Fujifilm xpro 4 expectations

Truman Prevatt wrote:

pidera wrote:

Read the comments of FR. Fuji management never considered the XPro as anything but a "special"l camera. The quote on FR was "However, we only release new products when necessary and useful. We don’t release new bodies just because we can. Especially for the X-Pro which is a very special device. For his successor, it has to make sense and really benefit users. Once these conditions are met, we will be able to launch a new X-Pro device.”

Quite a horrible statement to make by Fujifilm management. I was a relatively early adopter buying an X-10 in 2011, an X-E1 in 2013 and an X-Pro2 in 2016. I didn't buy them for reasons which are different than those of most other camera users. I didn't want to own a 'special device'. I just want a camera with ergonomics I like and relatively state-of-the-art technology, for both stills and occasional video shooting. The X-10 has a dust spot on the sensor but I still use the X-E1 and X-Pro2 on a regular basis. I would easily be tempted to buy an updated version with IBIS and improved video, keeping the ergonomics. The technology is there. I deplore the fact that Fujifilm altered the X-E line ergonomics and pushed the X-Pro line into a niche market.

The XPro was always a niche market. It was the only mirrorless ILC at the time that supported autofocus with the a true optical viewfinder as an option. The hybrid VF was expensive to develop and added recurring cost the the camera. It was not meant for every one and Fujifilm was very clear in their marketing of the camera that was the case.

Yes I know it is a kind of niche product and should have written 'pushed the X-Pro line *deeper* into a niche market' (deeper than necessary) . However, there used to be a choice between the X-E1 and X-Pro1, over which research was shared. For me they could have continued this way, offering a cheaper alternative to those who do not need or like the OVF or want something slightly more compact and lightweight. It was a good strategy but it ended and this (together with some weird choices like the X-Pro3 LCD screen) isolated the X-Pro line.

pidera wrote:

Truman Prevatt wrote:

pidera wrote:

Read the comments of FR. Fuji management never considered the XPro as anything but a "special"l camera. The quote on FR was "However, we only release new products when necessary and useful. We don’t release new bodies just because we can. Especially for the X-Pro which is a very special device. For his successor, it has to make sense and really benefit users. Once these conditions are met, we will be able to launch a new X-Pro device.”

Quite a horrible statement to make by Fujifilm management. I was a relatively early adopter buying an X-10 in 2011, an X-E1 in 2013 and an X-Pro2 in 2016. I didn't buy them for reasons which are different than those of most other camera users. I didn't want to own a 'special device'. I just want a camera with ergonomics I like and relatively state-of-the-art technology, for both stills and occasional video shooting. The X-10 has a dust spot on the sensor but I still use the X-E1 and X-Pro2 on a regular basis. I would easily be tempted to buy an updated version with IBIS and improved video, keeping the ergonomics. The technology is there. I deplore the fact that Fujifilm altered the X-E line ergonomics and pushed the X-Pro line into a niche market.

The XPro was always a niche market. It was the only mirrorless ILC at the time that supported autofocus with the a true optical viewfinder as an option. The hybrid VF was expensive to develop and added recurring cost the the camera. It was not meant for every one and Fujifilm was very clear in their marketing of the camera that was the case.

Yes I know it is a kind of niche product and should have written 'pushed the X-Pro line *deeper* into a niche market' (deeper than necessary) . However, there used to be a choice between the X-E1 and X-Pro1, over which research was shared. For me they could have continued this way, offering a cheaper alternative to those who do not need or like the OVF or want something slightly more compact and lightweight. It was a good strategy but it ended and this (together with some weird choices like the X-Pro3 LCD screen) isolated the X-Pro line.

The XPro line was always a niche product. It was intended that way. It was unique - the only mirrorless ILC besides the Leica M that offered an OVF. It was intended for a certain style of shooting certain genres. See the marketing around the XPro. It was planned that way. The XPro was always the most expensive camera in the X line up. The OVF cost money to design and to build. There are people willing to pay a premium for the hybrid finder. That only changed with the XH2S with the more expensive sensor. It was directed to a niche portion of the market. After all it was Fuji that coined the term "Pure Photography." It is very clear from their introductory video - the people they were targeting this camera for.

https://fujifilm-x.com/en-us/products/cameras/x-pro3/

I'm not sure why you have an issue with that. Sure there have been rumors dating back three years that the XE line was being axed three years ago.

https://www.fujirumors.com/rumor-fujifilm-x-e-line-canceled-game-over-for-fujifilm-x-e4/

To quote Mark Twain, "the reports of the death were somewhat premature." We will see what Fuji does with the XE line.

But if it is a camera with the television screen in the upper left corner you want - Sony makes a few nice ones - one FF and one APSC.

My desire for the XPro4 is the new processor. As for as display, redesign the current XPro3 concept and harden it to eliminate the flex on the cable or go to an FAC that can be turned around and stored. As far as sensor one of two options - the 40 MP replacing the 26. I could also go with a 26 stacked sensor with an ES only and elimination of the MS might give enough room for an IBIS unit. The VF, reintroduce the two levels of magnification in the OVF.

At the end of the day choice is good.

Truman Prevatt wrote:

pidera wrote:

Truman Prevatt wrote:

pidera wrote:

Read the comments of FR. Fuji management never considered the XPro as anything but a "special"l camera. The quote on FR was "However, we only release new products when necessary and useful. We don’t release new bodies just because we can. Especially for the X-Pro which is a very special device. For his successor, it has to make sense and really benefit users. Once these conditions are met, we will be able to launch a new X-Pro device.”

Quite a horrible statement to make by Fujifilm management. I was a relatively early adopter buying an X-10 in 2011, an X-E1 in 2013 and an X-Pro2 in 2016. I didn't buy them for reasons which are different than those of most other camera users. I didn't want to own a 'special device'. I just want a camera with ergonomics I like and relatively state-of-the-art technology, for both stills and occasional video shooting. The X-10 has a dust spot on the sensor but I still use the X-E1 and X-Pro2 on a regular basis. I would easily be tempted to buy an updated version with IBIS and improved video, keeping the ergonomics. The technology is there. I deplore the fact that Fujifilm altered the X-E line ergonomics and pushed the X-Pro line into a niche market.

The XPro was always a niche market. It was the only mirrorless ILC at the time that supported autofocus with the a true optical viewfinder as an option. The hybrid VF was expensive to develop and added recurring cost the the camera. It was not meant for every one and Fujifilm was very clear in their marketing of the camera that was the case.

Yes I know it is a kind of niche product and should have written 'pushed the X-Pro line *deeper* into a niche market' (deeper than necessary) . However, there used to be a choice between the X-E1 and X-Pro1, over which research was shared. For me they could have continued this way, offering a cheaper alternative to those who do not need or like the OVF or want something slightly more compact and lightweight. It was a good strategy but it ended and this (together with some weird choices like the X-Pro3 LCD screen) isolated the X-Pro line.

(...) I'm not sure why you have an issue with that.

I don't have an issue with that, not at all. I have an issue with Fujifilm isolating the product line and turning the product into what I see as a bit of a cliché (or statement product if you like). The difference is subtle.

But if it is a camera with the television screen in the upper left corner you want - Sony makes a few nice ones - one FF and one APSC.

Yes I know, but I have invested in Fujifilm bodies (2) lenses (6) and generally like the experience

My desire for the XPro4 is the new processor. As for as display, redesign the current XPro3 concept and harden it to eliminate the flex on the cable or go to an FAC that can be turned around and stored. As far as sensor one of two options - the 40 MP replacing the 26. I could also go with a 26 stacked sensor with an ES only and elimination of the MS might give enough room for an IBIS unit. The VF, reintroduce the two levels of magnification in the OVF.

At the end of the day choice is good.

I prefer an LCD which is easy for overhead shooting I wouldn't mind seeing the 26 MP stacked sensor either. Choice is good indeed (that's why I'm sad about how both the X-E line and X-Pro evolved into directions I'm not particularly interested in)

Kr, P.

pidera wrote:

Truman Prevatt wrote:

pidera wrote:

Truman Prevatt wrote:

pidera wrote:

Read the comments of FR. Fuji management never considered the XPro as anything but a "special"l camera. The quote on FR was "However, we only release new products when necessary and useful. We don’t release new bodies just because we can. Especially for the X-Pro which is a very special device. For his successor, it has to make sense and really benefit users. Once these conditions are met, we will be able to launch a new X-Pro device.”

Quite a horrible statement to make by Fujifilm management. I was a relatively early adopter buying an X-10 in 2011, an X-E1 in 2013 and an X-Pro2 in 2016. I didn't buy them for reasons which are different than those of most other camera users. I didn't want to own a 'special device'. I just want a camera with ergonomics I like and relatively state-of-the-art technology, for both stills and occasional video shooting. The X-10 has a dust spot on the sensor but I still use the X-E1 and X-Pro2 on a regular basis. I would easily be tempted to buy an updated version with IBIS and improved video, keeping the ergonomics. The technology is there. I deplore the fact that Fujifilm altered the X-E line ergonomics and pushed the X-Pro line into a niche market.

The XPro was always a niche market. It was the only mirrorless ILC at the time that supported autofocus with the a true optical viewfinder as an option. The hybrid VF was expensive to develop and added recurring cost the the camera. It was not meant for every one and Fujifilm was very clear in their marketing of the camera that was the case.

