Fuji X-E3 vs XT2 vs XPRO2

So I have decided to go all in with Fuji after a heavy Canon vs Fuji debate. Now my next problem is which body to choose. The more I read the more trouble I have deciding on a body. I have used both the XT10 and XT1 the past, I greatly preferred the handling of the XT1 and to be honest though the XT1 looks big online in reality it’s not much bigger than the XT10. Now I am leaning towards something different, like the XPRO2 or X-E3. I am a photographer all the way, I don’t care for video and have never once (that I can remember) ever used the tilting screen of my former bodies. If I need to shoot video, it’s mostly family events and my iPhone is good enough for these situations.

Logically the XT2 seems like a better all around value, but the XPRO2 is appealing, a different design and layout I might enjoy more. I added the X-E3 to the mix because the X-E3 is basically a mini XPRO carrying over some of the features that seem interesting to me like the joystick while also adding a few other features. Of course if I decide late to invest in heavier primes, the XPRO2 might be a better fit, I dunno.

Background: I have been shooting for over 20 years (I’m 41). I shot professionaly for a few years (hated it, lol) and have been around the block with numerous bodies and glass. These days I am much more of a casual shooter. Mostly family events, my kids running around, or their recitals and while I enjoy every type of photography, I have a love for portraiture. I enjoy primes to zooms. I am not going to lie, I am shallow enough to admit that camera looks are in fact important to me. Don’t ask me why, I am just inspired to take more pictures with gear I can appreciate both inside and out.

I have never shot a rangefinder style camera before, but the more I read the more intrigued I am. I am used to center eye point, so I imagine that would take getting used to.

I know all Fuji’s share the same senor, but I will admit the images online look better from the XPRO2, maybe that’s just due to the people who shoot Witt them.

Thoughts from others ?

Bought my own X-PRO2 day one of availability, after having a play about with one pre release, as a stop gap till the X-T2 was launching a few months later. Fully meaning to more to the X-T2 for the bigger EVF and tilty rear screen. Two years later still haven't bought an X-T2...

Things I sometimes miss;

The tilty rear screen - very handy for over the head shots.
The huge EVF - manual focusing is such a joy with that and the eye relief is great.
The grip - for more stability with bigger lenses & portrait orientation shooting.
The better Video - the X-PRO2 has caught up a bit but still lacking HDMI out for record ( to external recorder ).

This I prefer on the X-PRO2;
The rear screen - it is just a better screen and the images look better on it, can be important from time to time.
The layout of the controls - can use the camera one handed, that play button is in a great spot.
How great it looks - well I does...
The way I can see round the camera with it up to my eye - hand when talking to clients/subjects, keeps connection as I don't disappear behind a brick to shoot.

Probably that's it, either camera is great to use IMO. I still shoot with an X-E2 and an X-T1 both capable in their own right but the newer cameras are that bit more snappier in use.

This is a challenging decision, the XPRO2 is a hair more expensive compared to the XT2 while offering less capabilities. I have tossed around the X-E3, obviously not in the same ballpark as the XPRO2, but still offering the same IQ and performance, not sure about the build quality and handling, but it’s $600 less. I guess just have to ask myself what I need ? I don’t need much, I’m pretty simple when it comes to photography: just a casual shooter who appreciates a nicely designed body and lovely color.

X-E3 is quite tiny if you want small that is a big plus, missing some controls (ISO dial) but has others like touch screen and bluetooth and the 'handing it to the non photographer other person auto mode switch'.
More than enough of a camera for everyday shooting.

X-T2 has battery booster. The bulkier combo is still manageable with added "booster" performance and literally NO worries of running out of battery ever. Not that you care about video but iirc there is better video performance with the X-t2.

If you careless about battery booster it's all about your preference to ergonomics. I'll admit the added bump grip of the X-t2 battery grip is garbage and has little added benefits having a cheap plastic "add on" that overlays the existing useless "bump" grip of the X-t2.

Regardless of professional or casual snap shooting....images are always important to the photog. I will only accept a camera with dual memory cards. I'm all about redundancy. I know your into the 6dmk2 so this is where that is one reason why I sold my 80D and did not invest in the 6dmk2 for another Canon body. The X-e3 has only a single memory slot so this is something I will never consider either.

