X-E5 June announcement

KariP · May 22, 2025

Patographer said:
Are all new Fujifilm cameras going to have a 40MP sensor?

I don't need that resolution.

Probably 24mp is optimal. for a APS C sensor. I mean noise, resolution and so on

40mp is totally unnecessary if you show your images in internet or just on some screen. Even very big prints from APS C 24mp are so good that it is impossible to see any real differences if you try to see . It can be possible if you look at the big print with a microscope and if the printer is of very high quality.

Yes ... and then someone mentions cropping. Just crop a 40mp image and compare it to 24mp . Informative. Perhaps 20% more resolution , max . And who buys a camera to crop the images ?

My FF Canon R5 sensor has about 40 MP and my FF R6 20mp - both make images that look very good. R5 looks a bit better if I pixel peep. I have also had a look at my old X-H1 images (24mp) and the resolution is quite impressive actually.

40mp is a marketing thing - but if someone wants a 40mp APS C sensor ... it is just money and who cares if the results are not really better . Photography is a black hole taking all our money anyway.

--
Kari
I started SLR film photography in 1968
Now using Fujifilm and Canon gear

bastibe · May 22, 2025

It's funny. I very much appreciate the IBIS in my X-T5. And yet, when I'm out and about with the X-M5, I don't tend to miss it.

Still, it's a nice feature to have.

Not as important as the current AF, but that's a given for the X-E5 anyway. It sure is more important than 40 MP, which I find only very marginally useful.

The bigger question for me are the physical aspects, screen articulation (I like the X-T5, dislike the X-M5 screen), button layout, EVF... But I'm also very unlikely to buy one. The X-T5 and X-M5 serve me just fine, and the X-E5 will undoubtedly be bigger than the X-M5.

unceunce · May 22, 2025

bastibe said:
It's funny. I very much appreciate the IBIS in my X-T5. And yet, when I'm out and about with the X-M5, I don't tend to miss it.

Still, it's a nice feature to have.

Not as important as the current AF, but that's a given for the X-E5 anyway. It sure is more important than 40 MP, which I find only very marginally useful.

The bigger question for me are the physical aspects, screen articulation (I like the X-T5, dislike the X-M5 screen), button layout, EVF... But I'm also very unlikely to buy one. The X-T5 and X-M5 serve me just fine, and the X-E5 will undoubtedly be bigger than the X-M5.

We've been brainwashed to think that IBIS is necessary or the camera is garbage. Though I do feel, in this day and age, IBIS should be included as a default anyway and should be expected. the GFX100RF is selling pretty well without IBIS, i suspect the next gen will have it.

Phil BH · May 22, 2025

unceunce said:
We've been brainwashed to think that IBIS is necessary or the camera is garbage. Though I do feel, in this day and age, IBIS should be included as a default anyway and should be expected. the GFX100RF is selling pretty well without IBIS, i suspect the next gen will have it.

I'm probably one of the few outliers who do not want IBIS. I want fewer moving parts in a camera, not more. It is simply a personal preference based on the abuse my gear takes. I have killed an X-Pro1, and I killed a Canon 70-200f/4 L IS. I had the lens repaired, but not the X-Pro1, so far. I will tear it apart one day and repair it myself, it wasn't economically feasible to have it repaired due to the cost.

I prefer simplistic camera designs, which is one of the biggest reasons I moved to Fuji over Canon initially. I opted for an X-T3 over the X-Pro and X-T4 when I had to replace the Xpro-1.

I am hoping to buy the X-E5 when it comes out. I love the design and size. I will be getting it for my wife, who will appreciate the IBIS if it has it. I would consider it for myself if it comes without IBIS. Yes, in the future if I have no other choice, I would consider a body with IBIS, but I would do so reluctantly.

Phil

BklynBill · May 22, 2025

Just give me an upgraded X-E3, better EVF with a real eyecup, tilt screen with more resolution and, of course, better AF. IBIS would be nice(I think it's a given that it will have that), but for me not that necessary. It will probably have the 40mp sensor too, but if it doesn't that wouldn't bother me. But it better have all the controls of the X-E3, the X-E4 was always a 'no go' for me.