Yes I know it is a kind of niche product and should have written 'pushed the X-Pro line *deeper* into a niche market' (deeper than necessary) . However, there used to be a choice between the X-E1 and X-Pro1, over which research was shared. For me they could have continued this way, offering a cheaper alternative to those who do not need or like the OVF or want something slightly more compact and lightweight. It was a good strategy but it ended and this (together with some weird choices like the X-Pro3 LCD screen) isolated the X-Pro line.

(...) I'm not sure why you have an issue with that.

I don't have an issue with that, not at all. I have an issue with Fujifilm isolating the product line and turning the product into what I see as a bit of a cliché (or statement product if you like). The difference is subtle.

But if it is a camera with the television screen in the upper left corner you want - Sony makes a few nice ones - one FF and one APSC.

Yes I know, but I have invested in Fujifilm bodies (2) lenses (6) and generally like the experience

My desire for the XPro4 is the new processor. As for as display, redesign the current XPro3 concept and harden it to eliminate the flex on the cable or go to an FAC that can be turned around and stored. As far as sensor one of two options - the 40 MP replacing the 26. I could also go with a 26 stacked sensor with an ES only and elimination of the MS might give enough room for an IBIS unit. The VF, reintroduce the two levels of magnification in the OVF.

At the end of the day choice is good.

I prefer an LCD which is easy for overhead shooting I wouldn't mind seeing the 26 MP stacked sensor either. Choice is good indeed (that's why I'm sad about how both the X-E line and X-Pro evolved into directions I'm not particularly interested in)

Kr, P.

The current XPro3 display works fine for that, simply drop it to 90 degrees and turn the camera upside down over your head.  A fully articulating screen also works fine for that and I think I would prefer a FAS on the Pro4.  The secondary display would need to go but it would be worth it.  I can use it or store it away out of harms way.  Most of the time it would be out of harms way since I seldom use a display.  If I do the camera is on a tripod or it is for looking at the menu.  I've been doing photography for about a half a century.  Most of that you had to develop the film before you saw your results.  You either learned to do it right our you gave up.  I really would not care if they simply eliminated the display completely and spent the money involved in the display to develop a descent app that could replace the display.  The Leica Fotos App is quite nice - and of course we know the Fuji app sucks.

I expect the Pro4 will go the 40 MP sensor route - that's fine. But the 26 MP route eliminating the MS is quite intriguing.   However, more importantly is they do not increase the camera size. They will have to be clever to integrate the new battery but the XT5 is a bit smaller than the XT4 so it can be done..  I would not pay premium price for a larger XPro4 if they had to increase the size for IBIS.  I'll just wait for the Leica Q3M and be done with it.

If Fuji wants to charge me premium price - then it better be everything I want and no compromises.

pidera wrote:

biza43 wrote:

The X100 and XPRO lines have established the reputation of the APSC X system. They were something new at the time, 10 years ago. The XPRO has always been a special product for a niche market. A camera that costs over 2,000 USD can not be main stream.

There used to be a choice between the X-E1 and X-Pro1, over which a lot of research was shared. For me they could have continued this way, offering a cheaper alternative to those who do not need or like the OVF or want something slightly more compact and lightweight. It's Fujifilm management who stopped this and isolated the X-Pro line.

The XE line is still very much alive, so not sure what you are talking about. It is cheaper, no OVF, more compact and lightweight, compared to XPro.

What they are saying is that they will replace the PRO3 when they think that the market is ready for it, based on their market analysis. Which is normal. I think the XPRO1 was around for 6 or 7 years before being replaced. I see the XPRO4 with image stabilization and a 40mpx sensor.

I'm not sure what they are saying.

You can read their statement, it has been shared in this thread.

But what they have been doing lately is approaching the X-Pro market as if (and now I'm deliberately going to exaggerate to make the point clear) the X-Pro users are a weird bunch of people (tech geeks, snobs, film era nostalgics) who didn't by an X-T line, and need something 'special' to be convinced to upgrade or enter the market. I object to this way of looking at things and think that it is a self-fulfilling prophecy to go that

Your way of looking is wrong. film era nostalgics, I can understand. The rest, is nonsense really.

route.

Kr, P.

Threaded wrote:

DarnGoodPhotos wrote:

Threaded wrote:

It’s not like we don’t have recent form to compare it to either. Fujifilm has had a big failure in recent years, and that was the XH1. With that camera there were clear signs of lacklustre demand from the off, with generous discounts early on, leading to deeper price cuts, and then deeper cuts still, ending in a rapid sell off of stock (to many happy bargain hunters) and the model being discontinued entirely after barely a year. None of that has happened with the XP3, no discounts, no sell off, and a production run that’s been similar to previous X-Pro’s and much longer than most other models. Is that really what failure looks like?

The X-H1's demand is irrelevant to the X-Pro3 success/failure because it was a completely different situation.

Fuji released the X-H1 as their flagship/most-professional SLR less than half a year before the X-T3 eclipsed its performance. The deep discounts happened only after the X-T3's demand surpassed the X-H1's because the X-H1 was generally viewed, IBIS not withstanding, as obsolete**.

** Apologies to the X-H1 true-believers among us.

I don’t agree with that hypothesis - the XH1 failed entirely on its own terms before the successful XT3 launch - but in any case it’s immaterial to the point I’m making.

The point is the XH1 was a flagship launch from Fuji that failed, and we all saw exactly how that failure played out. If the X-Pro3 was also a failure, as some here insist, how did it stay on the market for twice as long and never see a discount?

I think Fuji made a ton of X-H1 cameras and couldn’t sell them where as they never make a ton of X-Pro cameras in anticipation of selling them.

John Gellings wrote:

Threaded wrote:

DarnGoodPhotos wrote:

Threaded wrote:

It’s not like we don’t have recent form to compare it to either. Fujifilm has had a big failure in recent years, and that was the XH1. With that camera there were clear signs of lacklustre demand from the off, with generous discounts early on, leading to deeper price cuts, and then deeper cuts still, ending in a rapid sell off of stock (to many happy bargain hunters) and the model being discontinued entirely after barely a year. None of that has happened with the XP3, no discounts, no sell off, and a production run that’s been similar to previous X-Pro’s and much longer than most other models. Is that really what failure looks like?

The X-H1's demand is irrelevant to the X-Pro3 success/failure because it was a completely different situation.

Fuji released the X-H1 as their flagship/most-professional SLR less than half a year before the X-T3 eclipsed its performance. The deep discounts happened only after the X-T3's demand surpassed the X-H1's because the X-H1 was generally viewed, IBIS not withstanding, as obsolete**.

** Apologies to the X-H1 true-believers among us.

I don’t agree with that hypothesis - the XH1 failed entirely on its own terms before the successful XT3 launch - but in any case it’s immaterial to the point I’m making.

The point is the XH1 was a flagship launch from Fuji that failed, and we all saw exactly how that failure played out. If the X-Pro3 was also a failure, as some here insist, how did it stay on the market for twice as long and never see a discount?

I think Fuji made a ton of X-H1 cameras and couldn’t sell them where as they never make a ton of X-Pro cameras in anticipation of selling them.

I’m sure you’re right, but that’s another way of saying the X-Pro3 met expectations 🙂

The X-H1 definitely didn’t, neither did the X-Pro1, hence all the heavy discounting in 2015.

I know for a fact they were still making X-Pro3’s as late as the end of last year, as I now have a “24” serial model (2022, 4th quarter), and yet they seem to be sold out pretty much everywhere now - suggesting they’ve had no trouble selling them.

Threaded wrote:

John Gellings wrote:

Threaded wrote:

DarnGoodPhotos wrote:

Threaded wrote:

It’s not like we don’t have recent form to compare it to either. Fujifilm has had a big failure in recent years, and that was the XH1. With that camera there were clear signs of lacklustre demand from the off, with generous discounts early on, leading to deeper price cuts, and then deeper cuts still, ending in a rapid sell off of stock (to many happy bargain hunters) and the model being discontinued entirely after barely a year. None of that has happened with the XP3, no discounts, no sell off, and a production run that’s been similar to previous X-Pro’s and much longer than most other models. Is that really what failure looks like?

The X-H1's demand is irrelevant to the X-Pro3 success/failure because it was a completely different situation.

Fuji released the X-H1 as their flagship/most-professional SLR less than half a year before the X-T3 eclipsed its performance. The deep discounts happened only after the X-T3's demand surpassed the X-H1's because the X-H1 was generally viewed, IBIS not withstanding, as obsolete**.

** Apologies to the X-H1 true-believers among us.

I don’t agree with that hypothesis - the XH1 failed entirely on its own terms before the successful XT3 launch - but in any case it’s immaterial to the point I’m making.

The point is the XH1 was a flagship launch from Fuji that failed, and we all saw exactly how that failure played out. If the X-Pro3 was also a failure, as some here insist, how did it stay on the market for twice as long and never see a discount?

I think Fuji made a ton of X-H1 cameras and couldn’t sell them where as they never make a ton of X-Pro cameras in anticipation of selling them.

I’m sure you’re right, but that’s another way of saying the X-Pro3 met expectations 🙂

The X-H1 definitely didn’t, neither did the X-Pro1, hence all the heavy discounting in 2015.

I know for a fact they were still making X-Pro3’s as late as the end of last year, as I now have a “24” serial model (2022, 4th quarter), and yet they seem to be sold out pretty much everywhere now - suggesting they’ve had no trouble selling them.

I should have said I agree completely with you. I see no sign the X-Pro3 was a sales failure.  Also, I never saw the final X-Pro1 discounts in the USA.  I heard of them in other countries though.

I absolutely love my X-Pro3.  I can’t wait for the X-Pro4.  That is the Fujifilm that I love.

biza43 wrote:

pidera wrote:

biza43 wrote:

The X100 and XPRO lines have established the reputation of the APSC X system. They were something new at the time, 10 years ago. The XPRO has always been a special product for a niche market. A camera that costs over 2,000 USD can not be main stream.

There used to be a choice between the X-E1 and X-Pro1, over which a lot of research was shared. For me they could have continued this way, offering a cheaper alternative to those who do not need or like the OVF or want something slightly more compact and lightweight. It's Fujifilm management who stopped this and isolated the X-Pro line.

The XE line is still very much alive, so not sure what you are talking about. It is cheaper, no OVF, more compact and lightweight, compared to XPro.

I know, I own them (one of each line). and you're basically repeating what I wrote.

What they are saying is that they will replace the PRO3 when they think that the market is ready for it, based on their market analysis. Which is normal. I think the XPRO1 was around for 6 or 7 years before being replaced. I see the XPRO4 with image stabilization and a 40mpx sensor.

I'm not sure what they are saying.

You can read their statement, it has been shared in this thread.

I know, I was one of the people who (re)shared it

But what they have been doing lately is approaching the X-Pro market as if (and now I'm deliberately going to exaggerate to make the point clear) the X-Pro users are a weird bunch of people (tech geeks, snobs, film era nostalgics) who didn't by an X-T line, and need something 'special' to be convinced to upgrade or enter the market. I object to this way of looking at things and think that it is a self-fulfilling prophecy to go that

Your way of looking is wrong. film era nostalgics, I can understand. The rest, is nonsense really.

Well, at least one person in the thread confessed to matching the description

route.

Kr, P.

BTW, my point is that Fujifilm started out well with the X-Pro sitting nicely in between X100 and X-E lines, sharing technology and design features. And then they started overthinking their products. Fine for me if you have another opinion.

biza43 wrote:

The X100 and XPRO lines have established the reputation of the APSC X system. They were something new at the time, 10 years ago. The XPRO has always been a special product for a niche market. A camera that costs over 2,000 USD can not be main stream.

What they are saying is that they will replace the PRO3 when they think that the market is ready for it, based on their market analysis. Which is normal. I think the XPRO1 was around for 6 or 7 years before being replaced.

No it was 4 years.  Kind of the same time between the 2 and the 3 too.  That brings us to Oct 2023 as a typical update time.

I see the XPRO4 with image stabilization and a 40mpx sensor.

Yeah, me too.

-- hide signature --

www.paulobizarro.com
http://blog.paulobizarro.com/

pidera wrote:

biza43 wrote:

pidera wrote:

biza43 wrote:

The X100 and XPRO lines have established the reputation of the APSC X system. They were something new at the time, 10 years ago. The XPRO has always been a special product for a niche market. A camera that costs over 2,000 USD can not be main stream.

There used to be a choice between the X-E1 and X-Pro1, over which a lot of research was shared. For me they could have continued this way, offering a cheaper alternative to those who do not need or like the OVF or want something slightly more compact and lightweight. It's Fujifilm management who stopped this and isolated the X-Pro line.

The XE line is still very much alive, so not sure what you are talking about. It is cheaper, no OVF, more compact and lightweight, compared to XPro.

I know, I own them (one of each line). and you're basically repeating what I wrote.

No I am not. You wrote:

"There used to be a choice between the X-E1 and X-Pro1..."

Implying that such a choice between XE and XPro series does not exist anymore, which is false. And they still offer a cheaper alternative, etc. Opposite of what you wrote.

What they are saying is that they will replace the PRO3 when they think that the market is ready for it, based on their market analysis. Which is normal. I think the XPRO1 was around for 6 or 7 years before being replaced. I see the XPRO4 with image stabilization and a 40mpx sensor.

I'm not sure what they are saying.

You can read their statement, it has been shared in this thread.

I know, I was one of the people who (re)shared it

Then why did you wrote "I am not sure what they are saying"? It is pretty clear what they are communicating.

