Ted Striker
Well-known
Ignoring the preferences of your customer base is often an excellent strategy to boosting sales. Not.
Seriously? You can't see that taking away the back screen would affect users who actually used it? That's an impressive lack of imagination.
Ted Striker
Well-known
Archlich
Well-known
The $699 (kit price), bottom-of-the-line X-A7 has this same processor package as well, just with standard 24MP bayer sensor, which had been more than enough for years. Same AF, same speed for less than half the price of the flagship X-T3...just imagine. Same for Canon and Sony's latest APS-C offerings. Very powerful entry level cameras are becoming the new norm.
I don't think Fuji will pour in extra sauce to further differentiate the X-Pro 3 spec-wise. Features has been what mainly differentiate the tiers in the current lineup.
gavinlg
Veteran
Simplification of interface IS a choice. That's why leica's are svelte to use, and Sony's are crap. Some of the best cameras designs require you to interact with them in a specific way.
The histogram should be available in the small lcd ...
Actually... historically, the X-Pro series gets the new sensor first. Also, I do not think the X-A7 has the same AF as the X-T3. The X-T30 does but historically the Bayer sensor cameras have dumbed down AF.
Archlich
Well-known
I don't know. I assume Fuji had break from previous cycles (and adopted new strategy) with the rather hastily release of the X-T3.
Besieds that, I can't see how an even newer sensor could benefit the X-Pro's intended users (=still shooters) much. Performance has been stagnant for several years, there's little chance the next one could improve by a significant margin, other than the usual megapixel & video tweaks. And it'll come at an extra cost on top of the camera's already costly gimmicks.
Anyway, RFF could always use another "I don't need more megapixels" thread...
ktmrider
Well-known
And I have to wonder how many XPro2 users are posting negative comments on the XPro3-less then 1%. I suspect most photographers are out shooting and not worrying about a camera who we have only seen in brochures. Again, no sure how it is less capable or why sales would be negative compared to XPro2.
Think some here need to get a life.
Think some here need to get a life.
Brian Atherton
Well-known
Interesting. Here's my experience:
Earlier this year I had an extended loan of the X-H1 with a view to purchase.
My main thought was its image stabilisation and how useful it might be, as now I’m finding sometimes that it isn’t so easy to keep a camera steady. Certainly I was impressed and it definitely worked a dream for me.
Also what immediately impressed me was the superb viewfinder: so bright and large. Second, the position of the release button on the integral grip: it fell to hand in the right place and is very comfortable.
Main negative is the lack of an exposure compensation dial because Fujifilm put a LCD panel where it should be.
In the end, reluctantly, I decided not to buy: despite the X-H1 being a nice size and the IBIS would have suited my needs admirably, it was just too heavy.
Ted Striker
Well-known
It's real simple. WIth the X Pro 2, after one takes a shot, one can pause and review it on the back screen, without any need to use one's hands. With the X Pro 3, that is impossible. You have to remove a hand, pull down the screen, review the image (and adjust it with FIVE less buttons) and then replace the screen, and replace your hand to the shooting position. You think that amount of tap dancing is the same as what is needed for the X Pro 2? Seriously?
You should follow your own advice.
The X-T3 is Fuji’s mainstream camera. It is released a lot more frequently. It sells well. It had the newest tech at that time... true. But it’s been a year or more and like I said a low end camera has those specs.
A new sensor is just one of those things that happen with cameras. They progress. It is possible there isn’t any other sensor they can use. However, historically speaking... the x-pro is generally the first to get new tech when it is released. The first with the 16mp and the first with the 24mp sensor. More MPs don’t cost more. It just happens as technology marches on.
Out to Lunch
Ventor
I don't know why but I have this nagging suspicion that 'Ted Striker' doesn't like the X-Pro 3...
Archlich
Well-known
We'll know next month...
Personally i won't hold my breath for it. Less hope, less disappointment...
froyd
Veteran
This has devolved into a chimping vs no chimping thread. Good thing Fuji will soon have models to address the needs of both camps.
Ted Striker
Well-known
You do know that one can turn off the rear display on an X Pro 2 don't you? That camera met both needs.
The X Pro 3 does not.
Gary E
Well-known
I understand everything about this camera except the need for titanium. It's just going make it more expensive than it needs to be. The only thing I wanted the X-Pro2 to improve upon was to have better eye relief and a larger VF. Oh and release with a lower price like the X-T3 did versus the X-T2.
My guess is someone on the Marketing team was a fan of the Leica M-D Type 262 or just wanted to move this into an even more niche market than it already is.
My guess is someone on the Marketing team was a fan of the Leica M-D Type 262 or just wanted to move this into an even more niche market than it already is.
willie_901
Veteran
Out to Lunch
Ventor
For those who haven't seen it yet, Fuji's design rationale for the X-Pro3 here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cvNBULS3tM The clip starts at 31 min.
willie_901
Veteran
- The sensor will be incrementally better. The X-T3 has similar dynamic range at ISO 80 as the X-T2 has a ISO 200. The X-T3 has superior ISO invariance (lower read noise). The X-T3 has less internal sensor heating. The low light sensitivity for the X-T2 and X-T3 are essentially identical.
- No details about the AF yet. Every one of the 4 newer X-Series cameras I bought since 2012 had better AF and fly-by-wire MF than the previous model. This doesn't mean the X-Pro 3 will have better AF than the X-Pro 2. But it probably will since the X-T3 has better AF than the X-T2.
- There is a new Classic Negative film simulation. This simulates FUJICOLOR Superia ISO 100 film rendering. Is it better? I don't know.
- Both the EVF AND OVF are significantly upgraded.
As far as I'm concerned the X-Pro cameras are all about using the OVF to compose while seeing what's outside the image-frame border estimates. This is the only compelling reason to own a X-Pro camera.
Having owned a X-Pro 1 and as a current X-Pro 2 owner, I am certain the X-Pro 3 will produce significantly superior technical image quality and and user experience compared to the X-Pro 1. I suspect the difference between the X-Pro 2 and X-Pro 3 will be less significant. I think it really depends on the EVF/OVF improvements and on how one prefers to focus. I don't use all of the AF capabilities of the X-Pro 2 (although I found they performed very well when I tried them). I prefer to use focus and recompose as I did with film RF cameras. But many could make good use of the more effective AF used in the X-T3.
