Would you buy an X body with OVF only?

[coelacanth]

Late Sunday night brought me this idea:

• X-E size/shape, full-metal body
• Weather sealed
• Bright OVF with auto-select 3 magnification level, no EVF
• Good LCD on back (fixed to keep body slim)
• ISO dial where rewind knob on M3 would be
• External flash only to save space

I guess it's a niche product, but I'd love this myself. Size of X-E made possible by just having OVF, X-Pro1/T1 build quality, and physical ISO dial in flat-top, RF camera like body.

It's like a digital Leica CL/CLE. 🙂 Could release a few smaller (skinnier), around F2 speed lenses to go with it.

What do you think? Too niche? Would you consider?

Alright time to go to bed...

 

[noimmunity]

I'm in the X-Pro camp, the hybrid VF is one of the main attractions of the X system.

I'm not sure I'd want to give up the hybrid VF in favor of exclusively OVF, without knowing more about how the focusing operates.

And as for size, I actually like the size of the XP1 and wouldn't want it too much smaller.

Anyway, it's always nice to dream...

 

[SixSeven]

Count me in! This is exactly what I'm wanting now.

I recently sold my X-Pro 1 and 'upgraded' to the X-E2. I kind of regret it. Not because the X-E2 is a disappointment, in fact it's better than the X-Pro 1 in most performance aspects. However, I didn't realize how much I would miss the OVF. The build quality of the X-Pro is also markedly more solid and 'dense' compared to the X-E2. I don't want a camera as small as the X-E2 unless it weighs a decent amount and feels substantial. The X-E2 is too light, in my opinion.

OVF only is great, but how would you do manual focusing? Without a a focus patch like a real rangefinder, how would you focus without the EVF? You'd be confined to Live View only. At that point you're more Contax G than Leica M.

Also on the topic of the OVF, instead of 3 fixed zoom levels, I would love to see a zoom-capable, user-adjustable OVF of say, 10-60mm, so that with any existing prime lens in Fuji's lineup, your bright lines would encompass a huge amount of the finder. It's no fun using bright lines that only take up ~30% of the frame (I'm looking at you, Mamiya 7 150mm).

Any idea how Fuji could implement quality manual focusing with the current OVF setup? (Unless I'm forgetting something).

 

[gavinlg]

I really like the OVF and use it mostly, but I wouldn't not buy an OVF only camera. The hybrid viewfinder is too useful.

 

[mretina]

I shoot the x100 only with OVF so that would do.

But for me the real winner will be the physical ISO dial or anything that can allow adjusting the iso easier than with my x100 as Auto ISO is quite a pain and adjusting is not fast even with the Fn button. Never thought of that!

 

[jsrockit]

I really like the OVF and use it mostly, but I wouldn't not buy an OVF only camera. The hybrid viewfinder is too useful.

Yep, plus one.

 

[rybolt]

It would limit the lens choices. The 18-55 would be usable but the 10-24 and 55-200 would only work with the LCD screen. Also, macro shooting would be a problem.

 

[kshapero]

I have the X-Pro1. I like the way it is.

 

[willie_901]

Would this camera be AF only?

Exactly how would you implement manual focusing (with a lens collar only) without a fundamentally different OVF design? How much extra would you pay?

Anyway, typical buyers still struggle with the effects of parallax correction on focusing and composition three years after the first X100 was bought.

I prefer the dual OVF/EVF system. However if the optical technology was implemented to make the EVF redundant, I would welcome the change.

 

[burancap]

Would (could) this concept not just be a bigger variant of the finder in the X20 -an OVF with an electronic overlay and NO EVF?

You could pull in an electronic split overlay similar to the X-T1 when legacies are mounted.

 

[coelacanth]

Note: Just meant to be a for fun topic and I have absolutely no technical backing to this idea at all. 🙂

I guess, for me, the main thing is "X-E size with OVF and ISO dial." X-E is a bit smaller than film M, and that's the sweet spot for me. One thing I miss from both T and E are the OVF I had with Pro1 and X100. When I'm shooting live things (not necessarily sports or action but people or other moving things in general), I really prefer the experience of traditional RF or other bright frame OVF where you can see things outside of the frame, and having no blackout during the shutter release.

Now, if anything is possible, hybrid vf would be great, but if that dictates the size and makes the body X-Pro1 size, I'd give that part up as well as flash, and use rear LCD for those tasks requiring digital view port of a sort. Over the past few years, Fuji has been optimizing a lot of stuff with various X series cameras so maybe the next Pro2 could be closer to X-E and X100 series size, retaining the hybrid vf.

While I just dream about things, how's then this? to save space, no full-size EVF, but have a tiny one that's projected in OVF, sitting where the RF patch would be in RF cameras. That can do sprit, highlight or zoom MF focusing aid and call that "real digital rangefinder." 😉

Since dedicated lens and body combination can give pretty accurate frameline projection, coming from film Ms, I'd personally be totally OK with the approximation of framing.

And I do really like the ISO control with physical dial. That's what I miss most from T1, not the huge size of EVF view.

 

[dct]

Note: Just meant to be a for fun topic and I have absolutely no technical backing to this idea at all. 🙂

I love fun and dreams, let's develop it further!

Anyway, typical buyers still struggle with the effects of parallax correction on focusing and composition three years after the first X100 was bought.

Same problem with rangefinders 😉 since more than 50 years. Hence not really a problem...

While I just dream about things, how's then this? to save space, no full-size EVF, but have a tiny one that's projected in OVF, sitting where the RF patch would be in RF cameras. That can do sprit, highlight or zoom MF focusing aid and call that "real digital rangefinder." 😉

There are already several threads wandering OT with similar ideas: Too bad they didn't come true. Though the technological pieces are all there.
You are definitely a dreamer, like me. 🙂

 

[jsrockit]

I guess, for me, the main thing is "X-E size with OVF and ISO dial." X-E is a bit smaller than film M, and that's the sweet spot for me.

The X-E1, as is, feels similar to the CL or CLE to me (but with cheaper materials).

 

[Samouraï]

I prefer the dual OVF/EVF system. However if the optical technology was implemented to make the EVF redundant, I would welcome the change.

This is the key: if there were some new OVF tech designed to make manual focusing possible (like a projected, electronic rangefinder patch, or some fancy AF/MF confirm points in the OVF), then I would find myself seriously interested. I'm just not loving the EVFs on any camera, and I'm pretty certain I never will (or not until there is no shutter blackout).

 

[Spyro]

I hate EVFs but they do have their place in many situations... I'd still buy an OVF only camera if the OVF and the camera are really good, but given the option I'd prefer hybrid.

 

[budajoe69]

Sure, but it would need a digital rangefinder overlay for manual focusing and use of legacy lenses.

I feel this could be implemented…hell, it's 2014, how difficult could it be.

Maybe also some sort of zoom feature highlighting the rangefinder patch, so you know you're nailing focus on fast and longer lenses.

For using AF, I would also like a way to know if your focus point is indeed where it should be — in the current set up, it's a bit of rough estimate

Would be a cool, 'purist' model - an evolution of the rangefinder digital camera — well, this is sounding like a bit of the current Leica digital M — I suppose if Fuji could do it, and make it relatively inexpensive, they'd have a sure winner…oh, and maybe even build a few all metal, all manual focus fuji lenses…ok…I've gone nuts 😉