What about a camera with almost identical (at exterior) body with film ones (slr or not), that is having a physical LEVER (and thus saving more power) to provide mechanical energy for shutter (and mirror maybe), but using the power for sensor only? I still use my X100s almost every day, and shot some of my best pictures in the last couple of years with it. Puts me in mind of the Nikon DF.I think the X-Pro3 will be perfect for me. Nope, that’s just bad design.Can someone not just make a digital camera which has no screen and is as elegant as a Leica but not costing £6500. Superia 400 is now a staple in my film stock.
Fuji has aimed this camera at a specific type of photographer. The X-Pro 3 might be a little gimmicky, but beyond that, it’s a design that’s is trying to offer something for a niche set of photographers who want something different; photographer who want a different user experience and want limitations imposed on them rather than the opposite.Hate to be that guy, but it’s losing, not loosingIf they make a new X100 in this vein I’ll buy that too.Personally, I’m so excited for this to come out. Often a more specialized camera that does fewer things does those few things much better.Great insight! When the X-Pro 2 came out three years ago I reviewed it, and the only thing that kept me from buying it was A: I had the X100, and B: did not want to start a new family of lenses. It doesn’t serve any purpose.Which is exactly why I am so pleased to see them bringing out a camera like the X-Pro 3. I’m hoping the screen is solidly built. I think, Fuji is half doing it, as unlike leica (I’m looking at M-D and Monochromes!) It remains to be seen whether there are enough of their market to allow this camera success.The rear screen is not entirely gone though (although they apparently considered it). X-Pro aims to be “focus on photography not specs” thing, as also clearly follows also from current press-release, but it fails to be that! they dont have balls to go all in and follow marketing department rather than their inner photographers soul. I think what Fuji have done is innovative, interesting, and actually quite brave. Instead, it is hidden from view and accessed via flipping it down from the rear of the camera.You need to carry the camera and access the subject.
I mean, Leica managed it.A real rangefinder would be better, thoughI have a similar idea on my wish list for several years. As such, to use the camera comfortably at eye level, you need to use the viewfinder.While I quite like Fuji X100, I have to disagree on your take on X-Pro3 (or 1,2 for that matter). All X-Pro releases so far have been aimed at film users who have made the jump to digital but still love their old film cameras, and the X-Pro 3 takes this a step further, with a unique hidden LCD design. Some people have taken the release of this camera as a personal attack on their ability to enjoy photography.We’re at square one again: How can you possibly have a comment on a product that hasn’t been out yet and you haven’t been able to even look at it at your local store? With the 24MP and later Fuji cameras, you really need to be a bit of a control freak (moi?) Fuji allow a square crop setting on their cameras, so with the screen up I have a rangefinder style 35mm ratio camera. Is it enough to tempt me when I have a 35mm rangefinder camera and a Hasselblad already?—well for travel it might be. I’m putting my ‘“money where my mouth is”. Diehard film photographers will no doubt be shouting “why not just shoot film” etc… but I’m not really interested in all that side of the argument. I am more & more of the opinion that comment forums (especially digital) are just full of angry people who are constantly right and think something is crap if its not exactly what they wanted or would have designed.Hamish, the “photographers” (frauds) on Dpreview hate it. So far, Leica have done this with the M10-D really effectively but I can’t quite forgive them for doing the fake film rewinder-lever-thumbrest-actually.Yes, the camera is a bit unconventional. I was thinking about selling my Fujifilm equipment, this announcement has certainly made me pause for thought.Hey Hamish – I’ve been following the X-Pro 3 and it’s a cliche to say this, but the X-Pro 3 is for me the first “shut up and take my money” camera since I bought the first X100 to hit my town in 2011 (I bought a D700 on release in 2008 but I did that for sensible commercial reasons)More importantly, while I do understand the complexity of the implementation of the hybrid VF, but the end result is, unfortunately, far from being perfect worse than on X100 series let alone leica (dimmer, lower magnification, worse eye relief).
If only I could use my Fuji lenses on a film camera now ….the concept is not bad, but the cam is to expensive for me as a family father.It’s all become really quite absurd in my opinion, which is why I applaud Fuji for this move. In the end, they probably suffer from that, as they claimed X-pro series is not particularly profitable anyway, and more of a halo product.