-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
The Fujifilm X half preview: what do you think?
- Thread starter AlanDPReview
- Start date
MJ_Photo38
Veteran Member
An X100F selling for 800 bucks is what I would consider overpriced. That camera should be no more than 650/700.
I have a really hard time to justify a X-Half over an X100F (or even a T or S model, which are much less expensive).
Also, there are no tariffs in Europe, and the camera is still selling for €799, including 20% sales tax.
That point is really the biggest offender for me. I was removing the center pin on the shoe really that necessary? That's doesn't go well with the camera already high prices (even without tariffs) and sound to me like unnecessary cost cutting.
Same goes for the LED instead of the flash tube. It has plety of space for it, looking at how small the sensor is, and how the viewfinder is just a tunnel with nothing in it.
There should have been some sort of mechanical feedback in the level. Maybe a point of slightly higher resistance towards the end of the course where it actually confirms to the user that the lever has been winderd (or a little click? I dunno)
Howard V
Veteran Member
But what does that matter? I’m not in the target consumer market for this camera.
Last edited:
UsherFellig
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,341
- Reaction score
- 1,597
Why would it not be a "creative tool" to an "old" photographer? Because photographers with experience of negative sizes and sensor sizes and the related difference in results understand there is much better use for $800. They know that if they want the thrill of downmarket lo-fi "creativity" they can be "creative" with a Kodak PixPro bridge camera for a couple hundred bucks. In "fun" candy-apple red, yet. Or make far better looking images and prints with a small, elegant, retro metal-body Olympus EM10ii or EM5ii and a small fast prime and/or small zoom, for less than half the price of this thing.
Last edited:
Minolta TC-1
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 323
- Reaction score
- 295
But is that really the case? In the late 90s, there was a niche market for high end compacts like the one I named myself after. They were also frequently ridiculed (f3.5 only?! For €1000 back then!?) but used by pros for exactly the use cases I can imagine for this one: informal quick shots where you care more about the atmosphere of the moment than technical perfection.
This again just comes down to how you want to do photography and disparaging everything that doesn't conform to your specific preferences. Oh, and my former Rollei 66 and LX3 both thank you for suggesting I have no experience with different film/sensor formats
DarnGoodPhotos
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,416
- Solutions
- 5
- Reaction score
- 7,947
It's not for me, but I think it's fun and cool.
UsherFellig
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,341
- Reaction score
- 1,597
You posed the question. I gave an answer. No need to agree with my answer, but also no need to mis-characterize my response as "disparaging everything that doesn't conform to your specific preferences."But is that really the case? In the late 90s, there was a niche market for high end compacts like the one I named myself after. They were also frequently ridiculed (f3.5 only?! For €1000 back then!?) but used by pros for exactly the use cases I can imagine for this one: informal quick shots where you care more about the atmosphere of the moment than technical perfection.
This again just comes down to how you want to do photography and disparaging everything that doesn't conform to your specific preferences. Oh, and my former Rollei 66 and LX3 both thank you for suggesting I have no experience with different film/sensor formats
And the Minolta TC-1 is a titanium full-frame 35mm camera. The TC-1's parallel today given inflationary equivalents would be something like the Sony RX1R ii. This Fuji half-frame product is not a high end full-frame compact. Or even a high-er end APSC compact like the X100# or GRiii. It is a lo-fi toy for low-fi, down-market fun one can have any number of ways at a fraction of its $800 price tag.
Last edited:
DirkPeh
Senior Member
I'd really like to know the manufacturing costs of these. A 10+ years old sensor, a $3 monitor, a $30 lens, a $6 VF, a $2 LED, lots of plastic. 100?, 150?
They might even get paid to use the lame processor, that makes their slow AF even slower, instead of disposing it.
Forgot the slow if at all reacting touch screen and the wind up lever that is basically a swivel on a button
They might even get paid to use the lame processor, that makes their slow AF even slower, instead of disposing it.
Forgot the slow if at all reacting touch screen and the wind up lever that is basically a swivel on a button
Maoby
Veteran Member
I will not have my car appraised by you 
I agree!
Is it expensive for what it is? Well, maybe a bit but then again not really. Welcome to 2025.
Just listed about $2000 worth of camera equipment I wasn't using on eBay, so I preordered one. Will in no way replace the X100VI I take our our next vacation, but it's so small and light I'll throw it in a bag and take it along, perhaps put it in film mode, and the wife and I will grab it and take a bunch of pics and not worry about reviewing them on the spot. Sounds like fun. Isn't that what it's all about anyway?
Minolta TC-1
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 323
- Reaction score
- 295
I fail to see how "photographers with experience of negative sizes and sensor sizes and the related difference in results" relates to the question about "old" photographers. And with that, I consider this useless back&forth closed. Glad you like how you work and that you've identified this camera doesn't fit in there. For others, be them young/old, male/female/other, experienced/newbie, pro/amateur, it may fit part of what they do, or they might bust get it for fun. That's the beauty of being different people in the world.You posed the question. I gave an answer. No need to agree with my answer, but also no need to mis-characterize my response as "disparaging everything that doesn't conform to your specific preferences."But is that really the case? In the late 90s, there was a niche market for high end compacts like the one I named myself after. They were also frequently ridiculed (f3.5 only?! For €1000 back then!?) but used by pros for exactly the use cases I can imagine for this one: informal quick shots where you care more about the atmosphere of the moment than technical perfection.
