Fujifilm X-Pro1 versus Fujifilm X100F
The Fujifilm X-Pro1 and the Fujifilm X100F are two enthusiast cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in January 2012 and January 2017. The X-Pro1 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the X100F is a fixed lens compact. Both cameras are equipped with an APS-C sensor. The X-Pro1 has a resolution of 16 megapixel, whereas the X100F provides 24 MP.
The side-by-side display below illustrates the physical size and weight of the Fujifilm X-Pro1 and the Fujifilm X100F. Three successive views from the front, the top, and the rear are shown. All size 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-Pro1 – represents the basis or 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 X100F is notably smaller (17 percent) than the Fujifilm X-Pro1. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the X-Pro1 nor the X100F are weather-sealed.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the X100F has a lens build in, whereas the X-Pro1 is an interchangeable lens camera that requires a separate lens. Attaching the latter will add extra weight and bulk to the setup. You can find an overview of optics for the X-Pro1 and their specifications in the Fujinon X Lens Catalog.
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-Pro1 (⇒ rgt)||140 mm||82 mm||43 mm||450 g||300||no||2012||1,699||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X100F (⇒ lft)||127 mm||75 mm||52 mm||469 g||390||no||2017||1,299||latest||check|
|Canon G1 X Mark III (⇒ lft | rgt)||115 mm||78 mm||51 mm||399 g||200||YES||2017||1,299||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 X-A2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||117 mm||67 mm||40 mm||350 g||410||no||2015||399||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X100T (⇒ lft | rgt)||127 mm||74 mm||52 mm||440 g||330||no||2014||1,299||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-T1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||129 mm||90 mm||47 mm||440 g||350||YES||2014||1,699||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|
|Fujifilm X-E1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||129 mm||75 mm||38 mm||350 g||350||no||2012||999||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||126 mm||75 mm||54 mm||445 g||300||no||2010||1,199||discont.||check|
|Panasonic FZ2000 (⇒ lft | rgt)||138 mm||102 mm||135 mm||915 g||350||no||2016||1,199||latest||check|
The listed prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The X100F was launched at a lower price than the X-Pro1, despite having a lens build in. 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 imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors 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. Further, a large sensor camera will give the photographer additional creative options when using shallow depth-of-field to isolate a subject from its background. On the downside, larger sensors are more costly to manufacture and tent to 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.
While the two cameras under review share the same sensor size, the X100F offers a higher resolution of 24 megapixel, compared with 16 MP of the X-Pro1. This megapixel advantage translates into a 23 percent gain in linear resolution. On the other hand, these sensor specs imply that the X100F has a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 3.92μm versus 4.80μm for the X-Pro1). However, it should be noted that the X100F is much more recent (by 5 years) than the X-Pro1, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that compensate for the smaller pixel size. 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 adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/24p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X100F (⇒ lft)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Canon G1 X Mark III (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||..||..||..||..|
|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 X-A2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X100T (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-T1 (⇒ 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||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-E1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/24p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||12.2||4288||2848||720/30p||22.9||12.4||1001||73|
|Panasonic FZ2000 (⇒ lft | rgt)||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||..||..||..||..|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the X100F provides a faster frame rate than the X-Pro1. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60p, while the X-Pro1 is limited to 1080/24p.
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. The two cameras under review are similar with respect to both having an electronic viewfinder. However, the one in the X100F offers a substantially higher resolution than the one in the X-Pro1 (2360k vs 1440k dots). The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Fujifilm X-Pro1 and Fujifilm X100F along with similar information for a selection of comparators. If needed, the dpreview camera hub, for example, contains further detail on the cameras' specs.
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ rgt)||1440||no||3.0||1230||fixed||no||4000||6.0||no||no|
|Fujifilm X100F (⇒ lft)||2360||no||3.0||1040||fixed||no||4000||8.0||4.6||no|
|Canon G1 X Mark III (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||swivel||YES||2000||9.0||9||YES|
|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 X-A2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||920||tilting||no||4000||5.6||7||no|
|Fujifilm X100T (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||fixed||no||4000||6.0||9||no|
|Fujifilm X-T1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||tilting||no||4000||8.0||no||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|
|Fujifilm X-E1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||2.8||460||fixed||no||4000||6.0||YES||no|
|Fujifilm X100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||1440||no||2.8||460||fixed||no||4000||5.0||9||no|
|Panasonic FZ2000 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||swivel||YES||4000||12.0||13.2||YES|
The X100F is a current model that online retailers, such as amazon, will have in stock. In contrast, the X-Pro1 has been discontinued (but it can be found pre-owned on ebay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the X-Pro1 was succeeded by the Fujifilm X-Pro2.
So what conclusions can be drawn? Is the Fujifilm X-Pro1 better than the Fujifilm X100F or vice versa? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.
Advantages of the Fujifilm X-Pro1:
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1230k vs 1040k dots).
- More flexible: Accepts interchangeable lenses, so that lens characteristics can be altered.
- More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in January 2012).
Arguments in favor of the Fujifilm X100F:
- More detail: Has more megapixels (24 vs 16MP), which boosts linear resolution by 23%.
- Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p vs 1080/24p).
- More detailed viewfinder: Has higher resolution electronic viewfinder (2360k vs 1440k dots).
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (8 vs 6 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Ready to shoot: Has an integrated lens, whereas the X-Pro1 necessitates an extra lens.
- More compact: Is smaller (127x75mm vs 140x82mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
- Longer lasting: Gets more shots (390 versus 300) out of a single battery charge.
- Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
- More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a build-in lens.
- More modern: Reflects 5 years of technical progress since the X-Pro1 launch.
If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the X100F is the clear winner of the contest (10 : 3 points). However, the pertinence of the various camera strengths will differ across photographers, so that you might want to weigh individual camera traits according to their importance for your own imaging needs.
In any case, while the comparison of the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it says nothing about, for example, the handling, responsiveness, and overall imaging quality of the X-Pro1 and the X100F in practical situations. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable. This is why expert reviews are important. The table below summarizes the assessments of some of the best known 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-Pro1 (⇒ rgt)||HiRec||79/100 Silver||4.5/5||4/5||4.5/5||2012||1,699||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X100F (⇒ lft)||Rec||83/100 Gold||4.5/5||..||4.5/5||2017||1,299||latest||check|
|Canon G1 X Mark III (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||79/100||4.5/5||..||4.5/5||2017||1,299||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 X-A2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4.5/5||4/5||4.5/5||2015||399||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X100T (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||81/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||5/5||2014||1,299||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-T1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||84/100 Gold||5/5||4/5||5/5||2014||1,699||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|
|Fujifilm X-E1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||79/100 Gold||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2012||999||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||75/100 Silver||4/5||4/5||5/5||2010||1,199||discont.||check|
|Panasonic FZ2000 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||82/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||5/5||2016||1,199||latest||check|
Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.
If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just use the search menu 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, kindly get in touch, and I will try to add information on that model to the database.
- Canon 100D vs Olympus E-PL9
- Canon 1D X vs Canon 70D
- Canon 200D vs Nikon D7000
- Canon 5D Mark IV vs Sony A7R
- Canon 6D vs Olympus E-M10
- Canon M3 vs Panasonic GX800
- Leica M8 vs Panasonic FZ2500
- Leica S Typ 006 vs Leica S Typ 007
- Leica X Typ 113 vs Canon G1 X Mark III
- Nikon D700 vs Canon SX60
- Panasonic G9 vs Sony A7 II
- Sony A5100 vs Sony RX100 II