Why Fuji stoped making DSLR after S5?

Hi,

I have Fuji Pro S2 and like its skin tone, search around and just found out S3 and S5 are not outperforme S2 too much, looking for Fuji's next gen DSLR but it looks like Fuji stopped making DSLR after S5, any one know why?
--
Thanks,

Brian Tian

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The great pictures came from me no matter Nikon or Canon.

Best guess is they didn't make enough money at it...

--
Matt Fahrner
http://boinkphoto.com

Why? Because Fujifilm couldnt compete in a vicious professional marketplace. So they pulled back. They havent left the market, but theyre reorganizing the company.

Long story short:

Fuji marketed the S-class DSLR's ONLY to working professionals, thinking that semi-pro's, enthusiasts and hobbyists would be satisfied with their bridge cameras.

The s5 wasnt enthusiastically embraced by that market, who instead went almost wholesale for D3's, 5D's and 1D's considering the s5 under-specced. So the entire Fuji professional digital ecosystem lost money, causing Fuji to cut back on the division. They CANCELLED the followup DSLR.

Its still a wait and see what they'll come out with and if they'll cater to the semi-pros and enthusiasts. The X100 and GF670 may make it seem that they might come back, but its a wait and see.

Brian Tian said:

Hi,

I have Fuji Pro S2 and like its skin tone, search around and just found out S3 and S5 are not outperforme S2 too much, looking for Fuji's next gen DSLR but it looks like Fuji stopped making DSLR after S5, any one know why?

Click to expand...

What probably also played an important role is the fact that Fuji depended on Nikon fot their bodies. The S1 was based on the film F60, the S2 and S3 on the -much better- F80 and the S5 on Nikon's D200.

In the good old film days, a particular body could stay in production for quite a number of years in a row, insuring a more or less steady body supply to Fuji. The D200's run time was already shorter, and the life span of dSLR's is decreasing more and more. As for film bodies, well... (hmm, just got a happy vision of a Nikon F6 based Fuji dSLR with a full frame Super CCD...).

Fuji isn't selling enough dSLR's to make it viable to Nikon (or other parties) to keep a certain body line in production just for Fuji's sake. That would force Fuji to adopt a much more rapid succession scheme for their dSLR's (with the huge extra development cost coming with that) or start designing and building their own bodies. However, Fuji isn't selling enough dSLR's to make that viable.

Unfortunate, but what can you do?

--
'We are only immortal for a limited time'

Those are good points regarding the Nikon bodies. When the S1 and S2 were released, Fuji was actually price competitive with the other dslr makers.... but this was when everybody's dslr was well over $1,000. Since then, though, the other manufacturers started pushing dslr prices under $1,000 and it wasn't long before entry level ones were only $500. In the meantime, Fuji simply decided that it wanted its dslr's to stay above $1,000. It seems to me that its not so much that Fuji never targeted entry level buyers, but that when the entry level price wars began (and prices dropped below $1,000), Fuji decided to stake out a position above $1,000 even if it meant placing their bodies exclusively in the semi-pro range. I think this hurt Fuji in the long run because the volume money is in the entry level market. Maybe they just couldn't lower their prices. After all, SCCD's are limited production components, so maybe the per-sensor cost is higher. But in 20/20 hindsight, maybe Fuji should have worked harder to follow Nikon into the entry level market, using, for example the D50 body after Nikon introduced the D40, or the D40 body after Nikon moved to the D3000.

Fuji S5 is the ultimate dslr!

--
Dimitar Ivanov

Let's not forget that Fuji was in a rivalry with a major film manufacturer (Kodak). It is strange that Fuji quit the dslr market soon after Kodak did. Fuji offered a reasonably priced pro camera compared to Kodak's camera.

Mr Pixel said:

Let's not forget that Fuji was in a rivalry with a major film manufacturer (Kodak). It is strange that Fuji quit the dslr market soon after Kodak did. Fuji offered a reasonably priced pro camera compared to Kodak's camera.