This again just comes down to how you want to do photography and disparaging everything that doesn't conform to your specific preferences. Oh, and my former Rollei 66 and LX3 both thank you for suggesting I have no experience with different film/sensor formats
Alan Hewitt Photo
Senior Member
I like what it is aimed at being. Looks like fun - maybe like a digital instax vibe.
Of course it’s not going to be everyone’s cup of tea. Certainly doesn't add anything to my main genre but I could see myself enjoying using one for BTS content when I’m away working: quick snaps of safari camp life, the team, setups, sundowner beers and just the general vibe. Yes I do this with my iphone but this looks like more fun, not just for me but for my guests too. I really like that its a bit leftfield.
Of course it’s not going to be everyone’s cup of tea. Certainly doesn't add anything to my main genre but I could see myself enjoying using one for BTS content when I’m away working: quick snaps of safari camp life, the team, setups, sundowner beers and just the general vibe. Yes I do this with my iphone but this looks like more fun, not just for me but for my guests too. I really like that its a bit leftfield.
rsn
Senior Member
Chris at Petapixel in his review, found if you did a fast double lever action, no problems were encountered, very quick to double tap.
rsn
Senior Member
This isn't the kind of camera I would purchase but what the price point is competing with is Canon's new Powershot and that camera delivers a lot for the bang.
I think the whole shooting like you are shooting film is a gimmick and I predict most will use it once or twice, decide it's a hassle and ignore it.
I would still use this camera for street, vacation, family and muck about photography, it's all you really need.
It’s entirely legitimate to evaluate and discuss the price of any consumer product. However, estimating the component and manufacturing costs etc is a game which people play to justify their unwillingness to pay the selling price but really has little point.
The price is the price; the consumer has no control over it. Are you willing to pay that much money for the latest iPhone in its basic form? And are you willing to pay the disproportionate extra for more storage? It’s a simple choice unrelated to production costs.
Last edited:
"What am I getting for my money?".
You can go about this in several ways. If there is a 128GB version of a phone with 256GB version at a much much higher price then you might be able to afford the 256GB version but not consider the price of the 128GB upgrade worth it based on the value of the 128GB vs what the phone manufacturer has set that selling price to.
Some people are more sensitive to this type of value measurement and decision than others.
The X-Half unfortunately starts to raise these sorts of questions.
What Fuji have done makes me uncomfortable. It doesn't affect the other Fuji products that I have. But it looks like a cheap attempt to exploit the goodwill in Fuji's brand.
And that doesn't sit well with me.
MJ_Photo38
Veteran Member
The main problem that I have with the X-Half is that there are a lot of cut corners on that thing that make sense only if you take the point of view of cost cutting.
Like the OVF being a tunnel with not even a DSLR style information display that would tell you what shutter speed you're dealing with (thing that was included in cameras like the X20 by the way), the hotshoe missing the center pin (or any other pin for that matter) turning it into a cold shoe that has little to no usefulness for this camera, the flash being a LED light instead of a proper flashtube, the video being limited to 55 seconds,...
All of this points towards a camera that would be so cheap, the price would be the only thing that would excuse those missing things. Like "oh yeah, but it's cheap so whatever". Like the X-Half for 500 bucks, it would be kind of pricey but it would be the digital alternative to cameras like the Pentax 17 so why not.
Problem being : it's not cheap, therefore excusing those things in the name of "silly fun" generally hits a wall. It feels like this camera is overpriced on purpose compared to what it's actually providing to the people that buy it. Yes, it looks absurdly good. So would an X100 or X100S that you can find used for half the price, will give you a proper OVF, flash tube and external flash support, among other things like RAW files or video that doesn't cut before you reach the 1min mark.
DirkPeh
Senior Member
Well said. “Yes it looks absurdly good”. Good yes, but even the positive critics can't hide the fact that it feels incredibly cheap. It looks like a 3d-printer printed copy of the Leica CM.
Here, let me write you a check for $200, that gives you a fair profit. When will you deliver my camera?I'd really like to know the manufacturing costs of these. A 10+ years old sensor, a $3 monitor, a $30 lens, a $6 VF, a $2 LED, lots of plastic. 100?, 150?
They might even get paid to use the lame processor, that makes their slow AF even slower, instead of disposing it.
Forgot the slow if at all reacting touch screen and the wind up lever that is basically a swivel on a button
DarnGoodPhotos
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,416
- Solutions
- 5
- Reaction score
- 7,947
Exactly. It's funny when people think components are the only costs while ignoring all the soft development costs like research, design, testing, documentation, tooling and manufacturing, assembly, etc. Looking at the bill of materials never paints an accurate picture of how much a camera costs to make. The X30 was $850USD when adjusted for 2025, but the X-1/2 should have has some of that camera's capability to make it worth $800 to me.Here, let me write you a check for $200, that gives you a fair profit. When will you deliver my camera?I'd really like to know the manufacturing costs of these. A 10+ years old sensor, a $3 monitor, a $30 lens, a $6 VF, a $2 LED, lots of plastic. 100?, 150?
They might even get paid to use the lame processor, that makes their slow AF even slower, instead of disposing it.
Forgot the slow if at all reacting touch screen and the wind up lever that is basically a swivel on a button
--
www.darngoodphotos.com
Last edited:
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum