Fujifilm X-T1 versus Fujifilm X-Pro1
The Fujifilm X-T1 and the Fujifilm X-Pro1 are two enthusiast cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in January 2014 and January 2012. Both the X-T1 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-T1 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 size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter. If you prefer, you can also use the toggle button to switch to a comparison in percentage terms (in this case, the camera on the left – the X-T1 – 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-Pro1 is somewhat smaller (1 percent) than the Fujifilm X-T1. However, the X-Pro1 is slightly heavier (2 percent) than the X-T1. It is worth mentioning in this context that the X-T1 is splash and dust resistant, while the X-Pro1 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-T1 (⇒ rgt)||129 mm||90 mm||47 mm||440 g||350||YES||2014||1,699||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ lft)||140 mm||82 mm||43 mm||450 g||300||no||2012||1,699||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||141 mm||83 mm||46 mm||495 g||350||YES||2016||1,699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-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-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-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|
|Panasonic GH4 (⇒ lft | rgt)||133 mm||93 mm||84 mm||560 g||500||YES||2014||1,499||discont.||check|
The listed prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The two cameras under review were launched at the same price and fall into the same 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 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.
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-T1 and the X-Pro1 have the same pixel density, as well as the same pixel size. It should, however, be noted that the X-T1 is much more recent (by 2 years) than the X-Pro1, and its sensor will 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.
For most cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service is based on lab testing and assigns an overall score to each camera sensor, as well as ratings for dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), color depth ("DXO Portrait"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"). 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-T1 (⇒ rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ lft)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/24p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||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-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-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||-||-||-||-|
|Panasonic GH4 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||15.9||4608||3456||4K/30p||23.2||12.8||791||74|
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-T1 provides a higher frame rate than the X-Pro1. It can shoot video 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 consideration are similar with respect to both having an electronic viewfinder. However, the one in the X-T1 offers a substantially higher resolution than the one in the X-Pro1 (2360k vs 1440k dots). The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Fujifilm X-T1 and Fujifilm X-Pro1 in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras. If needed, the dpreview camera hub, for example, contains further detail on the cameras' specs.
|Fujifilm X-T1 (⇒ rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||tilting||no||4000||8.0||no||no|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ lft)||1440||no||3.0||1230||fixed||no||4000||6.0||no||no|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1620||fixed||no||8000||8.0||no||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-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-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|
|Panasonic GH4 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2359||no||3.0||1036||swivel||YES||8000||12.0||17||no|
Both the X-T1 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-T1 was followed by the Fujifilm X-T2.
So how do things add up? Is the Fujifilm X-T1 better than the Fujifilm X-Pro1 or vice versa? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.
Reasons to prefer the Fujifilm X-T1:
- Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p vs 1080/24p).
- More detailed viewfinder: Has higher resolution electronic viewfinder (2360k vs 1440k dots).
- More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (8 vs 6 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Longer lasting: Can take more shots (350 versus 300) on a single battery charge.
- Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
- More modern: Reflects 2 years of technical progress since the X-Pro1 launch.
Arguments in favor of the Fujifilm X-Pro1:
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1230k vs 1040k dots).
- More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in January 2012).
If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the X-T1 is the clear winner of the match-up (7 : 2 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 the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the handling experience and imaging performance when actually working with the X-T1 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 following table reports the overall rankings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera review sites. You can find the full text of the reviews, respectively, at cameralabs.com, dpreview.com, ephotozine.com, imaging-resource.com, and photographyblog.com.
|Fujifilm X-T1 (⇒ rgt)||HiRec||84/100 Gold||5/5||4/5||5/5||2014||1,699||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-Pro2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||83/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2016||1,699||latest||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-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-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|
|Panasonic GH4 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||85/100 Gold||5/5||5/5||5/5||2014||1,499||discont.||check|
Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, 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. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.
In case you would like to check on the differences and similarities of other camera models, just use the search menu below. An an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool. If the camera you are interested in is not available, kindly get in touch, and I will try to locate and add the respective data to the application.
- Canon 1200D vs Nikon D7200
- Canon 1D Mark IV vs Panasonic GX9
- Canon 5D Mark II vs Nikon D810
- Canon 80D vs Fujifilm XP130
- Canon G5 X vs Hasselblad X1D
- Canon G7 X Mark II vs Sony RX100 V
- Fujifilm X100S vs Leica M10
- Fujifilm X30 vs Fujifilm X70
- Nikon D700 vs Nikon D600
- Nikon D7000 vs Nikon D5200
- Panasonic LX15 vs Panasonic GF7
- Sony A7S II vs Sony RX100 III