XE-2, XE-3, or X-E4... The Dilemma

Threaded wrote:

The XE line is kind of interesting as it’s the only Fuji model that’s never really stayed the same. Initially it was the smaller, cheaper X-Pro alternative for those who couldn’t afford Fujis only other ILC, and that was still the case up until the XE2, but after that Fuji widened the range and, notably, introduced the XT1 which immediately sold like hot cakes and rather supplanted the X-Pro at the top of the line.

As Someone who purchased the X-Pro 1 and sold it at the first moment the XE1 hit the market and someone who can and could afford (and purchased before) much, much more expensive cameras, I tell you that a lot of people bought the XE1 because it was the same technology as the X-Pro1 but much smaller, lighter, and without the absolutely useless OVF…

The success of the XT1 lead to the XT10, which essentially repackaged the XE2’s internals but in a shape that was proving more popular and cheaper to produce (in China). By that time Fuji were so uncertain over the purpose of the XE that they didn’t bother designing a new one, and just reworked the same body with newer firmware to produce the XE2S.

Fujifilm did not just offer the same XE2 with changed firmware as a „new camera called XE2s“ but reacted to complaints of customers about some problems with the XE2… IIRC the XE2s offered much better AF performance than the XE2 that could NOT be solved by a simple firmware-update (though firmware updates were possible and were made for the XE2)…

The subsequent redesigns of the XE3 and XE4 just seem to reflect the fact that Fuji are still continually rethinking just where or if the XE still fits in the lineup. I’m sure both are good cameras in their own way, but they’re both quite distinct from the original and targeting different markets. Neither really seem like satisfactory replacements for the XE1 or 2 because, I guess, Fuji felt those replacements already existed elsewhere.

Evidently you do not know that Fujifilm officially did stop the XE line with the XE3 without any successor. For 6 months the XE line was dead.
But a lot of XE- customers protested and demanded to go on with the XE-line.

Again, Fujifilm cared for their customers and reanimated the XE-line.

Evidently they did some market analysis and found that the XE-customers appreciated the ergonomics of the XE-line, it’s low weight and nice little dimensions… and tried to „cultivate“ these big points.

Maybe they believed that the XE-customers wanted to go that (too much) puristic design of Leica - especially because a lot of Leica owners appreciated more and more the Fujifilm- Technology and its philosophy.

But the XE fans were split in two groups: one that loved the extreme purism and one that found its design just exaggerating on purism just for its own sake and leaving the path of user-friendly ergonomics… I am one of the latter mentioned group…

The XT-line is for many people the perfect DSLM  camera. At least for the  XT4  I think so as well. The only thing I‘ d like to have is the EVF at the left side positioned  exactly like in the XE models.

cheers

pictograph wrote:

Threaded wrote:

The XE line is kind of interesting as it’s the only Fuji model that’s never really stayed the same. Initially it was the smaller, cheaper X-Pro alternative for those who couldn’t afford Fujis only other ILC, and that was still the case up until the XE2, but after that Fuji widened the range and, notably, introduced the XT1 which immediately sold like hot cakes and rather supplanted the X-Pro at the top of the line.

As Someone who purchased the X-Pro 1 and sold it at the first moment the XE1 hit the market and someone who can and could afford (and purchased before) much, much more expensive cameras, I tell you that a lot of people bought the XE1 because it was the same technology as the X-Pro1 but much smaller, lighter, and without the absolutely useless OVF…

Well no, you can tell me that’s why you bought it, and that’s fine.  I’m sure some others did the same, equally many others loved the X-Pro.  In truth though, Fuji had big problems with both cameras in terms of the performance and feature set not really being where they needed to be, and that didn’t start to resolve until the XE2.

The success of the XT1 lead to the XT10, which essentially repackaged the XE2’s internals but in a shape that was proving more popular and cheaper to produce (in China). By that time Fuji were so uncertain over the purpose of the XE that they didn’t bother designing a new one, and just reworked the same body with newer firmware to produce the XE2S.

