![]() ![]() I hope they put the LCD back the way it belongs (like the XT4), improve the EVF and OVF to work optically with all focal lengths, keep the better shutter, frame and finishes maybe even give me back my D-pad and keep the joy-stick like on my XT3, etc. The gains claimed over the XP2 definitely do not outweigh the friendliness and ergonometric losses in my opinion. I often wonder what Fuji was thinking? The XP3 immediately struck me as a net-step backwards. Several of the most attractive features in the XP2 disappeared and the closer I looked the more discouraged from purchasing it I became, so I did not. I was so disappointed in the X-Pro 3 when it came out. I can't use my 16/18mm and my beloved 50mm anymore on the X-Pro3 in OVF unless I settle with a very tiny frame or frame lines outside my OVF. That renders the X-Pro3 in OVF mode useless for lenses shorter than 23mm and longer than 35mm. Though it is larger and brighter, in OVF mode (which is why I bought the X-Pro) there's only one magnification left (x0.50) rather than the 2 magnification levels of the X-Pro2. The viewfinder for me is the real dealbreaker on the X-Pro3. The sub monitor is imo a useless gadget as there's not backlighting button like on the X-H1/GFX50S. ![]() I prefer a screen like the X100V were the user has options to choose how to use it and which is nicely integrated in the body. However, imo it sucks to have to open it for menu access and menu access through the EVF is cumbersome when you wear glasses (and have thumbprints all over them). The hidden LCD screen could be very beneficial to a street shooter (from the hip). The main differences between the x-pro2 (I'm a long-time owner) and the x-pro3 (tried it extensively) are the LCD screen and the viewfinder. Top that with a more powerful processor in the 26Mp camera's and you have snappier AF and higher video bit rates (up to 400 Mbps). That allows for greater throughput capacity and quicker AF. What does make a difference is the number of AF pixels on the 26Mp sensor (much higher) and the shorter circuits due to the BSI technology of the 26Mp sensor. That glitches out almost all advantages here. However, the photocells of the 24Mp are larger and therefor the yield of the 26Mp BSI-sensor is lower than the 24Mp FSI sensor (front-side illuminated). The BSI (back-side illuminated) technology of the 26Mp sensor has a theoretical advantage here because the metal wiring layer is not on top of the photocells, but beneath them. There's virtually no visible difference in low-light performance as well. In essence there's no visible image quality difference between the 24Mp X-TransIII/Processor and the 26Mp X-TransIV/Processor. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |