm lens does NOT behave like what you are used to.

        But in the GH1 and GH2 Panasonic had a bigger sensor. (~19×13,4mm – using the whole 18MP sensor would have resulted in a crop factor of ~1.88) This one was bigger in both X and Y direction. This allowed the different ratios to be used more efficient (fit the image cycle perfectly). That’s why a video with the 14mm on a GH2 looks more wide angle than on the GH3 (with uses the “normal” µFT Sensor [funny fact, it’s most likely the same Sony sensor that’s in the EM5 too])

        TLDR: EM1 does software cropping – the same you can do in post production.
        The GH1, GH2 had a bigger sensor, so it REALLY changed the whole aspect ratio without croping

        • Antonio

          I see. Thanks VM

  • Lumen


    That X sounds so good, but i’ts also a well known variable that can take every value you want it to give :-)

  • Gandolfi

    I like it – I could shoot using full APS-X sensor with 27MP, and one switch in the camera meanu and I can use classic APS-C size with 24MP. A little different effective 35mm focal length with APS-X (1,3x factor?) is not a problem for me at all. Every photographer will get used to it quickly. I would probalby shoot mainly with APS-X because of higher resolution, a little better DR and better high iso, besides that APS-X would make my 35mm lens which coresponds to 55mm in FF (1,53x factor), a 42-45mm equivalent lens, and 18/2 (28mm in FF a 16/2 (24/2), I really like it :-)

    The only question is what size X-Pro2 will be? If Fuji would make it a little smaller than X-Pro1, than they have my money.

  • Xmen

    Who ever does the calculation of the crop factor is clearly wrong! Canon’s aps-h size sensor is 28.7 x 19mm and it has a 1.3 crop factor. The aps-x sensor in the specs is 25.6 x 17.3mm which is smaller. This means it should have a crop factor between current apsc 1.6 and apsh 1.3

  • Zutzi

    interesting explanations on the multi aspect ratio. thanks for that. not sure if got it 100 % ly example: using the 35 mm lens on the ‘old’ sensor (xpro, xe) and the ‘new’ assumed sensor with the same ratio, i.e. 3:2 – will I see a big difference?

  • Lumen

    “X-PRO2 will outperform NX1”

    • MT

      …x-t1 already outperform NX1.

      • Plextor

        Yeah right… keep on dreaming…
        Resolution of NX1 is much higher and also dynamic range…

  • John

    we (incl. Fuji) need to remember that any benefit you get from a larger sensor can also come from a faster lens … Fuji has shown that they are willing to make large lenses (50-140) so why not a 27mm f1.0 ? That would compete with the FF 1.4 lenses in DOF and noise assuming a good APS-C sensor

    • hexx

      Don’t understand why people always associate large sensors with only shallower depth of field. Large sensor also means that for given angle of view, longer lens can be used which results in different rendering of an image and better focus roll-off. And that’s the advantage I like the most on larger sensors (FF/MF)

  • YingTong

    I read this as Fuji getting existing brand owners conditioned to the inevitable concept of an expanded sensor. A bigger sensor is now essential to Fuji’s medium term participation in a market which has yet to react to serious commitment from Canon and Nikon, and whose boundaries are being set by Sony. Put simply, when Canon and Nikon address this market properly their benchmark will be the Sony A7. If Fuji doesn’t have any skin in that game they’ll be marginalised in a market even now delivering risible returns on corporate investment.

    The bigger sensor Fuji is getting us ready for isn’t APS-X, T, J, L whatever. It’s full frame, 36 x 24. And if Fuji can deliver to their customary standards in full frame we’re in for a treat. Their technologists are brilliant.

    On the other hand, the Fuji suits should be fired for having wrong-guessed the eventual stabilised platform on which the future market will be built. Had they been smarter, Fuji would now have a commanding market lead.

  • APS-C is generally 1.6 only for Canons. Nikon, Fuji and most other APS-C sensors have a crop factor of 1.5

  • umad?!

