Fujifilm X-Pro3 review: living in the moment, not a screen in sight

I noticed that the screen/vf rating is among the weakest. Why is this so? Wasn't the vf the main reason to buy the xpro3? There are drawbacks such as smaller magnification, no vf zoom, wrong placement of the small screen in hybrid mode which btw is a pain to use with MF lenses and should be tackled as an issue, but still the EVF is extremely good, the OVF is usable and the screen is bright and detailed, though not so usable. So all in all the whole package is very good albeit the ovf and the lcd are not so usable. Still, the mark should be higher than mediocre - a bit lower than the xpro2 but higher than dpreview evaluated it...

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Thermidor

Keep in mind that when the X-Pro 2 came it, it did nearly everything better than the original X-Pro 1, with the notable exception of the stupid ISO dial, which they were never able to implement a workaround via firmware so you could control ISO using one of the command dials. That was a huge misstep, because even the Pro 1 could do that.

The X-Pro 3, loses some things that the Pro 2 got right, like the OVF magnification overlay screen, and a wider coverage that let you shoot with a 16mm lens on OVF. You get a better average magnification, but at the cost of wide and telephoto coverage.

The hidden rear LCD screen is highly divisive. Fuji could have easily just given you a flip out screen so you could just flip it inwards if you don't chimp your photos.

A score of 85 is more than generous considering this camera is only going to appeal to a very niche market.

Nov 14, 2019*permalink

To me, the most annoying thing is that popup fin in hybrid mode used with manual focus lenses. You can get crossed eyes for looking this tiny area located at the most unergonomic of places possible. Why not move it to the center. Fuji, you can do this, can you?

Nov 14, 2019permalink

MirrorLessHater

What's wrong with this camera?

Nov 13, 2019permalink

It should be full frame..

Nov 14, 2019permalink

V2S

This rangefinder is slightly bigger than a Leica M10 , slightly lighter by 163gr inc. batteries and 1/3 of the price cheaper , if it was full frame then it would have been a winner . But for some reason something stops them for doing that , am I wrong ? Possible maybe probably not

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Bjrn SWE

What’s stopping Fujifilm is that they have no lenses for FF but almost a complete line for APS-C size sensors.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

(unknown member)

@Bjm SE
You do have to wonder how many 'full' frame advocates think this old film format is some magical miracle optimum sensor size and are sold as much on the name as anything.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

ozturert

If it had FF sensor, it wouldn't cost 1/3 of M10

Nov 13, 2019permalink

And if this was an actual rangefinder it would cost at least half of the M10.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Daft Punk

1.Because there is no need to have full frame.
2. Because they already have an excellent range of lenses.
3. Because if you really "need"a larger sensor, then a Fuji GFX50R is what you need, with a sensor 70% larger than full frame.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Daft Punk

It is weird how 'full frame" has become almost a cult; a religion.

When the 35mm format was invented it was regarded as "small format". There is no reason at all to be tied to it now - especially these days when people often view images on digital devices.

Ironic that as the need for high resolution comes down, people are brainwashed into wanting larger sensors.

All of this nonsense is then revealed for what it is, when smartphones and computational photography provide image quality to satisfy 99% of people.

No wonder camera sales are plummeting.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

hteasley

Yep. FF is not a magical world of unrivalled image capture, with APS-C and m43 languishing in some hell of fog and noise. It's just not the case.

Back in the 90s and 00s, it was all "megapixel, megapixel, megapixel". Resolution was everything. In the earliest days, it really did matter. These days, it does not, for 99.99% of photos taken. It only matters for fine art prints, and I'll guarantee* 98% of the folks on these forums do not print larger than A3.

Now, it's all "sensor size, sensor size, sensor size" with a lot of real myths behind it that people believe uncritically. Heaven forfend they actually shoot the systems they claim are catastrophically bad...

*I will offer no proof of this, of course. I stand by my conjecture because we all know it's true.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

It’s because some people (want to) believe there is no difference between aps-c and ff..

Nov 14, 2019permalink

FF benefits from the greatest luck in what became the naming convention, because to many "full" implies the best, the most complete.

Tis true that there are many great FF cameras out there, but the Fuji APS-C lineup is great and arguably the best around.

And as someone else mentioned, if you want to go bigger on the sensor, there are the wonderful Fuji MF systems. Granted they are more expensive but they will deliver the IQ.

Nov 14, 2019permalink

Thermidor

@Thoughts R Us That's a good observation, just as how the term 'Micro' gave a negative perception to M4/3 format.

Nov 14, 2019permalink

FF also benefits from having a larger sensor. It’s that simple. And yes, if you want to spent the money you can go even larger and get a MF camera. But if you look at the price of the XPro3 one could say there are more interesting options around. The fact that Fujifilm does not have a FF camera line does not make the FF sensor size a thing of the past. Please don’t apply the Fujifilm marketing to other brands..

Nov 14, 2019permalink

hteasley

Henricusmaria, FF is fine (I have more FF cameras than I do m43 and APS-C), but a camera not being FF is not a flaw. FF is not an unalloyed virtue. There are things the smaller sensor cameras do better.

Fuji decided to compete in APS-C, because Canikon were clearly moving away from it, and in MF, where Canikon weren't going at all, and where they have extensive experience in any case. FF for them makes no sense.

So relax. Let people enjoy things.

Nov 14, 2019*permalink

@hteasley You don’t hear me saying that a camera not being ff is a flaw. I am saying something completely different. Some people here want to make believe that there is no use for ff. Well this is only valid from a Fujifilm marketing standpoint. It’s a defensive mode which doesn’t make much sense unless you work for the company. Of course there is room for ff, like there is room for m43, aps-c and mf. And all of them have they’re specific benefits..

Nov 14, 2019permalink

In a market where everyone's competing to make the best Swiss Army knife with the greatest number of functions and features, it seems to me that Fujifilm have produced a steak-knife. With a polished rosewood handle. And it costs as much as the biggest, fattest Swiss Army knife.
A lot of people are really, really put out by it. They're saying "Where's the magnifying glass, and the tweezers, and the tool for getting stones out of horses' hooves? Where's the IBIS? Where's the fully-articulating screen? Where's the advanced video capabilities?"

Nov 13, 2019permalink

https://images.knifecenter.com/knifecenter/wenger/images/WR16999a.jpg

A quote on the theme of why it's good to remove excess functions, from a book on Behavioual Economics, by Rory Sutherland:

"Google is Yahoo without the extraneous crap cluttering the search page. The more successful competitor achieved dominance by removing something the competitor offered rather than adding to it. Similarly, Twitter’s successcame from the arbitrary limitation on the number of characters it allowed. McDonald’s deleted 99% of items from the traditional American diner repertoire. If you want ease of use – and ease of purchase – it is a good idea not to offer something that claims to do lots of things. With the exception of the mobile phone, we find it easier to buy things with a single purpose. However, the engineering mentality – as at Sony – runs counter to this; the idea of removing functionality seems completely illogical, and it is extremely hard to make the case for over-riding conventional logic in any business or government setting, unless you are the chairman."