But what they have been doing lately is approaching the X-Pro market as if (and now I'm deliberately going to exaggerate to make the point clear) the X-Pro users are a weird bunch of people (tech geeks, snobs, film era nostalgics) who didn't by an X-T line, and need something 'special' to be convinced to upgrade or enter the market. I object to this way of looking at things and think that it is a self-fulfilling prophecy to go that

Your way of looking is wrong. film era nostalgics, I can understand. The rest, is nonsense really.

Well, at least one person in the thread confessed to matching the description

route.

Kr, P.

BTW, my point is that Fujifilm started out well with the X-Pro sitting nicely in between X100 and X-E lines, sharing technology and design features. And then they started overthinking their products. Fine for me if you have another opinion.

Then you have it all wrong. The XPro at the time, in 2011, sat at the top, not in between. Seems like you have no inclination or need for the XT and XTX lines, which is fine. But Fuji needed more than an entry level XE and top level XPro to have a successful business case.

biza43 wrote:

pidera wrote:

biza43 wrote:

pidera wrote:

biza43 wrote:

The X100 and XPRO lines have established the reputation of the APSC X system. They were something new at the time, 10 years ago. The XPRO has always been a special product for a niche market. A camera that costs over 2,000 USD can not be main stream.

There used to be a choice between the X-E1 and X-Pro1, over which a lot of research was shared. For me they could have continued this way, offering a cheaper alternative to those who do not need or like the OVF or want something slightly more compact and lightweight. It's Fujifilm management who stopped this and isolated the X-Pro line.

The XE line is still very much alive, so not sure what you are talking about. It is cheaper, no OVF, more compact and lightweight, compared to XPro.

I know, I own them (one of each line). and you're basically repeating what I wrote.

No I am not. You wrote:

"There used to be a choice between the X-E1 and X-Pro1..."

Implying that such a choice between XE and XPro series does not exist anymore, which is false. And they still offer a cheaper alternative, etc. Opposite of what you wrote.

They were much more similar, the choice mainly impacted OVF or not

What they are saying is that they will replace the PRO3 when they think that the market is ready for it, based on their market analysis. Which is normal. I think the XPRO1 was around for 6 or 7 years before being replaced. I see the XPRO4 with image stabilization and a 40mpx sensor.

I'm not sure what they are saying.

You can read their statement, it has been shared in this thread.

I know, I was one of the people who (re)shared it

Then why did you wrote "I am not sure what they are saying"? It is pretty clear what they are communicating.

Word are words, they are still open to interpretation, but I'm not optimistic there

But what they have been doing lately is approaching the X-Pro market as if (and now I'm deliberately going to exaggerate to make the point clear) the X-Pro users are a weird bunch of people (tech geeks, snobs, film era nostalgics) who didn't by an X-T line, and need something 'special' to be convinced to upgrade or enter the market. I object to this way of looking at things and think that it is a self-fulfilling prophecy to go that

Your way of looking is wrong. film era nostalgics, I can understand. The rest, is nonsense really.

Well, at least one person in the thread confessed to matching the description

route.

Kr, P.

BTW, my point is that Fujifilm started out well with the X-Pro sitting nicely in between X100 and X-E lines, sharing technology and design features. And then they started overthinking their products. Fine for me if you have another opinion.

Then you have it all wrong. The XPro at the time, in 2011, sat at the top, not in between. Seems like you have no inclination or need for the XT and XTX lines, which is fine. But Fuji needed more than an entry level XE and top level XPro to have a successful business case.

In between design and technology wise (OVF shered with X100, rest of the design shared with X-E), not positioning wise.

Question for you : are you interested in the X-E or X-Pro line (potential buyer) or just here to discuss (what you are free to do but I fail to see the point) ?

pidera wrote:

biza43 wrote:

pidera wrote:

biza43 wrote:

pidera wrote:

biza43 wrote:

The X100 and XPRO lines have established the reputation of the APSC X system. They were something new at the time, 10 years ago. The XPRO has always been a special product for a niche market. A camera that costs over 2,000 USD can not be main stream.

There used to be a choice between the X-E1 and X-Pro1, over which a lot of research was shared. For me they could have continued this way, offering a cheaper alternative to those who do not need or like the OVF or want something slightly more compact and lightweight. It's Fujifilm management who stopped this and isolated the X-Pro line.

The XE line is still very much alive, so not sure what you are talking about. It is cheaper, no OVF, more compact and lightweight, compared to XPro.

I know, I own them (one of each line). and you're basically repeating what I wrote.

No I am not. You wrote:

"There used to be a choice between the X-E1 and X-Pro1..."

Implying that such a choice between XE and XPro series does not exist anymore, which is false. And they still offer a cheaper alternative, etc. Opposite of what you wrote.