    If it really would be a multi aspect ratio sensor, then NO. there would be no difference in FOV (equiv. focal length) at all. You’d get a ~26MP file with exactly the same field of view

  • Here, I have one better: the X-Pro2 will have a trapezoidal sensor to make it easier to correct perspective distortions, because Fuji gods received numerous complaints about “falling” buildings. New version of Image Intelligence will recognize vertical lines and straighten them up automatically (you won’t be able to turn it off, so stay away from the railroad tracks).

    They also have plans on releasing a “Doctor Who” version with ovoidal sensor. Because, you know, from a non-linear, non subjective point of view it is more like a big ball of wibbily wobbly timey wimey… stuff.

    • Didiergm

      Someone just had his weekly complement of Doctor Who season 8 :)

    • Robert Ish

      I like to see a four dimensional sensor.

    • MrGecko

      Thanks, ROFLMFAO!

  • George

    Would you like to see on X-Pro2 “High Resolution Mode” like on E-M5II? So X-Pro2 with 50MP? I would use it for landscape for sure.

    • perhaps, but it wouldn’t be great if there there is any movement in the scene , such as water, trees…

    • nzswedespeed

      I think realistically it will be a feature lots of people will want but never actually use. How many situations can remain completely still for about a second? As pointed out below water, trees, grass etc etc will probably look awful with any movement

      • George

        I still shoot landscapes on film 6×9 Horseman camera and 1s exposure is often used with f/22. Large format landscape photographers stop the lens fo f/45-64 and 1s also is not a problem – you can shoot many landscap where there are no movement. Architecture and studio work shooters will also like high resolution mode.

        • nzswedespeed

          You obviously don’t know how this technology works then. It’s not one 1second exposure (which I agree is fantastic for landscapes etc etc), but several photos taken over a second while the sensor shifts – so my point still stands that it will most likely result in an awkward ugly blur of anything that moves in a second (as it will just combine several photos – where as one photo gives a nice soft rendering). Note I haven’t used this technology before – however all the tests done by Olympus are done in controlled studio styled environments…

  • Tv

    The camera market is so competitive that something like a slightly bigger sensor could help differentiate Fuji from Sony and Samsung.

  • asssss

    This is great and all…but I’m in the x-e3 segment, so just need to know if I need to know if I’m going to be ignored by the Fuji gods.

    • Superassssss

      yes you will !

    • MT

      I don’t want to see any x-e3. But only x-pro2 and x-t2
      and x-pro2 (entry level) and x-t2 (entry level)

  • DIE_BankofAmerica_PHUKKING_DIE

    I must have it!

    Don’t be jealous Mdm X-M1!

    • MT

      X-M1 have the same output quality of X-T1, don’t worry. same sensor.

      • Kalle

        Sensor is only one factor: ergonomics, processor, algorithms…

  • I guess we may know next year. We have been talking about the X-Pro 2 for about two years now. It is getting a little old. Whatever they choose to do, I am sure it will be a great camera.

    My X-Pro 1 is still a great camera. I just wish it had the option to convert the files to 16-bit TIFF using the in camera converter…

    • MT

      is it necessary? I had tiff in my “old” D700, never used. but you refer about poor software conversion (raw> tiff) after 3 years….I say..you are right.

      • I want it because I have found the in-camera converter to be the best converter for the files, but it is currently limited to saving as a lossy jpeg, which isn’t optimal. Thus, since I use Capture One/Photoshop for minor adjustments afterwards (white balance adjustments, tone curve, a little sharpening, perhaps leveling), each adjustment must reduce the quality of the lossy file to an extent. So, I would prefer the ability to save the files to 16-bit TIFF using the in-camera converter.

        While Iridient Developer produces results nearly as good as the combination I am using (in-camera converter and Capture One/Photoshop), it has more artifacts, not as good colours, and requires a Mac, which I have given up on after 2 of the 3 Macs I had got the blue screen of death because something internal was frying the logic boards.

        If Fuji offered a bare-bones raw converter, that would be even better. For some reason, they continue to ignore this issue. Many customers would be very happy if they provided one.

