Xpro3 observations

[helen.HH]

When the Xpro 3 came out I tried it
In the hand , it felt rather cheap , plasticky and light... I am not into flip out lcd screens
The VF bright but not my cup of tea

I much prefer the X100F ... man oh man Beautiful B&W files , rich , vibrant and Acros is Stellar. If You can be happy with just 35 it’s a Winner !!
I would probably love the Xpro2, never tried it

 

[jsrockit]

Stop trying to fit a square peg in a round hole Huss. You keep trying to find a camera that is better for manual focus lenses than a manual focus body. Stick to manual focus bodies and you won’t keep getting disappointed. I love how people think a company’s use of light metals equals plastic. Also, do you really expect a Leica level OVF in a sub $2000 camera in which the viewfinder houses 2 viewfinders? Stop expecting Leica build quality in cheaper cameras... it’s never going to happen.

 

[Archlich]

I anticipate the arrival of the X-E5.

 

[Huss]

Stop trying to fit a square peg in a round hole Huss. You keep trying to find a camera that is better for manual focus lenses than a manual focus body. Stick to manual focus bodies and you won’t keep getting disappointed. I love how people think a company’s use of light metals equals plastic. Also, do you really expect a Leica level OVF in a sub $2000 camera in which the viewfinder houses 2 viewfinders? Stop expecting Leica build quality in cheaper cameras... it’s never going to happen.

I just mentioned it as that is how it felt - and just in the weight. I did not say anything about plasticky etc. Helen mentioned that..
My concern was the use of the OVF and manual focusing. It is horrible, as well as the frame lines being tiny. It is an EVF camera for manual focusing. This camera works fine in OVF using AF, but you still are dealing with the tiny frame lines which is a step backwards by Fuji from the Xpro2.

I went to the store, tried out the camera, and gave my opinion instead of parroting what someone else heard on the web.

 

[Huss]

I anticipate the arrival of the X-E5.

I think the XE4 will come first...

That will make the most sense if you are into MF lenses, as the EVF is where it is at. The OVF on the Xpro3 is very kludgy for MF lenses, it needs to be in EVF mode so might as well get a camera that doesn't have an OVF.
Most probably will be 1/2 the price too.

 

[aizan]

It's a drag that Fuji customers prefer the EVF over the OVF on the X-Pro3. It's like they're picking the X-Pro instead of the X-T for the sake of style, and they don't really care for the benefits of reverse Galilean viewfinders at all.

 

[Huss]

It's a drag that Fuji customers prefer the EVF over the OVF on the X-Pro3. It's like they're picking the X-Pro instead of the X-T for the sake of style, and they don't really care for the benefits of reverse Galilean viewfinders at all.

Fuji doesn't help matters by making the OVF worse than the previous model.

 

[benlees]

It's a drag that Fuji customers prefer the EVF over the OVF on the X-Pro3. It's like they're picking the X-Pro instead of the X-T for the sake of style, and they don't really care for the benefits of reverse Galilean viewfinders at all.

I used my X-pro1 for a whole afternoon with the EVF and didn't notice...😱

As a dyed in the wool OVF kind of person I was kind of shocked. It definitely got me thinking I may look more closely at the X-T series...

Happily, the X-pro3 is a no-go due to the back screen and, now ironically, the reduced capabilities of the OVF.

 

[jsrockit]

I just mentioned it as that is how it felt - and just in the weight. I did not say anything about plasticky etc. Helen mentioned that..
My concern was the use of the OVF and manual focusing. It is horrible, as well as the frame lines being tiny. It is an EVF camera for manual focusing. This camera works fine in OVF using AF, but you still are dealing with the tiny frame lines which is a step backwards by Fuji from the Xpro2.

I went to the store, tried out the camera, and gave my opinion instead of parroting what someone else heard on the web.

I know man. I know you always try... but i wonder why? They are all AF cameras with manual focus as a secondary concern. And to me, light is good...

I never said you were parroting anything...

 

[jsrockit]

Yes
I mentioned the Xpro3 felt light, plasticky, cheap in the hands
I never felt that way about the X100F...

holding the Xpro2, (never shot photos with the Xoro2)
That camera felt substantial, Good in the Hand, Pleasant to the Eye

I love Fuji cameras , more so the b&w. Acods simulation, and enjoy the pop in color

The X-Pro2 and X-pro3 black versions should feel the same. The titanium won’t for obvious reasons. That said, there is no plastic. The X100 does feel different due to the lens being partly inside the body.

 

[Philip Whiteman]

The X-Pro2 is a delight, even more so at the run-out sale price it's now going for. I love my old film Leicas - and still use them - but for the digital stuff, including illustrations for the magazine I edit, the Fuji is first choice. I have long felt the X-Pro was the digital 'rangefinder' (yep; I know it's not) that Leica should have made. All credit to Fuji for producing such a brave and original design - in some ways the M3 of the digital era.

But I can only agree that doing away with the clever and useful dual-magnification viewfinder of the X-Pro1 and 2 seems to be a misstep on Fuji's part. Maybe they will come up with a '3W' or something, with a fixed low-magnification (i.e. wide angle) finder...

 

[Huss]

I know man. I know you always try... but i wonder why? They are all AF cameras with manual focus as a secondary concern. And to me, light is good...

I never said you were parroting anything...

See the thing is a camera like a D850 actually works really really well if you use it as a MF DSLR. W/O even having to look at the in focus confirmation dots. Beautiful OVF. It also has excellent AF. I loved using mine with my Zeiss ZF or Nikon AIS lenses. I honestly regret trading it for a Z7 - I thought I'd be using that with a bunch of adapted lenses, but didn't bother as the Leica glass still works better on Leica bodies, but it is great (better than the D850) with Sigma Art lenses that I already have.
The D750 also was pretty good, but not as good as the D850.

Why check out the Fuji? Curiosity. Why not? I went in with an open mind and I think it is a neat camera IF you use it as an EVF camera. No issue with tiny frame lines. No issue with focussing with either MF or AF lenses.
But the OVF implementation is so poor - worse than the preceding Xpro2 - it makes me wonder why they did this. It is an EVF camera so what are you paying all the extra bux for? To pretend you have a Leica?
This really is Fuji's poseur camera. The XT30 has the same sensor and image quality for $800! You are paying almost $1000 more to play fake RF camera with the Xpro3.

Can someone explain to me why the Xpro2 has a better OVF than the new, more expensive, more 'advanced' Xpro3?

 

[jsrockit]

But the OVF implementation is so poor - worse than the preceding Xpro2 - it makes me wonder why they did this.

Now that the specs for the X100V are out, we see why. It is speculated that they are using the same VF as the X100V and that’s why it is optimized for 23mm. No doubt it is a disappointment for people who only like OVFs.

It is an EVF camera so what are you paying all the extra bux for? To pretend you have a Leica?
This really is Fuji's poseur camera.

I guess I’m a poser then... because to me, it is still great and I prefer it to a Leica. It’s always been more of a Contax G than a Leica anyway.

The XT30 has the same sensor and image quality for $800! You are paying almost $1000 more to play fake RF camera with the Xpro3.

Well, yeah... I will pay the extra for the RF shaped body with weather sealing and the ability to switch to OVF when I need it. It also focuses down to -6ev which the X-T30 can’t. Now, the X-T30 feels like plastic (it isn’t though) and it’s VF is tiny. Using the same logic you can say why bother with the X-T3 too.

Can someone explain to me why the Xpro2 has a better OVF than the new, more expensive, more 'advanced' Xpro3?

Better in some ways and worse in others.

 

[Brian Atherton]

Here’s my tuppence-worth….

In early January I traded in my 2016 X-Pro2 for the X-Pro3, and have been using it almost every day.

As a healthy sceptic about the ‘3’ when it was released, I had loan of one for day to appraise myself, and really enjoyed using it. So what sold me the camera?

A number of things:
As a wearer of varifocals, the EVF is easier to see than the ‘2’ (I rarely use the OVF so I’m not bothered by the loss of the dual magnification - but yes, I agree, a bad decision on Fuji’s part).
The AF is much faster.
The AF is usable at lower light levels.
The ‘3’ is more responsive than the ‘2’.
The viewfinder diopter adjustment is harder to move (the bane of my life on the ‘2’, I resorted to taping over it, mostly unsuccessfully).
The divisive, hidden LCD is neither here-nor-there with me as I rarely chimp, but I do like the fact that the screen is protected when closed, and unfolded I have the option of taking shots with touch focus. Also it is easier with the screen unfolded to 90 degrees to view a day’s shooting with the camera on a table.
Not a real biggie but battery life is better by about an hour in a day.

Downsides/criticisms?
Major one with me is the lack of an included battery charger. Done for penny-pinching, it means unless I shell out £45 for a separate charger, I can’t charge a battery and use the camera at the same time - and Fuji should supply a longer USB/C cable.
Titanium top and bottom covers. A gimmick in my opinion, making the camera more expensive - but there is a cheaper black paint version - still titanium though, I understand.
The charger port cover is pathetic, it should be hinged and lockable. I can see this being a weak link as it gets a lot of use.

So, I guess some are wondering why I didn’t just go with the X-T3? Simple: I don’t like centre viewfinders as found on SLRs, I love the viewfinder on the lefthand rear edge. For me, the weather-protected X-Pro3 just handles better and suits my needs better.

 

[shawn]

Everyone I know who has a X-Pro or X100 tells me they really mainly use the EVF. So there is something to this theory. Which sucks for guys like us who actually use the OVF a lot.

XP2 was almost always OVF except for macro work or using the 100-400. X100F is OVF unless I am using the digital teleconverter or Ricoh GW-4 on it. My full spectrum x100 I shoot with the EVF a bit more due to wanting to see what the lighting looks like through IR filters.

Shawn

 

[shawn]

T
But I can only agree that doing away with the clever and useful dual-magnification viewfinder of the X-Pro1 and 2 seems to be a misstep on Fuji's part. Maybe they will come up with a '3W' or something, with a fixed low-magnification (i.e. wide angle) finder...

Would have been great if they went the other direction and added more magnification options. Wider and/or 1:1 for 50mm FOV would have been awesome.

Shawn

 

[Dogman]

Huss asked, "Can someone explain to me why the Xpro2 has a better OVF than the new, more expensive, more 'advanced' Xpro3?"

I'll try but I haven't used an XP3 so I'm only going by what others have said about its OVF. As reported online the XP3 doesn't have two magnification ranges for the OVF, unlike the previous models. The magnification used seems to work okay for 23mm and longer lenses, maybe down to 18mm for some. The XP2 (and XP1) OVF could be used with the 16mm lenses and even for the 14mm if you don't mind not being able to see a large chunk of the image area due to lens blocking the finder. I'm not sure if the XP3 has frame lines for the 18mm lens or not. The XP1 and XP2 do.

Prior to the XPro models coming along I was frustrated with the lack of a viable AF alternative to the Leica M6's I had used when I was still shooting film. Digital Leicas were too damn expensive for me plus my eyesight was getting worse as I aged and the rangefinder patch was difficult to see well. I've since been diagnosed with age related macular degeneration so my vision is never going to be good again. I tried several EVF cameras, including other Fujis, but I never fell in love with them. I like OVFs. The Fuji models were the alternative for me to return to using a smaller, quieter and less in-your-face camera when needed. The lenses were excellent and the XPros handled close enough to the Leica for my use. I fell in love with them.

Instead of improving on a superbly designed and built camera, Fuji appears to me to have loaded it with a flippin' gimmick screen and removed a necessary feature. Anyone who doesn't want to use the rear screen could always turn it off--I always keep mine off except to review shots. But those who prefer the OVF for wider lenses no longer have that available. I don't consider this as being a more advanced camera at all.

 

[Huss]

Here’s my tuppence-worth….

In early January I traded in my 2016 X-Pro2 for the X-Pro3, and have been using it almost every day.

As a healthy sceptic about the ‘3’ when it was released, I had loan of one for day to appraise myself, and really enjoyed using it. So what sold me the camera?

A number of things:
As a wearer of varifocals, the EVF is easier to see than the ‘2’ (I rarely use the OVF so I’m not bothered by the loss of the dual magnification - but yes, I agree, a bad decision on Fuji’s part).
The AF is much faster.
The AF is usable at lower light levels.
The ‘3’ is more responsive than the ‘2’.
The viewfinder diopter adjustment is harder to move (the bane of my life on the ‘2’, I resorted to taping over it, mostly unsuccessfully).
The divisive, hidden LCD is neither here-nor-there with me as I rarely chimp, but I do like the fact that the screen is protected when closed, and unfolded I have the option of taking shots with touch focus. Also it is easier with the screen unfolded to 90 degrees to view a day’s shooting with the camera on a table.
Not a real biggie but battery life is better by about an hour in a day.

Downsides/criticisms?
Major one with me is the lack of an included battery charger. Done for penny-pinching, it means unless I shell out £45 for a separate charger, I can’t charge a battery and use the camera at the same time - and Fuji should supply a longer USB/C cable.
Titanium top and bottom covers. A gimmick in my opinion, making the camera more expensive - but there is a cheaper black paint version - still titanium though, I understand.
The charger port cover is pathetic, it should be hinged and lockable. I can see this being a weak link as it gets a lot of use.

So, I guess some are wondering why I didn’t just go with the X-T3? Simple: I don’t like centre viewfinders as found on SLRs, I love the viewfinder on the lefthand rear edge. For me, the weather-protected X-Pro3 just handles better and suits my needs better.

So as you say you use it as an EVF camera. You like it because the VF is on the left side not the middle.
Completely fair points.
Then again an XE3 would have served those purposes too, and the upcoming XE4 should be better. I get liking one camera over an other purely because of design.

Looping back, my issue is with the OVF. EVF is fine.
🙂

 

[Huss]

Would have been great if they went the other direction and added more magnification options. Wider and/or 1:1 for 50mm FOV would have been awesome.

Shawn

This exactly. Maximize the OVF frame lines to the lens being used. That would have been so sweet and worth the premium.

 

[jsrockit]

Then again an XE3 would have served those purposes too, and the upcoming XE4 should be better.

They are great as well... but then the X-Pro has the weather sealing, build quality, EVF size, OVF (even if you hate it), higher shutter speed, higher flash sync, etc. I use both. I just prefer a viewfinder on the left.