Click to expand...

Interesting point, but I'm not sure there's really a link between both Kodak and Fuji exiting the dSLR market.

Kodak was in a segment of the market where it had to compete with the real giants of the industry, Nikon with (then) it's D2x and Canon with the EOS 1DS. These were very near perfect cameras, built and marketed by companies with almost limitless means for R&D and promotion. All Kodak could put up against that was a wonderful sensor, hampered by an (at best) mediocre body that was good for studio work but couldn't handle more extreme outdoor situations and also lacked really finished firmware development. Kodak must have realised it was pointless pouring in ever bigger amounts of money in that part of their business, since they were simply being completely pushed out of their part of the market by stronger and bigger competitors. BTW: just like Fuji, Kodak had to rely on third parties for supplying their bodies...

Fuji was in another position. Their Super CCD had earned itself a very deserverd reputation for IQ and colour rendition and therefore lead the way in a small niche of the market, where it could maintain itself over the years because it was better than the competition.

However, over the years the regular Bayer-type sensors caught up with Fuji. You no longer need a Super CCD to get the results that won many over to the Fuji camp in the past. You can just pick up any other make of camera and get (almost ) the same results. So in effect, Fuji's niche position simply disappeared. Rather than trying to claw some of that back at huge expense, Fuji apparently have given up on that and focus on making very good P&S cameras, and now the new X100.

--
'We are only immortal for a limited time'

I would think from participation on this forum the Fuji market is probably a D700 with a Super CCD sensor. There is no sense in chasing the low end D40/D3100 market which Fujifilm seems to be doing in the superzoom market. Purchasers Fuji would seem most likely to attract would be very advanced amateurs and pros looking for a higher level of performance and a longer body competitive life. I doubt Nikon wants any competition in this more limited market, though.

--
Alan, in Montana

Hi Brian,

No question that Fuji Pro Cams always offered something special in Image Quality - but they were hampered in not having a satisfactory Pro-DSLR body of their own to house their exceptional HD sensors. Relying on Nikon for their bodies was, it seems, uncompetitive.

It is probably too late now for Fuji to develop a High-end Pro DSLR body of its own that could compete with Nikon, Canon etc. But that doesn't necessarily mean the end of Fuji in the advanced-users and pro markets.

Personally I feel that the whole concept of the DSLR with it's delicate finely-tuned mechanics is becoming redundant. Really, it is an intricate and expensive hand-me-down from the days of film. New technologies are advancing, and in many ways a good electric viewfinder does the job quite adequately - including on-the-spot image magnification pre-color-tone correction etc., if required.

Also there is the issue of HD Video which is increasingly becoming more popular because of the ease of integration into our digital imaging world - advertising, home-movies, youtube, etc. The mechanics of DSLR bodies just won't work with this.

It seems that Fuji will develop along the lines of fully integrated electronic bodies. Let us hope that they can import the excellence of their sensor and color technologies into their upcoming new generation of Pro Cameras. Time will tell.

But competition is tough and other factors apply such as innovation and integration of new technologies. Panasonic for example is looking really good. Fuji has the clout to do it. But do they have the inspiration and out-of-the-box creativity that will keep them in the running? Time will tell.

Hopefully the'll manage to pull something together before my S5's die a natural death.

--
Herbert Bishko

well said

I agree with you on both counts. The Fuji dslr user base, such as it is right now, probably wants an FX body more than anything else. And Nikon probably would have been resistant to aiding a competitor in the entry-level market. But my feeling is that if sales were the issue, then Fuji ought to have started a entry-to-mid level series years ago. It wouldn't have replaced the S-pro's, but run parallel as a sort of feeder system into the more serious bodies. All of this is just 20/20 hindsight, of course.

Btw, going by Fuji's patent filings, they've got interesting sensor tech in the pipeline, its just a question of whether they can get a body to put it in.