I'll still admit I will capture 99.99999% of my images with a zero lag mirrored body. This is just my actual observation in my shooting style. Literally no lag when I depress the shutter button on a mirrored body. Even the response of my adapted canon glass with my Sony A7iii is a bit better to some extent vs my Fuji X-t2 with native glass for non moving/family gathering type of occasion.

As far as IQ is concerned the post processing is what makes a huge difference in the editing of the final image. You may already realize that Fuji RAW editing is extremely easy and virtually effortless.

The ergonomics to my average sized hands is slightly better with the X-t2. I'm tellin' you if you buy an inexpensive light aluminum grip and add GT5000 grip tape you'll appreciate it as much as the more confident grip of the 6dmk2. Since I use the X-t2 battery booster I have no alternative to compromise grip comfort since battery life is more crucial to me even for my secondary casual shooting.

Watson, if you're into portraits do yourself a favor and do NOT buy the 50-140mm. Fuji primes will consistently deliver but the 50-140mm is a hit and miss on having great bokeh (f/4 equiv to full frame) or contrasty, nervous and nasty with high contrast backgrounds. Or you can be like me and just roll the dice and just use it because sometimes you just.....roll with it for casual family portraits. If your a studio portrait shooter shooting smaller apertures the 50-140mm is a dream for versatility and bokeh quality isn't crucial.

Fuji rangefinder's or X-t2 or even my 5dmk4 I have no problems having phenomenal peripheral vision with my left eye (right eye in viewfinder). I do not buy into the rangefinder as a beneficial tool to communicate to Uncle Bob or a client when shooting. Knowing your environment is instant once you put emphasis on your "other" eye that is not concentrating in the viewfinder. I just do not understand how it's a common mentioned "benefit" shooting with a rangefinder. Rangefinder to me just reduce chances of rubbing my nose on the digital LCD. Otherwise I could rock an Xpro2 if it had a battery booster grip. I think there is more shooters not using rangefinder that are well renowned modern day current shooters. Doesn't matter what you use as long as you're good at creating magic.

Your preference is what is in question. All fuji's are almost virtually identical.

AlanU wrote in post #18642124
X-T2 has battery booster. The bulkier combo is still manageable with added "booster" performance and literally NO worries of running out of battery ever. Not that you care about video but iirc there is better video performance with the X-t2.

Fuji rangefinder's or X-t2 or even my 5dmk4 I have no problems having phenomenal peripheral vision with my left eye (right eye in viewfinder). I do not buy into the rangefinder as a beneficial tool to communicate to Uncle Bob or a client when shooting. Knowing your environment is instant once you put emphasis on your "other" eye that is not concentrating in the viewfinder. I just do not understand how it's a common mentioned "benefit" shooting with a rangefinder. Rangefinder to me just reduce chances of rubbing my nose on the digital LCD. Otherwise I could rock an Xpro2 if it had a battery booster grip. I think there is more shooters not using rangefinder that are well renowned modern day current shooters. Doesn't matter what you use as long as you're good at creating magic.

Your preference is what is in question. All fuji's are almost virtually identical.

What are the differences in video performance between the X-T2 and X-PRO2 other than the aforementioned HDMI output and the extended record time with the grip? They both shoot 4K at 100mbps, the same quality output. I haven't shot with an X-T2 in a while so might have forgotten a few things...

Ragefinder use has nothing to do with peripheral vision in your left eye, it's about the straight on view to the subject, less of the camera is blocking your face, the client or subject can see more of your face, more of you and less of a brick covering you, if you don't buy into in (and you didn't as you don't shoot with one) that's all good but that is different to not understanding the effect. I've shot professionally with all kinds of cameras and getting the camera out of the way is paramount at times. The little rangefinder is great in that regard, even over the about same sized X-T range. The X-E range is even smaller and more out of the way. There is a huge difference between taking a portrait of someone and a picture of someone, and the tools add up at times.

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18642131
What are the differences in video performance between the X-T2 and X-PRO2 other than the aforementioned HDMI output and the extended record time with the grip? They both shoot 4K at 100mbps, the same quality output. I haven't shot with an X-T2 in a while so might have forgotten a few things...