Fujifilm did not just offer the same XE2 with changed firmware as a „new camera called XE2s“ but reacted to complaints of customers about some problems with the XE2… IIRC the XE2s offered much better AF performance than the XE2 that could NOT be solved by a simple firmware-update (though firmware updates were possible and were made for the XE2)…

You’re either misremembering or were mislead at the time, XE2 performance with the later firmware was entirely identical to the XE2S.  The only hardware difference was a motion sensor in the S model to enable a full SR Auto mode (unavailable on the standard XE2).  That and a very slightly revised grip.

The subsequent redesigns of the XE3 and XE4 just seem to reflect the fact that Fuji are still continually rethinking just where or if the XE still fits in the lineup. I’m sure both are good cameras in their own way, but they’re both quite distinct from the original and targeting different markets. Neither really seem like satisfactory replacements for the XE1 or 2 because, I guess, Fuji felt those replacements already existed elsewhere.

Evidently you do not know that Fujifilm officially did stop the XE line with the XE3 without any successor. For 6 months the XE line was dead.
But a lot of XE- customers protested and demanded to go on with the XE-line.

This sounds like you’ve been reading too much Fuji Rumors.  Fuji “officially” said nothing about the XE line being stopped, there were rumours but nothing more.

Again, Fujifilm cared for their customers and reanimated the XE-line.

The idea that Fuji created the XE4 just to be nice or in response to some campaign is patently absurd.  It exists because Fuji believe or believed it would sell and make them money.  Clearly the differences from the XE3 indicate that Fuji weren’t entirely happy with that model and the way it was targeted, so they made changes, just as they did from XE2 to 3.

Threaded wrote:

pictograph wrote:

Threaded wrote:

The XE line is kind of interesting as it’s the only Fuji model that’s never really stayed the same. Initially it was the smaller, cheaper X-Pro alternative for those who couldn’t afford Fujis only other ILC, and that was still the case up until the XE2, but after that Fuji widened the range and, notably, introduced the XT1 which immediately sold like hot cakes and rather supplanted the X-Pro at the top of the line.

As Someone who purchased the X-Pro 1 and sold it at the first moment the XE1 hit the market and someone who can and could afford (and purchased before) much, much more expensive cameras, I tell you that a lot of people bought the XE1 because it was the same technology as the X-Pro1 but much smaller, lighter, and without the absolutely useless OVF…

Well no, you can tell me that’s why you bought it, and that’s fine. I’m sure some others did the same, equally many others loved the X-Pro. In truth though, Fuji had big problems with both cameras in terms of the performance and feature set not really being where they needed to be, and that didn’t start to resolve until the XE2.

The success of the XT1 lead to the XT10, which essentially repackaged the XE2’s internals but in a shape that was proving more popular and cheaper to produce (in China). By that time Fuji were so uncertain over the purpose of the XE that they didn’t bother designing a new one, and just reworked the same body with newer firmware to produce the XE2S.

Fujifilm did not just offer the same XE2 with changed firmware as a „new camera called XE2s“ but reacted to complaints of customers about some problems with the XE2… IIRC the XE2s offered much better AF performance than the XE2 that could NOT be solved by a simple firmware-update (though firmware updates were possible and were made for the XE2)…

You’re either misremembering or were mislead at the time, XE2 performance with the later firmware was entirely identical to the XE2S. The only hardware difference was a motion sensor in the S model to enable a full SR Auto mode (unavailable on the standard XE2). That and a very slightly revised grip.

The subsequent redesigns of the XE3 and XE4 just seem to reflect the fact that Fuji are still continually rethinking just where or if the XE still fits in the lineup. I’m sure both are good cameras in their own way, but they’re both quite distinct from the original and targeting different markets. Neither really seem like satisfactory replacements for the XE1 or 2 because, I guess, Fuji felt those replacements already existed elsewhere.

Evidently you do not know that Fujifilm officially did stop the XE line with the XE3 without any successor. For 6 months the XE line was dead.
But a lot of XE- customers protested and demanded to go on with the XE-line.

This sounds like you’ve been reading too much Fuji Rumors. Fuji “officially” said nothing about the XE line being stopped, there were rumours but nothing more.

Again, Fujifilm cared for their customers and reanimated the XE-line.

The idea that Fuji created the XE4 just to be nice or in response to some campaign is patently absurd. It exists because Fuji believe or believed it would sell and make them money. Clearly the differences from the XE3 indicate that Fuji weren’t entirely happy with that model and the way it was targeted, so they made changes, just as they did from XE2 to 3.

You are wrong:

there were some hardware- changements from  XE2 to XE2s that could not be solved by the firmware- update of the XE2.

There have been a lot of firmware-optimizations indeed, but….

If the XE2 would have been performance-wise identical to the XE2s there would not at all exist any need for an hardware-related upgraded Model.

Here just some features that could NOT be realized by the firmware-update of the XE2:

- the sensor of the XE2s had identical 16MP but was in fact a modified sensor, with  better low-light AF (XE2: 2,5 EV, XE2s 0,5 EV).

- much faster wake-up time

- 77 AF zones (XE2s)  instead of 49 AF zones (XE 2)

- better inner body design

These hardware-changements led to dramatically better AF performance compared to the XE2 and to much better high-ISO performance.

The XE2s has an OLED EVF. I did not find any information about the EVF of the XE2, but I am sure this would have been mentioned in bold if already existing in the XE2…

BTW: I did not read Fuji rumors until 1 month ago, so impossible that I „seem having  read too much Fuji-rumors forum“…

But honestly I am tired to discuss and lose time in discussions with people using insulting sentences like „You seem to read to much on Fuji-rumors“… so: bye bye…

pictograph wrote:

Threaded wrote:

pictograph wrote:

Threaded wrote:

The XE line is kind of interesting as it’s the only Fuji model that’s never really stayed the same. Initially it was the smaller, cheaper X-Pro alternative for those who couldn’t afford Fujis only other ILC, and that was still the case up until the XE2, but after that Fuji widened the range and, notably, introduced the XT1 which immediately sold like hot cakes and rather supplanted the X-Pro at the top of the line.

As Someone who purchased the X-Pro 1 and sold it at the first moment the XE1 hit the market and someone who can and could afford (and purchased before) much, much more expensive cameras, I tell you that a lot of people bought the XE1 because it was the same technology as the X-Pro1 but much smaller, lighter, and without the absolutely useless OVF…

Well no, you can tell me that’s why you bought it, and that’s fine. I’m sure some others did the same, equally many others loved the X-Pro. In truth though, Fuji had big problems with both cameras in terms of the performance and feature set not really being where they needed to be, and that didn’t start to resolve until the XE2.

The success of the XT1 lead to the XT10, which essentially repackaged the XE2’s internals but in a shape that was proving more popular and cheaper to produce (in China). By that time Fuji were so uncertain over the purpose of the XE that they didn’t bother designing a new one, and just reworked the same body with newer firmware to produce the XE2S.

Fujifilm did not just offer the same XE2 with changed firmware as a „new camera called XE2s“ but reacted to complaints of customers about some problems with the XE2… IIRC the XE2s offered much better AF performance than the XE2 that could NOT be solved by a simple firmware-update (though firmware updates were possible and were made for the XE2)…

You’re either misremembering or were mislead at the time, XE2 performance with the later firmware was entirely identical to the XE2S. The only hardware difference was a motion sensor in the S model to enable a full SR Auto mode (unavailable on the standard XE2). That and a very slightly revised grip.

The subsequent redesigns of the XE3 and XE4 just seem to reflect the fact that Fuji are still continually rethinking just where or if the XE still fits in the lineup. I’m sure both are good cameras in their own way, but they’re both quite distinct from the original and targeting different markets. Neither really seem like satisfactory replacements for the XE1 or 2 because, I guess, Fuji felt those replacements already existed elsewhere.

Evidently you do not know that Fujifilm officially did stop the XE line with the XE3 without any successor. For 6 months the XE line was dead.
But a lot of XE- customers protested and demanded to go on with the XE-line.

This sounds like you’ve been reading too much Fuji Rumors. Fuji “officially” said nothing about the XE line being stopped, there were rumours but nothing more.

Again, Fujifilm cared for their customers and reanimated the XE-line.

The idea that Fuji created the XE4 just to be nice or in response to some campaign is patently absurd. It exists because Fuji believe or believed it would sell and make them money. Clearly the differences from the XE3 indicate that Fuji weren’t entirely happy with that model and the way it was targeted, so they made changes, just as they did from XE2 to 3.

You are wrong:

No, I’m not. I was an X-E2 user when the S model and the new firmware came out, I’m very aware of the differences (or lack of them). There are the differences I’ve mentioned in terms of the motion detection sensor in the S and the auto mode, and that’s it other than cosmetics.

there were some hardware- changements from XE2 to XE2s that could not be solved by the firmware- update of the XE2.

There were not. Look at literally any report or review at the time. Find me one hands on report that claims better performance for the S over the standard model with new firmware. You will not find any.

There have been a lot of firmware-optimizations indeed, but….

If the XE2 would have been performance-wise identical to the XE2s there would not at all exist any need for an hardware-related upgraded Model.

Arguably there wasn’t, the XE2S certainly wasn’t a massive seller. But the E2 was long in the tooth and the S improvements, which had first been developed for the XT10 also based on the same platform, made for a convenient stop gap replacement. They obviously made some parts savings as they reduced the price slightly too.

Here just some features that could NOT be realized by the firmware-update of the XE2:

- the sensor of the XE2s had identical 16MP but was in fact a modified sensor, with better low-light AF (XE2: 2,5 EV, XE2s 0,5 EV).

Obviously untrue, there was only ever one X-Trans II sensor. The “modified” low light AF was down to improved AF algorithms, ie firmware. They did the same thing later with the X-Pro2 which got a similar low light EV bump, and more recently the XT3 received the same in its big AF update inherited from the XT4. Look up their firmware logs before you reply.

- much faster wake-up time

Firmware, the XE2 was improved too.

- 77 AF zones (XE2s) instead of 49 AF zones (XE 2)

Again, firmware. These are not physical points on a sensor as you imagine, they are entirely firmware based. They increased the AF points on the X-Pro2 in the same way, after the XT2’s release.

- better inner body design

These hardware-changements led to dramatically better AF performance compared to the XE2 and to much better high-ISO performance.

Prove it. Find one bona fide source claiming “dramatically better AF performance” over a firmware upgraded XE2, you will find none. Similarly high-ISO performance is identical, as you’ll see from any image comparison. The XE2S did allow access to a higher extended setting in jpeg (51200) but it was garbage, RAW performance and jpeg performance at any ISO below this was identical, because both the sensor and image processor was identical.

The XE2s has an OLED EVF. I did not find any information about the EVF of the XE2, but I am sure this would have been mentioned in bold if already existing in the XE2…

Look harder, it’s in the specifications at the back of the XE2 manual for example, it also had an OLED finder (come to that so did the XE1). There was speculation the part was changed in the XE2S (probably for cost/production reasons) but the spec is exactly the same.

Honestly, before you come back at me do some research. You are labouring under a misapprehension when it comes to the XE2S.

EDIT - for the record most of your claims can be easily disproved with a browse of the XE2 v4 firmware release notes found here - https://fujifilm-x.com/global/support/download/firmware/cameras/x-e2/

For example (my bold):

New AF System

(1) New AF system with Zone and Wide/Tracking modes for effortless capture of moving subjects. (*)
The AF System complements the fast and accurate 49-single-point autofocus system with new Zone and Wide/Tracking modes, which use 77 autofocus points across a wider area to substantially improve the camera’s ability to capture moving subjects.
(2) Improvement of AF accuracy.
Single-point AF divides the focus area into smaller sections to more accurately determine the distance to the subject for even greater focusing accuracy. The built-in phase detection pixels have the detection range of 0.5EV, an improvement from the previous 2.5EV, delivering phase detection AF performance that enables fast focusing in low-light conditions and on low-contrast subjects.