I really love my X-E3, lovely to shoot with, lovely to look at- it would take the aforementioned improvements for me to be even tempted to move on from it. And maybe not even then.

Jeff Biscuits · May 22, 2025

KariP said:
And who buys a camera to crop the images ?

Well, everyone who buys the GFX100RF for a start. And that’s a five grand camera, so I don’t think it’s something to be sneered at.

I think your concerns about the 40MP sensor are a little unfounded. From my brief time with the X100VI I certainly didn’t consider it soft in any way; it seemed a noticeable improvement over the X100V (and I hadn’t expected it to be, because compared to my Ricoh GRs, with similar resolution sensors, I felt the X100V was marginally behind on sharpness). And, as much as I like to get the framing right first time, it was genuinely useful on the street to be able to grab a shot without missing it by having to move closer—an advantage that’s doubly the case for the 100RF.

KariP · May 22, 2025

Phil BH said:
unceunce said:

We've been brainwashed to think that IBIS is necessary or the camera is garbage. Though I do feel, in this day and age, IBIS should be included as a default anyway and should be expected. the GFX100RF is selling pretty well without IBIS, i suspect the next gen will have it.

Click to expand...

I'm probably one of the few outliers who do not want IBIS. I want fewer moving parts in a camera, not more. It is simply a personal preference based on the abuse my gear takes. I have killed an X-Pro1, and I killed a Canon 70-200f/4 L IS. I had the lens repaired, but not the X-Pro1, so far. I will tear it apart one day and repair it myself, it wasn't economically feasible to have it repaired due to the cost.

I prefer simplistic camera designs, which is one of the biggest reasons I moved to Fuji over Canon initially. I opted for an X-T3 over the X-Pro and X-T4 when I had to replace the Xpro-1.

I am hoping to buy the X-E5 when it comes out. I love the design and size. I will be getting it for my wife, who will appreciate the IBIS if it has it. I would consider it for myself if it comes without IBIS. Yes, in the future if I have no other choice, I would consider a body with IBIS, but I would do so reluctantly.

Phil

I have not had problems with IBIS or OIS lenses.

I happen to live in Finland and winter is long and dark. There is not too much light and IBIS is quite useful for 6 months / year. Also it is very useful indoors. Of course I have lived many decades without IBIS.

KariP · May 22, 2025

Jeff Biscuits said:
KariP said:

And who buys a camera to crop the images ?

Click to expand...

Well, everyone who buys the GFX100RF for a start. And that’s a five grand camera, so I don’t think it’s something to be sneered at.

I think your concerns about the 40MP sensor are a little unfounded. From my brief time with the X100VI I certainly didn’t consider it soft in any way; it seemed a noticeable improvement over the X100V (and I hadn’t expected it to be, because compared to my Ricoh GRs, with similar resolution sensors, I felt the X100V was marginally behind on sharpness). And, as much as I like to get the framing right first time, it was genuinely useful on the street to be able to grab a shot without missing it by having to move closer—an advantage that’s doubly the case for the 100RF.

Hmm

GFX100RF is not on my shopping list at the moment.

Of some reason I like to use zoom lenses and I have also rather healthy feet . Of course it can be nice to have a 100mp MF camera. Pixel peeping could be something special ! The resolution can be something that you can not see in prints. 200% view and a 32 " 5K screen is also nice to have. But of course some people enjoy spending more money - nothing against that ( I can not afford...)

Phil BH · May 22, 2025

KariP said:
I have not had problems with IBIS or OIS lenses.

I happen to live in Finland and winter is long and dark. There is not too much light and IBIS is quite useful for 6 months / year. Also it is very useful indoors. Of course I have lived many decades without IBIS.

Yes, I have been to Finland many times. I do understand the appeal of IBIS, but as you, I lived many decades without it. I started with film, completely manual cameras. I shoot a lot in low light as well, and typically brace the camera in some way, as I have always. When I can I carry and use a tripod, but have found other ways to brace the camera when I do not have one. I have also found that the higher ISOs are much more usable than they were just a few years ago. I know IBIS can do all this much better.