Ragefinder use has nothing to do with peripheral vision in your left eye, it's about the straight on view to the subject, less of the camera is blocking your face, the client or subject can see more of your face, more of you and less of a brick covering you, if you don't buy into in (and you didn't as you don't shoot with one) that's all good but that is different to not understanding the effect. I've shot professionally with all kinds of cameras and getting the camera out of the way is paramount at times. The little rangefinder is great in that regard, even over the about same sized X-T range. The X-E range is even smaller and more out of the way. There is a huge difference between taking a portrait of someone and a picture of someone, and the tools add up at times.

Kim,

Video for me is strictly casual documentation. 1080 is good enough and not a big deal to me.

Gear is all about personal preference. Xe2 is sold and I do not miss it. It's preference as a client's personality and photogenic appearance is what counts. 2018 there are less professionals using rangefinders if you look globally. I do not think a camera gets in the way all of the time. The photographers personality, client approach etc wins in many cases regardless of "brick" gear. This is just trivial talk as gear is all about preference and in some cases a requirement. We shoot with gear that we can afford in many cases. This doesn't necessarily mean if effects the output and capabilities of the photog.

I love my brick

1080 is usually good enough for most things alright. You had me going there for a bit we (X-PRO2 users) got 4k in the last update to put us on an even(ish) standing for video. I 100% agree with you about the attitude part counting most. #BOOM

Oh and sorry for this...

AlanU wrote in post #18642139
Kim,

Video for me is strictly casual documentation. 1080 is good enough and not a big deal to me.

Gear is all about personal preference. Xe2 is sold and I do not miss it. It's preference as a client's personality and photogenic appearance is what counts. 2018 there are less professionals using rangefinders if you look globally. I do not think a camera gets in the way all of the time. The photographers personality, client approach etc wins in many cases regardless of "brick" gear. This is just trivial talk as gear is all about preference and in some cases a requirement. We shoot with gear that we can afford in many cases. This doesn't necessarily mean if effects the output and capabilities of the photog.

I love my brick

Why claim the X-T2 has better video though if you don't know that to be a fact (which it isn't)? All that does is muddy the water and misinform someone in what is supposed to be an informative thread.

The number of professionals using a camera type globally is a really crummy metric for how useful they are. Your post reads very clearly as someone who's never tried a rangefinder

My experiences with the X-Pro2 mirror those of Kim's first post; I bought the X-Pro2 originally with every intention of later selling it for an X-T2... it hasn't happened, nor do I have any desire to sell it or buy an X-T2 anymore. There's many great reasons to love a rangefinder layout, the optical/hybrid finder of the X-Pro2 further heightens those reasons.

TS: If you can, get into a camera shop and try all the cameras you're considering in person. For me, that was the first nudge to the X-Pro2... prior to that I was probably similar in thinking to Alan

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18642358
Why claim the X-T2 has better video though if you don't know that to be a fact (which it isn't)? All that does is muddy the water and misinform someone in what is supposed to be an informative thread.

The number of professionals using a camera type globally is a really crummy metric for how useful they are. Your post reads very clearly as someone who's never tried a rangefinder

My experiences with the X-Pro2 mirror those of Kim's first post; I bought the X-Pro2 originally with every intention of later selling it for an X-T2... it hasn't happened, nor do I have any desire to sell it or buy an X-T2 anymore. There's many great reasons to love a rangefinder layout, the optical/hybrid finder of the X-Pro2 further heightens those reasons.

TS: If you can, get into a camera shop and try all the cameras you're considering in person. For me, that was the first nudge to the X-Pro2... prior to that I was probably similar in thinking to Alan

Watson is not putting any emphasis on video. I did mention "iirc" the x-t2 was better. Not 100% certain what firmware has done to X-pro2. It's quite apparent that Watson is quite saavy and understands gear hardware and needs in performance.

Current video market seems to be more interested in touchscreen focus pulls. This appeals to me and many casual video shooters. Whole market is changing. X-t2 with no touch screen is not meeting this touchscreen demands of customers. This is where X-t3 will have touchscreen.