  • Fly fisherman

    A slightly larger sensor would be foolish. The current lens line-up would suffer from lower edge and corner sharpness, disappointing everyone. If and when Fuji makes the leap, it will be to full frame with an entirely new complement of lenses. That makes me believe that Fuji will NOT go to full frame, considering the effort that has gone into their APS-C line of excellent cameras. They will jump directly to “medium format” of some dimension larger than “full frame,” with an entirely new complement of lenses. I will buy their first production camera of this ilk in a heartbeat! Can’t blame me for dreaming…

    • Stephen Fretz

      From your lips to God’s ears. Signed, former Fuji GM670 user.

  • Mardock

    Yeah … no.

  • scopedude

    The rumors are getting overcooked. When is it coming, again?

  • Maybe that larger estate on the sensor could be used for electronic image stabilization?
    Or am I saying something technically stupid? (wouldn’t be the first time)

  • To me it also sounds (and calculates) like a multi aspect ratio sensor, further supporting the 4K/video improvement rumors. But there is one more new idea I might bring to the discussion:
    The larger sensor could be used to simulate an OVF with a bright frame and a bit of visible area (not much though) outside the frame. Bad corner performance would not really matter for the live view and it would be 100% accurate. But I hope there will still be a real OVF…

    And what Antoine B. said:
    It would be possible, but I don’t think electronic image stabilization is something Fuji wants to get into, at least for stills. Maybe for video stabilization…

    Or maybe it can be used in combination with the OIS. Not sure but could be possible it will be more effective if the sensitive area can be shifted slightly in accordance with the orientation of the floating elements.

    Maybe they also plan a 3D-lens like Samsung. Also shifting the sensitive area could be very handy.

    • “The larger sensor could be used to simulate an OVF…” You lost me there…

      • MJr

        Well then don’t cut him off and read the rest of the sentence. I take it you’ve never used a Rangefinder? Or the X100/Pro1 for that matter. With a bright frame and the ability to see outside the frame you can compose more freely, and anticipate moving subjects walking into the frame for example. It’s really something else. In the end that’s even more useful than the fact that it’s optical, or in the corner. So if you could have that with both ..

        It’s an awesome idea and a great way to multi purpose a multi aspect ratio sensor. If Fuji hadn’t thought of this yet themselves i bet they’re working like crazy to get the firmware fixed in time for release right now after reading this. ;-)

        • samuel

          That would be amazing, I love this idea. It would really be making the most of mirrorless cameras.

    • Very interesting idea!
      And now that Samsung, Sony and Olympus are challenging the X-T1 on the EVF side, maybe they will strike another blow by improving even more the EVF, with such “outside the frame” view, improved refresh rate and dynamic range.
      I resisted the urge to buy the X-T1 so far, so let’s wait until the XP2 :-)

  • MT

    after this rumors…I say..ok December is behind the corner!
    x-pro2 seems like “matrix movie”…blue pillow and you have ibis, organic sensor, aps-x, awesome af, etc….red pillow…back to reality ” we have nothing yet”

    • My neo 90 is sound asleep on a red pillow…

      • Didiergm


  • Dave (laztphotographer.ca)

    I’m sure whatever specs the X Pro-2 sports will be a vast improvement over the original.
    What I’d really really love to see, though, is the new design to be a larger version of the X100T so it would be a lot closer to the classic rangefinder film cameras of yesterday.
    I’m also praying Fuji introduces in-body IS so all their primes will be stabilized.

  • Jonno

    Episode 3- an April 1st windup.

  • David

    Elvis lives

  • If this is true, it is likely that Fuji is designing their own sensor for it, as I don’t believe Sony or anyone else produces that size of a sensor. And, it is doubtful that they would pay a 3rd party for a custom sized sensor. Perhaps it will be the organic sensor, which would be very interesting.

  • Fabio Amodeo

    I can’t imagine what the corners would be with the 18mm/2. It covers with pain APS-C.

    • MJr

      The same if it’s indeed only used for multi aspect ratio.

  • Marco

    X-PRO 2 why not with FULL FRAME sensor ??
    Waiting a X-PRO 3 in 20xx ???
    No thanks.

    • While full frame would have been nice, it isn’t likely going to happen. And, by the look of the disproportionate size of the lenses for the A7 Series, I would prefer an APS-C sized organic sensor over a full frame – unless Fuji could design the lenses smaller than Sony has.