FlossTycoon said:

I would think from participation on this forum the Fuji market is probably a D700 with a Super CCD sensor. There is no sense in chasing the low end D40/D3100 market which Fujifilm seems to be doing in the superzoom market. Purchasers Fuji would seem most likely to attract would be very advanced amateurs and pros looking for a higher level of performance and a longer body competitive life. I doubt Nikon wants any competition in this more limited market, though.

--
Alan, in Montana

Click to expand...

Hi there,

So many interesting posts, lots of valid points, but I guess everyone here seemed to miss one of the most important ones.

Fuji got smashed by the competition in one truly indeniable way: lack of megapixels.

I'm a Nikon user myself, so I could easily get into Fuji's system, as it uses the same F mount and D200's body I'm so familiar with.

Love the Fuji's great colors, love the high DR, not so concerned about noise, as my D200 is noisy in it's own way at high ISO.

Price? For working pros, the price tag is not so scary.

So, where exactly did Fuji miss it? Only 6 megapixels, for many generations of DSLRs.

Way too low for a high end, pro, modern DSLR. Waaaay too low.

You see, that's an academic problem. I know how big 6 megapixels print, I know, so don't worry about pointing me out.

I know 6 mp is more than enough for day-to-day use, and will cover 99% of pro needs most of the time.

But, and that's a big but , it's too low mp for today's standards, when many are already unhappy with FF 12 mp like the D700.

The market (pro photographers, art directors, and sometime even clients) demands higher res than that.

Let's take Sigma's example. Lovely Foven sensor, outstanding colors, and so on.

Many can live with an sluggish camera body, but how can you live with 4.6 mp today?

Sigma's announcement of the 15 mp SD1 caused strides on the market. Why?

It's a 15 mp (!!!!!!) Foveon sensor. From 4.6 to 15 mp? W - O - W

Bottom line: I'd love to buy a Fuji, as long as it was a 10 mp or higher APS sensor.

How about a FF Fuji one? Wow, I'd be the first in line.

So, MP do matter, even when you don't need it.

All the best,

Marcio Napoli
http://www.marcionapoli.com

That's a very good point regarding resolution. When the last Fuji was released, Nikon was in the 10-12 MP range, and so the disparity was there but not significant. But since 2007, resolution has really increased, especially with FX. Plus, the new Nikons are a lot cleaner at high isos (I bought a D200 instead of the S5, too). Another thing that might have caught Fuji off guard was the rapid rise of video in dslrs. I don't think they could have gotten a sccd to do that.

marcio_napoli said:

Hi there,

So many interesting posts, lots of valid points, but I guess everyone here seemed to miss one of the most important ones.

Fuji got smashed by the competition in one truly indeniable way: lack of megapixels.

I'm a Nikon user myself, so I could easily get into Fuji's system, as it uses the same F mount and D200's body I'm so familiar with.

Love the Fuji's great colors, love the high DR, not so concerned about noise, as my D200 is noisy in it's own way at high ISO.

Price? For working pros, the price tag is not so scary.

So, where exactly did Fuji miss it? Only 6 megapixels, for many generations of DSLRs.

Way too low for a high end, pro, modern DSLR. Waaaay too low.

You see, that's an academic problem. I know how big 6 megapixels print, I know, so don't worry about pointing me out.

I know 6 mp is more than enough for day-to-day use, and will cover 99% of pro needs most of the time.

But, and that's a big but , it's too low mp for today's standards, when many are already unhappy with FF 12 mp like the D700.

The market (pro photographers, art directors, and sometime even clients) demands higher res than that.

Let's take Sigma's example. Lovely Foven sensor, outstanding colors, and so on.

Many can live with an sluggish camera body, but how can you live with 4.6 mp today?

Sigma's announcement of the 15 mp SD1 caused strides on the market. Why?

It's a 15 mp (!!!!!!) Foveon sensor. From 4.6 to 15 mp? W - O - W

Bottom line: I'd love to buy a Fuji, as long as it was a 10 mp or higher APS sensor.

How about a FF Fuji one? Wow, I'd be the first in line.