Lucas, gear is all about preference and how it works with the individual. If Nikon, Canon and Panasonic felt the great need to meet the needs of public demand (professional and casual) they would be producing rangefinder style bodies like mad if it potentially increased camera sales. Is there advertisement / documentation from Olympus or Fuji to proclaim the incredible miraculous benefits in the rangefinder that will dramatically improve the communication between photog and client/Uncle Bob???? Maybe Leica has done such advertisements back in the day in the early 1900's????

I've owned the X-E2 with the new firmware 4.0 for a while. Drawback is single memory slot as there is no redundancy as well as an ineffective pinhole for a EVF. I sold it to a friend that wanted a camera that produces great IQ. Responsiveness and performance of the X-e2(s) is not on par with the Canon 6dmk2 Watson is using.

Fuji developed their gear on the premise of RETRO look. This was their motive from the get go. To fit that "look" they threw in the rangefinder to make their line more appealing to folks wanting that "look". Olympus jump on the E-m5 "brick" retro look as well as their Pen F body.

The X-Pro2 is great and I would own one if it had a battery booster pack and if it had more current technology for the price Fuji is charging at the moment. I'd have a hard time buying another New X-t2 or Xpro2 knowing the technology in the X-H1 is the current flagship. The X-t3 is coming sooner than many years later. Fuji must improve their performance as I think they are fully aware of the dominating force Sony has in the mirrorless world. Loyalty as well as investment in lenses in a fuji system can go so far. Fuji has to keep up with the aggressive trend of improvements. I think Fuji is doing all right.....

Watson, I'd just gamble and buy a used X-t2 or Xpro2 and call it a day. The X-h1 has not received the love fuji was hoping for in sales. However it appears the X-h1 has changed the price in the used market for the older X-t2, Xpro2 bodies.

Just do your research...... rumours are stating a better battery should be coming out with the X-t3. That alone is a bonus and about time! I can shoot all day long and chimp photos and have 50%++ left on my Sony A7iii. My Fuji with Battery pack (3 batteries) will eat through easy 2.5+ batteries or more. With a 6dmk2 you would not be thinking much about battery life issues.

Alan is always here to make decisions even more difficult lol. Somehow your A73 experience appears in every Fuji post

Osa713 wrote in post #18642652
Alan is always here to make decisions even for difficult lol. Somehow your A73 experience appears in every Fuji post

Terrible...I know.......

Watson mentioned bad battery life in the Fuji system in a previous post. It's warranted to mentioned that it sounds like Fuji is introducing a brand new battery for the X-t3. Unfortunate they are doing this after they introduced the X-H1.

x-pro2 is on sale for $1500 USD at the moment. Extra 100 bucks for a Canon 6dmk2 that's on sale.

Knowing X-T3 is around the corner..... in Canada I couldn't spend $2199.00 CDN for a new X-t2 camera body that will have virtually everything replaced from high MP sensor, battery and very likely different AF performance. High iso performance is definitely not known.

Picking up a cheaper used Fuji xpro2/xt2 would be a better deal

I bought a X-Pro2 after owning the X-t2 for about 6 months... I wanted a quick 'take with me' camera and really use the X-t2 with the grip or on a tripod )or both). If I'm taking one camera for a short excursion and do not need any tripod time I normally take the X-Pro2 with the three f2 primes in a very small Tenba bag (Messenger DNA 8). It's a joy to carry around. The X-e3 looks interesting, and I'd love to try one someday... but the X-Pro2 is pretty small as-is.

Fujis first X Camera - you know, the retro looking ones - was a rangefinder (X100), as was their second (X-E1) & their third (X-PRO1)... It took them until 2014 to launch their first non rangefinder style X camera, the X-T1. Form the start it was always rangefinder first.

I don't think anyone one here need to be told by a manufacturer what camera is better for what if a rangefinder is more for someone it's great to have the options. I 100% believe that the X-PRO2 is much easier to get out of the way & I know for sure that the little cameras are a lot less intimidating for your subject.

Fijifilm, Sony, Panasonic, Olympus & of course Leica all make a rangefinder style body. Just Canon and Nikon left out in the cold there.

As for batteries I get about 400 shots per battery so one shoot can use up one battery, but there is always that percentage readout in the display informing me how I'm doing there. It's just so easy to swap out that tiny light battery I don't even think about it anymore. Really now trouble and I've never missed a shot due to a battery going down because I pay attention to what I'm doing when I shoot. I also shoot with more than one camera so there is also that, for me anyway. Haven't been caught out and never will.

Comparing the 2016 X-E2 (and not the X-E3?) to the latest version of the 6D is hardly a component statement, plus the 'new' 6D2 has an RRP of over twice the price of the Fuji X-E3 and a whole lot more than an X-E2 will cost you.

No one here knows what a new camera from Fuji will have, no one knows when a new camera will be launched, what battery it will have or what touch screen etc... It's all wishing and speculation, and then chasing the latest thing for whatever reason.

Alan I don't know where you read the report or press release about the X-H1 not selling as well as Fujifilm thought, care to share the source?

---------------

Fuji X-E3 vs XT2 vs XPRO2


If you don't need good weather sealing and like a (really)small camera with good controls the X-E3 is a good bet. I've used one and it simple lovely in the hand - stick on a small lens like the bargain 27mm and you have a great little street camera.

If you are out in the weather a bit and want 'more' camera then either the XT or XP is good. Just find the fit. I know loads of shooter who moved to the X-PRO2 as the ergonomics are really nice but they might not be for you. I struggled a little at the start but quickly got use to them. Video has them matched for output as both will record 4K @100mpbs - the X-T2 can record to an external monitor and that is a huge plus if you are into video or, with the grip attached for almost 30 minutes, Plus you get a headphone jack. Of course all the cameras can be powered by a USB brick if you really feel the need to not bother changing batteries. If, for example, you were recording for a few hours in one take (??) otherwise it's really not a problem for most. Anyway for casual video a modern phone is most peoples best bet. Have a look at Filmic Pro for your phone, it's great.

Tilting rear screen and the really quite large EVF are big plusses for the XT line over the XP cameras.

watson76 wrote in post #18641978
So I have decided to go all in with Fuji after a heavy Canon vs Fuji debate. Now my next problem is which body to choose. The more I read the more trouble I have deciding on a body. I have used both the XT10 and XT1 the past, I greatly preferred the handling of the XT1 and to be honest though the XT1 looks big online in reality it’s not much bigger than the XT10. Now I am leaning towards something different, like the XPRO2 or X-E3. I am a photographer all the way, I don’t care for video and have never once (that I can remember) ever used the tilting screen of my former bodies. If I need to shoot video, it’s mostly family events and my iPhone is good enough for these situations.

Logically the XT2 seems like a better all around value, but the XPRO2 is appealing, a different design and layout I might enjoy more. I added the X-E3 to the mix because the X-E3 is basically a mini XPRO carrying over some of the features that seem interesting to me like the joystick while also adding a few other features. Of course if I decide late to invest in heavier primes, the XPRO2 might be a better fit, I dunno.

Background: I have been shooting for over 20 years (I’m 41). I shot professionaly for a few years (hated it, lol) and have been around the block with numerous bodies and glass. These days I am much more of a casual shooter. Mostly family events, my kids running around, or their recitals and while I enjoy every type of photography, I have a love for portraiture. I enjoy primes to zooms. I am not going to lie, I am shallow enough to admit that camera looks are in fact important to me. Don’t ask me why, I am just inspired to take more pictures with gear I can appreciate both inside and out.

I have never shot a rangefinder style camera before, but the more I read the more intrigued I am. I am used to center eye point, so I imagine that would take getting used to.

I know all Fuji’s share the same senor, but I will admit the images online look better from the XPRO2, maybe that’s just due to the people who shoot Witt them.

Thoughts from others ?

If you decide to get the X-T2, go with the silver graphite version. I would have bought that if it had been available when I bought mine. Since you love portraiture I think the 56 f1.2 would be great. The newer primes that focus faster and are smaller and lighter look kind of goofy on the camera. You said you care about looks.(me too).

If you think you might prefer the other 2, I totally agree with Kim and Lucas about their practicality. Especially for street photographers. They probably look great too if you prefer the rangefinder style. I have never used either of those.


Final thought... the looks of the XT-2 and probably the others as well (not to mention the feel and shutter sounds) will COMPEL you to take them out and shoot with them.