yayatosorus wrote:
A few thoughts I wanted to share on recent Fuji releases and what they (may) represent.
Small recap
Back in October 2019, the release of the X-Pro3 showed that Fujifilm is ready to experiment, much to the disappointment of some long time X-Pro users. Some still swear by the unique screen design and some call it, at best, creative segmentation.
Either way it's fair to say this was a very polarizing release. Subsequent cameras such as the X-T4 suffered to a lesser extent from similar controversy and polarization at launch. A recurring claim observed at the time was that Fuji was loosing its way.
However, the successive releases of X-T4, X-H2S/X-H2 and X-T5 releases have showed that Fuji had/has a pretty good idea of where its different lines should stand. Or at least, they seem to have a plan and stick to it.
It now indeed seems Fuji never moved away from it's original idea of having a high performance-rugged hybrid camera - the X-H line - but the rather unfortunate debacle/mix-up surrounding the X-H1 and X-T3 launch really made things unnecessarily complicated.
(Note the X-H1 is a good camera regardless, but its timing relative to the market was objectively off).
After the X-T3's release, the main recurring requests were for IBIS, better battery life paired with the X-T3's sensor and AF capabilities on par or better with the competition. By then it was clear the new generation of X-H line was not going to be ready in time, especially if Fuji was planning to introduce a stacked sensor - which was clearly the way forward, as showed by the positive response to Sony's A9 when introduced a few months prior to the X-H1.
The X-T series had to assume the provisional and informal role of Fujifilm's technological flagship, as releasing a mid gen hardware update for the X-H1 was probably off the table.
The X-T4's particular hybrid design clearly had a stopgap quality before the advent of the second gen X-Hs and their new tech.
Possible questions whether it was a true and complete successor to the X-T3 was accentuated by the fact that the older model was kept being produced and sold along the X-T4.
Regardless, the X-T4 was a great camera when it came out and is still excellent to this day, but it is also undeniably a victim of circumstances, its controversial design choices being dictated by the market, the timing, and the state of technology.
With the X-T4's particular hybrid design acting as a stopgap, Fuji had bought enough time for the X-H line to come out and reclaim the title of "highest performing camera in the X-series", for which it was initially advertised.
Accordingly, the X-T5 could then be developed within the framework of core features that granted the X-T line its popularity, instead of having to trade some of that to accommodate best-in-system technology/performance.
Was this part of Fuji's plan or did they change course after the X-T4's launch? Tough to tell.
The X-T5
The X-T5 is what many X-T2 and X-T3 users were hoping the X-T4 would be (based on what I've read on this forum over the last few years), and Fuji's marketing clearly hints at that.
It does also seem, based on specifications and first impressions that the X-T5 really is "the" upgrade to the X-T3, but largely also is an upgrade over the X-T4.
Granted, the full width ES drive speed is indeed slower (13fps vs 20 fps) - you still get the 20fps with a 1.29x crop (31MP), at the cost of noise performance - and loose the top end ES drive 30fps speed with 1.25x crop of the X-T3 and X-T4. There is also the loss of the battery grip and potentially the annoyance of headphone jack brought over from the X-T4.
There were some reactions that the video specs are somehow substantially worse, but I don't find that to be the case - 4k60p now has a smaller crop of 1.14x while having the addition of 4k30p HQ and 6.2k30p with a 1.23x crop and high speed slow-mo has a smaller 1.23x crop, 10 Bit 4.2.2 internal recording and RAW via an external recorder.
Obviously time will tell how well the 40 MP sensor really performs (DPR's studio scene of the X-H2 shows it is slightly more noisy than the X-T4) and how bad the rolling shutter is compared to the X-T3 and X-T4.
It seems to be a reasonable package for what it is. One interesting thing though is the X-T5's marketing headline - "Photography first"
The future of the X-Pro series
As said previously, Fuji picks up market trends and seems to adapt fairly well.
With the X-Pro3 being marketed as photocentric camera it's going to be interesting to see what happens with the X-Pro series,
The X-Pro is one of the most distinctive and unique cameras on the market, so I don't really think it is going anywhere. As I have been told at a local photography shop - If can't get a Leica M, get an X-Pro, if can't get a Leica Q2, get an X100V.
Having said that, will the upcoming X-Pro retain its most distinctive feature - the screen design - or will Fuji acknowledge the partially negative response towards it, will it address the OVF design and Titanium construction flaws/reliability issues?
My take is that we may see Fuji drop Titanium versions for the next X-Pro. I think the screen will remain, as it really is something unique that has since gotten praise from people that use it regularly. The OVF will probably not revert back to the dual magnification OVF system of the X-Pro2.
With the X-T5 being repositioned as a more photography leaning hybrid, I'd say Fuji will probably double down on the uniqueness of the X-Pro line, instead of bringing it back closer to the X-T line by reverting back to a classic screen - either fixed or 2-way of the X100V. This will probably upset some folks who are holding out the hope of seeing a new X-Pro with a classic screen - obviously anything can happen.
It's likely it will get the new battery, but the bigger question is if they will attempt to equip it with an IBIS unit. The same thoughts apply to the X100V line.
Conclusion
The recent releases indicate that Fuji has finally sorted out its problematic segmentation of X-H and X-T lines, which I feel is long overdue and very welcome. Fuji seems to have put a lot of R&D into this new generation of cameras, which is a good sign about their commitment to the system and gives us a good idea on future releases. It also shows that they do indeed take notice of feedback given by its customers and react (at least partially) to it.
Thanks for reading this incredibly long post and congrats to those that made it trough.
P.S: I really hope this post doesn't come across as inflammatory. If so, then that wasn't my intention. Just hoping for a good debate on the matter and would love to hear your thoughts on some of the points I have addressed.
Fascinating read. Thanks for taking time to write this for everyone.