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Sine_Nomine

You must be looking for this:

Nov 13, 2019permalink

That's the one!

Nov 13, 2019permalink

four under

@Sine_Nomine
Does that come with a backpack?

Nov 13, 2019permalink

But it has all of the features - it doesn't lack any features. It is by far Fuji's most versatile camera as it unites capabilities from the X-Pro line with those of the X-T line, and some.
The X-Pro2 didn't have a tilting screen, and that's why I went from the X-Pro1 to the ugly but functional X-T2. It does everything that the X-Pro2 did but better. Yes, they've changed the magnification in the process of improving the OVF and EVF, but y'know changes are made - design realities come into play.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

@Warwick Cairns: thank you for that quote on simplicity of design.

The camera companies have been adding tons of features and performance through the years and yet their market is dying. Clearly most consumers are not crying out for more features but greater convenience and ease of use. Hence the smartphone has won out as the camera for most users, and actually gotten people to take more pics than ever before. Imagine that: if you make something easy to do, more people will do it!

There is a market for feature rich devices, like among pro's and some serious hobbyists. However, even pro's value usability over the latest tech gadgetry.

In the future I think you will find that those who choose to buy dedicated cameras will do so mostly for the love of using them and hence gravitate towards the better design.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Sine_Nomine

@four under, no backpack, but imagine the torque you can get on the screwdriver! BTW, it’s a real product.

<philosophical>
The #1 attribute I’m willing to pay for is durability. The product has to do what it is intended to do, for as long as possible. That’s a measure of value. Be it cars, watches, cameras, whatever. What attracts me to the xp3 is the implied durability; titanium, screen is hidden from scratches, operating temp range, weather resistance. This is good stuff. I’d prefer a screen that could be reversed (like pen-f) but we can’t have everything. I prefer “rangefinder” style because the body is more compact for travel, and I don’t have to wipe the nose oil off the screen.
</philosophical>

Nov 13, 2019permalink

SpacemanUA

No, it's rather "And where is the blade in this knife? Is it only a handle?"

Nov 13, 2019permalink

hteasley

I do like how Fuji is praised for simplifying and removing features, while Leica is lambasted for it. And Leica does it even better...

Nov 14, 2019permalink

four under

@Sine_Nomine
Amazon .ca has a used one for $8000 CDN.

Nov 14, 2019permalink

I didn't get the parallax issue. what is the problem?

Nov 13, 2019permalink

The problem is when you use the OVF with AF Fujinon lenses, the selected AF point jumps a bit to correct for the paralax. What you see through the OVF as an AF point prior shooting is what you don't get when the image is focussed, thus the AF point "jump".

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Yes and no. Not sure if you are familiar with how the X-Pro's OVF works, but the frame lines and AF box stay where they are at infinity and move down and to the right more when the subject is closer; it also always displays two AF boxes or infinity and minimum focus. The AF box and frame lines move when you half press the shutter release, but don't after that.

On the 1 and 2, after taking a photo the box and frame lines would reset back to infinity, but on the 3 they stay where they are, based on the photo you just took. The issue being that there is now no visual indication of where infinity is. While this is a change, it may not be that big of a deal once you get used to it.

Nov 13, 2019*permalink

What's there not to know? It's a Galilean OVF, with TTL image projection in EVF mode... A prism unites the two. The EVF is either on or off and a curtain shuts to enable the EVF. Thus the parallax, the two are offset. A small curtain employs to enable the hybrid mode, though I doubt its efficiency, they could do away with it having that the EVF has a good brightness and contrast.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Ah thanks @DarnGoodPhotos
On my X100F, I would wish for the framelines to stay at the last focus distance.

Anyway, do we still have the white infinity and minimum focus boxes shown to see the range?
I don't care for the frame lines when I use AF, but need the approximate AF point first and then concentrate on framing.

Nov 14, 2019permalink

Tim Gallo

Can somebody exaplain me why eye af does not work in optical viewfinder mode? Camera sees the same thing right? Why its not working? Or its working just not showing in ovf?

Nov 13, 2019permalink

I would think it to be software first. I wonder if this will be possible to do as an update.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Because of the parallax. It could be implemented as the "AF point jump" with a software update, but you won't see it focussing on the actual face as viewed through the OVF for close focus distances. It will be offset.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Yeah, I think it doesn't display well due to parallax. If you have a group of people it would be confusing which face receives focus.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Tim Gallo

So it is doing eye-af or face-af and just not showing in the ovf? Cause its fine like that as soon as camera does focus on eye or face.

It is kind of dream,no?. You are looking through ovf, camera does eye-af for you (its ok if its just showing af-points in ovf)

Nov 14, 2019*permalink

It isn’t doing it.

Nov 14, 2019permalink

Critical Thinker

Actually serious question: Why cant you just cover the back screen of your camera with black tape and just not look at it? What is the appeal in paying more to have an inferior LCD screen?

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Its not inferior. Its high quality. And you can still use it if need be - i had a hands on. It worked fine and was fun. For everything else get the T3. Lets not be asking for the ever same body that’s already available.
Just removing the mirror and selling the ever same stuff wont help sales.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

supersargas

you gain an useless secondary screen and lose half of the functionality of the primary screen. 'inferior' fits pretty well

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Magnar W

Critical Thinker: Why cover the screen? Just don't look at it.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

They should've implemented a cover attached with magnets, as the Mac power plug. You want it - attache it, you want the screen - remove it.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

biza43

You can cover the screen with black tape. It might be difficult to remove it without leaving smudges though.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Guys. I came to my conclusion after a hands on.
Who of you had it in his hand? Try it - this is just guess work.
You dont want to? No Problem. Move on. Let us who care talk about it discuss it. Thanks.

Nov 15, 2019*permalink

Hellraiser

Hopefully the price for X-Pro 2 will go down :)

Nov 13, 2019permalink

it will not. even more, there are very few used X-Pro 2 bodies on the market, people apparently hog it

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Of course the price will go down.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

biza43

There is a 200 EUR cash back on the XPRO2.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

forpetessake

Here is a easy prediction. The sales will be a disaster.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

We shall see. If you read the forums and groups of more serious Fuji users, this camera is getting some love. And one consistent theme: among those who've been able to handle one, they all say it's great, better than expected.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

biza43

I hope you make better prediction that that.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Quantum Scientist

When I first heard about this camera I thought it might be too good to be true. Now after seeing it I believe it is too bad to be untrue.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

kristian2000

What did you hear about at first that was so different than the final product?

Nov 13, 2019permalink

kristian1

This is quite pessimistic view to think that all really good staff can't exist while all bad staff must exist.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

“get the X-T3” “You don’t like it? There are several other cameras”
Name me one other camera with a hybrid viewfinder and AF that’s competitive with current mirrorless AF? That’s right, there isn’t any. I’m getting an XPro3, because of the unique OVF, but it’s not going to stop me from complaining about the LCD and the OVF decisions.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Thermidor

Why not just stick with the Pro 2 instead?

