Hi
I told you, this is a really complicated rumor. I’ve heard several versions, all from new and unconfirmed sources. But which is the correct one?
Take it with a grain of salt, but here is what I think could be the correct version after working on this rumor for some time now:
The successor of the X-PRO1 could be called X-PRO1S and remain APS-C.
If it’s true that there will be βjustβ an βSβ update, I wouldn’t be surprised to see it coming in the first half of 2014.
This could also mean that an eventual X-PRO2 could be something radically different. Full Frame? Organic sensor? I remind you that a new source told me here that there will be an FF X-series camera with interchangeable lenses coming late 2014 early 2015. Could this be the X-PRO2?
I don’t know it now, but I’m working to dig up something more for you.
Now, looking at the comments in the X-dreams post here, opinions are differing a lot on the question if Fuji should go Full Frame or stick with APS-C. Rico suggested to launch a poll so here it is:
[poll id=”33″]
cheers
Patrick (facebook, google+ and twitter)
P.S.: Keep up sharing your rumors at fujirumor@gmail.com or completely anonymously via rumor box.
200 Responses
I spoke to a Fuji guy a couple of months ago. His “opinion” was that there would be an update of the X-Pro1 in the first part of 2014 but the full new product would come some time later.
That would fit in with what is being said here.
good to have some more confirmation!
Funny comparision FF vs 23 1.4 http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3581733?page=1
That is funny. Always interesting to see proof of concept.
Re 2014 X Pro 2 rumour.
If this rumour came to pass and there was a full frame X Pro, would that mean that any of the current X (XF) lenses would not be a perfect match to the FF sensor, akin to the Nikon DX lenses versus Nikon’s FF lenses?
DJJC
Of course, that’s the ‘problem’. It would be a lot for Fuji to take on, as they would need to develop at least 3 new lenses or so, like they did for the original X-Pro1. But they’ve got the whole of 2014 for that, and probably already started if FF is indeed the future.
I think an “S” version with an early ’14 release makes a lot of sense. Sensor-wise, it would bring the X-Pro1 inline with the X100S and the X-E2, and it would be easy for Fuji to do. Also, it would eliminate the “embarrassment” of having their “flagship” camera lagging behind their “lesser” offerings. Right now, Fuji has no real choice but to feature the X-E2 as their current “best offering.” That must be difficult from a marketing perspective when they know the XPro is a bigger gun.
I really wonder about the lenses, as well. If the current lens lineup won’t work with full frame, then I’d rather not invest in it and wait for the FF body and lenses.
With all these rumours around I am not going to be investing in a new x-system now until I know the longer term direction.
I won’t be spending another cent on Fuji glass until they clear this up… the last thing I need is to waste $$$$ on crop lenses if they won’t fit the ‘pro line. I actually almost regret spending what I have. Sorry Fuji, you’re losing me here, stick to one thing, and do it well just as you have so far.
That’s just the biggest of the excuses.
You can simply stick with the APS-C and that’s the end of the story.
Fuji is not going to stop or decrease their APS-C support. The simple possible availability of a FF is what is making you uneasy, so you are the one that has not made up your mind, not Fuji.
You bought a X-camera knowing that this is an APS-C sensor right? Why bother about a 2015 FF camera then? It makes no sense.
Ed you make me laugh. So, you’re not going to ‘spend another cent’ until Fuji dispels some internet rumor about full frame?? LOL. OK.
I don’t remember this silliness when Nikon started actually producing full frame cameras.
And yet a rumour about the possibility of Fuji producing a full frame camera causes absolute hysteria!
If you always wait for something better coming in the future you will never buy anything at all. Even if Fuji will bring out a FF camera next year – when will there be enough lenses for people to buy the cameras? Let’s say that Fuji will have a similar range of lenses as for the current APS-C system right now – yuou could as well buy a X-E2 with a few lenses, take great pictures with it and sell the kit as soon as you are ready to switch to the FF kit.
Just my 2 cents.
True, if someone chooses that approach it is totally fine with me. Personally, I am used to work with very little gear and feel I have always thrived off this limitation. If I absolutely needed a certain lens then I’d get it, and sell it later (at a loss, probably) when and if I decide to switch to a rumored FF system.
Or rather, I’ll get a old, cheap and good Nikon lens plus adaptor in the meanwhile π
P.S: I already own the X-Pro1 and love the X system, don’t get me wrong.
Is there any one who knows x system and existing lens lineup supports APS-H (like Canon’s 1DMIV) sensor? If yes why you don’t think about this size?
This is what I have been thinking abourt also. Why not APS-H if the lenses work? It’s a bigger sensor with 1.3 crop factor. The X-trans APS-H would certenly give any FF -camera a match, still we would have these nice and small lenses.
+1
A few things…
The APS-H – good idea, but do we really need it?
Wouldn’t the increase of resolution to 24MP, a higher sensitivity and some other smaller adjustments not fulfill 99.99% of the requirements we can EVER desire for the sensor in the next X-Pro-range?
Secondly, if there would really be a FF-line developed in the backstage I would find it extremely strange that the XF-mount as such – developed from scratch about 3 years ago – would already be a mistake to be replaced by some kind of wider version. I do not believe that Fujifilm made a wrong decision during the development of the XF-mount, what I mean by that: or the current XF is FF-compatible and we can expect a FF-range, or it isn’t and there will never be a FF-range.
I thought the statements made about the lenses were with the first 3 lenses. But since then, for me visually we can observe a kind of second and even a third generation now: both zooms were already having a different design than the first 3, but with the XF14mm and XF23mm, there’s again a radical change not only using the pull-back ring, but those lenses are also feeling more solid and they are bigger. Who says this second and third generation (as I call them) are not suitable for FF? Was that ever confirmed? I don’t think so.
But my 2c: the whole FF-discussion is pure nonsense. If Fujifilm is really planning this, I’m afraid it is because the commercially being pushed by the market, say be the Sony A7 and to a certain extend Leica.
But there is a big fear that I have.
DSLR-manufacturers want to maintain two groups of cameras in their range: the cheaper, amateur/advanced ones with rather mediocre glass, mostly slow kit-zooms and average IQ, but sold in large volumes @ a low margin – and the expensive ones, FF, true pro, with the best glass and IQ, sold in small volumes @ a high margin.
Fujifilm has a bit done the opposite: APS/C with a pro-approach, best glass & best IQ, sold at a decent price level (not cheap) with likely also a higher margin, certainly the X-Pro1. I don’t think that anyone of us puts in question that the X-trans received the best optical solutions possible and can as such not be compared with the APS/C DSLR-concepts. Also do not deserve the same mixed feelings a lot of professionals have with this type of consumer solution.
But if Fujifilm also enters the FF-arena, it will degrade everything that exist now to second class equipment.
Looking at DSLR’s, a FF X-trans will come on the market at 2x the cost of an X-Pro1, for glass we will see 2x or even 3x if really everything needs to be developed from scratch.
Well, in that case we are seeing a Fujifilm X-range that will be on the same price level as high end DSLR’s. I’m not so sure there is a market for that. Unless they want to try in the same as Leica does – apparently successful, but they almost went bankrupt quite a few times by choosing this business model.
A lot of good thinking here! I believe the FF issue is market drivven. If the market asks for FF then ths manufacturers will offer FF, sooner or later. I do hope you are right about the FF considderation from Fuji when developing the X mount, but havven’t some engineers already looked into that and found out that this is not the case. Because of that, I would preffer to keep my current lens line-up and promote a APS-H if the market asks for a bigger sensor. The current lens line up would work with a APS-H sized sensor. But my no 1 prefference would be to see Fuji stay with the APS-C and develope the sensor.
I’m not always liking Steve Huff’s attitude which is merely set to bash Fuji. But he’s got frequently inside info. Recently he was saying about the X-E2 ‘If the X-Trans is your thing, this one may be for you. If I were a Fuji use though or someone thinking about Fuji I would wait to see what the X-Pro 2 brings as it may bring a surprise or two. :)’ Whatever that cryptical message may mean. A surprise or two…?
You are just reading too much into Steve’s words. He is just stating the obvious, if you want something more PRO-like, wait for the XPRO2 before making your decision. It’s as simple as that, there is no subliminal message. And I don’t think he has a lot of inside info on the Fuji front anyway.
Do not forget Steve Huff was one of the first to publish pictures of the Olympus OMD E-M1, Sony A7’s, Nikon Df… and he has done this many times before that. Well I can’t make this kind prime news, that’s for sure. Most of us can’t… maybe Patrick can π .
Most of all, I would not be so sure there are no surprises.
To put value to the PRO designation in this camera’s name, the upgrade that came with the X-E2 + some X100s OVF-features are just not enough to convince new buyers versus competition.
3 years ago the market was surprised with the X100, one year later with the X-Pro1, but that effect has completely passed and the market is full of high-value competitors now.
Fuji entered a dangerous business model as I tried to explain in the post above. There is a tremendous force field between where they seem to be technically now and the market expectations. Even Nikon and Canon cannot sell a half cooked concept anymore, see the EOS-M disaster or the ugly bulky Df that will end up with very big rebates after the first wave of ‘wanna haves’ have spend their X-mas money.
If Fujifilm wants to convince another 700000 new X-users, they will have to fight for it. With something very credible, certainly if it is a top model.
Also here, I want to repeat to Fuji, that FF will not necessarily help your sales, the serious photographers are never satisfied with a second hands choice.
Don’t let the current X-trans range degrade to what Nikon & Canon have made their APS/C camera’s to be, in favor of a kind of an ultra-expensive FF-dogma project.