My gear spends a lot of time being carried on airplanes, stuffed into backpacks or others bags not intended to protect camera gear, along with other things I need for my work. They also see a lot of time on motorcycles, and bicycles. I do my best to protect them, but they are not babied by any stretch of the imagination, The lens died after about six years if hard use. It was repaired by Canon and is still good to this day. I appreciate OIS on lenses, though the prime lenses I use for Fuji do not have OIS. I appreciate their smaller size and weight.

The X-Pro1 stopped working after a 500 mile ride through the back roads of West Virginia, Virginia and North Carolina, on a Ural motorcycle, in a bag strapped to a rack on the rear fender. It simply got beat to death. I found that wasn't the best place to place it, and honestly I knew better. I usually put it in a tank bag on the fuel tank. Less vicious shocks and vibration there.

I will never deny the usefulness of IBIS, or OIS. They are wonderful tools. I just prefer simplicity when it comes to camera bodies. This is simply a personal preference, and I understand few feel the same way.

Phil

biza43 · May 22, 2025

KariP said:
Patographer said:

Are all new Fujifilm cameras going to have a 40MP sensor?

I don't need that resolution.

Click to expand...

Probably 24mp is optimal. for a APS C sensor. I mean noise, resolution and so on

40mp is totally unnecessary if you show your images in internet or just on some screen. Even very big prints from APS C 24mp are so good that it is impossible to see any real differences if you try to see . It can be possible if you look at the big print with a microscope and if the printer is of very high quality.

Yes ... and then someone mentions cropping. Just crop a 40mp image and compare it to 24mp . Informative. Perhaps 20% more resolution , max . And who buys a camera to crop the images ?

My FF Canon R5 sensor has about 40 MP and my FF R6 20mp - both make images that look very good. R5 looks a bit better if I pixel peep. I have also had a look at my old X-H1 images (24mp) and the resolution is quite impressive actually.

40mp is a marketing thing - but if someone wants a 40mp APS C sensor ... it is just money and who cares if the results are not really better . Photography is a black hole taking all our money anyway.

Following that logic, we might as well have stayed with the 3 MP of the Canon in 2003; Michael Reichmann claimed that it matched 35mm film. Who needs more, right?

bastibe · May 22, 2025

biza43 said:
KariP said:

Patographer said:

Are all new Fujifilm cameras going to have a 40MP sensor?

I don't need that resolution.

Click to expand...

Probably 24mp is optimal. for a APS C sensor. I mean noise, resolution and so on

40mp is totally unnecessary if you show your images in internet or just on some screen. Even very big prints from APS C 24mp are so good that it is impossible to see any real differences if you try to see . It can be possible if you look at the big print with a microscope and if the printer is of very high quality.

Yes ... and then someone mentions cropping. Just crop a 40mp image and compare it to 24mp . Informative. Perhaps 20% more resolution , max . And who buys a camera to crop the images ?

My FF Canon R5 sensor has about 40 MP and my FF R6 20mp - both make images that look very good. R5 looks a bit better if I pixel peep. I have also had a look at my old X-H1 images (24mp) and the resolution is quite impressive actually.

40mp is a marketing thing - but if someone wants a 40mp APS C sensor ... it is just money and who cares if the results are not really better . Photography is a black hole taking all our money anyway.

Click to expand...

Following that logic, we might as well have stayed with the 3 MP of the Canon in 2003; Michael Reichmann claimed that it matched 35mm film. Who needs more, right?

FTOG · May 24, 2025

Very curious to see what will be announced exactly; the X-E line is my favourite product line.

I wonder what implications the release of the X half will have on the X-E specifications. In a way, I imagine it opening a bit of a more 'sophisticated' spot in the portfolio again. Perhaps more physical dials again, à la X-E3, rather than X-E4.

IBIS and a flip screen, X-E3 controls, that would be the ideal X-E successor, in my humble opinion.

As for my own cameras, I'm very happy with X-T3 and X-E3. Seeing the price point of the X half, I have some concerns about the price the X-E5 will cost (regardless of specification). Likely more than I'd be willing to spend with my very infrequent use.

biza43 · May 24, 2025

bastibe said:
biza43 said:

KariP said:

Patographer said:

Are all new Fujifilm cameras going to have a 40MP sensor?

