Fujifilm X-Pro2 versus Fujifilm X-M1
The Fujifilm X-Pro2 and the Fujifilm X-M1 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in January 2016 and June 2013. Both the X-Pro2 and the X-M1 are mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras that are equipped with an APS-C sensor. The X-Pro2 has a resolution of 24 megapixel, whereas the X-M1 provides 16 MP.
The physical size and weight of the Fujifilm X-Pro2 and the Fujifilm X-M1 are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. Three consecutive perspectives from the front, the top, and the back are presented. All width, height and depth measures 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-Pro2 – 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 X-M1 is notably smaller (33 percent) than the Fujifilm X-Pro2. Moreover, the X-M1 is markedly lighter (33 percent) than the X-Pro2. It is worth mentioning in this context that the X-Pro2 is splash and dust resistant, while the X-M1 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.
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-Pro2 (⇒ rgt)||141 mm||83 mm||46 mm||495 g||350||YES||2016||1,699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-M1 (⇒ lft)||117 mm||67 mm||39 mm||330 g||350||no||2013||699||latest||check|
|Canon 6D Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||144 mm||111 mm||75 mm||765 g||1200||YES||2017||1,999||latest||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 X70 (⇒ lft | rgt)||113 mm||64 mm||44 mm||340 g||330||no||2016||799||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-A3 (⇒ lft | rgt)||117 mm||67 mm||40 mm||339 g||410||no||2016||399||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-E2S (⇒ lft | rgt)||129 mm||75 mm||37 mm||350 g||350||no||2016||699||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-T2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||133 mm||92 mm||49 mm||507 g||340||YES||2016||1,599||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-T10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||118 mm||83 mm||41 mm||381 g||350||no||2015||799||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-T1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||129 mm||90 mm||47 mm||440 g||350||YES||2014||1,699||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X20 (⇒ lft | rgt)||117 mm||70 mm||57 mm||353 g||270||no||2013||599||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-E2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||129 mm||75 mm||37 mm||350 g||350||no||2013||999||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||140 mm||82 mm||43 mm||450 g||300||no||2012||1,699||discont.||check|
|Nikon D500 (⇒ lft | rgt)||147 mm||115 mm||81 mm||860 g||1240||YES||2016||1,999||latest||check|
|Sony RX10 IV (⇒ lft | rgt)||133 mm||94 mm||145 mm||1095 g||400||YES||2017||1,699||latest||check|
|Sony RX10 III (⇒ lft | rgt)||133 mm||94 mm||127 mm||1051 g||420||YES||2016||1,499||discont.||check|
The listed prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The X-M1 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 59 percent) than the X-Pro2, 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 imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have richer color depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Moreover, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more control over depth-of-field in the image and, thus, the ability to better isolate a subject from the 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 X-Pro2 offers a higher resolution of 24 megapixel, compared with 16 MP of the X-M1. This megapixel advantage translates into a 23 percent gain in linear resolution. On the other hand, these sensor specs imply that the X-Pro2 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-M1). In this context, it should be noted, however, that the X-Pro2 is much more recent (by 2 years and 6 months) than the X-M1, 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.
For most cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service assesses and scores the color depth ("DXO Portrait"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports") of camera sensors, and also publishes an overall camera score. The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-M1 (⇒ lft)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Canon 6D Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||26.0||6240||4160||1080/60p||24.4||11.9||2862||85|
|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 X70 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-A3 (⇒ 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-T2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||4K/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-T10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-T1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X20 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2/3||12.0||4000||3000||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-E2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/24p||-||-||-||-|
|Nikon D500 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||20.7||5568||3712||4K/30p||24.0||14.0||1324||83|
|Sony RX10 IV (⇒ lft | rgt)||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||..||..||..||..|
|Sony RX10 III (⇒ lft | rgt)||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||23.1||12.6||472||70|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, but the X-Pro2 provides a higher frame rate than the X-M1. It can shoot video footage at 1080/60p, while the X-M1 is limited to 1080/30p.
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the X-Pro2 has an electronic viewfinder (2360k dots), which can be very helpful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the X-M1 relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Fujifilm X-Pro2, the Fujifilm X-M1, and comparable cameras. If needed, the dpreview camera hub, for example, contains further detail on the cameras' specs.