      • With the organic sensor the lenses could be smaller…

    • Shawn S

      Why not Medium Format? Full frame is so 2014.

      • Why not 6×6? the “revival” attitude is so mainstream

        • Shawn S

          Haha! Too true… Although in that case, I’d rather something a little less square, maybe in the ratio of 1:1.61803398875 or thereabouts.

    • shut up all already, hope that will never happen

  • imagine the pro2 NOT being compatible with current lenses… hige blow. I’d be over at Sony in seconds…

    • That can’t happen… they are not suicidal !

    • YingTong

      Much as I love my two X-E1s and will continue to use them I’m just about to pull the trigger on a “refurbished” Sony A7. The lure of full frame at this price is too great.

      • d

        The lure of full frame should be for better image quality. I would agree if Sony was smart enough to provide uncompressed RAW files – the A7 Series is restricted to lossy compressed RAW files, so your not getting the quality of the sensors in the D610/D810. If they had uncompressed 14-bit or 16-bit files, it would definitely be a lure. However, the only one I would consider is the A7r, but it is crippled from shutter vibration and other things as well.

        If it really provided the quality of the D810/800E in a smaller package, and was $1500, I would likely get one too. However, at the moment, I don’t see much – if any at all – advantage of getting an A7 Series camera -:unless you need shallower depth of field. The XF14mm f2.8 R, for instance, is an exceptional lens, and Sony’s ultrawide-angle lens isn’t nearly as good. So, for ultrawide angle shots, the images from a Fuji X Series camera can be better even with a smaller sensor. Lenses are more important, and Fuji has been providing high-quality lenses across the board. They just need some high-quality telephoto lenses and some tilt-shift lenses, and an upgrade to the sensor and flash capabilities, and the X Series cameras will be one of the best systems.

        Most of the lenses for the A7 Series are disproportionate to the small camera bodies. So, if Nikon could make a full frame camera without an AA filter (24 – 36mp), the only benefit of the A7 Series would perhaps be the EVF.

        If Fuji were to also release a full frame mirrorless system, it would be interesting to see if they could provide a more balanced system. Fuji is definitely better at designing lenses, but they would be larger too. A full frame X-Pro 2 or X-T2 would be interesting, but the organic sensor would be more interesting.

        • George

          Agree. With compressed RAW and everage high iso in Sony A7/7II they do not tempt me to change APS-C for FF. Only A7rII may interest me but I will wait for full specification. I am also courios how X-Pro2 will look compared to nwe “high end” Sony’s A7000, it will be really interesting to see what both cams will offer.

      • Jonasbg

        Had the Sony A7 for a month. Was not worth the switch. Took a lot more to get sharper images. The only thing it was better at was dynamic range and high ISO performance… Returned it without a single regret. Many RAW files looked to hav a lot of heavy compressed JPG artifacts, smearing and they where unsharp.

      • Stephen Fretz

        I just switched to a (2nd hand) Nikon D600. It’s not a cool piece of machinery like the X-Pro1 – it’s an appliance – but the step up in image quality is substantial.

      • Marco

        Is exactly what I said too much … if I have to change at least do it for a definitive Full Frame with all its new lenses, and could keep the old lenses with a new X-Pro 1 Mark II.

        Or was also their intention but have had problems to produce a new sensor Full Frame?

  • BWinkle J. Moose

    Much of this thread is baffling to me. It looks to me like we only have 2 generations of camera, the first x-pro, x-e1; the x-e2, x-t1, and a plethora of also rans/P&S that Fuji is throwing against the wall hoping they stick. The only difference between cameras within each gen seems to be minor improvements; I saw the xpro models as being flagship, with the xe models as cheaper versions (mostly sans the OVF). I have no idea where the T model came from since the entire line seems predicated on the rangefinder look and feel. I’m hoping we see an xpro2 this year and soon after an x-e3 preserving the relationship of the xpro1/x-e1.

  • Fuji user

    so, for the math experts:
    my 18-55mm would have the same FOV with this multi aspect ratio sensor or not?

    • Most probably, yes, if you set it to 3:2. In other formats the diagonal FOV will be the same.

      • Fuji user


By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The Fujirumors website, Fujirumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.