Absolutely spot on. I have the xe3 and xe4. You echo my feelings. I really like the AF upgrades and the tilt screen of the xe4, so my preference tilts that way. But really, Fuji, why did you mess with a good thing? I know a bar of soap is asthetically pleasing, but it's not much fun to handle! For me a camera is a tool.

I got a brand new X-E2s for $220 last year sometime. I love the colours.

give me the colours of the X-E2. The controls of the X-E3 the flip screen, autofocus,extra film sims + colour chrome/ grain / clarity options if the X-E4.

I’d be happy with flip screen MCS switch front and rear dial

Clive99 wrote:

Absolutely spot on.

Thanks Clive.

I have the xe3 and xe4. You echo my feelings. I really like the AF upgrades and the tilt screen of the xe4, so my preference tilts that way. But really, Fuji, why did you mess with a good thing? I know a bar of soap is asthetically pleasing, but it's not much fun to handle! For me a camera is a tool.

Agreed.

Just got to give a plug/shout out here on the 24mp raw files from Fujifilm cameras. It's ridiculous how good the raw files respond to push and pull in post, and the control over noise, especially for APS-C class cameras. Color bleeding is almost completely absent, even at a max "push" ISO of 51,200 out of camera, and detail from X-Trans is still ridiculous, which I might add, requires ZERO post process sharpening.

For an example of what I'm talking about, take a look at a quick product shot here. I'll go on the record by saying the 24mp sensor from Fujifilm has the best DR and noise control over all APS-C sensors, especially so at higher ISO's.

The only NR was chroma, +10 on the chroma slider with a +20 blend. This is insane good at this ISO level and competes very well with Full Frame cameras full stop.

Clive99 wrote:

Absolutely spot on. I have the xe3 and xe4. You echo my feelings. I really like the AF upgrades and the tilt screen of the xe4, so my preference tilts that way. But really, Fuji, why did you mess with a good thing? I know a bar of soap is asthetically pleasing, but it's not much fun to handle! For me a camera is a tool.

I agree with the AF and screen upgrades, but only partially agree with the bar of soap view.

As one who had the XE3 and now use the XE4. My style is pretty simple; no video and mostly shoot aperture priority. Initially I was sceptical about the ergonomics of the XE4 relative to the XE3, but after deciding to buy the XE4 I came to the conclusion that my scepticism for me was misplaced (I wrote about it here: XE4 - I was wrong: Fujifilm X System / SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com).

In sum, after setting up the XE4 for my style and putting it inside a quality leather half case to make handling better ( agree with the bar of soap analogy without a case and know that many people prefer not to use one, but I like them) I find it an intuitive, fast and very usable camera. Each to their own.

jhorse wrote:

Clive99 wrote:

Absolutely spot on. I have the xe3 and xe4. You echo my feelings. I really like the AF upgrades and the tilt screen of the xe4, so my preference tilts that way. But really, Fuji, why did you mess with a good thing? I know a bar of soap is asthetically pleasing, but it's not much fun to handle! For me a camera is a tool.

I agree with the AF and screen upgrades, but only partially agree with the bar of soap view.

As one who had the XE3 and now use the XE4. My style is pretty simple; no video and mostly shoot aperture priority. Initially I was sceptical about the ergonomics of the XE4 relative to the XE3, but after deciding to buy the XE4 I came to the conclusion that my scepticism for me was misplaced (I wrote about it here: XE4 - I was wrong: Fujifilm X System / SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com).

In sum, after setting up the XE4 for my style and putting it inside a quality leather half case to make handling better ( agree with the bar of soap analogy without a case and know that many people prefer not to use one, but I like them) I find it an intuitive, fast and very usable camera. Each to their own.

Totally agree. I have two copies, one with a Gariz half case and one with the Fujifilm metal grip. The one with the metal grip usually has the (relatively) longer lenses, and easily mounts on a monopod/tripod. The Swiss Arca plate adds as much value as the grip, IMO. The half case usually has a wide angle and feels really luxurious in hand. Both cameras fit nicely in a Peak Design 6L.

GreatOceanSoftware wrote:

jhorse wrote:

Clive99 wrote:

Absolutely spot on. I have the xe3 and xe4. You echo my feelings. I really like the AF upgrades and the tilt screen of the xe4, so my preference tilts that way. But really, Fuji, why did you mess with a good thing? I know a bar of soap is asthetically pleasing, but it's not much fun to handle! For me a camera is a tool.

I agree with the AF and screen upgrades, but only partially agree with the bar of soap view.

As one who had the XE3 and now use the XE4. My style is pretty simple; no video and mostly shoot aperture priority. Initially I was sceptical about the ergonomics of the XE4 relative to the XE3, but after deciding to buy the XE4 I came to the conclusion that my scepticism for me was misplaced (I wrote about it here: XE4 - I was wrong: Fujifilm X System / SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com).

In sum, after setting up the XE4 for my style and putting it inside a quality leather half case to make handling better ( agree with the bar of soap analogy without a case and know that many people prefer not to use one, but I like them) I find it an intuitive, fast and very usable camera. Each to their own.

Totally agree. I have two copies, one with a Gariz half case and one with the Fujifilm metal grip. The one with the metal grip usually has the (relatively) longer lenses, and easily mounts on a monopod/tripod. The Swiss Arca plate adds as much value as the grip, IMO. The half case usually has a wide angle and feels really luxurious in hand. Both cameras fit nicely in a Peak Design 6L.

Yes, the lack of controls is not as big an impact as i first thought (still prefer more). But both of you make the point that's it's fine with a leather case or a grip...and yes, that's how i shoot it too. My point is if you're intending it to be a small camera, what was the point in making it a bar of soap so you *have* to make it bigger with a case or grip? My xe3 doesn't need either to be comfortable.

Clive99 wrote:

GreatOceanSoftware wrote:

jhorse wrote:

Clive99 wrote:

Absolutely spot on. I have the xe3 and xe4. You echo my feelings. I really like the AF upgrades and the tilt screen of the xe4, so my preference tilts that way. But really, Fuji, why did you mess with a good thing? I know a bar of soap is asthetically pleasing, but it's not much fun to handle! For me a camera is a tool.

I agree with the AF and screen upgrades, but only partially agree with the bar of soap view.

As one who had the XE3 and now use the XE4. My style is pretty simple; no video and mostly shoot aperture priority. Initially I was sceptical about the ergonomics of the XE4 relative to the XE3, but after deciding to buy the XE4 I came to the conclusion that my scepticism for me was misplaced (I wrote about it here: XE4 - I was wrong: Fujifilm X System / SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com).

In sum, after setting up the XE4 for my style and putting it inside a quality leather half case to make handling better ( agree with the bar of soap analogy without a case and know that many people prefer not to use one, but I like them) I find it an intuitive, fast and very usable camera. Each to their own.

Totally agree. I have two copies, one with a Gariz half case and one with the Fujifilm metal grip. The one with the metal grip usually has the (relatively) longer lenses, and easily mounts on a monopod/tripod. The Swiss Arca plate adds as much value as the grip, IMO. The half case usually has a wide angle and feels really luxurious in hand. Both cameras fit nicely in a Peak Design 6L.

Yes, the lack of controls is not as big an impact as i first thought (still prefer more). But both of you make the point that's it's fine with a leather case or a grip...and yes, that's how i shoot it too. My point is if you're intending it to be a small camera, what was the point in making it a bar of soap so you *have* to make it bigger with a case or grip? My xe3 doesn't need either to be comfortable.

I think Fujifilm was thinking that everyone would walk around with the 27mm pancake kit lens combo in their coat pocket, and that it would need minimal resistance. That combo only works for me about 2% of the time, so yeah, I probably wouldn’t have made that design choice either 😒

Clive99 wrote:

Yes, the lack of controls is not as big an impact as i first thought (still prefer more). But both of you make the point that's it's fine with a leather case or a grip...and yes, that's how i shoot it too. My point is if you're intending it to be a small camera, what was the point in making it a bar of soap so you *have* to make it bigger with a case or grip? My xe3 doesn't need either to be comfortable.