They were much more similar, the choice mainly impacted OVF or not

It was more than that - at the time those two cameras represented literally Fuji’s entire range of interchangeable lens cameras.  The XE1 was introduced as an alternative to the XP1 but it wasn’t solely about EVF vs OVF, it was also a significantly cheaper camera with lower end build quality (around 50/50 aluminium and plastic rather than entirely mag alloy)  and had more consumer friendly features like a built in flash.  They were pitched quite differently; the X-Pro1 continued as a high-end flagship for enthusiasts, and essentially the XE1 was the start of the more consumer oriented line we see today not only in the XE4 but also the XT30, XS10 etc.

What they are saying is that they will replace the PRO3 when they think that the market is ready for it, based on their market analysis. Which is normal. I think the XPRO1 was around for 6 or 7 years before being replaced. I see the XPRO4 with image stabilization and a 40mpx sensor.

I'm not sure what they are saying.

You can read their statement, it has been shared in this thread.

I know, I was one of the people who (re)shared it

Then why did you wrote "I am not sure what they are saying"? It is pretty clear what they are communicating.

Word are words, they are still open to interpretation, but I'm not optimistic there

I can’t see any negative in what they’re saying.  They want to keep the X-Pro special - it always has been.  It was in the days of the X-Pro1 and XE1.

Seems to me your main fear is that they might be suggesting the X-Pro4 won’t toe the line of convention and become a more ordinary camera with an ordinary screen… and you’re probably right.  But you’re wrong to think the X-Pro has ever walked that path.

pidera wrote:

biza43 wrote:

pidera wrote:

biza43 wrote:

pidera wrote:

biza43 wrote:

The X100 and XPRO lines have established the reputation of the APSC X system. They were something new at the time, 10 years ago. The XPRO has always been a special product for a niche market. A camera that costs over 2,000 USD can not be main stream.

There used to be a choice between the X-E1 and X-Pro1, over which a lot of research was shared. For me they could have continued this way, offering a cheaper alternative to those who do not need or like the OVF or want something slightly more compact and lightweight. It's Fujifilm management who stopped this and isolated the X-Pro line.

The XE line is still very much alive, so not sure what you are talking about. It is cheaper, no OVF, more compact and lightweight, compared to XPro.

I know, I own them (one of each line). and you're basically repeating what I wrote.

No I am not. You wrote:

"There used to be a choice between the X-E1 and X-Pro1..."

Implying that such a choice between XE and XPro series does not exist anymore, which is false. And they still offer a cheaper alternative, etc. Opposite of what you wrote.

They were much more similar, the choice mainly impacted OVF or not

I have used XE1 and XPro1, they were miles apart. Also have used XE4 and XPro3 more recently, again, they are still miles apart.

What they are saying is that they will replace the PRO3 when they think that the market is ready for it, based on their market analysis. Which is normal. I think the XPRO1 was around for 6 or 7 years before being replaced. I see the XPRO4 with image stabilization and a 40mpx sensor.

I'm not sure what they are saying.

You can read their statement, it has been shared in this thread.

I know, I was one of the people who (re)shared it

Then why did you wrote "I am not sure what they are saying"? It is pretty clear what they are communicating.

Word are words, they are still open to interpretation, but I'm not optimistic there

Fuji's statement was quite objective and clear.

But what they have been doing lately is approaching the X-Pro market as if (and now I'm deliberately going to exaggerate to make the point clear) the X-Pro users are a weird bunch of people (tech geeks, snobs, film era nostalgics) who didn't by an X-T line, and need something 'special' to be convinced to upgrade or enter the market. I object to this way of looking at things and think that it is a self-fulfilling prophecy to go that

Your way of looking is wrong. film era nostalgics, I can understand. The rest, is nonsense really.

Well, at least one person in the thread confessed to matching the description

route.

Kr, P.

BTW, my point is that Fujifilm started out well with the X-Pro sitting nicely in between X100 and X-E lines, sharing technology and design features. And then they started overthinking their products. Fine for me if you have another opinion.

Then you have it all wrong. The XPro at the time, in 2011, sat at the top, not in between. Seems like you have no inclination or need for the XT and XTX lines, which is fine. But Fuji needed more than an entry level XE and top level XPro to have a successful business case.

In between design and technology wise (OVF shered with X100, rest of the design shared with X-E), not positioning wise.

Question for you : are you interested in the X-E or X-Pro line (potential buyer) or just here to discuss (what you are free to do but I fail to see the point) ?

See above. XPro series with OVF always interested me, suppose I am one of those film nostalgics. It is nice to use OVF with small lenses that do not block it, simple controls. If you turn off EVF, the battery lasts a long time too.

Fujifilm has an adapter for Leica M lenses with electrical contacts, but one feature that would make this even better is rangefinder coupling.

