It ultimately comes down to FOV preference.
My buddy has a hard time with my X100 cameras, as he loves focal lengths in the mild tele range, usually 85-150mm. He is literally too far away and does not like to walk up to frame an exposure. For me, the 35mm FOV is perfect and I don't mind being stuck at that.
The addition is the OVF. For some, this makes or brakes their workflow. I love the OVFs and collected almost all OVF cameras since the x-pro 1. awesome stuff if you adapt to the camera.

Exactly! I love the OVF, and the EVF option here, with the X100 Series. I do prefer the OVF, but it's good to know, i can always switch to the EVF, with the push of a lever, if needed.

Perhaps the next X100 iteration cycle after the X100V would bring IBIS, by design. Anyway, it's great to have choices. I've had the chance to get the X100T into black color with Gariz half case, 4x batteries, for 465 EUR, and retail package, but decided to not buy it. Maybe a bad choice - it was sold just 2-3 days later.

Problem is, as good as the X100V is, it's a tough choice - X-E Series body with XF 23mm F2, vs the X100V. YT video shows, the XF 23mm F2 does have advantages, here & there, the X100V isn't always being the better lens, into 1:1 comparsion, especially at the edges. But a smaller, cuter, all around package. Like the new Lens, but 1400 EUR asking price is way over my limit. Perhaps i buy this Camera within the next 5 years, when there are at least 2 updates out.

Good Light.

/line added.

For landscapes you can use ANY lens. Limitations on glass for nature is ricockulous. Some of my best selling work for landscape images were shot with the 200 2.8Lii

At one time Nikon was rumored to be on the verge of releasing a fixed lens, wide angle zoom 1" sensored camera. I knowany were disappointed when that product was cancelled.

The GRIII's fault is not the lens. The problem is the poor AF, lack of dust sealing, terrible battery life, lack of a viewfinder, no fill flash and incredibly slow FPS.
But the lens is pretty good, though not as good as the faster 35mm on the X100v. As for the Sony RX100 VI, I still use it and it can actually focus! But for now I'm shooting mainly with the Nikon Z7 II, which replaced my D850.

The new sensor on the x100v have a terrible yellow cast and highlight rolloff that weren't present in the previous model and the lens isn't sharper than the gr wide open.
While the sony files have the same quality as any flagship phone.
You talk as someone that never used the camera, and I don't undestand why you bash it while praising the x100v. You kept talking about how the rx100 is so much better because it has a zoom lens instead of a prime.

At the same time right now you are complaining that it doesn't have dust sealing, the x100v have dust resistance with a lens cap, not dust sealing, you can also add dust resistance to the gr lens with the new nisi filter adapter without increasing the size too much.
While the sony doesn't have neither dust resistance nor the capacity to add an adapter, it also doesn't have a hotshoe for external flash.

The sony viewfinder is also smaller than the hotshoe OVF that you can buy for the Ricoh. Also you have fast charging with the usb-c

And it seems that you don't know the main strenght of the GR series.
The main selling point of the GR models isn't af performance, it's how fast it is to pickup, turn on, and capture a moment while using it with one hand.
You have 3 custom settings in the dial where you can have 3 different settings for zone focusing with 3 different snap focus distances, while the 28mm is wide enough that you can capture any scene that you don't have time to compose and crop later. I wouldn't be able to capture a lot of the scenes I stumble upon while driving with any of the alternatives.
Just yesterday I was driving and saw this old guy with a hat fixing a sidewalk in the 4 seconds it took to pass by him at 40mph I managed to pickup the camera, turn it on, and get the shot, while one handed and using only my periferal vision.

I've owned all of these cameras. I kept the Sony RX100 VI as a compact travel camera to keep aboard our cruising sailboat. And no, my new smartphone seems to lack the focal range of the little Sony. Not only that, but we actually used the Sony on a gimbal for a commercial test shoot because the video and AF work so well, ideal for confined spaces. On my GRII and GRIII I had both OVF models and they were clunky and inaccurate. In bright sunlight it's nearly impossible to see the rear LCD of the GRIII. My wife gave up on it for that reason alone. It's not a proper camera without being able to compose and see settings easily. And again, the AF is very weak. I have no idea why people make excuses for a feature that we've all come to expect. They also killed off the internal flash, which was very useful for shooting people at moderate to close distances on the GRII. The main strength of the GRIII, which I did like, was the fast start-up.

The Fuji X100v has won virtually every comparison test with the GRIII. The lens is faster and sharper. It shoots FAR faster and has superior ergonomics and an amazing viewfinder. It handles like a real camera and is nicely sealed with a simple screw on filter that has no effect on the size.
If there's a "yellow cast" to the sensor, it's sure not showing up on anyone's sample photos, but then I shoot RAW, so I can control colors as required. Again, the Fuji is absolutely sharper than the GRIII wide open at F2 and has superior contrast. Look at the YouTube and online reviews, all saying the same thing.
But the Ricoh costs a lot less and is much smaller, so it has a niche. I just don't think they've done enough to make it a more rounded product. The lack of state-of-the art AF is just criminal for the price. I do most of my shooting with my D850 and Z7II. Toy cameras are mainly for fun, but the GRIII wasn't good enough to keep. I'm happy that yours works well for you. +1 for choices!