Nov 13, 2019permalink

@thermidor: because night and day difference in AF w older f/1.4 lenses with the current gen Fuji AF vs XPro2 & co. Which is important for me.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

I get it, you want it all, including the OVF.
But maybe the X-Pro line is not for you?

Nov 13, 2019*permalink

@kreisluf
Huh? The XPro3 is exactly for people like me = wants the OVF + latest and greatest AF.
If you didn’t want the OVF, you’d get an XT3 or something else. If you didn’t want the AF, you’d keep/get the XPro2.
Excluding people who buy cameras based primarily on looks of course e.g. those who claim they want all three colors of the XPro3 simply because they look great.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

But moving pictures, you rely on an LCD too much, so maybe it isn't really for you.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

@John Gellings
Maybe.
If this was 5 years ago, I’d have loved the idea of a hidden LCD. I would have even gone as far as to say Fuji should disable all zooms and any lens longer than a 50mm-equivalent for use on an XPro body. But that was back when I was a ‘purist’ who only shot street photography.
But I have young kids now, and I know that the LCD is sometimes the best, fastest viewfinder, for the many times when there is no time to pull down a flip LCD or bring a camera to your eye.
In many ways, this would have been the perfect camera if not for the LCD. OVF+distance scales on the 23mm f/1.4= street shooter. Latest and greatest AF = for kids.
Maybe Fuji wants me to get both the XP3 and the XT3. 🤷‍♂️

Nov 14, 2019permalink

well, face it: you either change the way you take pictures or you don't buy this camera. it's that simple.

Nov 14, 2019permalink

sirhawkeye64

While I Like Fuji and what they're doing, $1800-$2000 is getting up there in price especially for what it is. Now, I know shooting Fuji is more about an experience and that film shooters will feel right at home with a Fuji (because I've made this comment myself several times on here), but there's a point at which people aren't going to buy it simply because they look at other options or they get a slightly used XPro2 or something.

I also would have liked to see the LCD be hinged so you could fold the screen if you wanted to (like it is by default) or have it facing out.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Victory Camera

Not everyone is going to love this but I think that it is great that someone who isn't Leica is making digital cameras with an aesthetic appeal. I think that it is cameras like this that will save photography from merging with phones.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Amen. Fast forward 5 years. Unfortunately, the market will probably be down to less than 5 million cameras sold per year.

You will have the pro's who will use the tools that work for them, and then you will have consumers with a genuine interest in a dedicated camera system. Most of these will have higher than average discretionary funds. So many will choose based on user experience, brand image, aesthetics, maybe a bit of nostalgia, and they will want higher end equipment.

Look at what happened in the world of HiFi audio. That was obliterated by first the iPod and then the iPhone and all of the knockoffs. Now we have smartphones and digital devices largely used for audio. But what remains of the HiFi market is the high end stuff, and the retro type stuff, like turntables, tube amplifiers, etc.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Completely agree. As Hugh Brownstone said one day, "photography is not only about the picture quality, but also the quality of taking the picture". And I am ok with that.

Regarding HIFI, I still haven't found a digital audio device who looks as sexy as a good old McIntosh vacuum amp...

Nov 13, 2019*permalink

Critical Thinker

>downgrading an LCD resolution is quality

LMAO

Nov 13, 2019permalink

The LCD and its resolution is very high quality and an improvement from the X Pro 2.

I think the sub monitor is pretty cool, with the ability to show the film simulation modes. There is room for some fun design in cameras.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

RoundVu

This reviewer treated the EVF almost as if it was an afterthought. I had a chance to compare the EVF of the X-Pro3 to the X-T3 yesterday and the X-Pro3's EVF is a big step up. As a non-OVF fan, this camera is worth a good look for shooters who prefer EVF.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Why would you ever pick this camera over the X-T3 if you weren't going to use the OVF primarily?

There are so many cameras on the market with much, much better EVFs than this. Not to mention more versatile rear screens, to boot...

Nov 13, 2019permalink

As noted by the OP, the EVF of the X Pro 3 apparently is better than the X T3.

Some people may like to use both EVF and OVF, some like the rangefinder style, I know one guy who uses an X T3 who will also get this.

There is no rule that each person only gets one camera at a time. In today's camera market, many of those who care to buy a dedicated camera own more than one. This camera can be a nice addition for many.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

@Androole
I would pick any X-Pro body handling and feeling and *drumroll* asthetics over a X-T3.
On my X100F I often use the EVF for close focusing and more deliberate shots.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

moimoi

A big flop with this third iteration for Fuji!

Nov 13, 2019permalink

sirhawkeye64

In what ways? Could you elaborate?

Nov 13, 2019permalink

forpetessake

It's a bigger blunder than X-H1. It will also be selling for half price in a year.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Critical Thinker

I would unironically get an X-Pro3 if it dropped to $500.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

sirhawkeye64

I guess sales shall be the true metric to this. What may be a blunder to one, may be perfect to someone else. I guess I could say the same thing about Sony's commitment over the years to their APS-C users.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

corleve

Fuji has lost it's identity with the release of this camera. As an xpro2 owner, all I wanted was an updated USB-C port, Bluetooth LE, the new colour options and profiles are nice, new bigger EVF/OVF and the ability to charge via USB and I would've been more than happy to pay handsomely for that upgrade. This is Fuji just trying to be some edgy millennial hipster, trying to be different for different's sake and sure there will be people who will buy it but it won't be as many people who bought the Xpro2.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

57even

I (and nearly every Xpro2 owner I know) agree with you.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

fuji lost it's identity? man, you are a drama queen!

In fairness, many X-Pro owners are more the hybrid kind-of-guys who want X-T performance but in a retro rangefinder body (aka cheap-mans power-Leica).

Does anybody remember the screams, when the X-Pro ISO wheel was revealed and people went crazy, because they could not punch in the ISO as with the X-T1 or X-T2? I do. Love the wheel, because it forces me to think ahead what I want to achieve.

Man, personally I am so happy that Fuji tries to evolve the X-Pro line into a less tech-centric camera. Because I want a cheap-mans Leica. You know, the one where you take you time and enjoy setting up the camera.

Nov 13, 2019*permalink

supersargas

ok boomer

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Corleve... it sounds like Fuji hit a lot of your needs with this cameras... so what you are really trying to say is that you NEED a screen...

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Edmond Leung

For rangefinder type camera, the only choice is Leica M Series.
If you can afford, why do you buy a second tier OVF and lenses?

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Sine_Nomine

Because second tier is 1/4 the price?

Nov 13, 2019permalink

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uV7-wzEfsXY

@Edmund Why would you? I think Hugh Brownstone gave the best answer to that question:

Nov 13, 2019permalink

TN Args

One for the fans.

