I love that Fuji is pushing outside previous boundaries by incorporating a touchscreen and fixed 28mm lens; however, as a Ricoh GR owner I can’t justify the purchase. The handling of my Ricoh GR is second to none, and my past experience with Fuji RAW files wasn’t pleasant. I’ve yet to encounter any issues with RAW DNG files produced by Ricoh. For me, maybe not you, the handling of the Ricoh GR makes up any differences in excluding a tilting lcd and touchscreen.

I purchased my Ricoh GR around Christmas and paid $599 for a package deal that included the Ricoh GR, 32GB Class 10 SD Card, Tough case, and GV-1 Viewfinder. The Fuji optical viewfinder looks like a replica of Ricoh’s GV-1 Viewfinder but priced $100 more.

I have a Sony RX100 mark 2. I also have a Fuji XT10. The general picture quality of the Fuji is superior in many ways. I assume the X70 which shares the same sensor will show the same results.

I think the X70 is great alternative to the Rico GR . I own the Rico GR and I love the snap focus option and compact size but I think the X70 has the better image quality, colors and high ISO performance. Manual focus of the X70 seems to be much better implemented then in the GR (I don’t even know how to focus manually with the GR) and allows to set focus distance with the focus ring which is actually the same snap focus capability than the Rico offers just a little differently. The only thing I would really miss with the X70 is the build in max. long exposure time of 300 seconds the GR has. The new Acros film simulation would have been great too but maybe Fuji leaves room here for their Kaizen strategy and will provide these features with a new firmware update at a later stage.

The more negative greetings a camera gets from trolls, it looks more promising against the competitors. SX70 gets a lot. GRII is much afraid of X70 (the many troll exclamations reveal that). Coolpix A is apparently dying. All three cameras are great in their niche (a small one though). Competition may grow a niche market. Do not worry. Trollmates.

RX100m2 is $550, X70 is $700

The Sony's a smaller sensor but it's a BSI sensor and a much faster lens. Low light high ISO performance is likely a wash. At base ISOs, the Sony offers higher resolution and similar noise (basically nil) to Fuji's APS-C. The image quality and dynamic range from the sensors are fairly similar depending on ISO.

The Fuji prime lens will likely be sharper than the Sony zoom at 28mm. How much is uncertain.

The Sony is considerably smaller in all dimensions and weighs 17% less.

The Sony zooms to 100mm. The Fuji's crop at that focal length is close to 1/20th the resolution of the sony.

Personally, I think the RX100m3 or LX100 is worth the extra $50 compared to the X70 but even if you ONLY have $700 to spend, I'm not seeing the purpose here besides a small gain in lens sharpness. There seems to be some market in purposely making a compact prime camera but you could just not zoom on the sony. This is why the GR is $550 and the coolpix A is $450

Better than the Coolpix A, but not gonna touch the GR's.

$200 for optical viewfinder - wtf?

I wish I could see some obvious advantages over the Canon G7X or a similar Sony camera, but I can't. The price of the X70 is too high for what it has to offer. The build quality suggested by the pictures looks okay rather than outstanding and the controls appear to be badly positioned. As for the teleconverter this really seems like a pointless gimmick that will degrade quality.

Some people are going to like this camera and perhaps it should be judged by the results it produces and the product's reliability, but it's unlikely to sell in big numbers and is certainly not for me.

This is the true successor to the Leica X1, but with a 28mm equivalent lens. An excellent, jacket or belt pouch sized tool. Will it win me over from the Ricoh GR? I don`t think so. With a f2.0 lens it would have been a consideration. But IQ and UI wise it`s tough to go after the Ricoh.

I still prefer the simplicity and compactness of the Ricoh design.

If they have kept the f/2.0 aperture, it would have given this camera more advantage.

I do not like 28mm, it is an exercise in monster arms and hands. I prefer 35mm 2.2.

I love Fuji's ILC line and the X100, but I can't really see a reason to recommend this over a GR.

This camera excites me as a travel camera. I always lusted for the GR series for its beautiful sharp lens and lovely black and white shots but never liked its ooc color becuase I prefer to shoot in color more. The x70 gives me lovely Fuji colors I always admired in a form factor similar to the GRII.

I'd have the GRII for its non-retro design.

I wonder is the lens moving a bit outside the camera during focussing like the X100T? I ask because danger of dust sucking.
Peter

There are. A few things I like better about this than my coolpix A. Built in WiFi radio iscool. The film sims look awesome. I have no use for a tilting LCD. But overall I can't make a case that this is enough better to justify a purchase.

A (relatively) simple optical viewfinder would have made this a cult camera and distinguished it from the GR and $300 Coolpix A.

Pretty crowded market with Ricoh GR and Nikon Coolpix A both of which aren't huge sellers. Competition is always welcome but I'm not sure what Fuji brings to the table other than the touch screen.

Beautiful design. I will only miss the screw type shutter button, but just for few minutes, not longer. And there are various vintage and new voighlander, zeiss, leica ovf's out there. I would skip the Fujifilm ovf. Especially for the silver body.

Good for Fuji's audience and fans for sure. But going to be tough competition against the Ricoh GR/II.

I appreciate that I seem to be in the minority here, but I never understood what is interesting about 'street photography'. Perhaps Fuji doesn't either?

Fuji is still paranoid about cannibalizing IL camera sales if they came out with an x100 version with a zoom.

Review of a pre-production X70 (from today, 1/15)

http://jonasraskphotography.com/2016/01/15/the-fujifilm-x70-review/

.edit. the body is made out of aluminium, so i take the X-A1/A2 & M bad build quality back. :)

Touchscreen,why ? what a joke.

Now add an EVF and a 24mp chip.

I don't get it. LX100 offers more light at 28mm and it zooms in and out from there. Has a viewfinder too. I really don't get it. At least the Ricoh and the Coolpix slide in your pocket, this clearly doesn't. Therefor it has to beat the LX100 at SOMETHING. 16mp x-trans over 12mp brayer? Bah. I don't get it.

Let's just say that this would not be my only camera. Far from it. For this reason, this camera interests me.

If it had the ACROS simulation like the jointly announced X-Pro2, and a more thoroughly implemented in camera HDR processing, I'd be on the waiting list already.

I keep telling myself that Fuji is making the camera I'm looking for (a digital Canonet), but US$800 for a camera without a viewfinder? That's going to be a tough sell.

So, Fuji is making a direct competitor to the discontinued Nikon Coolpix A and Ricoh GR II, after dominating the fixed lens, fixed focal length APS-C market with their own X100 line? Is the Ricoh selling that well?