I’m not saying he doesn’t have some inside stuff, but what he said had no big meaning. It’s just that the X-E2 is out and people should wait to see what the XPRO1S/2 will bring before deciding which one is better for you. XPRO1 successor SHOULD bring a surprise or two by definition, at least that’s what most people expect, that’s not just Steve’s desire. It will be disappointing if it’s just an update instead of bringing new stuff. X100 and XPRO are supposed to bring something new and refreshing and I expect no less. But so far, by the confusing rumors, it’s very hard to read anything, will it be weather sealed? Will it really be a XPRO? What about the other OM-D-like camera? Will it have new sensor? What else new can Fuji bring? Overall I trust Fuji. I’m not a Fuji user yet, but I admire Fuji and I really want a Fuji camera. Problem is, I also need a bit of video, it’s not much but I need full manual control and more fps options, which is not much but it’s still not available. But on the photographic front, I hope Fuji just continue doing what they’ve done so far.
I Think the FujiMan not necessary to change the xpro1 processor with same as x100s or xe2 or xq1 , so let xpro fly take position as the flagship for all off x series . Let xpro1 change the processor with FullFrame on 2014 .
I have been watching how the full frame mirror less market has begun to play out and I too am not investing too much more in an aps-c system until the whole ff direction begins to clarify. I like my Fuji xe1 very much but the new sony a7 & a7r have caught my attention. Actually the whole uncertainty in the camera market and my resultant hesitation about buying mor gear has lead me to focus more on taking pictures with what I have already – not a bad thing!
‘Kawahara confirmed that the covering circle of Fujiβs current X-series lenses is large enough to accommodate full frame.’
http://petapixel.com/2012/09/21/fujifilm-may-already-be-working-on-a-full-frame-camera-for-the-x-series-lineup/
It will be probably something like Sony A7. The mount will be the same in a crop mode for someone who wants to use the existing APS-C xf lenses.
That rumor was quashed as soon as it surfaced. XF lenses do not work on FF sensors. Whether the X mount is big enough to be adapted to it remains an open question.
I doubt that the current XF lenses would work with a full-frame sensor, but the FF lenses would be backward-compatible with APS-C bodies. I expect many people will not want to build and maintain two completely independent camera systems, so… my guess is that an FF camera would only be attractive to people who have not already made a huge investment in XF glass, OR… there’s going to be a lot of 2nd hand XF glass coming onto the market shortly after the FF camera is announced. Hmmm.
I wonder how Zeiss will react if all of a sudden the XF series of lenses is demoted from Fuji’s prestige range – becoming the ‘little brother’ of an FF range. Tricky marketing situation – Fuji would have to encourage uptake of the FF series as a flagship product, but how to do that without implying that the XF series is inferior?
Exactly – if Fuji released an FF series of lenses, their crop lens line-up would be automatically demoted. Everyone who understands marketing well knows this.
The problem is that Fuji has demonstrated that their understanding of marketing is a little off-base (to say the least!). Flooding their offerings with various camera models at various price-points rather than keeping things simple and polishing what they already have (X100, X-E, XP, compact, etc.) was, IMO, a marketing gaffe.
So it would not be surprising if a whole new line-up of FF lenses were released. Fuji will piss off a lot of people that want the prestige of knowing they have the top of the line (and paid for it). A full-frame X200 would also upset these buyers. Whatever we say about more choice being better, marketing just doesn’t work that way. It’s an emotional play as much as a technical one.
There’s still time to backtrack, Fuji. For the XP2, either stay with APS-C or develop some jaw-dropping wizardry that allows the XF lenses to work with it.
“if Fuji released an FF series of lenses, their crop lens line-up would be automatically demoted. Everyone who understands marketing well knows this.”
Anyone who understands marketing also knows that the further upmarket a company goes with its products then the further upmarket the perception will be for all its products.
“Fuji will piss off a lot of people that want the prestige of knowing they have the top of the line (and paid for it). A full-frame X200 would also upset these buyers. ”
If Fuji didn’t make any improvements at all to any of its products, ever, then presumably the happier its existing customers will be.
Fuji must be either laughing or cringing at the utter drivel written by all these “experts”.
Fred –
I never suggested fuji shouldn’t improve its products. In fact I said the opposite: Fuji absolutely should polish what they already have.
What you say about going upmarket is true but only for their brand, not their individual product segments (here, the X range).
Elsewhere in these comments you imply that FF is “for pros” and that Fuji’s current X offerings are for the amateur market. I disagree completely, but don’t take my word for it: check out Zack Arias or any of the other horde of pro photographers who are using the X on paying jobs. A camera is just a tool; it’s what you do with it that matters. Let’s not get emotional about TOOLS.
The issue here isn’t pro/amateur but one of specs and perceptions (if you yourself need FF for those – increasingly rare – edge cases where you can’t make a Fuji X do the job, more power to you and enjoy your equipment). Of course on paper FF is ‘better’ and that’s the problem; a new FF lineup would be a bad marketing strategy for a Fuji because it would dilute their range and confuse their customers, both existing and prospective. Fuji is not Canon.
I don’t have any other reason for stating this; i don’t even own any of the XF cameras. Happy to hear arguments for and against in any case. Calmly please.
I know many pros that are using the X Pro cameras. Fuji wouldn’t have used the term “Pro” in the model name if they weren’t aiming it at least partially at the pro market.
I have never suggested the X range is just for amateurs. Some of them clearly are, but the X PRO 1 is one camera that is taken very seriously by pros, myself included.
Neither have I said that full frame is just for professionals, but there are people on here claiming to know better than those who do it for a living, saying that FF is just hype. It isn’t and believe it or not, there are professionals using FF who actually know what they are doing and who can do things with FF cameras that are not possible with their APS equivalents.
I think it quite unreasonable for amateurs to get so upset by the thought that Fuji might want to really get into the pro market, which is after all Fuji’s natural market. Fuji are being serious about this and are actively courting professionals and asking their opinions, even lending them equipment for their critique to help them with future models. Amateurs can’t demand that Fuji only service their market.
If amateurs/enthusiasts don’t like that then I’m sorry. They certainly can’t complain about the excellent way that they are being treated by Fuji with their range of enthusiast products. How many other companies update already superseded models with firmware?
BUT…
Going full frame would cause an economic over stretch for the tiny photographic business division of Fujifilm.
The body of an FF X-pro1 alone could cost like 2800-3000 US$. And none of the lenses would fit. So, it would also be an over stretch for many of their customers if they want to keep their system as updated and x-trans as possible.
And their is really no need for FF, in terms of picture quality.
Fuji, please keep your x-series cool and aps-c sized, it’s awesome, light-weight and sexy.
An X-Pro1s would make sense.
It buys them some time for the APS-C organic sensor X-Pro2.
That’s my opinion.
Agreed.
An organic X-Trans APS-C sensor at about 24 megapixels would offer all the IQ 95% of shooters would ever need anyway.
If you really start to break it down and do a cost/benefit vs technology improvement analysis, you quickly realize that it makes no sense whatsoever for Fuji to introduce a FF X camera. Not for the foreseeable future, anyway.
+1 Develop the organic sensor…then if more size from a sensor is really needed/wanted then a step up to APS-H could be done…while hopefully keeping the whole system still light and portable.
A FF sensor would please a lot of people (probably myself included) as I still stick with the X100, waiting for a X-Pro new version, besides the X-trans sensor will introduce some changes to my workflow as DxO doesn’t support it.
But the possibility of a new “organic” sensor that Fuji is developing with Panasonic is a new uncertainty factor as we don’t know if such a new sensor will use new algorithms and produce RAW files calling for new conversion methods.
It would be important to know well in advance from Fujifilm if they will continue to support the X-trans in the future and the implications of this new technology to the customers workflow(s).
My dream is all current Fujinon prime lenses to cover full-frame…just a dream.
‘The long zoom lens fits but a wide lens cannot’
by Fuji’s own words. See link above.
This means that Fuji in a strategic fault if they still does not make new lenses (i.e 23mm, 10-24mm, 27mm) FF compatible!
No that’s not a strategic fault. I don’t need a FF camera, APS-C is just fine for me. I bought the X-E1 because I wanted a small camera with small lenses and good picture quality. Why should I bother to buy oversized FF lenses for my APS-C system?
Fuji should continue to bring out APS-C lenses and another rangeof FF lenses as well.
I won’t…by Fuji’s own words.
“. It has also moved to quell suggestions that its XF lenses are ready for a full-frame X-mount camera. ‘It would not work – XF lenses could not be used with a full-frame sensor,’ said Hiroshi Kawahara, operations manager of Fujifilm’s product planning division”
Source :
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7230565274/fujifilm-shows-off-zoom-lens-on-x-pro1-and-denies-xf-lenses-allow-full-frame
We can make a test to check if actual x-lenses can cover full frame size …
Why, we already know that they don’t. Seems like a waste. Even if some came close (as in the APS-H suggestion above), the distortion, CA and sharpness in the corners would not be good. The lenses were just not designed for an image circle with more than twice the physical area.
Actual Fuji lenses can’t fit in a full frame camera. That was said by the heads of Fuji in an interview after the system was launched. This mean that if a new FF camera will be announced you will need a complete set of lenses.
Sony originally said their E-mount wouldn’t work with full frame as well. Now they have the full frame A7/A7r cameras using that mount.
this is very confusing and mean i will wait even longer to see what is next.
The XP1 could really use an update, so people buying the XP1 over the XE2 because it’s the “flagship” model will actually be buying a flagship camera.
I’d like to see a X100s or an X-Pro with weather sealing and in-body shake reduction. That would be an immediate buy.
If the X-Pro1S would be only accumulation of updates for X-E2 and X100S it wouldn’t make much sense unless there’s more to it, after all X-Pro was meant to be flag ship not a ‘catch up with the rest if the line’ camera
You don’t seem to be familiar with the Canikon way of putting out new pro cameras? Canon e.g.has a new rebel camera out every year, the midrange x0Ds and the FF bodies take much longer cycles. So the entry level cameras feature new stuff the pro lines don’thave yet.
