[Controversial] The worst thing about Fuji

Senior Software Developer said:

Click bait title but had to give a disclaimer that I am risking creating a flame war... Also, I know this complaint can (unfortunately) be said equally true of all the camera brands...

The worst thing is not the JPEGs, or worm artifacts, or color science, or autofocus, or menu systems, etc.

It's just that Fuji (and other brands) keep holding back software tech they already have from other camera models just to differentiate (or to save slightly on development cost).

Ex: The X-T4 autofocus not ported to other cameras with same image sensor and processor (ex: X-T30). They develop new film simulations but don't port to same cameras in the system for ... seemingly to differentiate? They are available on both X-Trans and Bayer; but not on all models.

You could say that people who bought a cheaper camera like X-T30 (like me) didn't pay enough for these improvements to be ported over but then what about people who spent a lot on X-Pro3? Or GFX50S, GFX50R, GFX100, etc.

Or people who bought a X-H1 which is a great camera but could have been an even better camera with more support. Shouldn't a pro camera be supported for at least a year? Probably several would be more appropriate honestly. I think people will ask about that when X-H2 comes out. If Fuji will support it or not. Would you bet you livelihood on it?

Anyway, maybe X-H1 is a special case because it is discontinued but most others are not discontinued and are still being manufactured, sold, put up as competition vs. other camera brands ... But held back unnecessarily from their full potential.

I think that Fuji customers choose their camera based on form factor mostly (X-H*, X-Pro*, X-T*, X-T**, X-E*) so why not just make all in the same generation awesome software-wise and make all your customers happy with their choice. Major features can still come at next generation which could help them generate new sales. But I think that new sales don't come from people upgrading in same generation.

Well that's the end of my rant! Sorry if I upset anyone. If I am completely wrong I am sure someone will tell me!

Click to expand...

pictograph said:

Fujifilm is the company that offers not only updates to clear bugs in their software, they offer REAL UPGRADES to as much of their older cameras and lenses as possible.

that is what all the other big companies do NOT.

so - they do JUST THE OPPOSITE of what you claim here, they develop their older cams further firmware-wise to let their customers profit from even the older models as much as possible - regarding existing ressources of sensor and chip and memory space..

Click to expand...

Coldpaw said:

pictograph said:

Fujifilm is the company that offers not only updates to clear bugs in their software, they offer REAL UPGRADES to as much of their older cameras and lenses as possible.

that is what all the other big companies do NOT.

so - they do JUST THE OPPOSITE of what you claim here, they develop their older cams further firmware-wise to let their customers profit from even the older models as much as possible - regarding existing ressources of sensor and chip and memory space..

Click to expand...

Other companies don't? Since I shoot Micro Four Thirds besides Fujifilm, I can clearly say this statement is wrong and at least Olympus as well as Panasonic are both upgrading firmware for their cameras and lenses. Panasonic for example just last week released a pretty big upgrade for their G9 and GH5S, as well as updates for a couple of lenses. Olympus this year upgraded their flagship E-M1X with a fairly decent update, the E-M1 Mark III got a minor video oriented update. Their still popular late 2016 flagship E-M1 Mark II got a huge update in mid 2019, bringing a bunch of AF improvements and even the AF algorithm from the much newer and more expensive E-M1X to the camera. The very first E-M1 model got quite some big updates over the years.

While some cameras from both companies didn't get that much love, it still is somewhat far away from a claiming only Fujifilm is keeping older cameras alive through firmware updates. Besides from what I've seen, also Nikon and Canon are keeping their mirrorless cameras updated.

I at least agree with the OP when it comes to Film Simulations: Is there any reason the X-T4, X-S10 and X-E4 have Bleach Bypass, yet the X-Pro3, X100V, X-T30 and X-T3 don't? They all share the same sensor and the same processing unit, so at least at first glance there is no reason why the latter cameras are left out.

Click to expand...

Samuraidog said:

I also have the X-T30. The relative lack of firmware updates doesn't bother me as much as Fuji falling so far behind in terms of autofocus (in any of their cameras).

I'm willing to buy an updated camera to get AF updates. I just want something that I can go birding with. Sure, I can go birding with current Fuji gear, but they clearly lag the competition. My hope is that we will get that AF I'm looking for with the X-H2 next year. I want something on par with Sony and Canon. My friend has the Canon R5 (in addition to his Fuji gear), and the AF is what he calls a "game changer." By the time the X-H2 comes out, Sony and Canon will have had this awesome AF for THREE years. Three years is a relative lifetime when it comes to technology.

Click to expand...