So, MP do matter, even when you don't need it.

All the best,

Marcio Napoli
http://www.marcionapoli.com

Click to expand...

I think a DSLR manufacturing company should expect earnings from 1-DSLR body sales 2-Lens sales.

In case of Fuji ,the earnings should only been expected from body sales .If we also think the higher costs Fuji incur in body production (because of supplying components from Nikon) it will become too hard for Fuji to sustain DSLR production .This may be the reason lead Fuji to stop DSLR production .

Imagine if Fuji just went ahead and put in-body stabilization. They'd say a big f*ck you to the other two companies and have some good competition with it. So they might not be able to use Nikons body, who cares, they know how to design a body. This teemed with FF, and I'm hooked, back to Fuji!
--
Erik Stouffer

Erik Michael Nahman Stouffer said:

Imagine if Fuji just went ahead and put in-body stabilization. They'd say a big f*ck you to the other two companies and have some good competition with it. So they might not be able to use Nikons body, who cares, they know how to design a body. This teemed with FF, and I'm hooked, back to Fuji!
--
Erik Stouffer

Click to expand...

I doubt that designing the body would be the issue here, Fuji would certainly be able to do a fine job at that. However: getting enough dSLR's sold to justify setting up production of a complete dSLR-line, that could prove to be the breaking point...

--
'We are only immortal for a limited time'

Fuji is still a member of the 4/3 consortium, so I suppose that they could jump right in with a 4/3 body and immediately fill the gap that Olympus seems to be in the process of leaving. They'd have a built-in user group that already owns compatible lenses and very little competition from Olympus, which seems to be moving on to micro.

Ringwraith69 said:

Erik Michael Nahman Stouffer said:

Imagine if Fuji just went ahead and put in-body stabilization. They'd say a big f*ck you to the other two companies and have some good competition with it. So they might not be able to use Nikons body, who cares, they know how to design a body. This teemed with FF, and I'm hooked, back to Fuji!
--
Erik Stouffer

Click to expand...

I doubt that designing the body would be the issue here, Fuji would certainly be able to do a fine job at that. However: getting enough dSLR's sold to justify setting up production of a complete dSLR-line, that could prove to be the breaking point...

--
'We are only immortal for a limited time'

Click to expand...

In only general and principle I do agree, but let me added that ...

While Fujifilm's sensor is great, its imaging engine performance ( as in time , buffering, storage ) is rather wanting. And the Software side is not rosy also. Let's not forget this is no film era. The camera is only part of the chain of the total imaging solution. When delivering a S series DSLR. It must be said that Fujifilm is still entrenched in the " provide the hardware " mentality instead of " provide the platform, and the solution " mentality.

As of today, Fujifilm still had not been actively out to work with 3rd party to facilitate support for their unique imaging hardware. Sort of like Sigma X3F. Both of them had a sensor technology that promise and do deliver much, while at the same time also shown great shortcoming in significant area of imaging performance ( both the sensor and after that ). They both lack a decent Semi-PRO ( and up to date performing ) camera part / platform. Well Sigma is pushing it and the SD-1 might turn out to be their break away product ( or a disaster ) and Fujifilm is looking at other mean of doing it. The X100 is one of that direction but I can see that its part of it all.

--

• Franka -

I remember how anxiously awaited an "S4" was, and how it never came, and then how excited everyone was to see the S5 introduced. But in reality, it was just a warmed-over S3. It used the same sensor, but now with different image processing software, and it and a newer (emphasis on "new-er", as opposed to "new") body.

This sensor had excellent dynamic range, but was slow as hell compared to the competiton. Forget it completely for sports photography. I think the buffer could only hold three JPEG images!

If Fuji could have introduced a 24 megapixel full-frame sensor with the superior dynamic range that this sensor had, I believe with would have again dominated the market like their S2 did when it was introduced. But too small or a pro market, and Canon was pulling away from Nikon so I doubt Nikon was all that interested in selling their better bodies to Fuji. Oh well...