If it *looked* exactly like a Z6, how well would it sell, I wonder?

Nov 13, 2019permalink

worldcup1982

This question makes no sense at all

Nov 13, 2019permalink

TN Args

Gee, it was too hard for you to figure out that I am saying that its looks are contributing to its appeal? That many people wouldn't want it if it looked just like any other camera?

Love it.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

love it too.
plus all the haters make me scrape together the quids for the X-Pro3 even faster.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

worldcup1982

That’s exactly why it makes no sense. It’s obvious and Fuji has cameras like the one you compared

Nov 13, 2019permalink

TN Args

Still lovin' it. Pray continue.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

worldcup1982

Love is always a good thing. Keep praying, keep being obvious, keep walking. Whatever

Nov 13, 2019permalink

@ T N Args, The rhetorical device you're trying to use is obvious enough, but it simply doesn't work because it's a rangefinder-style camera with a corner viewfinder and an OVF, so of course it would bomb if it looked exactly like a Z6. For one thing its most distinctive feature (the OVF) wouldn't and couldn't work. You may as well have written "If it *looked* exactly like an X-T3, how well would it sell, I wonder?" You need to re-work your attempt at snark ;-)

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Photoman

"Some lenses (particularly the F1.4s) aren't especially fast to focus, undermining the the immediacy of street shooting."

That is a killer con.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Richard Butler

It shouldn't be a killer, just worth being aware of.

It's impossible for be to precisely predict how much impact it'll have for each person, but I'm not saying it's disastrous.

Nov 13, 2019*permalink

Paul JM

It is not a killer. I use the X Pro 2 and the 35 1.4. Hit rate is still high as if you are really wanting to be quick you can always zone focus. People have used manual focus lenses for street shooting for many decades. If you rely so heavily on quick autofocus for street shooting then there is something wrong with your technique

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Photoman

I like the Fuji system, (had a few X100's) but I have seen a few complaints about the older lenses not focusing as quick as the new lenses.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

amazing that people are set off by that statement about focusing speed of the large and heavy f/1.4 lenses.
i wonder if in those heads, a line like this pops up: "not class leading AF speed? not good enough for me!"

Dec 3, 2019permalink

Conrad567

I am confident enough that I could use this camera successfully. I shoot film most of the time anyway.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

as usual people complain when a camera is not exactly the camera they want. Nothing new then, it happens a lot with Canon who is used to crippling cameras, or every iPhone because people expect so much.

Companies are making the product they want us to buy, not the one that we want.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

MrHollywood

What a dumb and miserable design.

Imagine being so creatively crippled that you buy a camera to "force" you into some sort of behavior or style of shooting?

I mean....good grief. This camera is actually an insult upon itself.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Leicalika

some beg to be insulted

Nov 13, 2019permalink

speaking of dumb and miserable...

I am amazed about the people who feel offended, once the LCD is not there for chimpanzeeing

Nov 13, 2019permalink

gavinlg

... You're an iPad photographer aren't you..

Nov 13, 2019permalink

You can chimp to your heart's content - via the LCD or via the EVF - just as you can with the X-Pro2 - it just provides tilt and protection, affording more composition opportunities and travelling better.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

MrHollywood

More protection? Travel better???

Good grief. The defense of this camera is like listening to cult members defend Trump.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

@MrHollywood, if you want to chimp via the LCD instead of the EVF, it's a simple one finger flip away. No biggie. I spent 30 minutes with the X-Pro3 at a Fujifilm "Touch and Try" day with my area's Fuji rep last weekend. I rather liked the fact that a single upward flip hides away the relatively vulnerable screen and means that you can leave the touchscreen functions fully activated without worrying about inadvertently triggering them when shooting and handling the camera. I came away much less concerned about the screen than I was about the replacement of the two OVF magnification modes with a single, compromise mode.

Nov 13, 2019*permalink

MrHollywood... imagine a camera that wants you to use it at eye level just like every other hand held camera in the last 70 or so years. And it still has a screen. This camera has 3 framing options and people act like it forces you in some new way. Get a grip.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

MrHollywood

LOL....imagine a camera that becomes LARGER and more awkward when you want to use the rear LCD. Doh!
Who's so useless with a camera that they consider what the "Camera Wants."???
Great cameras get OUT of the way. They don't impart anything of their own to interfere with acquiring the image. This camera, in some situations, will be awkward. There are much better designs and this poor thing is laughable.

Nov 14, 2019permalink

If someone is thinking of this as their only camera, for general use shooting wildlife, astro, landscapes, etc. then yes, it will be a sub-optimal choice (as would a manual focus Leica rangefinder, or a camera with a monochrome only sensor, or a studio-grade medium format camera, etc.). But for its intended uses for walk around photography and "street", it'll be excellent and a lot of fun. The screen opens into the void between your arms or onto your lap. It's not going to snag or get in your way. Most people who buy an X-Pro either use it as a second (or third, etc) camera or else use it for the types of photography it's best suited for. I bought an X-Pro2 eight months back and I've yet to want to put it on a tripod. It's not how I use it. I have other cameras for that.

"Great cameras get OUT of the way. They don't impart anything of their own to interfere with acquiring the image" You'll be the one with the gear set to full auto then, presumably.

Nov 14, 2019permalink

"You'll be the one with the gear set to full auto then, presumably"
uh i feel the burn.

Nov 14, 2019*permalink

memau

Well, that hidden LCD screen design reminds me of Epson R-D1 fifteen years ago, which even got a film advance lever and a fancy analog exposure metering display.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Aoi Usagi

The LCD design on the R-D1 worked because it didn't have the ability to do liveview shooting. The X-Pro3's hidden LCD is only a gimmick that makes the camera less usable.

Nov 13, 2019*permalink

oh there goes the logic. just a gimmick? think about it again.

and less usable is debatable.
the same way as a 2-seat coupe is less usable than a off-road Defender with a safari snorkel. it depends on your needs.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Aoi Usagi

It is less usable. It would have been more useful if Fuji decided to use a side articulating LCD like the R-D1. They could have achieved the same goal of hiding the screen without compromising usability for those who want to use the LCD without having to take a extra step of opening it up. What Fuji did was take away the choice for users, and that's why its a gimmick.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Inukim

@ kreislauf. Interesting analogy. I think a better one would be if the Landrover decided to not install 4WD system on the offroad Defender, so that the driver can feel the 2wd experience. Personally, I think that's a stupid idea, like the X-Pro3 LCD. But that's just my opinion.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

memau

It's just a subtle look-and-feel design choice, everyone knows Fujifilm loves that retro style, just like the shutter speed and ISO combined dial.
Not a fan of Fujifilm, but really miss the old fashioned rangefinder camera, although not a necessity indeed.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

right. nothing wrong if you don't like it. But don't forget: all of this here are just theoretical considerations and only if you test in in real life will you know, if the X-Pro3 will work for you.

my opinion is: it is a great choice. but then again I am a long fan of the X100/XPro series and sold my X-T1 and X-T10 without any hesitation, in contrast to the X-Pro1.
The only thing the X-Pro1 was missing was the hybrid viewfinder, that helped you manual focus with adapted lenses.