I am familiar, but as you might have noticed, the flag ship models are hardly worse than the lower-end ones – agree?
AND this is not Canikon…
If Fuji was just like them, it wouldn’t make sense to a lot of us to pay attention to Fuji.
I spoke with one of the Fuji guys in October and was told the company is dedicated to having the best APS sensor/camera out there. I asked about FF, and was told it is being kicked around but no firm decisions plus it would require a new set of lenses – so figure another year or more for a complete system. Lastly, I asked about the Organic sensor and they are still working out some technicalities and it is far from finished. So perhaps a early 2015 launch for Organic sensor – if it happens at all. Personally, I can easily wait for 2015 for a quantum leap in technology as my XE1 is doing just fine.
So,Ii am happy, because there is no need for a change in near future. the step from pro 1 to pro 1 S is not pressing !
Why go FF? There are already two gorillas and a orangutan battling it out. Fujifilm has barely captured any of the mirrorless market, and it wants to put out an even more specialized, more expensive system, that won’t be backwards compatible with their current lenses? Why? To what advantage?
+1 Exactly what I mean.
Another +2 from me. It makes no sense.
I could imagine that there would be a lot of customers who would prefer to have Fuji X FF camera instead of Sony’s Alpha 7 or 7r.
Bingo!!!!
700 000 sold APS-C Fujis. How many FF would it be? 70 000 ? Or 7 000 ? 700 ? …
XP1s + 10-24mm + X100s + 56mm .
I wish Fuji wanted my money.
seems to make sense to me:
FF would be too much of a stretch currently as it would require all new lenses and they only now are getting out the last lenses out of the current formats and reaping the praise and benefits.
my (uneducated) guess:
2014
– refresh the XP1 with an XP1s in APSC format updating it with the latest technology (EVF resolution, AF speed, weather-sealing) to re-establish as the top of the line (and buy time for the FF move)
– announce lens roadmap part 2 to close some gaps (long prime, 16mm, mid tele, weather sealed standard zoom…)
– test the FF-water with a X200
– and the rumored new XHP (half pro) to squeeze btw XE2 and XP1S. This I can’t really see the niche it’s trying to capture but maybe preparing the ground for when XP moves into FF… or maybe it’s just a compromise to keep those want “better, smaller, FF and now” and that are ready to jump ship once Sony announces a decent FE lens roadmap (even though they wouldn’t get FF straight away but maybe enough of “hi tech” specs to keep them for the time being…)
2015 and beyond
XP2 with FF and complete new lens roadmap.
I have zero interest in switching to a FF system. The size would be detrimental. If Fuji ditches APS-C this soon, I will never buy another Fuji product again.
And the lenses will be really huge or not very lightfast. I just received 40*60 prints, and I would not know what I miss. And I can compare with my Nikon D800 !
A full frame camera doesn’t mean “ditching APS-C”
APS-C is more than capable or providing all the IQ most of the market will ever need – if Fuji developed a full frame X camera the APS-C cameras would continue to sell better.
Nobody said anything about ditching APS.
In fact it’s only vague rumours that even said anything about full frame! All we’re talking about here is the vague possibility of Fuji producing a more upmarket model.
After all, they’ve been producing very high end professional and commercial equipment for decades, so there really isn’t any reason to be upset when there’s a possibility that they may produce a professional level camera!
Currently I have a nikon d700 outfit and an x-pro1.
I beg Fiji to not waste time building so called full frame support, it is a marketing term and nothing else.
Do I see difference in the Nikon full frame and the Fuji in almost any situation? No.
It’s an old argument that needs to go away. They make a brilliant sensor and great lenses, leave it as it is rather than seeing who had the biggest sensor at the trough!
Before anyone says ‘but it throws the background out of focus more’, ask yourself does it really matter for that little bit more blur? Hell instagram can do that for free!
Bravo – +1 Most people don’t even know what produces great bokeh. Sad.
Most people doesn’t even know how to pronounce bokeh!
Sorry Stephen but I can’t agree with you when you say FF “it is a marketing term and nothing else” because it isn’t, and it is wrong to put the light only over “bokeh” when we talk about the differences because the most important factor for “bokeh” production is lens related instead of sensor format.
Being the way the lens treats the out of focus areas and these ones depending more on the focal distance you have to compare things taking into account the crop factor, i.e., a 23,4mm in APS-C to a 35 mm in FF and not considering both as 35 mm lenses.
Yu will have different angles of coverage that will produce different images and this is one of FF, a 23,4 mm ( or a 24 mm) lens will be a 24 wide angle but the same lens used with a crop body will come close to a “normal” angle of view. Nevertheless, when it comes to tele lenses the crop sensor gains the advantage and will offer you the advantages of a longer lens.
So is up to you to choose which one suits you and your photographic need and/or preferences.
But I do agree and understand you don’t feel the need to get a FF Fujifil camera, having the D700 as I also do you can use one or the other according to your needs and the Fujifilm’s sensor already produces an IQ that is able to meet most people’s needs.
I just love my X-100 IQ and it has been the camera I took for holidays since I bought it two years ago, so the APS-C sensor is not a limitation for me and I would prefer it to a FF Fuji camera using heavier lenses and bringing back to me the weight of my DSLR gear, that I will continue to use when I consider it will be the best tool for the job even if I buy a new Fuji body and some lenses.
Yes, the Fuji is just about a match for a five year old full frame model.
As I understood it, the whole idea about X-Trans is, as Fuji markets it, to get “FF image quality with APS-C sensor”. If that’s the case, why step up to actual FF? In order to get even a little more of “above FF image quality”? That image quality improvement would probably be fairly small, and especially not needed / even realized by the majority of customers. It would thus be in no relation to the investment needed to make up a new lens line, plus maybe a new mount.
Please tell me why you people want / need a full frame sensor. Most, and I mean 90% of all photographers don’t need it nor can most explain why they want it.
Someone above said it perfectly. Fuji is barely hanging on with sales of the current line up. Why invest in all the R&D for a full frame system. Or, maybe you people don’t want a system.
I make my living from what I shoot. I don’t need full frame. I currently shoot full frame, Nikon D4 etcβ¦ I’m selling it all off to switch to a complete Fuji system. I could even go to m4/3 but I love that Fuji magic in that Sony sensor.
Full frame means more money for the camera body and more money for lenses. ($$$$$$$) For what? So you can pixel peep at 100% on your monitor or perhaps 200%? Makes no sense.
I read on a noted pro’s blog, (he uses Fuji X cameras in his daily work), that the pixel density on the Fuji sensor translates to roughly 20MP on a full frame sensor. How much more do you think you need? He gave up a complete Canon system BTW to switch to Fuji.
My rant is over. I get so tired of this FF mania.
Agree.
Apart from the fact that the aps-c pixel density of 16mp rather translates to 37mp in 35mm, full frame lenses with equivalent Dof capabilities are actually cheaper to produce since they feature a simpler design. Just compare the prices of lenses like the nikon 50mm 1.8G vs the Fuji 35mm 1.4. The Nikon version actually gathers 2/3 stops more light but costs so much more that the difference can not be explained by the better build of the Fuji.
Here is a good article describing the issue: http://genotypewritings.blogspot.de/2013/05/lens-equivalence-vs-price-equivalence.html
Excellent point! The way I see it, Nikon & Canon, and to some extent Sony, have created a market with outstanding marketing of the full frame sensor.
They both could produce fabulous APS-C cameras with incredible IQ if they wished. It’s all pretty much hype. “Mine is bigger than yours.” π
So all those professionals using full frame cameras have just fallen for marketing hype? Oh please!
As a pro I use full frame cameras because when you compare like with like, the larger sensor will always give better quality, particularly in low light. The current Fuji sensor, good as it is, is not up to the standard of current full frame sensors. It is about level with full frame sensors of about five years ago, i.e. the D700. Five years is a long time in sensor technology. A larger version however would be right up there.
Fuji has a long history of producing high end equipment for professional applications. However their “Pro” model at the moment does fall quite short of its title and for this reason I would be thrilled if they were to
aim high with their pro camera. I would buy two of them and I know many fellow pros who would do the same.
They have several superb cameras for the amateur market, particularly with the new XE2, but we seem to have a situation where amateurs are demanding that Fuji should aim the pro model at them too. Well sorry, but I think they should be aiming their pro model at pros.
I’m sorry but I don’t agree. I would bet you that you could not tell the difference from a Canon 5dMIII or a Fuji X-E2 image printed, double truck, in any magazine ad.
In general, what I have learned, is the sensor is only one aspect of good image capture / output. The image processor, (the little computer inside the camera), from what I know, is more important at this point.
Now, five years ago, perhaps you are right. Just recently I viewed some images produced by Ming Thein, a noted pro in Asia. He shoots a lot of very high end product photography for high end Asian clients. He uses medium format, and a Nikon D800E. In this particular case he shot all the watches with his Olympus OMD E-M5. The images produced detail the printer could not replicate in the magazine spread. He even commented he did not tell the client what camera he used and did not shoot it on-location for that reason.
That tells me many people have bought into the bigger is better con job, including some art directors. Five years ago, yes. Today, no.
I’m not saying that “all” pros are wrong. I use full frame now, and certainly DSLR’s will have a place in our field for a few more years. You can argue ergonomics, and I agree. I love my D4!!
I mean the Fuji costs so much more;)
Because a FF sensor gives better depth to an image. Marry that with some excellent Fuji glass and you have wonderful ability to make images with lots of ‘pop’. Admittedly the difference would not be as great if you were perhaps to go from FF to medium format but it’s certainly one of the reasons why some may want to upgrade from APS-C.
This. So many people do not understand that a 35mm lens is optically 35mm no matter what the aperture or field of view. A 35mm will have a certain “look” or “compression” no matter the sensor size.
If you take a shot of the same subject with a 35mm on FF and a 23mm on a APS-C, even with the depth of field adjusted to be the same, the images will still look different (the background in the FF shot will seem further away).
I personally would LOVE a FF Fuji Camera with a 36MP sensor, as long as they don’t change the mount. If I shoot with the current APS-C lens lineup, I can get a 16MP image, and if I shoot with a larger FF lens, I could get 36MP. It would be a win-win, especially if they just add another body to line-up.
I also agree that they should test the waters with an X-200 w/ 35mm lens.
So many people are right. Angel/Field of view is responsible for the compression. Nothing else. 23mm on APS-C has the exact same compression as 35mm on FF.
Man, I thought I was right. I’ve been looking into this further and what I thought was a confusing issue is now even slightly more confusing, but I do seem to be wrong.
Now I really can’t wait to get my hands on the 23mm, and I care less about a FF camera, although a FF 16MP would likely have very low high-ISO noise levels.
Correction, the 35 background would be compressed to look closer, and the 23 would look further away.
No.
Full-frame X100 with 35 f/1.8 please π
make it a 2.8 and you’re close π maybe you can dream about a 2.5
I meant RX1 like camera (it’s f/2.0), but Fuji can make it 1.8 i know π
A simple FF would never be enough. To gain a lead, Fuji must leapfrog the competition with a *unique* FF that rivals medium format IQ, while retaining the small X-Pro design framework. Yes, we want it all. The new lenses will need to equal or likely exceed the current Fujinon X series. Only then will Fuji become the center-fold of the photography world.
Oh this, you are right if they did this they would rule the camera world for pros.
It’s funny how people get so worked up about full frame just because someone somewhere suggested that Fuji might be producing a full frame X Pro 2.
Two facts:
1. None of us know if Fuji are working on full frame.
2. The majority in the survey above have said that they would prefer Fuji to produce both full frame and APS models (myself included).
What most need is NOT a FF camera, BUT a reasonably-priced 27-32″ 4K monitor or 55-65″ 4K TV to actually see and appreciate the extraordinary IQ being captured by the Fuji X-Trans camera they already own. Those monitors are now on the way. PS. Why own an expensive camera and cheap monitor/TV? Makes no sense.
you might be better off by investing in proper calibration instead of 4K TV/monitor π
My IPS HP2475w still works just fine @ 1920 x 1200 resolution, 5 ms response time, 3000:1 dynamic contrast ratio, extra-bright screen, and 102% color gamut.
But it doesn’t sport the fine-grain resolution of say Apple’s current 27″ Thunderbolt (TFT active-matrix liquid crystal display, LCD with in-plane IPS switching, 2560 by 1440 pixels) or LG’s comparable WQHD (27″ TrueColorPro, IPS LED, 2560 x 1440).
4K monitors, like Dell’s 24″ 3840 x 2160 panel to be rolled out shortly or Apple’s rumored new Thunderbolt release also using 3840 x 2160 pixels and Thunderbolt 2 connectivity, will leapfrog the current monitor crop with astounding resolution, color, and dynamic range.
Even then, you’ll only approach seeing and appreciating the IQ associated with a X-Tran sensor’s 4896 x 3264 image. To really understand IQ, order your special enlargement from FinePrints, Ft. Collins, CO or any other high-end photo lab.
http://www.macrumors.com/2013/12/01/new-24-inch-4k-monitor-detailed-on-dells-website/
http://www.macrumors.com/2013/11/26/new-display-panels-from-auo-spark-speculation-of-4k-apple-displays/
why use such monitors if you just upload photo on facebook? Ps i have the lp2475w calibrated too π
That’s the point. You wouldn’t use these fine-grain monitors unless you regularly produced physical fine arts prints for exhibition or sales.
Why does anyone NEED full-frame cameras when they have little-to-no idea about the IQ and detail contained in the camera they already own?
The camera industry would prefer you NOT find out how good the grass at your feet already is…so that you’ll continue to think the grass is greener on the other side of the fence and buy the next model.
i was talking about colour accuracy not technical data π
They should give xpro1 owners an option to buy and swap out the x-trans sensor with a new one! We have to pay for the labour as well, of course. The xpro1 body is kind of wasted if they just merely upgraded to an xpro1s.
I really love the xpro1 but focusing accuracy is still sometimes an annoyance. If focusing is corrected, then it will be my perfect camera!
also holding off on the 23mm lens purchase for now. The fact that the “lesser” cameras are surpassing the x pro 1 shows that the road map is not stable…
I think your poll is missing an option: MF π
Seriously, FF is just a tad bigger APS-C. But Fuji is (still!) a MF company too. They should create a more radical machine for the discerning few that have a use for it:
– Something like digital Fujifilm GF670, or GSW 690 (i.e. a fixed lens camera, possibly collapsible)
– modern Fujica G690: hybrid viewfinder, interchangeable lenses with leaf shutters.
“FF is just a tad bigger APS-C.”
I wouldn’t personally describe twice the size as being “just a tad bigger”.
But it is. In terms of picture quality, focal lengths, DOF, lens construction … not a big difference. Just like “small MFs” like Pentax 645D are a bit bigger and better than 35mm FF.
Now 6×6 or 6×9, that would be significantly different. And Fuji already has at least some modern optics for it. At least I guess they make the lens and then brand it Fujinon in their GF670 and Heliar in the Voigtlander Bessa II.
Personally I am happy with APS-C, though. I would not trade the size of X100 for anything bigger.
Would you say that a 16×12 print is only a tad bigger than a 12×8 print?
I read people saying they are holding back their purchase of the 23mm lens waiting for the – very unrealistic – FF system to come.
I can’t believe that. What a pity.
The 23mm lens is a biest, the best lens Fuji made for the x-series. Every day not making photos with it is a wasted day.
Since I bought it 3-4 weeks ago in Beijing, I didn’t change to any other lens (14, 18, 35, 60) ever since. I am addicted. It’s a hell of a beauty.
Don’t wait for systems that don’t come.
I don’t mind fuji developping a FF along with the APS-C camera, as long as there remains always a top of the line camera in Aps-c. I don’t want technology advancements to become redirected to the FF line only! I invested too much in the current APS-C format of Fuji to switch anytime soon, and i invested in this system for the top-notch lenses and the X-PRO 1 line of cameras.
For what it’s worth this is what a guy working on a Fuji stand, at a recent event in the UK, told me. Although he didn’t say the 2014-15 camera would be full frame, just that’s when the PRO2 would be coming.
FF? For what? Aps-c x-trans is the optimal compromise.
As often I walked over a night market here in Taipei tonight. What do I see? Low-end Nikons and Canons, hanging over the shoulder, hundreds of cameras packed away in cases, cheap p&s cameras with cheap flashes.
All these cameras don’t take any pictures tonight. They are toys or wannabe cameras. They don’t work well in low light conditions of the night market.
But guess what?
My X-pro1, matched with the 23mm, was the lady of the night. X-trans is all about colors, details, control. The best system for low light conditions! Hell, my Fuji was busy tonight!
And that’s what counts.
FF does not turn you into a better photographer.
No. It’s the talent and passion of the individual behind the viewfinder that does. That said, I have the Canon 5D Mark III and when paired with fast primes, it sees very well in the dark, and I dare say much better than the current X-Pro1. As a photographer, I don’t care so much about the brand but rather the tools necessary to further myself and create better work.
Totally agree!
My 5D Mark II and collection of L lenses has barely left the cupboard since moving to the x-Pro1. In fact I just sold my favourite lens (35mm f/1.4 L) after getting the XF 23mm f/1.4.
The moment the 56 comes out, and I complete my 14 / 23 / 56 fast prime trifecta, I anticipate that the rest of my Canon gear will be heading to the glue factory.
I realise the 5D Mark III is supposed to be a slight move up from the II but I’m more than happy with the quality I get out of the Fuji when compared to Canon full frame and even if there are small improvements with the Mark III I wouldn’t trade for the smaller size of the Fuji given it’s excellent quality.
I don’t really care if Fuji move to full frame or not, I just won’t be adopting. I will however be pissed off if they completely shift the future pro level roadmap to FF only but I can’t imagine they will.
Craig,
How good is the Fuji 23mm f1.4 vs. your Canon 35mm f1.4? The majority of reviews I read state that it’s pretty good but others state that it’s just merely good. I’ve thought of getting that lens as a nice walkaround lens as the 35mm f1.4 is a bit too long for me to use it for that purpose.
I really like it mate. I find it sharp with a feeling of depth to the shots (the same qualities I liked about the 35/1.4), well built, ergonomic with the AF/MF mechanism. No complaints here at all.
A lot of people say they prefer the 27mm for a walkabout lens but I love the 35mm equivalent focal length. I just need to take a dremel to the hood, it’s ridiculously big.
Guys. An FF sensor has well over twice the surface area of an APS-C one. Maybe you don’t need the extra quality, but let’s not deny that it will be there; there’s simply no replacement for displacement. If your current XF camera is working for you, why stress out about a new FF line? Personally, I’d love to see more small FF cameras come into fruition as an alternative to the A7(R).
couldn’t agree more
Absolutely agree. Those saying that the X-Pro1 is as good as a full frame just miss the point that a full frame Fuji sensor will give better image quality than an APS Fuji sensor. The bigger sensor will always be better when all else is equal.
I wonder how many on here think that high end pros who spend tens of thousands on medium format gear have fallen for the medium format “hype”?
If Fuji produce a proper professional camera with a larger X trans sensor it will give image quality approaching medium format and will be absolutely hoovered up by professionals.
All this about people not being able to tell the difference is just wrong. You may get comparable results in the studio under controlled light, but you can’t match a modern 35mm full frame sensor for demanding low light situations.
I was lent a whole X-Pro1 kit by Fuji for a fortnight. I put it through its paces and found it comparable to my D700s in image quality terms. Quite an achievement for an APS sensor, but the D700 is now five years old and current FF cameras have now gone a step further image quality wise.
You’ve got your enthusiast cameras, please stop telling Fuji what to do with their pro cameras. Fuji have been been very active in listening to us pros what we want and it’s the pros that they will take notice of as far as their pro models are concerned.
“I put it through its paces and found it comparable to my D700s in image quality terms. Quite an achievement for an APS sensor, but the D700 is now five years old and current FF cameras have now gone a step further image quality wise.”
I would agree that FF cameras have gone a step further in image quality but it is most certainly due more to processor advancements rather than sensor advancements. My Nikon has the new Expeed 3 processor. My D3 had the first generation Expeed processor. Fuji is now on their second generation processor and it just gets better.
If FF was always better then why are not Sony FF cameras, or Samsung for that matter, the main stay of pros? The sensors are pretty darn good, but the processors are not.
If you want to over spend on something that does not make a difference to your client then go ahead. But you have fallen for all the “hype” in my view.
My original post was mostly aimed at the amateur and serious enthusiast, which I probably did not adequately convey. And, I guess I should caveat my comments by saying I am not saying the X-E2 or X-Pro1 are suitable for all uses a pro might encounter, because they are not. But this FF is always better than APS-C or 21MP is always better than 16MP, etc is mostly bragging rights with todays equipment.
BTW, I don’t expect for many to agree with me. It’s kind of like the Nikon vs. Canon argument, or RAW vs. JPEG. :-))
“If FF was always better then why are not Sony FF cameras, or Samsung for that matter, the main stay of pros?”
Which bit of “when all else is equal” didn’t you understand?
“you have fallen for all the βhypeβ in my view.”
Thank you so much for your expert advice, but I’ll continue to earn my full time living using whichever equipment suits me best, particularly for low light. When Fuji improve on the X Pro , then that may be well be my answer, but in the mean time I will continue to full frame as the format that is, without any question, the most suitable for my purposes, even if people who know nothing about what I do advise me otherwise.
Why not go the sigma route and come out with two full frame fixed lens cameras one 35 and the other 50! A 50mm fixed full frame camera that would be my dream full frame camers
X100RF, which means a full frame rangefinder so that we can have small lenses π
Fuji really ought to come out and announce something soon. With all these rumours around I am not going to be investing in a new x-system now until I know the longer term direction.
Meanwhile Sony don’t have many lenses but they have a clear commitment to the new FE line. I really want a new 24mp xpro but I will go ahead and switch to Sony instead if there’s no certainly about Fuji ‘s direction.
+1 on your first paragraph.
Sure – some people spread rumors and Fuji should announce something? How about letting Fuji decide when to do such things?
Oh and how many good FF lenses are out for the Sony A7s? If you want to switch, just do it.
I think now Fuji should stick to the APS-C. Too late to switch to FF. That should have been the choice in the first place. APS-C also has enough potential for future developments. If Fuji can’t make a profit from selling 700.000 units (with lenses) a new development for FF is doomed because not enough resources will probably be available for a proper development. Consequence will be that we start all over again with camera’s that are not good enough from the start. The X-Trans sensor for instance was a mistake to use. That technology was (is) not developed enough. Issuing all those bodies is in my opinion is also a wrong road to follow. Probably required for financial reasons. However it distracts from a good development of the X-series to make it perfect a photographic tool. To survive they should make a very good APS-C camera (a real professional model, a semi professional one and a consumer type). This together with first class lenses (like the 14mm) it still has potential. I really tried to switch to the X-series. For me it has been a struggle. I liked to switch (size and weight advantage) but it is just not good enough. After missing to many shots this afternoon it decided to sell my X-series camera’s (X100s and XPro-1’s) and stick with my DSLR. A camera is just a tool for me. When I photograph I must be able give all my attention to my subject and not have to concentrate on my camera’s. I like to thank Fuji for developing the original X100. It gave a special feeling (I still regret I replaced it with the X100s). With the X100 I could forgive Fuji to issue the camera before it was proper developed. That is not the case anymore, despite all the Kai-Zen efforts. What happened with “first time right? By now it should have been an almost perfect system. I wish Fuji a lot of new customers and wealthy resources to develop the X-series to a mature camera system.
Yep – first time right. Show me one product with that quality…
At what is that nonsense about ‘too late to switch to FF’? They don’t have to switch but add FF to the system if they want to and second other camera manufacturers started wit APS-C cameras too and added FF later. Where is the problem with that?
If you like a system for a reason just buy it, else buy something else.
One word: “paragraphs”.
Patrick, you may need a different format for FR, to accomadate the dissertations.
ROFLMFAO!!!!!
I agree that it looks like crap on a phone (iphone). I always have to view in flat view to see all the comments, but then I lose how they relate to each-other…
This is killing me!!!! Early adopter of the X series with the X100 and still love to use it every week. However the urge to upgrade is peaking and with potentially two new cameras soon I’m flipping out. With both options being above the E-2 I can’t wait to get confirmation on dates and specs.
Wish: X-Pro1s or whatever they want to call it, available for purchase in Q1 2014 (pre-order even), specs well above E-2, and a 2.0 18-55 zoom.
You are not alone, MrGecko.
Just a few thoughts:
1. Fuji needs to make a public statement about future of the X system and their plans regarding FF. As of right now, many photographers (myself included) are NOT investing more money in the X system because we’re not sure what to expect in the near future. This is a marketing disaster for Fuji.
2. Polls like the one in this post are totally irrelevant. Vast majority of active visitors on this site are tire kickers, fence sitters or Sony fanboys. They would like to “see” a FF X system, but they ain’t gonna buy it.
I want to be a fence sitters! .. or maybe a tire kicker …and i want large format fuji XLarge
Agree
i read somewhere above about fuji mf camera. I wonder of that wouldent be the solucion. I uwe the x-pro1 and am very happy with it.
on the other hand i do not feel comfortable with an ff as that wouldent mean that aps-c rangΔ cameras wont be top notch but will be classified as emerging below the ff range. Idealnie like fuji to consistently improve on IQ and performance with current sensor size and feel reasured that fuji has an idea of what its developing.
Of fuji would introduce an ff camera it would mΔ kΔ me start thinking whenever to switch not switch or abandon the fuji ship . MF rangefinder camera would show me a “we produce the best cameras out there” attitude and would not interfere with current product line.
The overall mirrorless/CSC market is not mature yet – the release cycle and even direction of where a system is headed is not clear. I would like a FF CSC if it can be small enough – inc the lenses- and be the centre of a complete system like the 5D mark III in the DSLR world. The release of the sony A7 etc has raised the possibility of a full frame CSC system although time will tell if it lives up to the hype. It is this uncertainty and relative smallness (in lens choices, flashes etc) of the CSC systems – made more worse by sony’s new cameras – that makes people hesitate before going all in with a CSC system/brand. Also how long will theses companies continue to tolerate non profitable camera divisions before pulling the plug completely?
This idea that Fuji shouldn’t produce a full frame simply because it would make the APS second best is a non starter.
Fuji aren’t going to stop producing APS so there isn’t an issue. There was a time when Nikon didn’t produce full frame: should they have avoided FF because it might upset some existing APS users? Of course not.
Once again, we don’t know if Fuji are onto full frame or not. It isn’t even a rumour, just a suggestion on here that they might, but if someone in the boardroom suggested that they shouldn’t add full frame to the range because it would make exiting APS cameras second best, they would be laughed out of the room.
Fuji should look after pros with the pro line, and they are working like no other company to interact with pros on what they want and their comments on the existing pro camera. What I’ve had from Fuji is amazing and I’m not even a Fuji customer yet. I certainly will be though.
They are updating the enthusiast line far quicker than the pro line, so really the enthusiasts should stop whinging. Fuji are listening to their customers, enthusiasts and pros, like no other company.
I agree with Trent – Fuji needs to disclose its plans for future X-Series cameras. While it is unusual to do such a thing, we are now witnessing a watershed in the camera market,and as a result, there is too much confusion regarding what Fuji, and others, should or will do: stick with APS-C, go full frame, or both. This confusion will hurt lens and camera sales, so perhaps Fuji should clarify their plan.
While I am sure there will be better image quality with a larger sensor, I doubt it will be noticeable to or necessary for most. Most users aren’t even using the current X-Series cameras to their full potential, which is evident on Flickr and 500px. That said, if they have the resources and the ability to design a balanced, high quality FF system, they should do so perhaps for the professional market. If so, however, they would need to make it a sufficiently high performance camera, to attract professionals, which means it will be expensive.
Based on th reviews and lack of native lenses for the A7r, their is definitely room and need for a high-quality FF mirrorless camera; and there is demand for it. In my opinion, it wouldn’t be difficult for Fuji to design a far better camera system than the A7/A7r, even if they use the same sensor, as I believe Fuji designs better cameras and lenses than Sony – just my opinion – and the A7/A7r have weaknesses. The question is whether they have the resources to do so in a timely manner.
Irrespective of what they do, I am excited about the firmware update for my X-Pro 1 this week; and, I would be interested in a X-Pro 1s, as long as it is released in early 2014 and it comes with a brighter, larger EVF/OVF. If it comes later in 2014, I would expect more improvements. Personally, if they stick with 16mp, I would like them to introduce it with, for instance, the D4 sensor, which is better than the current one (D7000 sensor), as it should have better image quality.
Full frame would be nice, but only if they can do it right – better performance, with a set of high quality fast primes and features needed by pros.
You can’t take pictures with a camera you don’t own, can’t use, or hasn’t been released yet.
No point not investing in APS just because Fuji might ‘p*ss on your parade’ with FF in a year’s time ….
