Will the X-E4 have IBIS?

uniball wrote:

DarnGoodPhotos wrote:

uniball wrote:

John Gellings wrote:

Keithpictures wrote:

Judging by the success of the X-T4 (bigger than the T3 by some millimeters) and the S10 so far (bigger than the T30), seems like a safe bet they’ll sell more units to IBIS fans than they’ll lose to cheap/compact fans.

They risk upsetting X-Pro and X100 users if they add IBIS to this camera... they will stop selling those models while everyone waits for ibis.

The fact the X100V's new lens does not have OIS, a technology that’s well known to Fuji, suggests to me Fuji does not view stabilization in general to be all that important. I find it an absurd posture in today's market but, so be it. Users of the XPro's and X100V's knew this going in and got what they paid for.

I suspect the reason why the X100 didn't get OIS, or a WR lens even, was to protect its small size.

You’re probably right. A good example of a few millimeters in size is more important than a feature that’s become very important to buyers. Execution like that isn’t going to attract new customers and risk losing good customers (7 bodies and 12 lenses when I left). So be it.

Adding OIS to the X100V would probably change things more than a few millimeters.

We don't know how much larger the X100V's lens, with its leaf shutter, would get if it had OIS, but I doubt there is very much open space insider the tiny X100V. The more the lens protrudes the wider the body would grow to move its OVF away from the larger lens, and the greater the lens' diameter the taller the body gets because of the flash above it.

Lens size is even more crucial when you consider how weather sealing the larger lens with a filter ring and also adding a lens hood to the now larger lens can block more of the OVF's view.

Of course once you add stabilization, the body would probably have to get larger due to the increased size of its heatsink.

PS: Im not opposed to stabilizing the X100V.