Jump to content

Fuji X Pro 2 review - a Leica killer. Also a surprisingly capable Super 35mm cinema machine? Let's find out...


Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, DaveAltizer said:

Lol! No kidding. I agree but again, as boring as the camera is...its been a workhorse. 

Fair enough. I need to get my hands on one and do a test myself. My buddy just got his so maybe he can let me borrow it. If the XT-2 has 4k and more video centric features, I think that would be a great cam to get. 

Agreed. Especially since the xt1 could use speedboosters

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 101
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Well, over a year later I went to the store to buy the X-T20. Came out with the X-T2. A few weeks later I switched to the X-Pro. There is also a little tiny bit of a video sample from the X-Pro

You break out your Samsung NX1, and say, we can do that!  

I don't agree with the people saying Fuji's colour is anything less than stunning. In video mode the XPro 2 can compete with all of the below cameras for resolution and detail in 1080p, whilst gi

Posted Images

19 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Its awesome, I was so close to getting one the other week, got a great offer.

I think for web delivery you can't go wrong....However, I was DP on a doc that had a limited theatrical release and I shot a lot of the film on my BMPCC but the footage that looked best on the 70ft screen was the C100 without a doubt...and that was shooting in the internal codec! It was a super cheese ball documentary...but it was still a cool thing to see my work on the big screen. 

C100 below:

Screen Shot 2016-03-25 at 4.08.39 PM.png

Screen Shot 2016-03-25 at 4.09.36 PM.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, duffman said:

Dude I take out a c100 9/10 times, when I could just as easily grab a bmcc, bmpcc, a7s, gh4, gx7, or a 5D. 

I think where the C series cameras succeed is that they aren't irritatingly bad in any areas, and they manage to excel in including all the stuff other manufacturers leave out for one reason or another. XLR's, ND's, a big selection of native lenses, all the stuff which can piss you off is taken care of (although their omission of a histogram is beyond me).

Grats on the doc btw, it's always awesome seeing your work up on the big screen :) 

Totally agree. Even if an a7s, bmpcc, gh4, etc can outperform specs wise....you can't compete with the ease of use with the Canon C series. And professional clients love the image. You got to remember that once our images are delivered...nobody really gives a crap what you used to shoot on. As long as the shooting day went smoothly and the images look great thats all that matters. The ND's, XLR, Battery life, low light ability, and pleasing Canon Log all make it a great workhorse. 

Back to the original reason for this post tho...would love to test Fuji X-Pro 2 still and see how it performs in a professional scenario. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators
1 minute ago, DaveAltizer said:

Totally agree. Even if an a7s, bmpcc, gh4, etc can outperform specs wise....you can't compete with the ease of use with the Canon C series. And professional clients love the image. You got to remember that once our images are delivered...nobody really gives a crap what you used to shoot on. As long as the shooting day went smoothly and the images look great thats all that matters. The ND's, XLR, Battery life, low light ability, and pleasing Canon Log all make it a great workhorse. 

What do you tell those clients to whom you deliver the images then, when they want 4K and 120fps?

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

What do you tell those clients to whom you deliver the images then, when they want 4K and 120fps?

What "TheRenaissanceMan" said. Literally haven't been required or requested to do either. It's a funny thing really as a freelance DP. Financially it just doesn't make sense for me to buy anything more than $6k. Also, clients know the c300, c100 cameras. They are very popular and honestly, owning two c100's and a set of lenses is more valuable than owning an a7s II right now for me. Clients like the image off c300 c100 and just like how the RED name is popular among producers, so is "C300". 

Ive got $5,000 cash ready to spend on whatever my next rig is. I'm waiting till NAB but I think two c100s or even a used c300 may be the best for me. Again.... FOR ME. I currently am still only rocking bmpcc. I'm so ready to get out of the Blackmagic world. Tired of dealing with the headaches that come with those cameras. Also, my experience has been very negative from clients on their perception of Blackmagic. 

Honestly, as a Leica M3 owner and user..I would love an X-Pro2 just for the stills. If the video is decent, then thats a huge plus. Need to try myself. 

Was the DP on this silly shoot directed by Seth Worley for a children's video series. All shot on C100 with Atomos Ninja 2. Great skin tones and had zero issues with the camera on set. A fantastic little workhorse. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

And if the client demands it, they can pay the rental fee. ;)

Well yes precisely. Honestly any time something like that comes up in a professional sense they just assume a rental. So I just say my day rate and a rental fee and they always are fine with it. Thats why the camera's I own need to be the most versatile tool possible. Most minimal versatile tool. Anything beyond that is just rental. 