We had all this in film days … everyone talked about ultimate quality of MF … how they were ‘moving up’ soon to this revered format – until they felt the weight/size of the average MF camera. They discovered why the ‘pros’ used them mainly in studios – on tripods – then went back to the ‘inferior’ 35mm (FF) format …
So FF – a.k.a. 35mm – is not even the ultimate ‘quality’ format (nor is MF – Try 10×8″ … or even larger)
Digital has largely made the format wars a thing of the past. There is now no direct co-relation between ‘quality’ and format size – as there was in film emulsion technology.
If you are getting the images YOU want from APS – or even m4/3rd – plus a convenient sized range of equipment to carry about … you have photo nirvana!
I am interested in an x-pro 1s. The improvements I would like to see are better auto focus ie quicker, more accurate frame lines (? Coming in the new firmware update anyway), better focus peaking ie different colours, split image focusing, a modest increase in resolution ie at least to 20 mega pixels as long as low light performance remains good and finally more video controls would be welcome.
I forgot to add higher resolution faster refresh rate EVF and possibly an LCD which can flip out fir better viewing
“While I am sure there will be better image quality with a larger sensor, I doubt it will be noticeable to or necessary for most. Most users arenβt even using the current X-Series cameras to their full potential, which is evident on Flickr and 500px.”
But the whole point of this is that we are talking about PRO cameras, so the above comment just isn’t relevant.
If you read on, I mentioned that a full frame MILC would be a good choice to satisfy the professional market…
For my money, I left FF system to go with the X-series, and am more than happy. My next step won’t be back into FF.. If fuji are going to make my current lineup a has been, then I’ll be looking elsewhere. my ideal kit is the APS-C X series with good prime lenses, and a MF with a couple of lenses… Now a MF Fuji (i.e. hasselblad) with the attributes of the X series… that interests me… I really don’t see FF being that much of an improvement over the crop… a true “pro” camera for me is MF… I’d be more likely to invest in high end gear with a good future than in seesawing crop/ff marketing and consumer driven hype and flavour of the month products..
I’d love to see Fuji stick with crop sensors in the compacts, and start looking at a realisable MF system… I’ll take a 30mp MF over a 40mp FF anyway!
A medium format, rangefinder-like camera, similar to a Mamiya 6 or 7 would be fantastic. However, it would likely be far too expensive.
Depends what kind of camera it is. I would be very tempted if this was digital and not priced through the roof: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/678957-REG/Fujifilm_16019089_GF670_Rangefinder_Folding_Camera.html
I would like to see a FF from fuji, although I am quite happy with my XE1+35+14 and X100s right now.
1) Speaking of pixel density, 1600mp is already pretty high for APSC, so there is not much space to increase pixel without hurting high iso performance on APSC, if we are talking about current cmos based sensor.
2) When using flickr, I prefer to resize my photo to about 50% of the original photo size, which gives the x3-like pixel quality. Based on that, I will say 1600mp is not enough, not to mention the future big retina screen.
3) High iso performance is good on XE1 or X100s, but not excellent if we are talking about 3200 or 6400, let’s just be honest. Which means in low light environment, I can not take photos of the full potential of the XF lens. But imagine what FF could do.
4) Fuji will keep on making and improving APSC lines, and I am sure the advanced features (except for FF-based ones) will not be FF exclusive. Fuji has this kind of commitment, so no worry.
5) The organic sensor, will probably start as an APSC sensor, or even smaller.
6) That said, FF will not be successful, if not given the right size, AF, and other critical performance, these altogether can be a BIG challenge for Fuji. Big challenge usually means big cost. This is something really matters. If it is feasible and profitable, why not.
7) After A7 from Sony, Fuji could really use a FF CSC or mirrorless as its high-end flagship, sometimes it is also important to show the consumer that they can do it too. So when people compares Fuji with other brands, they know Fuji is not underdog, it is also a capable camera provider and their products are good and technically advanced.
If they need to develop a completely new lens lineup for FF, I’d rather they stick with APS-C and maybe design a separate digital medium format system. That would be awesome, and a much more significant quality upgrade from APS-C. Their X-Trans sensor is good enough that FF would be slightly redundant.
I’d like FUJI to stay with APS-C rather than jump into FF competition for mirrorless market.
I believe that Fuji can make very compact FF mirrorless body, but for the FF lens is not possible to be small.
Plus, according to sensor technology, Fuji absolutely won’t be able to compete against Sony’s A7/A7r. Both sony camera now are even much superior to Nikon’s and Canon’s FF flagship. If Fuji decides to enter FF mirrorless, it will be like suicide.
I don’t think the A7/A7r are both superior to Nikon’s D800E. While they are smaller, they have significant issues with wide-angle legacy lenses (smearing of details and colour shifts) and do not have a sufficient set of high-quality native lenses to support them. So, aside from size, the D800E is likely a better choice ~ a full set of high-quality lenses to support the system.
While you could argue that you can use Nikon or Canon lenses on the A7/A7r, I highly doubt it will be even close to as efficient…
So, while Sony has done a great job of providing some groundbreaking cameras, which have stirred up the market, there are some serious weaknesses with those cameras. Personally, I would rather shoot with my X-Pro 1 until the full frame options mature, as Fuji has some great lenses, and will soon have more ~ can’t wait to get the 56 f/1.2.
One of the key advantage of A7/A7r is that Sony has Zeiss glass which undoubtedly is probably the best glass available. I think only Leica M can be comparable with Sony Zeiss. Even though currecntly there are limited native Zeiss glass for A7/A7r, it will be more available in near future.
Fuji XF is also superb but may not be able to compete with Zeiss/Leica unfortunately.
currently there is only 1 lens, 35 f/2.8, that’s it
Actually, Fuji glass, in my opinion, is just as good, if not better than Zeiss. I prefer the Fuji 35mm to the Zeiss 32mm, and the Fuji 14mm to the Zeiss 12mm. Sure, the Zeiss Otis (I think that is what it is called) is exceptional, but…
While Zeiss will likely make more lenses for Sony, Fuji could release a full frame X-pro 2 by that time (end of 2014), if they choose; and, if Fuji does, I believe it will be better. The only thing holding Fuji back is their dependency on Sony for sensors.
The A7/A74 are very innovative and are like a watershed in the camera market. However, like most first generation versions, they need to iron out the kinks. Apparently the A7r has back focusing issues (digitalrevtv review), detail smearing and colour cast issues with wideangle legacy glass. While there is a lot of hype about the A7/A7r, and every camera has its issues, I would not buy a first generation one, not only because there are very few native lenses for it, but because I expect there to be significant issues with them, which will be improved on with future generation cameras, from Sony and others, such as Fuji.
Only the future will tell, but any company that can design a well-balanced, full frame MILC with a complete set of high-quality fast primes and zooms, and with AF performance competitive with full frame DSLRs should be very successful. Unfortunately, such a camera does not exist yet. Perhaps one, or some, will in 2015.
The X-Mount Touits are built at Fujinon, anyway, and unlike their Fujinon counterparts need digital distortion correction. The 14mm, 23mm, and 35mm from Fujinon are fully optically corrected.
If they launch a FF X-pro series i’ll have to sell all my X-gear as this means all my gear will now be obsolete. It means my current x-pro1 is possibly no longer top of the line, which means i can’t take pictures with this anymore.
There’s also the significant factor that by going FF, they are diluting their dedication to APS-C, which is against my moral high ground.
/s
I choose mirrorless because I want smaller system and I choose Fuji because I want smaller system that I can enjoy DOF from APS-C sensor.
I have just one XF system (18-55), so invesment in FF lens is not avoidable. However the problem is : How small and compact will the Fuji FF lens be?
What about an APS-C line of cameras, and a new line larger than FF (aka Γ la Leica S)? Therefore, the format difference would be big enough no to cannibalize each-other’s sales, and with something larger than FF fuji would enter a market with very little competition, or even no competition if the price is right!
Leica S is such a successful camera! I hear the stories of professional photographers switching to this format all the time! Oh wait…
Medium format would likely be far too expensive, and it would be much larger and slower. Fuji has been struggling to make its APS-C sensor cameras fast enough. If they went medium format, I think it would be much slower. That said, a digital Mamiya 7-like mirrorless camera for under $5000 (body only) would likely be appealing to pros and wealthy enthusiasts, but based on the price of medium format digital cameras, I doubt it is doable for that price point.
So, how many medium format sensor with state-of the-art CMOS technology (aka Sony A7R, D800, NEX 6) exist in the known universe? Last time I checked (3 minutes ago) I counted ZERO.
It’s the same with APS-H sensors. They not exist, so I keep asking myself how Fuji would build such a camera w/o a sensor?
Of course, Fuji could have a sensor developed and built, that would double or tripple the price of the camera compared to the competition, because as we know, Fuji can only sell low volume as a niche player. So sure, if you want to pay 5000 dollars for an APS-H body instead of 2500 dollars for a full-frame body with the Sony sensor of the A7R, that’s probably doable.
I couldn’t tell you…just responding to the comment about mf above. If they don’t exist, then just as I said, they would be far too expensive. I am happy with my X-Pro 1 anyways.
1) sony develops and builds sensors. Their cameras do not cost 2 or 3 times more. Why? Because they sell their sensors to other manufacturers. Fuji could do the same, especially if they develop a format others don’t have yet.
2) fuji I S already developing their organic sensor. According to your logic, we are doomed to get a 3000 to 4000 dollars x-pro1 successor if it has this sensor. I bet it won’t be the case.
3) with fuji claiming from the begining that their aps-c sensors are as good as FF, bringing a FF camera now would basically correspond to them admitting that FF is indeed better than APS-C.
Fuji has left the sensor business. They sold their sensor factory to Toshiba. They are trying to work with Panasonic on a new sensor concept that may or may not materialize in a few years. Why do you think they are partnering with Panasonic? Because Pana will use the technology, too, increasing the numbers. And of course they hope to sell organic sensors to others. But they don’t exist, yet, and there’s no expectation when this changes.
Btw, current X-Mount lenses wouldn’t work with APS-H, either, so developing an APS-H sensor (that nobody wants and nobody else buys) would be like triple suicide. Not gonna happen, Fuji may be stupid, but not that stupid.
“with fuji claiming from the begining that their aps-c sensors are as good as FF, bringing a FF camera now would basically correspond to them admitting that FF is indeed better than APS-C.”
You don’t understand the principles here. Fuji only claim that their APS sensor is as good as some existing FF sensors. They don’t claim that the principle of APS sized sensors gives better image quality than larger sensors.
It always depends on what you compare. For example, the resolution if an X-M1 (16 MP, $650) will easily surpass that of a Nikon Df (16 MP, $2700) or Nikon D4 (16 MP, $4900).
See http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=nikon_df&attr13_1=fujifilm_xe2&attr13_2=fujifilm_xm1&attr13_3=fujifilm_xpro1&attr15_0=jpeg&attr15_1=jpeg&attr15_2=jpeg&attr15_3=jpeg&attr16_0=100&attr16_1=200&attr16_2=200&attr16_3=200&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.6368704156479218&y=0.0897305171158048 for details (literally)
“t always depends on what you compare. For example, the resolution if an X-M1 (16 MP, $650) will easily surpass that of a Nikon Df (16 MP, $2700) or Nikon D4 (16 MP, $4900).”
That has nothing to do with the size of the sensor and it certainly isn’t because the Fuji sensor is smaller.
Fuji claimed that the resolution of thr XP1 would match or surpass that of FF cameras, and it did. They even showed plenty of charts “proving this” to the media, and unlike those charts that were officially published, I also saw unredacted internal versions that actually contained the real names of the competitors from Canon and Nikon that Fuji tested. Fuji really believe (or wants to believe) that their sensor is superior in other regards, as well, they have charts for everything, but of course, believe and reality don’t always match. π
Personally, I find the whole “matches FF” marketing angle ridiculous and detrimental, it will eventually backfire and haunt Fuji, as I do expect them to at least bring a FF “X200” ar one point.
But this isn’t really about resolution. Image quality isn’t the same as resolution.
Yep, resolution is a factor of IQ. Like noise. IIRC, Fuji made comparison charts for resolution and noise in order to demonstrate to “the world” that the XP1 delivers IQ similar or better than (some) FF cameras. Those charts were partly published by bloggers at and after the CES 2012, so there should be traces of it on the Internet.
Resolution is a small part of image quality. Nikon’s current cheapest DSLR has higher resolution than a D3, D3S, D700 and D4.
That doesn’t mean to say that it gives better image quality. The image quality of the bigger cameras, even the 5-6 year old models, is still superior, particularly at higher ISOs.
Well, Fuji talked about resolution and noise when elaborating their IQ claims. So this is this.
Rico, there are mobile phones with higher resolution than my D700s.
Too bad the studio scenes on DPR don’t contain smartphones. They actually have a different studio scene for these “cameras”. It might be interesting to compare those 40 MP+ smartphones with 35mm DLSRs.
Didn’t Fuji say that it’s not possible to have FF using this same X-mount? Wouldn’t they have to create another mount?
I agree with Renato.
So many comments about a full frame X-Pro2, at least a couple of years down the line, when the rumor seems to be an upgrade to the existing X-Pro1. I’m more interested in hearing about a 1s, and wonder why the speculation isn’t about that instead.
So…
People are freaking out over a possible and only rumored FF which may come in… 2015???
Things that I don’t get:
– Fuji’s support towards their APS-C X-System won’t change, so why the fuss? Take a look at what Fuji has been doing, the no longer produced but still supported X100, for instance. Why all of sudden, they are going to change the way they support their products?
– If you don’t want or need a FF, you don’t actually have to buy it. Your camera won’t become worse just because there is a FF one, your skills are not supposed to become worse just by the existence of a FF camera. If you prefer a smaller but still capable camera, stick with the APS-C and stop complaining about the FF camera.
– If you always wanted to have a FF – even more from Fuji – and you are rethinking if you buy or not new XF lenses because of a camera that MAY come in 2015, you should also rethink other stuff on your life.
I know that there is marketing and a market to consider if a FF is introduced but c’mon, it’s nothing to be freaking out about. By the logic that a lot of people are using here, Fuji would have never developed the X-system. Which company started their camera line up, even more a mirrorless one, the way Fuji did? Starting with a top of the line camera instead of entry-level one? So following the logic of some “experts” here, Fuji should have never done that even less in that fashion – just because they don’t want.
It’s meaningless if FF is in array with what you want or not, there IS a market for that, all the buzz Sony received for their A7/A7R just shows that. And those two cameras have a lot of compromises that Fuji wouldn’t take. Fuji FF cameras won’t be cheap and if Fuji has balls, they are going to do it again, aiming for the top, not entry-level FF like 6D/D600/A7, Fuji will aim higher. And I bet Fuji’s glasses won’t cost as much as those Sony/Zeiss lenses and Fuji probably won’t start with a slow 35/2.8 either. Sony haven’t even delivered the initial line up of lenses they announced and giving Sony’s history with lenses, that’s not a surprise, unfortunately, I don’t think Fuji would do things like that.
Fuji had some difficulties entering the APS-C mirrorless market because it’s a more crowded one and Fuji did it right by exploring the high-end which was very defficient but the FF mirrorless market barely exists, there is a lot to explore and if Fuji just do like they did, they will be much more successful then they are in the APS-C market.
The FF mirrorless market has a lot of gaps to fill and people willing to buy a FF camera also cares a lot more about the system, the lenses and they know that high-quality glass come with a cost. Fuji’s model of top notch glass, kaizen, etc. fits much better in the FF market where people value those things much more than the APS-C market, where only the enthusiast/PRO people actually care about it – and it’s probably not even half of the enthusiasts that do.
And it will probably be a new mount and yes, the APS-C X-lenses may not work because it will be very hard to create an adapter for such a short flange distance. It would be nice if it was all compatible but the only thing that people could possibly feel bad about is that the FF lenses wouldn’t fit the APS-C so you could carry just FF if you wanted. Because APS-C not fitting the FF and using it as a cropped camera, you better off waiting for the proper FF equivalent focal length, so stick with the APS-C system until there then. Thinking about a FF system, not being able to use cropped lenses is not really a big concern in the long term – at all. It may help in the beginning if you really CAN’T wait, so just be a little patience.
E-mount people may be able to use the cropped lenses on their A7/A7R but I bet that this doesn’t make them happier and overjoyed just because of that. The majority of the cropped lenses from E-mount are not good, they are low quality optics with low resolution. I know that the situation with Fuji’s glass is different but even so, is this really such a BIG issue??
Fuji won’t ditch the APS-C cameras and there is a market to explore, what is the problem of Fuji coming with a FF in 2015? Development costs? Fuji just dunmped basically their whole P&S market, I’m sure that that money can be used here. FF market may be much smaller but you can get more profit than in the entry-level APS-C market. And just for the note, I think that Fuji entering the entry-level APS-C market is also about reducing their production chain and supplies cost for their overall production.
So that’s why I see no reason to freak out if you don’t want a FF, if you want a FF, if you don’t care about a FF, if you want them both or whatever. Besides that, c’mon, by 2015 the X-system will be much more mature, just look at what Fuji did in less than 2 years and compare to any other system, more 2 years and this system should be quite complete. By then they will have weather sealed lenses and also cheaper lenses, more pancakes for those that want it as well.
It’s not the end of the world.
Good to see a bit of common sense. Great post Renato.
Truth is that Fuji has always been at their best with their high end products. The higher you go, the better Fuji has always done it. Their efforts at low end cameras were never their best, but their high end professional studio cameras, their lenses for professional applications (e.g. printers, Hasselblad etc.), their Frontier minilabs are where Fuji shines. Not to mention their consumables like film and paper.
I do hope they won’t listen to the enthusiast “experts” demanding that they make all their cameras for them. Some serious Fuji professional cameras would do really well amongst pros who are, I believe, ready for them. All hypothetical of course, because this idea of a Fuji full frame 35mm camera hasn’t even properly reached rumour status yet!
Great comment!
It’s also my opinion that Fuji really excels in the high end/professional products-range, especially lenses. Therefore I’m continuously hoping and waiting that they will bring their A-game to a new, professional, fully manual camera system, no matter the sensor size.
I also find the complaints about full-frame quite absurd:
Miniaturization is a common effect of technological progress, why shouldn’t this be true for digital camera systems.
Fuji just get the X-PRO1S right! Give us a real world APS-C X-Trans pro body with the features and usability expected by people that get paid to shoot for a living. And get rid of the crap manual focus by wire that is useless in real world shooting.
All this talk about a Fuji full frame is nuts! Fuji entering the full frame market will back fire on them. They are going to demote loyal X users to a βlower tier of camera usersβ. I really hope they have thought this out.
They already did get rid of the focus by wire mate, ages ago. Both the 14 and 23 are proper manual focus
There seem to be an increasing number of people suffering from the mysterious condition known as Full Frame Fobia.
After reading a number of postings on the subject, I still struggle to see the root and cause of this seemingly serious outbreak.
Anyone?
Nobody is scared of full frame. If the body containing the full frame sensor can be the same size as the APS-C version and reasonably similar cost then I’m sold. It can’t and it won’t. I’m happy with the quality I’m currently getting and willing to take the slight hit on quality to get the smaller, lighter, less obtrusive body.
I got my 5DII out last night and I can’t imagine ever using it again for street or travel photography. It felt like carrying a breezeblock. Landscape maybe but that wouldn’t be why I would buy a FF x-Pro.
I’d say a greater number are suffering from “OMG I need a FF camera to be a pro!” disease.
Yes, apparently pros aren’t allowed to say that they would like a full frame PRO camera from Fuji because they don’t know what they’re talking about.
Their opinion on the Pro series is irrelevant and misguided apparently. (Good job Fuji don’t think like that!)
Full frame isn;t the be all & end all.
less that 10 years ago the majority of “pro” photographers were shooting cropped sensor APSC DSLR’s, Nikon D2X, D200’s, D300’s, Canon 50D’s, Canon 1Ds’s. Just because Full frame has become affordable to most it doesn’t mean that it is the best
I think Fuji SHOULD release an X-PRO1s. It would bring the XP1 in line with the rest of the X series cameras, fix a lot of the issues plagued by the original model (although mostly ironed out via firmware updates) and future proof it.
The Fuji Lenses are some of the best released, the system as a whole is great, retaining the hybrid VF it would again be the big brother to the X100s, for photographers who desire an optical viewfinder. it would be a cheap upgrade for fuji to implement and make sense.
The whole Camera imaging industry has successfully brainwashed consumers into believing that in order to be a “pro” or good photographer then one must have a FF sensor. Not true. Its about the body, form & function of a camera, something that fits your hand, is intuitive to use and portable for most. it’s about the user that makes the photos not the biggest & best camera. The X-Pro1 was and still is a milestone in camera technology and a move in the right direction for so many photographers, yes it can be a little slow, but in this modern age everyone is so impatient how fast does something need to be?? slow down, take time over your craft, you don’t need 24mpxl, 500 Af points and 20 fps.
Dave, a larger sensor of the same type (emphasis there on same type) will always be better than a smaller one. It is an indisputable fact. Double up a Fuji sensor and it will give image quality of even better quality, particularly in low light.
This talk of manufacturers “brain washing” professionals is just silly and is just offensive to the intelligence of professionals who generally know a great deal more about what they are doing than those who don’t do it for a living.
The fact is that having a larger sensor is of particular benefit when working at higher ISOs. There still isn’t a single Nikon APS camera, even after 6 years, that can approach the quality of a D3 at 1600 or over.
All of Nikon’s full frame cameras ever made give better quality in low light than any of Nikon’s smaller sensors.
All of Canon’s full frame cameras give better quality in low light than all of of Canon’s smaller sensors.
These are facts.
The only APS camera that can even approach full frame in low light is the Fuji X series. Even then we’re only talking equivalent of the six year old D3 and five year old D700.
Saying that we used to manage before isn’t really relevant. A D2X at 1600 ISO is completely unusable for most professional applications.
Some thoughts, how the future model lineup of Fuji might logically look like:
This rumor about the x-pro1s makes a lot of sense. Didn’t we all wonder, what this s actually means? Why did they gave the update over the X100 an s and the update over the x-E1 no s? The latter update was surely not a bigger update than the update with the X100s. So this “s” seems not to mean “small” update. In stead it seems to mean that the s model is the last model with an APS-C Sensor and the next version of this model will be an FF model.
This interpretation makes also sense according to the rumored dslr-like camera, to the rumored X200 and according to the problems fuji has in distinguishing the x-pro from the x-E and the X100 from the X-E. The X-E was right from the beginning a rival to the X-Pro and it was hard to justify, why the X-Pro is the Pro-Camera and the X-E are not. Or why the X-Pro costs nearly two times of the X-E. Many people even consider the X-E as a better camera than the Pro model. The problem between the X100 and the X-E is, that you only need a decent 23mm pancake f2.0 and everybody would go for the X-E instead of the X100.
So here is what I think we will logically see:
The only APS-C cameras which will be continued is the X-A, the X-M and the X-E. In Addition they will bring a pro APS-C camera, which will be the rumored fujica like X-S. Besides this, they will establish a FF line, which will have the single lens rangefinder X200, the interchangeable lens rangefinder X-Pro2 and an dslr-like FF camera maybe called X-D.
If my logic does’nt fool me, this will happen:
X-Pro 1s early 2014 (last Pro with APS-C Sensor)
X-S1 early 2014 (dslr-like pro model for APS-C)
X200 mid 2014 (first fullframe)
X-Pro 2 end 2014 early 2015 (first interchangeable lens rangefinderstyle full frame camera)
X-D1 mid 2015 or end 2015 (first interchangeable lens dslrstyle full frame camera)
the X-E will become the pro rangefinder camera in APS-C
the X-S will become the pro dslrstyle camera in APS-C
the X-Pro2 will become the pro rangefinder camera in FF
the X-D will become the pro dslrstyle camera in FF
the X100 will change completely to FF, with aprox. the same size
the X-E will become the APS-C X100 by releasing an pancake 23mm f2.0
in addition the X20 will become an 1 inch sensor
and the XQ will remain 2/3 inch
Many fear, that they will innovate only in the FF section. But instead they will try to have two pro lines: the APS-C and the FF line. The X-E will become one pro-model in APS-C, the other is the X-S. It will also mean, that the OVF option you will only have in the FF section. Because they think (i suggest) that people who want an OVF are the same people who can’t be happy with APS-C and need FF. Many APS-C shooters don’t care about the OVF, as you can see by the success of the X-E over the X-Pro1.
I already have an X-S1, and it does indeed look a bit like a DSLR.
hey Rico, yes i know that it exists. I just tried to find a name. Maybe they will name it S2, if they want to address it to the X-S1 owner. Maybe they will call it completely different. But these are just names…
Nope, they won’t name it X-S2, either. π
i don’t know why, but somehow i have the feeling that you know the name already π
a secret you can’t speak about π
Many here (including me) are wondering, why people are getting so hysterical, considering the thought, that Fuji might go FF. The answer is this:
Most buyers of camera equipment are technique fetishists. They need the feeling for their ego, that they bought the best stuff within the brand, they are dedicated to. If there suddenly is a FF equipment within the same brand they feel cheated, cause all what they wanted was the feeling of owning the best. And now, its not the best anymore. But the absolute quality of their equipment didn’t change, only the relative quality. Their equipment is as good as it was before FF. Someone in the post said this absurd and funny sentence “If Fuji goes FF, the X-Pro is not the best anymore. That means I can’t take pictures anymore”. This sentence also includes the somehow pathologic converse argument, that you only take pictures because you have the best equipment. If people suffer from this compulsion neurosis (this would be the clinical term for it) its quite normal, that the next complain is, that they have now to sell all their expensive equipment, they invested in. On the basis of this neurosis they even don’t have a choice, they are forced to buy the better stuff, because thats all their neurosis is about.
Translated in a real world situation this is like saying: “Shit they made a Ferrari, so that means, I can’t drive anymore”. People who suffer from this neurosis shouldn’t wonder, if they loose their money very soon, by investing and investing in the best equipment they can buy. Its not the fault of Fuji, that technology is able to develop and improve, instead its your fault, that you think you have to buy it, with exactly the same amount of freedom like somebody who is suffering from compulsion neurosis.
Yep, quite true, and it’s pretty much the same whenever a company announces a successor model. When Leica released the M240, there was an outcry from some M9 users who bad-mouthed the new model in every imaginable way. It became pretty clear that those guys couldn’t or didn’t want to afford the new M240, so they still wanted to convince themselves (and others) that the M9 remained the best camera of the lineup. You could witness similar scenes when Fuji came up with the X100S or (quite recently) with the X-E2.
It’s funny: As long as they are still looking for a camera, some people keep comparing and waiting for upcoming announcements, reading rumor sites and asking “where is the X-Pro2”. But once they have finally pulled the trigger and bought a camera, they would very much like the same company to stop innovating and never ever release an improved successor product. There are people out there who can’t handle the fact that a “cheap” X-M1 offers at least the same IQ and much better performance than an X-Pro1.
Spot on Rico!
Personally, having owned Canon 1DmkIV etc with APS H sensor I’d really love to see that kind of sensor offered in the X Pro 2. If it could be a square sensor then that would be even better!
If I were Fuji I’d upgrade the APS C to H to extract better IQ while keeping existing lenses for people who’ve invested in current glass then I’d bring out a *larger* than FF sensor – a bit like a mini Leica S but one that we mortals can afford. It would of course be expensive but hopefully in say original D800 ball park pricing but would position Fuji well above… Just thinking aloud π
why would they bring out FF when there is no lens system yet a fantastic system in place for the c. Get real guys and be happy with the x series.
Well, APS-C is going to prove to best format form mirroless cameras. Look at the Sony A7(R). Leica lens can produce a photo, but is not sharp and has to be 35mm or longer. This would limit use with such RF lens.The second problem the A7s are showing are that lens of real speed are a poor balance with these FF cameras. A 35mm F1.4 lens would all lens little body.
Billions of years ago when I went into photography. You had to make choice 35mm cameras would take a picture of anything anywhere, Medium format cameras were the next up. But portability and lens speed/size and View cameras were the best IQ, but bad at 3 FPS. From what I have seen, the only real compacted mirroless FF camera are the Leica and the Sony RX1. Adding the EVF and fast AF lens, well the cameras just start going DSLR.
APS-C is the best size, for now in mirroless. So stay with mirroless or go DSLR. With DSLR you get great AF and balance of lens. Also look at lens quilty, I do not want to make a Fuji add, but most of the Fuji lens are the in the best, highly rec. or top level lens. All are rated good. No dogs, even the Nikon, Canon and even CZ has a dog or two, or three. Just think about why you got your X-Pro or
X-?. Because it felt right and worked right, it was a tool you used, not a tool that uses you.
Someone spoke of Steve Huff, I remember when you had to get a Leica, just beacuse of that Leica way of making picture, what ever that means. He does not like Fuji, because the cameras in whats you to buy are not Fuji. To me Fuji is the new “Nikon” of the 1960’s. The X-Pro 1 is not a Hasseblad 500CM, but it is the Nikon F.