You make a good point, and yes had I been the chief designer I would have included grips moulded into the body front and rear as they help handling without adding too much bulk or weight.

That said, even with the grips front and rear, I did put my XE3 into a leather half case. When the XE4 came out, I contacted the manufacturer of the XE3 grip I had, which was of excellent quality, and asked them to design in a small vertical ridge on the front and a pronounced lip at the rear where the thumb rests to aid handling. This they did. See (I bought a black case with black stitching):

Fujifilm XE4 Half Case Camera Retro Genuine Leather Cover Insert VR Handmade New | eBay

jhorse wrote:

Clive99 wrote:

Yes, the lack of controls is not as big an impact as i first thought (still prefer more). But both of you make the point that's it's fine with a leather case or a grip...and yes, that's how i shoot it too. My point is if you're intending it to be a small camera, what was the point in making it a bar of soap so you *have* to make it bigger with a case or grip? My xe3 doesn't need either to be comfortable.

You make a good point, and yes had I been the chief designer I would have included grips moulded into the body front and rear as they help handling without adding too much bulk or weight.

That said, even with the grips front and rear, I did put my XE3 into a leather half case. When the XE4 came out, I contacted the manufacturer of the XE3 grip I had, which was of excellent quality, and asked them to design in a small vertical ridge on the front and a pronounced lip at the rear where the thumb rests to aid handling. This they did. See (I bought a black case with black stitching):

Fujifilm XE4 Half Case Camera Retro Genuine Leather Cover Insert VR Handmade New | eBay

I have both a grip and a leather half case.  The grip is nicer to hold but is too bulky if I want to go light.  My half case has a 1/4" steel base plate in it. the thing probably weighs 150g.  Not exactly great for going light.  I went and drilled a whole load of holes in it to make it lighter..probably cut 60g out of it.  I'm not exactly thrilled that I have to do all this to get a useable camera. The XE4 is useable with the pancake lenses, but anything more and you need to improve the grip.  I carry mine ski touring, mountain biking and climbing. Minimizing added weight is important. Those extra molded pieces on my XE3 probably weigh 10g at most...infact, I think the XE4 is slightly heavier.

It's putting aesthetics ahead of function and usability ..which as a engineer is a pet peeve of mine.

Clive99 wrote:

jhorse wrote:

Clive99 wrote:

Yes, the lack of controls is not as big an impact as i first thought (still prefer more). But both of you make the point that's it's fine with a leather case or a grip...and yes, that's how i shoot it too. My point is if you're intending it to be a small camera, what was the point in making it a bar of soap so you *have* to make it bigger with a case or grip? My xe3 doesn't need either to be comfortable.

You make a good point, and yes had I been the chief designer I would have included grips moulded into the body front and rear as they help handling without adding too much bulk or weight.

That said, even with the grips front and rear, I did put my XE3 into a leather half case. When the XE4 came out, I contacted the manufacturer of the XE3 grip I had, which was of excellent quality, and asked them to design in a small vertical ridge on the front and a pronounced lip at the rear where the thumb rests to aid handling. This they did. See (I bought a black case with black stitching):

Fujifilm XE4 Half Case Camera Retro Genuine Leather Cover Insert VR Handmade New | eBay

I have both a grip and a leather half case. The grip is nicer to hold but is too bulky if I want to go light. My half case has a 1/4" steel base plate in it. the thing probably weighs 150g. Not exactly great for going light. I went and drilled a whole load of holes in it to make it lighter..probably cut 60g out of it. I'm not exactly thrilled that I have to do all this to get a useable camera.

Yes, I too often adapt accessories.

The XE4 is useable with the pancake lenses, but anything more and you need to improve the grip. I carry mine ski touring, mountain biking and climbing. Minimizing added weight is important. Those extra molded pieces on my XE3 probably weigh 10g at most...infact, I think the XE4 is slightly heavier.

I agree with your weight point. As a skier (Alpine) and hiker weight is important.

It's putting aesthetics ahead of function and usability ..which as a engineer is a pet peeve of mine.

Couldn't agree more. My phrase was vanity over ergonomics!