Fujifilm X-E1 versus Fujifilm X-Pro1
The Fujifilm X-E1 and the Fujifilm X-Pro1 are two digital cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in September 2012 and January 2012. Both the X-E1 and the X-Pro1 are mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras that are equipped with an APS-C sensor. Both cameras offer a resolution of 16 megapixel.
The physical size and weight of the Fujifilm X-E1 and the Fujifilm X-Pro1 are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All width, height and depth dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter. You can also toggle the display to switch to a percentage comparison if you prefer that the measures are being expressed in relative terms (in this case, the camera on the left – the X-E1 – represents 100 percent across all the size and weight measures).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Fujifilm X-Pro1 is notably larger (19 percent) than the Fujifilm X-E1. Moreover, the X-Pro1 is markedly heavier (29 percent) than the X-E1. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the X-E1 nor the X-Pro1 are weather-sealed.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. In this particular case, both cameras feature the same lens mount, so that they can use the same lenses. You can find an overview of suitable optics in the Fujinon X Lens Catalog. Mirrorless cameras, such as the two under consideration, have the additional advantage of having a short flange to focal plane distance, which makes it possible to mount many lenses from other systems onto the camera via adapters.
The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, just select a new right or left comparator from among the camera models in the table. Alternatively, you can also move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible comparisons there.
|Camera Body Specifications
|Fujifilm X-E1 (⇒ rgt)||129 mm||75 mm||38 mm||350 g||350||no||2012||999||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ lft)||140 mm||82 mm||43 mm||450 g||300||no||2012||1,699||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-E3 (⇒ lft | rgt)||121 mm||74 mm||43 mm||337 g||350||no||2017||899||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-T20 (⇒ lft | rgt)||118 mm||83 mm||41 mm||383 g||350||no||2017||899||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-E2S (⇒ lft | rgt)||129 mm||75 mm||37 mm||350 g||350||no||2016||699||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||141 mm||83 mm||46 mm||495 g||350||YES||2016||1,699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-T10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||118 mm||83 mm||41 mm||381 g||350||no||2015||799||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X100S (⇒ lft | rgt)||127 mm||74 mm||54 mm||445 g||330||no||2013||1,299||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-E2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||129 mm||75 mm||37 mm||350 g||350||no||2013||999||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-M1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||117 mm||67 mm||39 mm||330 g||350||no||2013||699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-A1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||117 mm||67 mm||39 mm||330 g||350||no||2013||399||discont.||check|
|Panasonic GX1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||116 mm||68 mm||39 mm||318 g||..||no||2011||949||discont.||check|
The listed prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The X-E1 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 41 percent) than the X-Pro1, which puts it into a different market segment. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.
The size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant of image quality. All other things equal, a large sensor will have larger individual pixel-units that offer better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Furthermore, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more possibilities to use shallow depth-of-field in order to isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Both cameras under consideration feature an APS-C sensor and have a format factor (sometimes also referred to as "crop factor") of 1.5. Within the spectrum of camera sensors, this places the review cameras among the medium-sized sensor cameras that aim to strike a balance between image quality and portability. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.
The two cameras under review do not only share the same sensor size, but also offer an identical resolution of 16 megapixel. This similarity in sensor specs implies that both the X-E1 and the X-Pro1 have the same pixel density, as well as the same pixel size. It should, however, be noted that the X-E1 is a somewhat more recent model (by 7 months) than the X-Pro1, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that neither of the two cameras has an anti-alias filter installed, so they are able to capture all the detail the sensor resolves.
Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for most cameras. This service determines an overall sensor rating, as well as sub-scores for low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and color depth ("DXO Portrait"). The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.
|Fujifilm X-E1 (⇒ rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/24p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ lft)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/24p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-E3 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||4K/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-T20 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||4K/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-E2S (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-T10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X100S (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-E2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-M1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-A1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Panasonic GX1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||15.8||4592||3448||1080/60p||20.8||10.6||703||55|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, and both provide the same movie specifications (1080/24p).