Senior Software Developer said:

Click bait title but had to give a disclaimer that I am risking creating a flame war... Also, I know this complaint can (unfortunately) be said equally true of all the camera brands...

The worst thing is not the JPEGs, or worm artifacts, or color science, or autofocus, or menu systems, etc.

It's just that Fuji (and other brands) keep holding back software tech they already have from other camera models just to differentiate (or to save slightly on development cost).

Ex: The X-T4 autofocus not ported to other cameras with same image sensor and processor (ex: X-T30). They develop new film simulations but don't port to same cameras in the system for ... seemingly to differentiate? They are available on both X-Trans and Bayer; but not on all models.

You could say that people who bought a cheaper camera like X-T30 (like me) didn't pay enough for these improvements to be ported over but then what about people who spent a lot on X-Pro3? Or GFX50S, GFX50R, GFX100, etc.

Or people who bought a X-H1 which is a great camera but could have been an even better camera with more support. Shouldn't a pro camera be supported for at least a year? Probably several would be more appropriate honestly. I think people will ask about that when X-H2 comes out. If Fuji will support it or not. Would you bet you livelihood on it?

Anyway, maybe X-H1 is a special case because it is discontinued but most others are not discontinued and are still being manufactured, sold, put up as competition vs. other camera brands ... But held back unnecessarily from their full potential.

I think that Fuji customers choose their camera based on form factor mostly (X-H*, X-Pro*, X-T*, X-T**, X-E*) so why not just make all in the same generation awesome software-wise and make all your customers happy with their choice. Major features can still come at next generation which could help them generate new sales. But I think that new sales don't come from people upgrading in same generation.

Well that's the end of my rant! Sorry if I upset anyone. If I am completely wrong I am sure someone will tell me!

Click to expand...

Threaded said:

I have some sympathy for OP’s view. Back in the day Fuji redefined people’s expectations around firmware, by consistently updating and improving older cameras in line with their newer releases. In those early years when mirrorless technology was still quite new and developing at an accelerated rate, I think it was the right approach - they built themselves a solid reputation for supporting their new camera system as an ongoing process, rather than letting relatively new models become completely outdated and left behind within months of release.

These days many other manufacturers take a similar approach to firmware, but Fuji have taken their foot off the gas. From the XT3 onwards, firmware support even for the highest end cameras has become sporadic and unpredictable. XT3 owners had to wait a very long time to get autofocus parity with the X-Pro3 for example, and still lack many of the XP3’s other basic firmware features, presumably forever now. The X-Pro3 has received next to nothing in the way of improvement, despite being one of Fuji’s most expensive cameras. Lower end cameras like the XT30 etc also seem abandoned.

Partly this can all be explained by the fact that none of these “missing” updates have the same urgency as the earlier improvements. The existing cameras are all very capable still; the XT3 isn’t obsolete because it doesn’t have classic neg for example. But unfortunately, people still feel aggrieved because of the expectations that have been set in the past, and the fact that Fuji have been previously beeb so open about the fact that their sensor and processor platforms are so interchangeable in terms of features. We all know that the XT4, XT3, X-Pro3, XE4, XT30 and XS10 all share exactly the same core hardware, and could all run the same firmware features, excepting those things obviously reliant on model-specific hardware such as IBIS etc. That makes it harder to accept that Fuji choose, for reasons purely based in their own commercial interest, not to allow that. We’ve all seen behind the curtain and know that these are purely marketing decisions rather than engineering.

Click to expand...

Jerry-astro said:

Threaded said:

I have some sympathy for OP’s view. Back in the day Fuji redefined people’s expectations around firmware, by consistently updating and improving older cameras in line with their newer releases. In those early years when mirrorless technology was still quite new and developing at an accelerated rate, I think it was the right approach - they built themselves a solid reputation for supporting their new camera system as an ongoing process, rather than letting relatively new models become completely outdated and left behind within months of release.

These days many other manufacturers take a similar approach to firmware, but Fuji have taken their foot off the gas. From the XT3 onwards, firmware support even for the highest end cameras has become sporadic and unpredictable. XT3 owners had to wait a very long time to get autofocus parity with the X-Pro3 for example, and still lack many of the XP3’s other basic firmware features, presumably forever now. The X-Pro3 has received next to nothing in the way of improvement, despite being one of Fuji’s most expensive cameras. Lower end cameras like the XT30 etc also seem abandoned.

Partly this can all be explained by the fact that none of these “missing” updates have the same urgency as the earlier improvements. The existing cameras are all very capable still; the XT3 isn’t obsolete because it doesn’t have classic neg for example. But unfortunately, people still feel aggrieved because of the expectations that have been set in the past, and the fact that Fuji have been previously beeb so open about the fact that their sensor and processor platforms are so interchangeable in terms of features. We all know that the XT4, XT3, X-Pro3, XE4, XT30 and XS10 all share exactly the same core hardware, and could all run the same firmware features, excepting those things obviously reliant on model-specific hardware such as IBIS etc. That makes it harder to accept that Fuji choose, for reasons purely based in their own commercial interest, not to allow that. We’ve all seen behind the curtain and know that these are purely marketing decisions rather than engineering.

Click to expand...

It's called differentiation, and it's found in any line of high tech products, whether it be cameras, refrigerators, etc. Many companies design products with various common core components. However, There are many ways to achieve differentiation between models in a product line... some of which are based on hardware features and capabilities while others are purely software/firmware related. Expecting a camera (or any high tech product) line to offer all common capabilities at all price points, even if technically possible, is unrealistic and basically a pipe dream. Fujifilm, like any company building and selling high tech products, will continue to differentiate features between products, and it will be based on the pricing and positioning of the products, not their internal capabilities to support various features. Bottom line: the fact that they CAN doesn't translate to the fact that they SHOULD or they WILL.

Feeling cheated because Fuji chooses to not proliferate all features across all lines is unrealistic and, to be blunt, strikes me as more a feeling of entitlement rather than a realistic view of product/price differentiation within a given product line. Bottom line, I'm afraid I can't share that sympathy you're feeling. Just because Fuji CAN doesn't necessarily mean that they SHOULD.

Click to expand...

Threaded said:

Yes, but the problem Fuji have (and it is their problem, not mine or yours) is that this firmware level differentiation is a new concept in a Fujifilm world built on kaizen. They initially founded their system, and built their customer’s loyalty, on the back of a refreshing lack of that differentiation. They demonstrated that a budget body could be upgraded with the same autofocus system as a new high end body, because this was the new mirrorless future and everything was possible with kaizen and a common hardware platform. They ingrained the idea that these cameras could be supported the same way as smartphones, with updates that would continue to keep them useful for years.

Turning their back on that feels like a retrograde step to a lot of people, because objectively it is. Slating people for acting “entitled” misses the point, customer expectation is a thing and Fuji used the kaizen concept to their advantage for years, it became part of the product, therefore people are going to feel cheated when Fuji quietly renege on their side of the deal and don’t uphold the previous standard. Presumably Fuji have calculated that they can ride that out and it’ll ultimately be better for their bottom line, but nobody should act surprised when people complain.

Click to expand...

Jerry-astro said:

Threaded said:

Yes, but the problem Fuji have (and it is their problem, not mine or yours) is that this firmware level differentiation is a new concept in a Fujifilm world built on kaizen. They initially founded their system, and built their customer’s loyalty, on the back of a refreshing lack of that differentiation. They demonstrated that a budget body could be upgraded with the same autofocus system as a new high end body, because this was the new mirrorless future and everything was possible with kaizen and a common hardware platform. They ingrained the idea that these cameras could be supported the same way as smartphones, with updates that would continue to keep them useful for years.

Turning their back on that feels like a retrograde step to a lot of people, because objectively it is. Slating people for acting “entitled” misses the point, customer expectation is a thing and Fuji used the kaizen concept to their advantage for years, it became part of the product, therefore people are going to feel cheated when Fuji quietly renege on their side of the deal and don’t uphold the previous standard. Presumably Fuji have calculated that they can ride that out and it’ll ultimately be better for their bottom line, but nobody should act surprised when people complain.

Click to expand...

I don’t think they’ve turned their back on it at all. I think you’re bent out of shape because they aren’t willing to propagate all possible features across all product lines, and frankly, I can’t blame them for that. I don’t think they’ve given up or walked away from the concept of Kaizen, however, I suspect they’re simply not taking it quite as far as you’d like. Also keep in mind that their current product line is significantly more “fleshed out” than it was years ago. As such, they have to find a balance between Kaizen updates and retaining some level of differentiation within the product line.

I’ll stick with my contention that your expectations are based on how the Kaizen philosophy was implemented at a time when their product line was much simpler. Expecting that to remain the same as the product line matures is simply unrealistic and I’d challenge you to find other companies that have done that. During my working years, I spent the majority of my career bringing high tech products to market. Maintaining differentiation between products in a complex lineup is no easy feat. There has to be a balance maintained between continuous improvement/updates and ensuring that each product stands on its own. There’s always room for improvement, but I see Fuji’s approach here to be pretty solld, well implemented, and a nice differentiator from some of their competition. It all comes down to expectations… obviously yours and mine differ considerably.

Click to expand...