1 hour ago, tupp said:

I think it's more of the look in his eye rather than the color from the C100, but Johnny looks like he could be part of the window display at the funeral home.

HAHAHA!! Of course :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrew, you are so right... Last year was at Tokyo Midtown to contest the bad video quality of Fuji cameras (for about 2 hour testing it in the flagship exposition with him) opposed to the gorgeus photo quality (also of my small X30), but the engineer seems to not understand (he knews...)  but he promised me some good news for next year (Xpro2 ?). So this summer I will protest again for the lack of 4K... Who nows...

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

In decent light and with a human subject, you'll be surprised at how close the X Pro2 and C100's images are.

Ergonomics wise, of course the C100 can do longer takes, massive battery life, easier to manually focus, a tad easier to expose with zebra, waveform, etc... but the X Pro2 is smaller, lighter, more simple, more direct, and has a MUCH better EVF. So again it's not quite so simple as writing one off because it is mainly a photo camera.

Biggest difference is on the audio side... Obviously if professional onboard audio and XLR is a priority then C100 is going to give you that.

This is quite interesting to me. I've been using a C100 for video and Fuji - an XT-1 - for quite a while now. I've been lamenting the isolation of the systems and the inability to use the Fuji's as a second cam to the C100 and that might be able to change soon. I'm not in a rush and will wait a bit for an XT-2 unless I have a compelling project that forces my hand earlier.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, duffman said:

WTF clients are you dealing with?

Well, FWIW, I have a sports client that loves manipulating time in the shots they acquire.  They do a mini-doc for every episode of a SEC college football show.  That's 20 short films a year.  So there's that sort of work where it's great to have flexible tools, like a camera that does pretty good slow-mo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators
5 hours ago, duffman said:

WTF clients are you dealing with? Peter Jackson?

No, but come on... The C100 is such a dull little work camera. An office tool in comparison to something like a sports car.

I'm not saying it's a bad camera... It's just that is designed to be a work tool, by a company that also makes photocopiers :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, duffman said:

The client is the one who approached those people and said "can you make me these videos for x amount of money?"

Yes.  And, as the client, they also tell me what visual style they want in those videos in order for me to get paid x amount of money.  Which, in their case includes a lot of slow-mo.  

Delivering to the client what they want is usually standard operating procedure in a client/vendor relationship.  Sorry if I'm misunderstanding what you're on about, but it seems contrarian to me.  

Regardless, I'm here to tell you that a client will indeed make requests for things like slow-mo, and that being the case, I use cameras that can provide it.

As it happens, I have a shoot tomorrow in which I'll be at a race track for a client and I plan on shooting slow-mo for the piece.  60p conformed to 24p, but I would have certainly provided 120p slow-mo if the client could have paid a bit more in the budget.

Also, it'll be the first time I use the Xpro2 on a paying gig (as the B-Cam).  We'll see how it goes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So let me throw out this question, do you think the Fuji XPro2 is worth buying for video acquisition? With that being said, which I know is a loaded question, I'm talking about this  as a B-camera were 4K isn't a factor, it would be more of a let's see how this camera evolves through FW updates that enhance its video capability and not having to rely heavily upon it. I just really love the image this thing produces, I'm not big on heavy post color correction, I'm more of getting my image as close to final output, in camera, as possible, and adding the Fuji film simulations seems very cool!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steve M. said:

do you think the Fuji XPro2 is worth buying for video acquisition?

It was bought for my biz as a stills camera.  

However, it's definitely going to get used as a "B" video camera too.  We may switch over completely to Fuji gear depending on what they offer in the next XT model.  Since supposedly it will have 4K, that makes it tempting to unload other cameras/glass and invest in a single system.

It seems so weird to stay, "Im considering Fuji as a video acquisition system," as Fuji has been worthless in video for so so long.

Again, it kind of depends, for us, how they do with the XT.

As far as I'm concerned, all these new cameras are more than adequate for the online/corporate stuff I do, and all these hybrids are great for that.  And when I need pro stuff, I just rent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, fuzzynormal said:

It was bought for my biz as a stills camera.  

I'd be interested to hear more on how this camera works out for you! I've seen a couple of hands on reviews, all of which breeze over the video capability, which makes sense, but what isn't mentioned that I'm wondering is can you punch in on the image to set a critical focus? Can you do this during recording? Does the split image focus work in video mode?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...