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1620||fixed||no||8000||8.0||no||no|
|Fujifilm X-M1 (⇒ lft)||no||no||3.0||920||tilting||no||4000||5.6||7||no|
|Canon 6D Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||1040||swivel||YES||4000||6.5||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 X70 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||1040||tilting||YES||4000||8.0||7.9||no|
|Fujifilm X-A3 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||1040||tilting||YES||4000||6.0||7||no|
|Fujifilm X-E2S (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||fixed||no||4000||7.0||7||no|
|Fujifilm X-T2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||tilting||no||8000||14.0||no||no|
|Fujifilm X-T10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||920||tilting||no||4000||8.0||5||no|
|Fujifilm X-T1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||tilting||no||4000||8.0||no||no|
|Fujifilm X20 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.8||460||fixed||no||4000||12.0||7||no|
|Fujifilm X-E2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||fixed||no||4000||7.0||7||no|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||1440||no||3.0||1230||fixed||no||4000||6.0||no||no|
|Nikon D500 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||2359||tilting||YES||8000||10.0||no||no|
|Sony RX10 IV (⇒ lft | rgt)||2359||YES||3.0||1440||tilting||YES||2000||24.0||10.8||no|
|Sony RX10 III (⇒ lft | rgt)||2359||YES||3.0||1229||tilting||no||2000||14.0||10.8||no|
Both the X-Pro2 and the X-M1 are current models that good online retailers will have in stock. You can check the latest prices, for example, at amazon. The X-Pro2 replaced the earlier Fujifilm X-Pro1, while the X-M1 does not have a direct predecessor.
So what is the bottom line? Is there a clear favorite between the Fujifilm X-Pro2 and the Fujifilm X-Pro2? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.
Arguments in favor of the Fujifilm X-Pro2:
- More detail: Offers more megapixels (24 vs 16MP) with a 23% higher linear resolution.
- Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p vs 1080/30p).
- Easier framing: Has an electronic viewfinder for image framing and settings control.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1620k vs 920k dots).
- Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (8000/sec vs 4000/sec) to freeze action.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (8 vs 5.6 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
- More modern: Reflects 2 years and 6 months of technical progress since the X-M1 launch.
Reasons to prefer the Fujifilm X-M1:
- More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
- More compact: Is smaller (117x67mm vs 141x83mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
- Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 165g or 33 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
- Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (59 percent cheaper at launch).
- More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in June 2013).
If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the X-Pro2 emerges as the winner of the contest (8 : 6 points). However, the relative importance of the various individual camera aspects will vary according to personal preferences and needs, so that you might like to apply corresponding weights to the particular features.
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-Pro2 or the X-M1. 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 where reviews by experts come in. The table below summarizes the assessments of some of the best known camera review sites. The full reviews are available, respectively, at cameralabs.com, dpreview.com, ephotozine.com, imaging-resource.com, and photographyblog.com.
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ rgt)||Rec||83/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2016||1,699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-M1 (⇒ lft)||Rec||77/100 Gold||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||2013||699||latest||check|
|Canon 6D Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||80/100||4.5/5||4/5||4/5||2017||1,999||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-E3 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||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 X70 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||76/100||4.5/5||4/5||4.5/5||2016||799||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-A3 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||74/100||4.5/5||-||4/5||2016||399||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-E2S (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||77/100||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||2016||699||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-T2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||86/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||5/5||2016||1,599||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-T10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||80/100 Silver||5/5||4/5||5/5||2015||799||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-T1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||84/100 Gold||5/5||4/5||5/5||2014||1,699||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X20 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||77/100 Silver||4.5/5||-||5/5||2013||599||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-E2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||80/100 Gold||4.5/5||-||5/5||2013||999||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||79/100 Silver||4.5/5||4/5||4.5/5||2012||1,699||discont.||check|
|Nikon D500 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||91/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||5/5||2016||1,999||latest||check|
|Sony RX10 IV (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||84/100 Gold||4.5/5||..||5/5||2017||1,699||latest||check|
|Sony RX10 III (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||84/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2016||1,499||discont.||check|
The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The ratings are only valid when refering to cameras in the same category and of the same age. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.
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 contact me, and I will try to update the database with the necessary infos.
- Canon 800D vs Canon 700D
- Canon G7 X vs Leica Q Typ 116
- Canon M5 vs Canon G5 X
- Nikon D100 vs Canon 10D
- Nikon D5100 vs Nikon D5000
- Nikon D5300 vs Canon 750D
- Olympus E-M1 II vs Panasonic GH5
- Panasonic G9 vs Leica Q Typ 116
- Panasonic LX15 vs Leica Q Typ 116
- Sony RX10 vs Sony A6000
- Sony RX100 IV vs Nikon D3300
- Sony RX100 IV vs Sony RX10 II