MJP1 wrote:
I'm wanting to try the Fuji rangefinder cameras. I think the Xpro cameras would be best for me since I like the rangefinder experience and I have a number of Leica M lenses...
I believe that I can use my Leica glass with these cameras with an adapter. I would also like to play with the native Fuji lenses to experience the AF. I had the Olympus and Panasonic MFT cameras and lenses, etc. But I became seduced by the M240 and the whole rangefinder photography.
My question would be what you would recommend between the XPro2 and XPro3 (and what you think about the 18-55 fuji lens to start out with. Naturally the XPro2 is available used at very attractive prices, yet the new XPro3 is appealing n it's own right. I've never had experience with the Fuji cameras but I read and see a lot of good reviews and praise online.
As an aside, I have used a Sigma DP camera (awesome images, horrible little camera), a Nikon DSLR and an Epson RD digital RF camera (wonderful camera) if they made them again with modern sensors and processors I'd get one in a heartbeat. Anyway, better stop digressing and go back to my question: XPro2 or XPro3? Or am I missing something else altogether?
Thanks!
If you are a fan on the 18-55, I'm not sure that the XPro design is the right one for you. The distinguishing feature of the XPro system is the hybrid viewfinder system that offers both OVF and EVF modes. In general zooms are large lenses and they block a portion (sometimes a large portion!) of the view through the OVF.
The OVF typically works best with relatively small prime lenses — the f/2 primes are really designed for this camera. I also use the 27mm f/2.8 with mine, and the 14mm f/2.8 works well (on the XPro2) if you don't use a large hood on it. The 35mm f/1.4 also is good with it.
If these sorts of lenses are not your cup of tea – and you prefer large aperture primes or you really want to use zooms — the XPro models don't really offer many advantages to you. You'd like be better off with the XT3 or XT4, since their DSLR-like design and electronic viewfinder work fine with larger lenses.
(The XPro models can work fine with the bigger lenses and zooms, but you'd almost certainly want to use the EVF... and there goes a primary advantage of the XPro models.)
BTW, the 18-55 is a fine lens that works better than you might expect... if you use the EVF.
I do think the XPro models produce an honest rangefinder-like experience, especially if you use the sorts of small primes that were traditionally used on such cameras.
As to the XPro2 versus XPro3 question. I've used the XPro2 since it was first released. I like this camera a lot — its flexibility is unparalleled. It works with small primes for street photography with the OVF, but it also works with large zooms with the EVF. My main purpose for the camera is street photography and it works quite well for that.
I'm unimpressed with the Xpro3. Actually, I'm disappointed in it. Yes, it provides a small sensor resolution increase. The rear screen offers a (somewhat limited) articulating ability. I regard the little fake film box end holder square screen as being a dumb gimmick, and lots of photographers are saying the same thing. (There were plenty of better ways this change could have been implemented, but Fujifilm's approach is inexplicably about the worst one imaginable.) In addition, as I understand it, the OVF no longer allows two levels of magnification, which helped with a wider range of focal lengths and the OVF.
I'm keeping my XPro2.
Dan
Feb 07, 2020 at 12:20 AM
Previous versions of gdanmitchell's message #15135410 « X-pro2 or X-pro3? »
