And? Does that somehow render it any less valid or accurate?
I was one of the first to recieve an XT-1 when it was released due to having pre-ordered it months in advance. As such, it was palgued with the light leak issue and the soft button issue, which warranted having to wait and have it replaced by a new unit that had those issues fixed. Others also have had, and are still having, button failures, settings dial failures, rear thumb-wheel failures, On/Off switch failures, shutter button failures, port doors that bowed from normal use to the point they wouldn't shut, squeaky SD card doors, rubber covering peeling off after less than a few monthes of use, and paint peeling off after the same. Do you want me to go on? This was for a $1400 body, you know (still $1k plus even now).
Mine was also the only camera I ever had to buy a rear LCD protector for because the "tempered glass" scratched after one day due to a soft rubber button on my jacket. My D3 also has a tempered glass LCD and after 7 years of professional use, including times being carried with the aforementioned soft rubber buttoned jacket and other far worse options, still looks identical to the day I bought it.
Operationally, the camera was quirky at best. Having to re-focus for every shot even when the shutter button was held with a continuous half-press for the follow up shots is ridiculous and unlike any other mirrorless/DSLR on the market, save for P&Ss. Having metering lock with shutter press and no option to have a free meter is also sub-par; even my Canon A-1 from the 80's can do this as well as all of my current Nikon gear and Canon in certain modes - and my cheapo A6000 as well. Not being able to view menu settings on the rear LCD when I have only the EVF active, yet it's fine with image review is also stupid and unlike any other camera out there. And I could go on. Oh, and inconsistent or sometimes non-existent aperture ring markings across the lens line doesn't bode well either.
Also, having already long established a professional pp/editing workflow for the rest of my cameras, having to play RAW-convertor-of-the-day to deal with XTrans rendering weaknesses was less than satisfactory. I will admit that the OOC jpgs are quite nice, but they're jpgs so fairly useless to me. Metering was spot on everytime though, I'll give it that, and the colors quite pretty too. Overall though, the IQ was still pretty artificial looking, and my 12MP D3 with a 50mm f1.8 lens that cost less than half of the Fuji 35 f1.4 did was noticeably better in almost every instance. And the D7100 that replaced my X-T1? - along with its cheap 35mm f1.8, it absolutely ate it for lunch IQ-wise, never mind build quality and reliability-wise as well. Oh yeah, and at $300 less cash too. And it could shoot action as well without a hitch and no fiddling with AF spot size, hi performnce mode, or fighting an EVF drowning in lag due to 8fps of continuous captures.
And before you say that it may just be a single-case scenario I experienced, I see the same IQ faults and operational quirks in my little XQ1 too, which means it's systemic to Fuji in general.
So, if you want to call foul on me and try to downplay my experience, too bad. To say the X-T1 was one of the most, if not the most, disappointing cameras I've owned, is pretty much spot on. I really like what Fuji is doing concept-wise, and I had high-hopes when I pre-ordered it, but the reality was that they really don't know how to polish a final product like other manufacturers and I didn't appreciate paying top-dollar for a camera that still felt like a late prototype in hand and in use. My first digital cam ever was a Fuji, so to have to say that is somewhat deflating.