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. The two cameras under consideration are similar with respect to both having an electronic viewfinder. However, the one in the X-E1 offers a substantially higher resolution than the one in the X-Pro1 (2360k vs 1440k dots). The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Fujifilm X-E1, the Fujifilm X-Pro1, and comparable cameras. If needed, the dpreview camera hub, for example, contains further detail on the cameras' specs.
|Fujifilm X-E1 (⇒ rgt)||2360||no||2.8||460||fixed||no||4000||6.0||YES||no|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ lft)||1440||no||3.0||1230||fixed||no||4000||6.0||no||no|
|Fujifilm X-E3 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||fixed||YES||4000||8.0||no||no|
|Fujifilm X-T20 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||tilting||YES||4000||8.0||5||no|
|Fujifilm X-E2S (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||fixed||no||4000||7.0||7||no|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1620||fixed||no||8000||8.0||no||no|
|Fujifilm X-T10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||920||tilting||no||4000||8.0||5||no|
|Fujifilm X100S (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||2.8||460||fixed||no||4000||6.0||9||no|
|Fujifilm X-E2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||fixed||no||4000||7.0||7||no|
|Fujifilm X-M1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||920||tilting||no||4000||5.6||7||no|
|Fujifilm X-A1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||920||tilting||no||4000||5.6||7||no|
|Panasonic GX1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||460||fixed||YES||4000||4.2||7.6||no|
Both the X-E1 and the X-Pro1 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The X-Pro1 was replaced by the Fujifilm X-Pro2, while the X-E1 was followed by the Fujifilm X-E2.
So how do things add up? Is there a clear favorite between the Fujifilm X-E1 and the Fujifilm X-E1? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.
Arguments in favor of the Fujifilm X-E1:
- More detailed viewfinder: Has a higher resolution electronic viewfinder (2360k vs 1440k dots).
- More compact: Is smaller (129x75mm vs 140x82mm) and thus needs less room in the bag.
- Less heavy: Is lighter (by 100g or 22 percent) and hence easier to carry around.
- Longer lasting: Can take more shots (350 versus 300) on a single battery charge.
- Easier fill-in: Is equipped with a small onboard flash to brighten deep shadow areas.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (41 percent cheaper at launch).
- More modern: Is somewhat more recent (announced 7 months after the X-Pro1).
Reasons to prefer the Fujifilm X-Pro1:
- Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.0" vs 2.8") for image review and settings control.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1230k vs 460k dots).
- More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in January 2012).
If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the X-E1 is the clear winner of the match-up (7 : 3 points). However, the relevance of individual strengths will vary across photographers, so that you might want to apply your own weighing scheme to the summary points.
In any case, while the comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the handling experience and imaging performance when actually working with the X-E1 or the X-Pro1. User reviews that are available, for instance, at amazon can sometimes shed light on these issues, but such feedback is all too often partial, inconsistent, and inaccurate. This is why expert reviews are important. The adjacent table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular camera review sites. The detailed reviews can be accessed, respectively, on the websites of cameralabs.com, dpreview.com, ephotozine.com, imaging-resource.com, and photographyblog.com.
|Fujifilm X-E1 (⇒ rgt)||HiRec||79/100 Gold||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2012||999||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ lft)||HiRec||79/100 Silver||4.5/5||4/5||4.5/5||2012||1,699||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-E3 (⇒ lft | rgt)||..||84/100 Gold||4.5/5||..||4.5/5||2017||899||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-T20 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||82/100 Silver||5/5||..||4.5/5||2017||899||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-E2S (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||77/100||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||2016||699||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||83/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2016||1,699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-T10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||80/100 Silver||5/5||4/5||5/5||2015||799||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X100S (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||81/100 Gold||4.5/5||4/5||5/5||2013||1,299||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-E2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||80/100 Gold||4.5/5||-||5/5||2013||999||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-M1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||77/100 Gold||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||2013||699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-A1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||2013||399||discont.||check|
|Panasonic GX1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||85/100 Rec||77/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2011||949||discont.||check|
The review scores listed above should be treated with care, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.
In case you are interested in seeing how other cameras pair up, just make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored. If you do not see the camera that you are looking for, please send me an email, and I will try to update the database with the necessary infos.
- Canon 1300D vs Canon 200D
- Canon 20D vs Canon T6s
- Canon G16 vs Olympus E-420
- Fujifilm X20 vs Fujifilm X100T
- Leica SL vs Leica Q Typ 116
- Nikon D7500 vs Olympus E-620
- Nikon D810 vs Nikon D3S
- Olympus E-3 vs Olympus E-420
- Olympus E-M5 II vs Panasonic G80
- Panasonic G9 vs Sony A7 II
- Sony A6300 vs Sony A6500
- Sony RX1R vs Sony RX100 IV