We know which camera you keep on your cruising sailboat, but we are all waiting with baited breath to find out what you keep on your racing yacht?

I really doubt the nisi filter adapter stop dust to enter in the GR's sensor. It would be too good to be true.

No glaciers in the UK, not much snow either. Sorry.

#Hoxton Bridge... READ...'As a GX9 user...' I ALREADY have one, you dozy keyboard warrior... Douche.

hopefully we can all travel soon

"I really dont get the point of a compact camera that needs a tripod anytime I want to do video."
This is not a good camera for video, that is just thrown in there probably because the chips support it. I think the consensus for most X100S/T/F users is that they don't use the video feature.

This is a specialty camera. Who is buying Panasonic's GH5 to shoot stills?

What I love about fixed lens cameras like this one is the leaf shutter. Being so silent means I dont need to use the electronic one that has so many problems (artifacts with some light sources, rolling shutter effect..). I can use the flash up to 1/4000th shutter speed! ..allowing the built-in flash to have far more range than with the 20-times-slower sync speeds of focal plane shutters of interchangeable-lens cameras.
Im not interested in video though. If I was, I guess I would pick another camera.

I don’t think Q2 would have significantly better IQ.

For roughly $2,400, or $1,000 more, and no OVF, I don't think you can draw an equivalence with the X100V. While I would never diss the Sony, image quality is more than just sensor size. It's also about the ability to compose the image, and that process is different when an OVF is in the mix.

The Rx1R is $7-800 less than the X100v, that will be enough for many.

Even in the US, the first RX1R without the EVF isn't that cheap.

Never had dust on my Fuji cameras. I recently checked my X100F and it is fine. All fixed lens cameras are at risk but there are legendary dust catchers like the Ricoh GR line. I love those little Ricoh cameras but buyer beware. I own two of the RX100 line (original and the IV). No dust issues with either after years of shooting. I admit to being careful with my gear but sometimes that isn't enough.

The OG x100 images are indeed magic. However having owned both xtrans and bayer sensored x100s it's hard to tell the difference in everyday use. I'm not sure I could tell the difference. Additionally the Contrast Detect AF on the original was absolutely atrocious in low light. Its basically a focus and recompose camera.

Olympus has smaller sensor and there is difference in noise levels, tonality, depth of field and color science. Some people don't see it but I can see it clearly. Video and af is also better on Fuji. Want cheap with option to change lenses you can buy X-T30. Olympus wins on IBIS only.
As for Canon M6II, Fuji still is a better choice. Better video, much better lens selection (X-T30), better sensor (dynamic range, high iso) and I would argue about AF as well.

IBIS is a moot point. I have bodies with IBS and without, I hardly ever use IBS unless I am shooting handheld at night which is very rare. I don't shoot video either. It's a cool feature, but I much prefer lens based IS. And yes there is a rather large difference Steve between m43rds and Fuji, I am sorry to tell you this, but you just have to come to terms with it.

For small body size combined with a small price, there is the Canon M200 with 22mm lens.

Nikon DL. Oh, i pray Nikon will resurrect the DL line.

Cameras that are the size of the LX5 are too small for me. The X100V is small enough with usable controls and an integrated viewfinder. My first digital camera was a Nikon Coolpix 8400 and it was a very nice size with a surprisingly usable grip.

I usually carry such cameras in a tiny fanny pack. The X100V will fit in any pocket I would want to use to hold a camera.

@User5397822823
If you want that small of a camera, use your phone. This is a professional camera, for people looking to create professional photos.

David, that doesn't make any sense if you take a minute and think about it.

You can charge the battery via USB3 cable while inside the camera from any suitable charger, including mains or battery pack, or you can buy a mains charger that requires the battery to be removed from the camera. The latter method is preferable if you buy extra batteries and swap them out.

What doesn’t make sense? Please explain.

So, Fuji expects me to have the camera unusable while it charges from a USB charger they don’t even supply? Is there at least a USB C cable in the box?

This penny pinching on chargers, while prices skyrocket, is getting ridiculous. I’m mildly interested in an X100V, and would be a new customer for Fuji, but this really puts me off.

@David - It doesn't make sense that Fuji wouldn't include any way to charge the camera. The X100V comes with a USB cable.

@David Mantripp, you can use the camera while it’s being charged with an external charger In the field and most people logically bring more than one battery If they plan on shooting all day.

That wouldnt be for me. ;-) Different product.

Of course you can use an add-on OVF with the Ricoh. I have one (Voigtlander). *** You are right, the 100V can do more tricks, I don't deny that, but the fact remains that it's $500 more than the GR III and $800+ more than the quite good and still available GR II. Thing is, the things the 100V can do that the GR III can't do are available on models with interchangeable lenses that compete directly with the 100V at the price point. I think it makes sense, if you can afford it, as a second camera, but I question it as an only camera in terms of value.

I'm not sure that people who are looking at the value proposition or versatility of an ILC were ever the target market anyway, a lot of people seem to shoot X100s in addition to an ILC system anyway, and I imagine those looking for a do it all camera would buy one with a zoom regardless. If you're looking to cross shop vs an ILC anyway you should probably add the price of a decent WR lens as well tho.

I wouldn’t buy a camera without an EVF. “ Versatility and value“ is 100% subjective.

yes. Its called the manual. It should have come with the camera :)