Once the camera knows the focused distance it could adjust the OVF frame lines for parallax (and image size?) automatically, as it does for Fujifilm lenses. This would need a rangefinder cam in the adapter, but would it require any changes in the camera(s) beyond a firmware update?

The company is unlikely to do this as it might encourage more third-party lens use and fewer Fujinon purchases... but it might sell more cameras!

Heritage Cameras wrote:

Fujifilm has an adapter for Leica M lenses with electrical contacts, but one feature that would make this even better is rangefinder coupling.

Once the camera knows the focused distance it could adjust the OVF frame lines for parallax (and image size?) automatically, as it does for Fujifilm lenses. This would need a rangefinder cam in the adapter, but would it require any changes in the camera(s) beyond a firmware update?

The company is unlikely to do this as it might encourage more third-party lens use and fewer Fujinon purchases... but it might sell more cameras!

No idea about the feasibility of this but it sure sounds amazing to be able to have a truer rangefinder experience with an X-Pro. Having said that, the same problem I have with the Pixii would remain: the lenses and their focal lengths are made for full frame and wouldn't work as well, at least for me, with the crop factor.

For instance, as far as I know there is no 18mm M lens I could use to have a 28mm equivalent, or a 26mm for a 40mm equivalent.

ViMa wrote:

No idea about the feasibility of this but it sure sounds amazing to be able to have a truer rangefinder experience with an X-Pro. Having said that, the same problem I have with the Pixii would remain: the lenses and their focal lengths are made for full frame and wouldn't work as well, at least for me, with the crop factor.

For instance, as far as I know there is no 18mm M lens I could use to have a 28mm equivalent, or a 26mm for a 40mm equivalent.

Just use your Leica Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21 f/4 ASPH - doesn't everybody have one?

https://leica-camera.com/en-GB/photography/lenses/m/tri-elmar-m-16-18-21mm-f4-asph-black

Heritage Cameras wrote:

ViMa wrote:

No idea about the feasibility of this but it sure sounds amazing to be able to have a truer rangefinder experience with an X-Pro. Having said that, the same problem I have with the Pixii would remain: the lenses and their focal lengths are made for full frame and wouldn't work as well, at least for me, with the crop factor.

For instance, as far as I know there is no 18mm M lens I could use to have a 28mm equivalent, or a 26mm for a 40mm equivalent.

Just use your Leica Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21 f/4 ASPH - doesn't everybody have one?

https://leica-camera.com/en-GB/photography/lenses/m/tri-elmar-m-16-18-21mm-f4-asph-black

wow, didn't even know such a monstrosity existed! Is it like a proper zoom or does it only shift between these three focal lengths? I shouldn't ask its price even for academic purposes, I fear I may have a heart attack.

ViMa wrote:

Heritage Cameras wrote:

Just use your Leica Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21 f/4 ASPH - doesn't everybody have one?

https://leica-camera.com/en-GB/photography/lenses/m/tri-elmar-m-16-18-21mm-f4-asph-black

wow, didn't even know such a monstrosity existed! Is it like a proper zoom or does it only shift between these three focal lengths? I shouldn't ask its price even for academic purposes, I fear I may have a heart attack.

Yes, it's a true zoom lens and can be used at any focal length - though only the marked and click-stopped ones work with the cameras' frame lines, of course. There was an earlier 28-35-50mm version which only worked at these three settings.

If you think the price of the Wide Angle Tri-Elmar is likely to cause a cardiac arrest, don't even look at how much a prototype Vario-Elmar M 28-75mm f/3.4-5.6 ASPH made at auction a while ago... Suffice to say in much of the UK (and even more of the wider world) the sum would buy you a house.

ViMa wrote:

Heritage Cameras wrote:

Fujifilm has an adapter for Leica M lenses with electrical contacts, but one feature that would make this even better is rangefinder coupling.

Once the camera knows the focused distance it could adjust the OVF frame lines for parallax (and image size?) automatically, as it does for Fujifilm lenses. This would need a rangefinder cam in the adapter, but would it require any changes in the camera(s) beyond a firmware update?

The company is unlikely to do this as it might encourage more third-party lens use and fewer Fujinon purchases... but it might sell more cameras!

No idea about the feasibility of this but it sure sounds amazing to be able to have a truer rangefinder experience with an X-Pro. Having said that, the same problem I have with the Pixii would remain: the lenses and their focal lengths are made for full frame and wouldn't work as well, at least for me, with the crop factor.

For instance, as far as I know there is no 18mm M lens I could use to have a 28mm equivalent, or a 26mm for a 40mm equivalent.

There are 18mm lenses made by both Zeiss and Leica for Leica M mount and Zeiss also makes a 25mm. There are many 28mm lenses that would be 42mm lenses on APSC.