I don't need that resolution.

Click to expand...

Probably 24mp is optimal. for a APS C sensor. I mean noise, resolution and so on

40mp is totally unnecessary if you show your images in internet or just on some screen. Even very big prints from APS C 24mp are so good that it is impossible to see any real differences if you try to see . It can be possible if you look at the big print with a microscope and if the printer is of very high quality.

Yes ... and then someone mentions cropping. Just crop a 40mp image and compare it to 24mp . Informative. Perhaps 20% more resolution , max . And who buys a camera to crop the images ?

My FF Canon R5 sensor has about 40 MP and my FF R6 20mp - both make images that look very good. R5 looks a bit better if I pixel peep. I have also had a look at my old X-H1 images (24mp) and the resolution is quite impressive actually.

40mp is a marketing thing - but if someone wants a 40mp APS C sensor ... it is just money and who cares if the results are not really better . Photography is a black hole taking all our money anyway.

Click to expand...

Following that logic, we might as well have stayed with the 3 MP of the Canon in 2003; Michael Reichmann claimed that it matched 35mm film. Who needs more, right?

Click to expand...

We care about resolution only insofar it improves the final rendition. For web display or printing, 12ish megapixels is plenty. Let's round it up to 20ish MP for some cropping, and accounting for a bit of natural softness.

This can not be generalized. It depends on print resolution and size; it depends on how much you need to crop.

bastibe said:
40, 60, 100 megapixels are more, but offer diminishing returns for real renditions.

What is real rendition? Again, it depends on the final use of the image.

bastibe said:
For the record, I like my X-T5's 40 MP resolution. But when I go back to my 26 MP backup body, the lower resolution doesn't matter.

Antone · May 24, 2025

bastibe said:
It's funny. I very much appreciate the IBIS in my X-T5. And yet, when I'm out and about with the X-M5, I don't tend to miss it.

I take my X-M5 and Voigtlander 18mm and 27mm for walking about nice pocketable set. X-T4 for more serious work with Fuji and Sigma lenses. Even on bright days the LCD is adequate.

bastibe · May 24, 2025

biza43 said:
bastibe said:

We care about resolution only insofar it improves the final rendition. For web display or printing, 12ish megapixels is plenty. Let's round it up to 20ish MP for some cropping, and accounting for a bit of natural softness.

Click to expand...

This can not be generalized. It depends on print resolution and size; it depends on how much you need to crop.

biza43 said:

40, 60, 100 megapixels are more, but offer diminishing returns for real renditions.

Click to expand...

What is real rendition? Again, it depends on the final use of the image.

OK. You do you.

jhorse · May 24, 2025

unceunce said:
Per fujirumors, should be a June announcement for X-E5.

Who else is waiting for this?

unceunce said:
Feel free to chime in.

It is going to be interesting to see if the XE5 will be able to open my wallet.

As a past XT3 user, I bought a XE3 as a second body; really liked it. At the time, I weighted up the X100F, but the XE3 + 27f2.8 Mk I was cheaper, more flexible for other lenses and I doubted I'd use the OVF. My heart said X100F, head said XE3 - head won.

Forward a couple years and the XE4 + 27 Mk II saw the light off day and I went through the same deliberation vis the X100V; head won again. Traded the XE3 for the XE4. As mainly an aperture only shooter, far preferred the minimalist design of the XE4 over the XE3.

Then, in Feb 24, saw the X100VI at the X Summit and spontaneously pre-order one; it arrive two weeks later and I took it skiing. I traded-in the XE4 + 27 Mk II and have not looked back; the X100VI has been a lot of fun to carry and use.

So, will the XE5 excite me enough to open my wallet? May be, if it has:

The 40MP sensor; I like the ability to crop images from the X100VI without any discernible loss of IQ.
IBIS, got used to it.
The new AF stuff; no complaints about my XT5's or X100VI's AF performance.
A minimalist design.
Paired with a new 23mm pancake lens.

What a first world problem to consume my waking hours!

Alan Sh · May 24, 2025

I've set my alarm for 6am on the 12th June. Very interested in what they offer.

I'd like 40mp and Ibis in an interchageable format. The rest doesn't really matter.

Alan

KariP · May 24, 2025

biza43 said:
bastibe said:

biza43 said:

KariP said:

Patographer said:

Are all new Fujifilm cameras going to have a 40MP sensor?

I don't need that resolution.

Click to expand...

Probably 24mp is optimal. for a APS C sensor. I mean noise, resolution and so on

40mp is totally unnecessary if you show your images in internet or just on some screen. Even very big prints from APS C 24mp are so good that it is impossible to see any real differences if you try to see . It can be possible if you look at the big print with a microscope and if the printer is of very high quality.

Yes ... and then someone mentions cropping. Just crop a 40mp image and compare it to 24mp . Informative. Perhaps 20% more resolution , max . And who buys a camera to crop the images ?

My FF Canon R5 sensor has about 40 MP and my FF R6 20mp - both make images that look very good. R5 looks a bit better if I pixel peep. I have also had a look at my old X-H1 images (24mp) and the resolution is quite impressive actually.

40mp is a marketing thing - but if someone wants a 40mp APS C sensor ... it is just money and who cares if the results are not really better . Photography is a black hole taking all our money anyway.

Click to expand...

Following that logic, we might as well have stayed with the 3 MP of the Canon in 2003; Michael Reichmann claimed that it matched 35mm film. Who needs more, right?

Click to expand...

We care about resolution only insofar it improves the final rendition. For web display or printing, 12ish megapixels is plenty. Let's round it up to 20ish MP for some cropping, and accounting for a bit of natural softness.

Click to expand...

This can not be generalized. It depends on print resolution and size; it depends on how much you need to crop.

biza43 said:

40, 60, 100 megapixels are more, but offer diminishing returns for real renditions.

Click to expand...

What is real rendition? Again, it depends on the final use of the image.

biza43 said:

For the record, I like my X-T5's 40 MP resolution. But when I go back to my 26 MP backup body, the lower resolution doesn't matter.

Click to expand...

Routinely people say that you can crop more if the sensor size is 40mp - compared to 20mp.

BUT how much more ? in real life !

40mp compared to 20mp means something like 20-25% more resolution (geometry ). And then there is the lens - resolution of a lens is not infinite and the high mp count shows the quality limits of the lens...

I started my electronic ILC. career with Canon 40D about 18 years ago . The quality of the images has been gettin better during the years. Not so much because of the MP amount. New sensors have less noise , high ISO is much better and especially the DR is stellar nowadays. Compared to the "good old days"

I just had a look of a big print of my old photo made with X-T1 - size is about 80cm x100cm and I can not see the lower MP count is a problem. I think I can make better big prints from my R5 40mp FF images - but the difference is surprisingly ....

Of course FF and 40mp. really shines in low light and contrasty situations - FF files are better than APS C - I think it is because the sensor is larger and pixel size is bigger . But do we really need FF or 40mp or 60 mp - perhaps somebody needs occasionally.

Jeff Biscuits · May 24, 2025

KariP said:
Routinely people say that you can crop more if the sensor size is 40mp - compared to 20mp. BUT how much more ? in real life !

I just had a look of a big print of my old photo made with X-T1 - size is about 80cm x100cm and I can not see the lower MP count is a problem.

Well, you’re essentially answering your own question here.

If you agree that 16MP is adequate for a large print then it means that you can crop a 40MP image to emulate a 58% longer focal length. So, for example, that means with an 18mm lens you can have adequate resolution at a simulated 28mm, thanks to having more resolution than you need at 18mm.

Minolta TC-1 · May 24, 2025

I know it's probably not the philosophy of the X-E line, but I've really come to appreciate the fast access to presets on my X-S20. C1 - video in my studio. C2 - Acros still photography. C3 - colour photography. I would appreciate it if my X-E4 had the same, and had a tool to sync them, quickly. The Fujifilm app knows both my cameras so that could be one way of doing it.

Aside from that, the X-E4's simplicity is pretty nice. Not much change needed. Everything being discussed here is nice to have.

X-E5 June announcement

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts