X-T3 over X-T2?

I’d intended to replace my X-E3 with an X-T2, for a number of reasons, and it would be mainly for use with manual lenses thanks to the big viewfinder (though also for hiking with the 16-80 and potentially other uses).

I’ve had the X-T2 at least a couple of times before and love it except for the central viewfinder: I’m left-eyed and wear glasses, and when I use an SLR-style body I inevitably cover the right lens of my glasses with greasy smears from my right thumb.

I note that the X-T3 has its viewfinder pushed back a few millimetres to keep noses off the screen, and maybe this is enough to also keep my glasses away from my thumb. Maybe not. But even if it does then on the used market it’s a £300 jump from the T2 to the T3, which is a lot.

Now, I don’t shoot video and I don’t use continuous AF (though faster and more reliable AF is never a bad thing). I find the image quality of both X-Trans III and IV to be absolutely fine, so no big deal there (I’ll happily take some of the additional features of the IV processor, but can live without, and as far as I’m aware the X-T3 doesn’t have the clarity option…?). Maybe the buttons and dials are a bit nicer and more robust…?

So is there anything about the X-T3 that might compel me to stump up the extra? Hopefully I can get to try one out to see if the viewfinder offset is really effective, but any other insights (particularly as to any subtle usability/build quality improvements that wouldn’t be apparent from a spec sheet) are most welcome…