Nov 14, 2019*permalink

RedFox88

Misleading title. Canon dslrs can have the rear lcd screen not visible for...a decade at least!

Nov 13, 2019permalink

OMG, I can't believe Canon is dictating what consenting photographers do in the privacy of their own eyes ;)

Nov 13, 2019permalink

ragbasti

With the nameable lens profiles, will this finally allow us to set automatic distortion or vignette compensation for lenses that have no electric contacts?

That would be huge for both native and adapted manual lenses

Nov 12, 2019permalink

any of old full frame DSLR easy beating this new APS-C sensors in terms of image quality and details, especially at high ISOs. And old Nikon D7100 is in pair with them, what we can easy see at this chart, and it cost about 300 USD in mint condition now. For photographers its more then enough. Same we can say about old Canon 6D too - cost now 600 USD, that all, also you can buy full frame lenses cheaper then modern aps-c lenses...

Nov 12, 2019permalink

(unknown member)

No.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

I wouldn't go back to D7100 with its AF issues and there is too much noise above ISO 3200.

Of course Canon 6D is still relevant today, but it is still quite bigger and heavier. And if one is shooting something that moves its 11 AF-points might be limited.

Obviously most cameras released now are overpriced when considering what they bring compared to older cameras. But maybe it is the right price for its target audience.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

dccberry

The X-T3 spanks my Nikon D4 for image quality and tracking of action at any ISO. Charts don't tell the story the way real-world usage does.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

No +1

Nov 13, 2019permalink

But its can't compare with my old Nikon D3s, how its spanks D4? Something like fantasy...

Nov 13, 2019permalink

I was one of the "full-frame advocates" until my X-T3 arrived.

The IQ is fantastic and I don't need to see or do any side by side useless comparisons; it is more than enough for all MY photographic needs and I enjoy shooting with it very much. Far better experience than the A7Rii which is eating dust right now waiting to find a new home.

kobakokh, if you love Canon full-frame cameras so much I can sell you my like-new 5D for 350 bucks.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

I have Canon 5Dm3 and Nikon D3s. Most use Nikon because of most my work connected with high ISO images, and even at high ISOs usually I must reveal shadows. Unfortunately any of aps-c sensors can't compare with FF in this situations, of course for me will be better to have small cameras, but I tried all of them, from Nikon D500 or Fujifilm cameras (D500 files are even better then X-T3 files! at high ISOs)... Until ISO 1600 FF can be replaced by APS-C, but even at ISO1600 if you want to get shadows from dark images, its very hard or even impossible, you will lost a lot of details, at least. Until ISO1600 modern aps-c cameras are nice and useful, also without pay 1300 USD for Fuji its possible to get used D7500 for 600 USD and use, there are no big different for stills.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

(unknown member)

@kabakokh: which subject do you take photographs at high iso ? How high?

Nov 13, 2019permalink

ISO 1600 isn't high iso by today's standards... is the noise that much of an issue?

Again, of course there are better or cheaper alternatives. If you're looking at Fuji, if price is the issue, go for X-T30, it doesn't make sense to consider X-Pro3.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

really? FF vs APS-C debate again?

Nov 13, 2019permalink

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr144_0=fujifilm_xt3&attr144_1=nikon_d5&attr144_2=canon_eos5dmkiv&attr144_3=fujifilm_xh1&attr146_0=160_6&attr146_1=100_5&attr146_2=100_5&attr146_3=200_5&attr177_0=off&attr177_1=off&attr177_2=off&attr177_3=off&normalization=compare&widget=633&x=-0.7263012181616834&y=-0.5383825350949629

no need to debate, its technically impossible, otherwise Canon 1D and Nikon D5 will be with aps-c... I have both of them and use them last 15 years, as well as millions of other photographers... Now I think about medium format Fujifilm, and now maybe people will also begin to talk aps-c is same as medium format... But its not true. Imagine, there is a ISO6400, but you got dark image, and you want to get all information, from aps-c you will get nothing, no details, from D3s and some other cameras you will get 80-90% of them. Why we talk about this simple question?

Nov 13, 2019permalink

(unknown member)

@kobakokh.
Well one can recover more detail with an X-T20 or X-T3 as we many FF formats. so it's technically possible..

Here an example with the X9T3 and D5

Nov 13, 2019*permalink

@kobakokh:
You're making it too simple, shadow recovery depends on many factors, and while it's easier with FF, it doesn't mean smaller sensors can do nothing, or FF sensor can recover any details.

I used to shoot with a 1/1.7" sensor P&S during concerts and could, sometimes, recover up to 3-4 EVs. I rediscovered some pictures I had discarded. With 1" sensor or above it's even easier.

Now, I recently bought a Canon EOS RP and was amazed to see that it could focus and recover details that I couldn't see in a room with no light. But on the other day I was out during the night and it couldn't really recover details from road and grass, although it was lit from an airport and I could see it.

I'm thinking, even though I can go a little higher with ISO on the FF camera than I can with APS-C or below, it doesn't matter if there isn't enough light caught by the sensor. Like it is better to shoot f2.8 1/30s ISO 6400 than f2.8 1/60s ISO 12800, although in theory it brings the same exposure.

Nov 13, 2019*permalink

NicoPPC, its true, and who talk about D5? Its bad camera, I tried it too, and its impossible to get from it normal files, its not same as D4 or D3s, it has banding!!! Then I can't use it for my works and then I use D3s. You know, cost is also important for me. Most I don't use AF, then its nothing for me, as well as video. And also, for me camera must be heavy, for get more stability, and he must have a big size grip. If you interesting, the grip of D3s is not enough for me, even I have not large hands, sometimes I use Canon 1Dx and it has really great grip, especially in vertical position. I also use sometimes Fujifilm X-T20, its very nice camera, not very comfort in use, because of small and small size grip, but sometimes its also very relevant, in some situations. I want to try Fujifilm XR, if it has 24mm equivalent fix lens.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

dccberry

In the real world, I have never had a client say "this image rocks, but I wish you'd used a full-frame camera". I agree that some cameras can produce better image quality under certain circumstances than the X-T3 sensor, but since I shoot for print reproduction mostly, there have been no circumstances where it has failed to deliver images that people pay me for. That is the bottom line for professionals: delivering great usable images that the client loves. I still use a D810 and Zeiss 100mm macro for copying artwork, but the APS-C system works for everything else so far.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

darinb

This might be relevant.

When I was young--a teenager--I shot with a Minoilta XD-11. (I didn't buy a car like my friends, I bought a camera.) Thirty-six frames! You could blast away, basically, willy nilly.

Then (on my $3.25/hour job) I bought a used Hasselblad kit. A heavy Bogen 3035 tripod. Found that each time I went to use it (carrying it all around) *each* shot would take like twenty minutes to shoot, beginning to end.

Pretty quick you start asking yourself questions. Is this really a good photograph? Am I really going to print this negative? And then, how can I make it a little bit better? Should I move the tripod a tad? Move closer or farther back?

I learned a lot from that experience. I got much better at thinking about making photographs. I tell this story all the time when people ask me about how to learn photography.

Nov 12, 2019*permalink

Cerridwen

Exactly, thanks for sharing that

Nov 12, 2019permalink

Conrad567

I agree completely. I started shooting film again because it forces me to take more time and to contemplate each frame. I probably will purchase this camera just for the reasons that people seem to be complaining about it.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

AlanG

There are a lot of ways to learn photography. There are a lot of different kinds of photographers too.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

true. but here you mostly meet the photographers who scream "stupid design" and "crippled" about this camera.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

dtibi

If you want to slow down get a manual film camera. This is a jewellery for doctors/lawyers.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

Really? I thought Leica owners are doctors and lawyers? Maybe you need a better doctor.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

oh the burn.
literally.
burning urethra.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

joeletx

Fuji forces you to slow down! eliminated five buttons! and how about that parallax OVF? I wonder if any millennium even comprehend the concept of range finder parallax OVF and that hidden screen? How do you effectively chimp after shots; not for exposure but just to make sure you compensate for that parallax? Wonder how soon the price drops to $500. I wouldn't even buy it then.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

You can chimp with the EVF if that's your thing.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

joeletx

I never chimp because I don't need to with mirror-less WYSIWYG. unless I am missing something here but that parallax OVF belong to the camera I used to shoot over 40 years ago. I know it is your Leica thing and you dig it dearly. But I don't think anybody else does.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

eliehbk

Haha, hilarious

Nov 12, 2019permalink

“Price drops to $500” LOL, sure, maybe in year 2029.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

Joe:

False positives occur in all autofocus systems. I always chimp when shooting paid events because a single miss can mean no job next time. Chimping in the EVF removes you from the action and is less accurate and slower than chimping on a screen. For fun use and hobby stuff sure, trust what you think you see thanks to WYSIWYG feedback but even then, I’d think false positives would make you re think that approach.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

Eric Hensel

"Chimping in the EVF removes you from the action and is less accurate and slower than chimping on a screen."
Right.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Reilly Diefenbach

1799 for APSC? Mmmm no.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

It’s much more in the country of manufacture.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

tailings

Soooo...., it does actually have a screen. The DPR bait and switch will get you every time, (well, it got me this time).

Curious concept, one that a percentage of users having by asking for, (sort of). Will be interesting to see how it sells, whether folks actually use it sans screen and whether demand continues for a truly screenless digital camera.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

‘Not a screen on sight’ does not mean ‘no screen’.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

Rich Niewiroski

I shoot on the Fuji platform. It's an incredibly nice set of tools to use, but the worst part about it is being associated with the Fuji community. They're some of the most uneducated, blind fanboys out there who are more about the technology than they are about the storytelling and have just the biggest napoleon complex. So when technophiles say things like the X-Pro3 is for "purist", "enthusiast", or "real" photographers (whatever that means), it makes me roll my eyes and throw up in my mouth a little bit. The X-Pro3 is cool, but let's be honest here. It's an extremely compromised tool and a very expensive piece of jewelry. People are going to buy just for the bragging rights and pretend they're a purist, enthusiast, or real photographer. Leica shooters can relate.

Nov 12, 2019*permalink

I'm a Leica owner and I also used to shoot a Fuji X-Pro. Let's call a spade a spade...many of us buy Leicas/Fujis because they look cool, feel good in the hand and handle well. Let's face it, every camera made in the last 5 years has awesome image quality. So what's wrong with wanting something that moves your soul?

I'll tell you one thing, shooting my Leica SL and M240 and M8 before it gives me much more pleasure then I ever got from shooting all the Canon bodies I had over the years including 1 series. Guess what, when you love the tool you tend to use it more and that translates to more photos:)

Nov 12, 2019*permalink

I don’t understand why is Fuji’s community fault if some reviewers say this camera is “for purists”. I am also a Leica owner (M8, M9P) and I can happily use those cameras along with my X-T3 which is amazing, so if this XP3 gives me the same output I don’t see why is so terrible to have a hidden LCD! The camera is a beauty, and yes, as soon as I manage to sell my Sony A7Rii I’ll get one, end of story.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

I’m also a Leica user who has used Fujifilm since 2013. I got into Leica because of the inconsistencies in the Fujifilm interface. Also, after borrowing an M240 I was amazed. It was so solid and precise. I had been told that Fujifilm was the poor man’s Leica. If so, it is the poor man’s Leica that is made poorly and not just made more cheaply.

But I’m forty and now I need autofocus so I will replace my Ms with X-Pro’s for paid events. I dislike EVFs and there are only two games in town, M and X-Pro for those of us who don’t like to use dSLRs for events.

One thing I like about the new pro is how they cleaned up the face. It used to have too many swoosh flourishes and now is cleaner like an M. Still... that Fujifilm interface is going to be ‘fun’ to work with at events.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

Nov 12, 2019permalink

The irony in that original comment. Here we have someone accusing Leica and Fuji users of being pretentious and yet that person by doing so is coming off as pretentious and condescending and boorish.

People should just buy what they like to use. Leica and Fuji cameras do offer a lot beyond their image and feel. But let's also get real: many people buy a whole lot of stuff for the brand image and the way it makes them feel. Nothing wrong with that.

Newsflash: when you get around to criticizing the users of a particular camera system, and not just the equipment, then you are the one straining to prove to the world how clever and enlightened you are.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Thoughts, that’s correct. Usually fanboys are the first accusing other people of acting as fanboys 😂

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Rich Niewiroski

Thoughts R Us, pot calling kettle black there, buddy. Next time find a taller soap box.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Happy Opposite Day :)

Nov 13, 2019permalink

(unknown member)

1006 comments and counting, I guess it’s mission accomplished Fuji on that front.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

LMOE

Odd mission. To create all kinds of discontent and animosity on your current customers.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

(unknown member)

Haha I was referring to the ‘getting people talking about it’ aim.

It’s definitely not for me I must admit.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

It shouldn’t create any animosity amongst current customers, because Fuji have a range of different cameras. If the XPro3 isn’t your thing, there’s always the XT3. And the XH1. And the GFX. What’s not to like about that?

Nov 13, 2019permalink

aloli

It definitely could, especially for existing X-Pro2 users looking to upgrade (who don't fall into the niche of the X-Pro3), as well as those who prefer rangefinder styled bodies but are forced onto other choices due to the limitations of the X-Pro3.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

If an inanimate object causes you to feel animosity, I think you have bigger issues than a hidden LCD.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

aloli ... what is the X-Pro3 going to let you do that the X-Pro2 can`t? And are you really that married to an LCD?

Nov 13, 2019permalink

“It's the type of camera that encourages users to slow down and think about the shots they're taking.”

Was this some sort of problem with photographers prior to the X-Pro3? Was there a lack of self-control?

Nov 12, 2019permalink

TheChappie

Problem? No. But I appreciate the thought process.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

retr01976

This camera isn't for everyone. If you want boring, sterile with lackluster color there is always Sony...

Nov 12, 2019permalink

TheChappie

As someone who owns and uses both systems, stopppp. The rhetoric adds nothing but eye rolls. Let's talk about the product and not something else completely off topic.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

Man, so much whining. I don't shoot Fuji, I'm a Leica guy. That said I used to own the X-Pro1 and this new X-Pro3 looks to be a better camera in every way. Some people are never happy I guess...
Here's the thing, in an age where camera companies are threatened with extinction Fuji is trying to do something different. This is a good thing...

Nov 12, 2019permalink

How is making a camera less attractive to the majority of people going to help fight the cellphone vs camera wars? I hope this camera helps Fuji get out of their big financial losses but I don’t see it.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

Raist3d

It’s about market coverage. This camera is for a specific audience. The rest got xt3. All fine options.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

ikaika77:
If you want a boring, do everything camera there are already plenty to choose from...and there are too many manufacturers already doing it. If Fuji went down that path they would likely go out of business.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

ikaika777 ... where`s the proof of Fuji`s huge financial losses?

Nov 12, 2019permalink

User7440441409

@clint, it's interesting how folks 'defending' the unique characteristics that makes a particular camera attractive to them will use words like 'boring' to put down other cameras. Any camera is as 'boring', 'exciting', 'sterile', 'inspirational' as the person behind the camera allows it to be.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

https://www.fujirumors.com/new-fujifilm-financial-results-instax-declines-mirrorless-suffers-revenue-down-12-4-but-fujifilm-gfx100-sells-strong/

John Gellings,

Links to primary sources n the article.

“New Fujifilm Financial Results: Instax Declines, Mirrorless Suffers, Revenue Down 12.4% but Fujifilm GFX100 Sells Strong!”

Nov 12, 2019*permalink

Clint Dunn, you didn’t answer the question.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

bla bla bla... that revenue going down is the whole imaging division, let's compare it to the global camera sales. If Fuji is losing more than the other manufacturers, fair enough, but otherwise I don't see why mention Fuji and not the market instead.

To me the X-Pro is not meant to be the biggest seller, but more a camera to keep their users happy with a different product, not just a X-Pro2 with new sensor.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Larkhon,

“ Well, Fujifilm now published their financial results for the this quarter (ends September 30, 2019) and the numbers are not good either*.

Fujifilm’s cashcow Instax keeps slowing down, ***and digital camera sales suffer strong. All this results in a revenue decrease for the imaging division of 12.4%.”

Everyone already knows the camera market is going down but Sony was only -3,4% decline. Fuji had 15% decline in the first quarter and 12.4% decline in the second quarter.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Revenue decline needs to be tempered against profit. No one cares about how much revenue you make, profit is the only thing that matters (especially in an industry where you sell physical products, not services or data).

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Craig from Nevada

Way too cool for me.
I'll pass.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

ozturert

So the design forces the user to "slow down", it has a worse OVF than previous XPROs, it has less fn buttons, but still it can get 85% and silver award... Nice DPReview, very nice...

Nov 12, 2019permalink

Richard Butler

It gets an 85% because the score is primarily based on the camera's performance and image quality. Significantly it gets 3% less than the X-T3, despite sharing most of its major components.

Similarly, the text of the review says 'I can see how it'd be a Silver to some people.' If you're the kind of person who likes what the X-Pro3 is, I believe it's worth a Silver. But it doesn't get the Gold that the X-T3 received precisely because the new viewfinder seems to be a step backwards even for the target user.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

Raist3d

@Richard Butler- this is the one thing this camera is doing that is decidedly worse for the target market- make the OVF worse. In a way, I almost wish they did no OVF and lowered the price. Focus in a hyper fast refresh EVF.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

De Fotoman

Fuji made some bold choices which led to an even more specialized product.
As camera gear enthusiasts we should applaud Fuji for this, whether we like this camera or not.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

I think people would be cheering more loudly if the bold choices happened to be ones that benefited their customers.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

Fuji is smart, they know that the camera market is saturated and to stand out you need to differentiate your product. All these people complaining should go buy a homogenized Canikon.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

LMOE

Oh, they are standing out alright. For all of the wrong reasons.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

tailings

The Canikony crowd will never understand why all cameras aren't Canikony clones. Just smile inwardly and enjoy the rarer fruits for the differences they provide.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

LMOE - You can say the same thing about Leica and yet there they are, differentiated from the herd and a successful company. Meanwhile the Pentax and Olympus's of the camera world are going to go the way of the dodo bird because they're mainstream and Canikon does mainstream better then anyone.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

tailings

I don't often hear Pentax referred to as 'mainstream', certainly not these days. How many other brands offer such a deep line of APS-C lenses? How many have offerings comparable to the Limited series (Fuji, perhaps)? How many have a direct counterpart to the Q? Who else is steadfastly committed to the SLR platform?

Pentax has been 'going the way of the dodo' for >DECADES<, at least so it has been continually forecast. Yet they soldier on, making really great cameras. And their financials actually look quite good. Yes, they're smaller than almost everyone else at this point, but they're not bleeding money. Looks like there's life still left in that dodo........

Nov 12, 2019permalink

@tailings - I hope you're right, my first film camera was a Pentax P&S back in the early 90's!

Nov 12, 2019permalink

But it's less specialised than the X-Pro2 or X-Pro1

Nov 13, 2019permalink

@Strangefinder - how's that?

If someone wanted to, it would be easy to shoot an XPro1/2 just like a smartphone, holding it out at arm's length and using it like a point and shoot.

And going the opposite direction, the adjustable magnification diopter means that more focal lengths are useful with the OVF.

So the older screen design makes it simpler, and the older OVF design makes it more versatile. Sounds like it's a less specialised to me...

Nov 13, 2019permalink

FrancoPhoto

My God, and I thought the crazy screen was the only downside to this camera. And now I learn that the ovf is less capable than the previous one. I really admire Fuji, but this just doesn't make any sense.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

The OVF on the X-Pro1 I used was basically useless. The framelines were completely inaccurate and I just used the EVF the whole time I owned the camera. If you really want a bright, nice OVF then buy a Leica, otherwise get with 2019 and use an EVF.

Nov 12, 2019*permalink

FrancoPhoto

Sorry, how this relate to my comment? Are you saying that I should be ok with a less capable ovf because I shouldn't even want to use the one found in the xpro in the first place? Or are you just recommending cameras to me? I'm confused.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

I'm saying the OVF in the X-Pro line is really not very good and not worth worrying about. I'm saying that I wouldn't let the supposedly inferior OVF in the X-Pro3 stop you from buying it, just use the EVF. I'm saying if you REALLY care about the OVF experience buy a used Leica.

Nov 12, 2019*permalink

FrancoPhoto

Ok Clint, I appreciate your suggestion. But wouldn't you agree that the OVF is one of the main features of the xpro line? All their marketing always relied heavily on this feature as a strong selling point, a key differentiator from the xt line. Most users of the xpro, as far as I know, claim that the OVF is what makes these cameras their choice. So, what on earth is Fuji doing? Again, I appreciate your suggestions, but my point still stands.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

@All: Check out the studio comparison tool in RAW between the X-Pro3 and the X-T3.
Interestingly enough a difference in color rendition between the two. Fuji stated the X-Pro3 hat a special setup due to its intended purpose for street photography

Nov 12, 2019permalink

tlinn

The people cheering on this body and reflexively responding to criticism with "it's not for you" are ignoring a whole bunch of previous X-Pro shooters who do NOT want to go to an X-T or X-H body but who also don't want a hobbled X-Pro body. This is the group that is really screwed. And don't bother arguing that they can just use their old body. Of course, they can. But it is reasonable for them to want the upgrades available in the current generation bodies, particularly as they relate to AF; Full coverage PDAF, improved tracking, and significantly improved low light AF are all features that would benefit the type of photographer who prefers this body style.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

Hugo808

If they're screwed they can buy another X-pro 2 if theirs is broken surely? You don't have to use the new gear, it isn't like there's ever going to be a vast improvement in image quality.

I intend using my X-T2 until it falls apart, hopefully it'll hang together for a while longer though.....

Nov 12, 2019permalink

There are plenty options. And I actually had a hands on with the 3 and owned the 2. Its not hobbled. Its lightning fast and the VF is beautiful. I recommend you do the same before commenting negatively.

Nov 12, 2019*permalink

tlinn

@Hugo808 I addressed the "just use your old body" argument in my original comment. You're right about IQ but that's not the issue. You may not recognize (or need) the improved functionality of the latest generation processor and sensor but there is a difference and it isn't minor when it comes to certain aspects of shooting—particularly AF. Anyone who shoots sports, moving children, portraits, street, in poorly lit environments, or on a tripod will enjoy a noticeable improvement in the shooting experience with the current gen hardware. The X-Pro3 gives a middle finger to all the X-Pro2 owners who have invested in Fuji's most expensive body and regularly rely on the rear LCD as they shoot. Now they've got to choose between being locked out of the advances available with the X Processor 4 or being locked out of convenient access to the rear screen.

Nov 16, 2019permalink

tlinn

@CaPi The X-Pro3 is absolutely hobbled for anyone who relies on quick access to the rear LCD as they shoot. It is hobbled for anyone who wants to use the custom functions available on the touch screen as well. That you don't find these limitations unacceptable doesn't invalidate the concerns of those who do. I don't doubt that there are many who will purchase this body and *love* the choices that Fuji made. That's great. But I question the wisdom of narrowing the appeal of what was already a niche body and, in the process, alienating a significant percentage of the existing user base.

Nov 16, 2019permalink

&tlinn: I disagree. Its a different offering

Nov 17, 2019permalink

Hellraiser

Its not a camera for me but i was looking forward to see wha new Fuji HDR mode brings to the table. Dissapointed with the implementation. Its a far cry from what phones can do. Hopefuly better HDR modes based on tiling and multiple exposure will start to make its way into cameras sooner than later

Nov 12, 2019permalink

Reactive

The most incredibly stupid part of this design is the viewfinder in the corner. My daughter had a Fuji compact with this design... just try to keep your fingers from blocking the viewfinder!

Nov 12, 2019*permalink

xjuanx

So every rangefinder is a stupid design?

Nov 12, 2019permalink

Hugo808

I think we can safely file that under "User error".

Nov 12, 2019permalink

WhoisDoubleA

The left hand is supposed to cradle the lens, giving better stability and access to the Aperture ring.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

"The most incredibly stupid part of this design". Is that so? One of the things I most enjoy about my X-Pro2 and X100F is the position of the viewfinder. You do realise that there's a huge slice of Fujifilm (and Leica) customers who feel exactly the same way as me about the viewfinder location? As for your fingers obscuring the OVF, well, if you do that then sorry, you're just clueless about camera holding technique and need to learn the basics.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

It’s a rangefinder.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Not sure what your daughter was doing but in six years of owning X-Pros I have never blocked the OVF with my fingers.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Reactive

Calm down :-) I was thinking more of holding the camera in portrait mode. On a DSLR, with my left hand supporting the lens (top plate facing left, viewfinder to right eye) that corner of the camera is buried in my palm/wrist. How exactly do you support this design in portrait mode? I think my daughter's little Fuji actually had the lens in the corner, so her first experiences of photography were ruined by 50% of her shots having a fingerprint in the top left corner!

Nov 13, 2019*permalink

Teach your daughter the correct way to hold a camera.

Nov 13, 2019permalink

Pipboy

DPreview : what we think :
"It's the type of camera that encourages users to slow down.."
Nuff said.
I'm Currently using X-Pro2. Been waiting for X-Pro3 and disappointed..

Nov 12, 2019permalink

George Pierre

I sold my x-pro2 in anticipation of the X-Pro3. But I am disappointed as I value the optical viewfinder in the former with its dual magnifications and the availability of the infinity focus point. The loss of these two in the new body certainly degrades the usefulness of the optical viewfinder to a degree that I probably would not use it much at all. So why buy the X-Pro3 if you get a crippled optical viewfinder? I think I am better off buying another x-pro2. Major disappointment!

Nov 12, 2019permalink

PhotoRotterdam

Out of curiosity: why would you sell the gear before you knew what the replacement was going to look like?

Nov 12, 2019permalink

George Pierre

I have an XT-3 and knew that all the goodies in that body would probably arrive in the X-Pro3; and I was right. However I was thrown for a loop when I read about the crippled viewfinder. That optical viewfinder is the only reason I value the the X-pro body . The new version of the back screen is neither a plus or a minus for me, since I don’t normally chimp; however the waist level capability could come in handy. But I already have that and more with my X-T3.
I hope that Fujifilm will take note that their many X-Pro2 owners are truly disappointed with the downgraded usefulness of their optical viewfinder in their new model, and rectify the issue in their next reiteration of the camera.

Nov 12, 2019permalink

Mateus1

This is simply matter: Fuji betrayed X-Pro1/2 users bringing this nonsensical X-Pro3 with removed 5 fn buttons, restricted OVF with one magn. and bringing this stupid double LCD for "hipsters children". Now Fujis marketing propaganda tells X-Pro users loudly they wanted it and they are even more special then before.

Nov 12, 2019*permalink

quatpat

Fuji betrays nobody. It's just another camera body, you can either buy it or go on using the one you have. Don't be such a drama queen.

Nov 13, 2019permalink