So what’s next from Fuji??? X-shooter waiting for the Rumor-Bomb 🙂 (by FXF member Trenton)
More Fun Creations here
_ _ _
Is it an organic sensor Camera? Or a monochrome camera? And what about an X100Z with zoom lens? Or are you maybe still dreaming of a Full Frame Fuji? Is your secret wish a Medium Format Camera? Or is the 24MP X-PRO2 all you need?… These are some of the X-camera dreams shared recently at the Fuji X Forum.
Whatever you desire, you can keep up sharing it in this thread. We will then collect all the different wishes and make the Ultimate Dream-X-Camera poll out of your suggestions shared here on the Fuji X Forum.
It’s time to let Fuji know what our secret wishes are!
And now dream here, without limits 🙂
131 Responses
X100mf : rangefinder style fixed lens medium format with leaf shutter, weather sealed, for US$1999 = nirvana. Then a lineup of interchangeable lens models
But make it monochrom
Plastic lens, single shutter speed (it’s ISOless anyway), single aperture, monochrome… Yes, we need a digital Holga! These sensors are dirt cheap anyway!
Actually, a digital holga (6×6) that can directly print on instax printers would sell very well and would bring in loads of cash to Fuji for development of serious cameras. Just sayin’.
There’s an app for that
I would love a affordable medium format camera. A fuji version of the hasselblad they helped create, but smaller some how. CaptureOne compatible.
rangefinder style cam with square sensor and 4k video as good as stills.
XE-3 (and current lineup) with unprecedented dynamic range and resolution sensor (organic or other). But give the XE some love!
– No Full Frame needed/wanted!
– 16Mpixels are enough.
– Much better high ISO performance (less noise).
– Much better and faster autofocus; Phase detect all over the whole sensor; Better low-light autofocus.
I want a Fuji X40 with a 21-84mm f2.8-4.0 lens and a 1 inch sensor.
Rangefinder 35mm film camera. Or mf 6×6(9)
It already exists and is called XPan.
I would like to see a camera with a:
– 24MP X-Trans sensor with
– phase detection pixels all over the frame (like Sony A6000),
– 9.44MP EVF with 0.77 mangification ratio
Nice-to-haves with this would be:
– a rangefinder style body,
– size like X-E2/1 or X-T10,
– built in flash that can tilt upwards like in the X-E2/1,
– grip like X-T1,
– metal body,
– a bit longer battery life,
– manual controls of the X-T1,
– SOOC jpegs of the X-E1,
– auto-dynamic range up to 400%
A true rangefinder and manual lenses, simplicity and control.
What does it take to have photographers finally given back the manual controls to do their job?
It already exist, its called a Leica
Leicas are uneconomical luxury collectables with insufficient digital engineering. Additionally Fujinon lenses are distinctly superior.
How about “impossible to focus fast primes that are longer than 50mm?”
This is untrue with good eyesight.
FF or MF, no more APS-c please
– XE-3 with new sensor, same EVF magnification as XT-1, magnesium body, front dial, joystick to select AF point
– better dynamic range and sensitivity
– 50 ISO in RAW
– 100% zoom in RAW
my x100t is enough, i don’t need more.
No dreams. The X-T1 is my favorite camera at the moment.
Ultimate camera? Maybe decent support for old cameras, like new firmware for abandoned x100s? Too much to ask?
Yes, you paid for a single product, not a decade long update service.
A true black and white X-T1
Given the choice I would prefer 16mp and better iso performance than the current sensor (not that it is bad) rather than 24mp and similar or poorer iso performance
A 6×9 version of the GF670
Remake Astia 100F slide film
X-E3: 8-10 mp apsc (organic) sensor (or 16 mp with pixel binning) with high DR and sensitivity. Pdaf with 80% coverage, rangefinder style, the eyepiece/evf of X-E2 (the new type in X30 and X-T10 is small) – and GUI should be the same size as my X-E2 (again the X30 and X-T10 has the same pixel sime gui as X-T1, but with smaller magnification, so it is unconfortable for me).
I would like to have a new film mode too, what should be the same as X-E1 provia. AND the same noise pattern as in X-E1 or X100. These cameras had more pleasing noise, than the X-E2.
+1 on the latter
A true rangefinder. Would be great if it will be M mount FF sensor
Leica sell these I believe.
Didn’t ask for a leica replica. I asked for a Fuji rangefinder, leica isn’t the only company that made rangefinders.
Realistically a retro-styled Fuji with an actual rangefinder, full frame sensor and M mount with Leica lenses is going to look like a Lecia without a red dot on it.
thats not true. Minoltam, Konica, Zeiss, Voigtlander they all made M mount rangefinders. Fuji doesn’t have to make it a M mount but its preferable because there will be a wider lens selection from day 1. btw all dslrs look similar to me would that mean that canon, nikon or sony should stop making them?
It’s a fun idea actually. Then Fuji could sell a bunch of nice all manual M-mount Fujinons to owners of pretty much all the various mirrorless systems on the market today. (With or without adapters, but mostly Leica and Sony. Fuji too I guess..)
Perhaps it’s not enough of a business though, revenue wise.
Fuji doesn’t need Leica M support, their lenses and digital technology is vastly better. Backwards compatibility is the death of innovation and Leicas 6bit coding is ridiculous. Like the Zeiss Loxia, Fujinon lenses deserve a range of manual primes with true exif data.
Manual doesn’t mean 30 year old technology and this false implication has harmed photography a great deal since the beginning of digital imaging.
I want Fuji to make a X-T2 that beats the Canon 7D2 in every way.
Even Fuji said they were impressed by the Canon 7D2 and I believe Fuji is targeting the 7D2.
And please, get a modern radio flash system going.
And flash sync speed at least 1/500 or 1/1000 please
I should add in-body OIS.
Like guys before me – X-E3 like camera with APS-C sensor
Faster CPU (resulting in faster AF and faster startup)
higher DR
could have higher pixel count, like 20-24Mp, but not necessary
all user interface features and improvements of X-T1/X-T10/X30
PDAF on entire sensor
100% zoom in RAW
touch screen for AF point selection
Face detect AF seamlessly integrated with other modes (íf no face detected, AF will fall back to whatever is selected, as i understand, it is not possible now)
1/8000 mechanical shutter
longer battery life (at least a bit)
more range in EV bracketing
could have IBIS
I’d like to see the X-Pro2 as a premium X-E3…equivalent to X-T1 in features, build, and price…including tilt screen (leave the Hybrid optical to the X100T). Basically a rangefinder style X-T1. Perhaps a 20mp sensor with even better high ISO/DR.
It’s not the ultimate camera, but a true b&w x100bw and FF @16MPix (for more light sensitivity) I would order right away without asking my wife first, and deal with the consequences afterwards…
X100X , full frame with 23mm f2, which is needlesharp at f2., superfast autofocus, mechanical shutter 8000.. . and for extra bonus, IBIS 🙂
Remove PDAF as it degrades image quality and implement DFD contrast focus as Panasonic is doing. Sensor should be for imaging, too much extra crap in there… Ah, and do that on an X200 with a 50mm f/2 please!
please no 50mm on the new x200… stay with 23mm…
Implementing DFD requires paying Panasonic for a license, since they would be fools if they didn’t patent it. That said, it may be what’s going on with the AF improvements in the X-T1 and X-T10 (and maybe the X-E2) since Panasonic may have received the organic sensor in return. (Payment need not be financial.)
My dream would be a new a weather-sealed x200 with an organic sensor. 1 stop low light improvement and a better RAW conversion. It would be great if Fuji released a monochrome version but I am not sure if I would actually buy it. I love color and use b&w sometimes. Not sure if I could force myself to only shoot b&w and have no ability to choose if I want to keep my photo in color or convert it to b&w. On the other hand it wouldn’t be a bad idea if Fuji released a Monochrome x100M version. They could keep milking the old technology for a bit longer. I’m quite sure a lot of people would buy x100M for $1299.
Level X-T1 to controls and AF.
24MP with good dynamic range and noise. Like Sony and Olympus – the stabilizer matrix…
1) If you are shooting RAW and move the ISO dial to the Higher ISO than 6400 (accidentally or not), shouldn’t change the shooting to JPEG, if the new camera is not capable to shoot RAW on those crazy ISO, just show a message like: “YOU CAN’T SHOOT RAW OVER 6400 ISO, SWITCH TO JPEG IF YOU WANT TO GO HIGHER”
2) Better performance on HIGH ISO
3) Shooting RAW at 50 ISO
4) High Speed Sync
5) This is not big deal, but instead of asking for a better battery performance, like other folks, I would say BIGGER battery and make a grip with a LARGER lithium battery, and different than the camera battery.
6) Better Video. I’m not asking to look like a RED camera, if the video looks like the Canon 60D I’ll be happy!
7) Image Counter, yes! the easiest thing to do!!!! If you are in a photoshoot and want to know how many shots you have (images on the card), don’t need a calculator to do that!
8) Since we are dreaming here………I would love to see a Digital Medium Format Fuji Camera.
9) I know that a larger body will go against the trend but something to put the camera in and feel like you are holding a camera….a big camera. Just an accessory for big dudes like me.
A full-frame X200 with a 50mm lens, locking exposure compensation ring and the same button layout as the X-Pro1.
135mm FF /w 1.5x crop + 16-70mm F4 kit lens
X100 with small zoom – 24 -70 equiv and tilty screen – perfect!
X200, really simplified menus, RAW-only, with better high ISO, an ISO ring around the shutter speed dial, and a real (not fly-by-wire) focus control around the lens.
Do you guys notice the same trend as I do? Most people here want the rangefinder form factor.
I’m sure many RF fans have found their way into this forum so it won’t be representative of the whole photography community. But it still dazzles me that everyone keeps repeating how DSLR form factor (center hump) is way more popular than RF and that’s why the X-T1 outsold the X-E2.
This really confirms my view that the X-T1 was successful because of 3-4 points and not because of its form factor:
– Much better AF
– Awesome EVF
– To a lesser degree: weather sealing and ISO dial
I’m in agreement, the X-T1 sucess is curious. It’s really only marginally better in actual use to the X-pro1. I think minor usability changes and cost was better at the intro.
“RF-style” is the most useless camera concept ever invented. The point of a RF is manual focus, instead we were getting dressed up point and shoot cameras.
The X-T1 succeeded because it has true feature parity with an identically shaped Autofocus DSLR, and is therefore the only honest camera in the Fuji lineup.
RF shape will make sense again if it functions like a rangefinder, and only then will it sell. Consumers aren’t as stupid as they’re made out to be.
RF form factor (which – in our case – just means the EVF is in the top left corner) is meant to be for manual focus and Fuji is just imitating it. Ergo: stupid.
DSLR form factor is meant (and needed) for a camera with mirror and pentaprism viewfinder and the mirrorless one is just imitating it. Ergo: awesome.
Whatever you’re smoking, I want some of it!
This is not what I said. RF are manual focus cameras, the RF-styles aren’t, thus no feature-parity.
Look, we’re just talking about the placement of the VF. RF is a term that is used for that in today’s world. Just live with it.
I do, I just shared my perspective.
Cool, and mine is corner, like to shoot with the ability to scan with my open eye.
Fair enough.
I’m with starsailor here. What everyone here seems to want is an SLR with the VF on the left, that’s it. They don’t want to interact through glass, they want full TTL, which is 100% opposite from typical rangefinder usage.
This isn’t about RF vs dSLR style, it’s about placement of VF, that’s it.
“it’s about placement of VF, that’s it.”
Yeah, exactly what I wrote.
We don’t want an SLR with EVF on the left. If we’re cherry-picking here, let’s do it correctly. The “R” in SLR stands for Reflex, which references the mirror. So mirrorless can never be SLR or DSLR style if it can’t be RF style. Or we just enjoy life and use either term.
We only have two “styles” of cameras with VF these days: VF centered (with or without hump) or to the left (Leica-style). Since the centered VF is inspired from the (D)SLR and the VF on the left is inspired from RF cameras like Leica’s why don’t we just use those terms? I would never call the thing an actual RF, but RF-style is something everyone understands. It’s like it’s some new kind of sports here on FR to point out how terms are used incorrectly.
“But Kaizen doesn’t actually have anything to do with FW updates!” *whine”
Let’s just get back to discussing photography, cameras and Fuji and stop picking on each other’s choice of vocabulary and calling other people whiners which has been another trend recently…
DSLR : pentaprism need the viewfinder to be in the center
RF : VF need to be far from the lens
Both VF places are determined by the way the VF works.
EVF can be placed anywhere.
So, the real question is where is the best place ?
My nose sit on the middle on my face, it’s more comfortable / clean to keep it away from the screen. Then I think EVF should mimic rangefinder VF place instead of dslr (better access to control and use of other eye too). Main drawback with corner EVF is that the screen may be smaller or aesthetic / size of the screen (or camera) have to be smaller.
The pentaprism doesn’t need to be in the centre, as was shown by the Olympus PEN-F series.
I imagine that implementation is easier in the centre (?)
On an SLR, due to the film spooling mechanism and the desire to have the viewfinder as large as possible, that’s a yes. On a DSLR, which doesn’t have a film spooling mechanism, that’s a no. It’s just tradition.
DSLR-style cameras put my nose on the LCD. Smudges ensue. RF-style cameras keep my nose off the LCD. Plus, RF-style is more comfortable.
I happen to like a SLR style better then RF. I tried the X-E1 and E2 and had the x100.
The X-T1 was the only camera from fuji that made me really consider making it my primary camera.
There’s a huge, huge difference between the types of people who are going to come to a site like this and comment on what their ‘dream’ Fuji camera is, and the actual, average, camera-buying public.
The average person prefers the DSLR styling, either because they think it looks better or it is more familiar to them. That is why the X-T1 has done better than the rangefinder-look-a-like bodies that came before it. Your average customer isn’t going to know the technical differences between the different cameras and they’re not going to buy or not buy a camera just because it has or doesn’t have an ISO dial. Your average Fuji buyer is someone who was probably going to buy a DSLR but at the last minute read about Fuji being smaller or some example photos and picked up an X-T1. It looks most like what they were going to buy, they understand what it is. it’s more expensive than the E2 so it must be better and it’s newer than the Pro1 so it must be better than that, too, and ‘Pro’ scares people. They shoot .JPG, they live in automatic modes, they take pictures of their kids and the occasional holiday. The T1 fits the market best The T10 will probably take over quite quickly.
… That, and the profit margins are better on the X-T1 so shops have more reason to keep it in stock compared to the Pro1 or E2. The Pro1 has always been a bit of a cash sink for shops.
Are you kidding me? The standard consumer is scared of the X-T1 with its many control dials and would never touch it!
I’m pretty sure the main group of people buying the X-T1 are enthusiasts and professionals, not some average Joe who initially wanted a DSLR with kit lens.
Of course there’s a difference between this forum and the average consumer (like I wrote) but neither you nor me have hard numbers to back that up so let’s not jump to conclusions too quickly and claim they are facts.
No, I don’t have hard numbers, but I spend enough time hanging out with staff of local shops, writers of photography magazines and Fuji PR (and staff of other manufacturers) to have a good handle on what’s selling and what isn’t. The X-T1 is the only Fuji body that has proven worthwhile for shops to keep in stock and there is positively no way on Earth there are that many professionals and serious enthusiasts for three shops’ stock to continuously sell out in one below-average-population city. (In fact I’m not sure if we’re even technically a city, we’re probably classed as a larger town.)
Perhaps, by some absolute freak occurrence, the local area just happens to have a hell of a lot more people buying cameras and with a hell of a lot more money to spend. (Unlikely given the average income around here.) It seems a much more reasonable assumption, to me, and the—albeit anecdotal—evidence I’ve seen and been informed of, that the T1 simply appeals to your average camera buyer more than a Pro1 or E2, and not because of any techie nerd spec sheet features.
Apart from those who know their photography, the X-T1 also sells to older people who used Asahi Pentax, Nikon FM1 or Olympus OM cameras and find the current DSLR’s just simply too big. Also, throw in an adapter and the X-T1 (and now the X-T10) becomes a direct replacement for that old film SLR from the 1960/70’s, with the person being able to still use his favourite lenses.
I bought into the ‘adapt and use older lenses’ thing and found it completely wrong. While I’ve only used older Nikons on the X-T1 for all non-studio hired shoots, the experience is completely different, mainly due to having to rely on separate focus/stop-down actions, that were not necessary for about 50 years on SLR cameras and never on rangefinders.
Sure, you can get them to work, but these lenses, which jump into focus on any Nikon film or dSLR really don’t work that well to nail focus speedily through today’s EVFs, and need that extra step of stopping down post-focus.
I’m going to answer in two parts:
My own experience with adapted lenses is exactly the other way around. Presetting the aperture works wonderful on a camera with an EVF, as the EVF not only compensates for the “less” light, but focus peaking works far better than a centred split image focusing screen. In fact, by using the old lenses I get a WYSIWYG effect.
The point of my previous post was not that the old folks never buy new FUJINON lenses, but rather that the transition to these lenses is more gradual and the expense is distributed over months and years. For example, calculate what it would cost to switch from a Asahi Spotmatic system with 50mm f1/.4, 135mm f/3.5 and 200mm f/4 lenses to the equivalent Canon system, where all the necessary lenses must be bought in one go. However, by replacing the Spotmatic with an X-T1 (or X-T10), the old photographer only needs to buy the FUJINON 35mm f/1.4 lens; but usually not, as the 35mm doesn’t provide the same perspective as the 50mm lens.
Interesting, old hands like me, who grew up with manual focus lenses, can in general manually focus a manual focus lens faster on the X-T1 than it can auto-focus most of its own native lenses.
Anyway, the question wasn’t about using MF lenses, but on why the SLR-styles X-T1 sells better than the rangefinder-styled X-E2. Even my semi-local pseudo-photography shop now only carries the X-T1 and they are very excited about the X-T10, as that would be a direct competitor to “entry-level” DSLR cameras.
Not what I would expected but it does sound like a reasonable conclusion from the information you have.
I reckon you’re right. But then there’s the age-old point:
How is the XE-3 considered ‘rangefinder style’ when it looks through lenses and interacts with subjects, the surrounding area, and is 100% TTL like every SLR camera.
A viewfinder on the side does NOT make a rangefinder or rangefinder style. If the RF thing is so important, people would be clamouring for X-Pro style with an optical viewfinder.
Instead, they want an EVF SLR whose viewfinder is on the left side.
Give us a professional RAW Converter/Management Data system on hand! Great cameras but a poor Software.
Xpro 2 IBIS 1/8000 shutter. Don’t care about 4k, but improved video would be nice.
RF type, in X-E2 size, but:
* Weather-sealed
* 24-28MP organic or Bayer (no, never & ever again X-Trans2 !)
* AF performance in low light that match Panas AF performance with -4EV AF
* Absoulutely clean 6400iso (and not cheated) and 50iso
* 5 Fn buttons (1 at front body) + 1 iso button
* Front and back dial
* 3 Custom Function modes
* All back buttons on right side (around thumb)
* Mechanical manual focusing primes (no by wire!)
* Bigger EVF with higher res
* 16bit TIFF file saving in camera RAW converter
* ND filters
* Sillent mode (true)
* NR set to -/+5 and OFF
* 14bit RAW and higher DR
* Battery life for 700 shots
* and smaller WR primes: 16/2, 23/2, 35/3, 55/2 and 85/2.8
Panasonic’s AF in low light is on a completely different level, it would be great to have something similar on Fujifilm’s cameras. It’s the only thing I really miss.
I know because I tried GH-4 and GX-7 in reportage and wedding and their AF is amazing in low light (thanks to -4EV AF), X-T1 compared is really poor in low light shooting with 0EV AF. Futher more GX-7 has 5 Fn buttons, 3 Custom Function modes, NR +/-5 and truly sillent shutter mode!!! Shame on Fuji it offers so little.
Haven’t tried the GH4’s DFD focusing, only the GX7’s AF but I’m sure it’s even better.
What do you mean by truly silent shutter? AFAIK the GX7 and now the X-T1 have similarly implemented electronic shutter functionality.
Fuji is clearly excellent at producing lenses, but their autofocus performance lags behind. Is it simply an issue that their system is newer, or that their engineers just aren’t as good in this area? I’m just wondering what accounts for Fuji’s weakness in this regard.
I know, that Fujis AF is not the best, but if you shoot a wedding at moonlight with no additional lighting (-4EV), the AF is the least of your problems 😉
If the AF works well even in near darkness it means it works much more reliably in low light a few EVs up where Fujifilm’s cameras are sometimes hunting and slowing down, especially when you have to focus on faces and don’t have vertical lines of contrast.
I would like to see an actual medium format sized sensor. e.g. the sensor in the Pentax 645z is nowhere near 645 film size.
The X-T10 is almost my dream camera, just add IBIS, so i can use it with third party lenses, a 24mpx X-trans sensor and dedicated DOF check button. And a cheap pancake 23mm f2 WITH aperture ring won’t hurt too 🙂
An X40 that’s an X30 with a larger sensor and a correspondingly larger lens. Leave everything else the same.
Also, an X-S2 with a larger sensor, but a lens range that’s all long (e.g., picking up where the X40 leaves off & extending out pretty far), so that the X30 + the X-S2 complement each other as a complete “compact camera system”. 🙂
X-Pro2 or X-E3 with:
-IBIS
-APS-C Sensor (NO “Full Frame” 35mm equivalent)
-Tilt Screen
-Prime lenses with true manual focusing (not focus by wire)
-Front and Back dials
-Replace exposure compensation with ISO (I bought a camera with manual settings because I can figure out my own exposures)
-Longer Battery Life
-No Weather Sealing (leave that to the X-T SLR form factor cameras. I think it is great for those who want it, but I don’t need the added expense on an RF form factor camera)
Also, interesting to see on this forum at least that people are not interested in a 35mm equivalent sensor, medium format sensor, or some other configuration of crop sensor (square etc).
You must be skipping over the many, many comments and posts here where people are asking for 35mm and medium format sensors.
That said, agreed with all your suggestions. (Except IBIS, which categorically will never happen since Fuji already made their methods clear by putting OIS on lenses.) The tilt screen is the main selling point of the T1/T10, to me, and that + more straight forward manual control options and battery life would more or less take the Pro2 from being an oddity to my main body, for me.
Medium Format rangefinder fixed lens,
down to ISO 50,
and super fast AF, great in low light
F2.8 or even F2 if they can do it, Id pay handsomely for that. Though might have to sell half my belongings
Nice idea, but f/2 is (almost) unheard of in medium format other than on the ‘crop’ medium format of 6×4.5, and then there are only a few very, very expensive examples. Even standard lenses of f/2.4 and f/2.8 are kinda tricky. Pentax did a 105mm f/2.4 and Mamiya’s standard lens is a 110mm f/2.8 and those are considered the fastest standard lenses for medium format. They’re huge and not something you can throw on as a fixed lens. For a fixed lens camera, you’re looking more at f/3.5-f/4.5 as your widest aperture. F/3.5 is the fastest Fuji has managed, and that’s on a relatively wide-angle lens. One of their previous fixed lens medium format cameras only managed f/5.6. Accepting the 6×4.5 crop would make faster aperture easier but then you get into the argument about making a crop medium format or just making a high-mp 35mm full frame camera…
True, but quite a few large format process/enlarging lenses exist in both f/2,8 and f/4 designs.
I know it’s unheard of, it’s probably totally impractical to get the lens elements compact enough for a fixed lend MF ….. But hey, it’s a wish list and that would be a dream come true…… Realistically, f3.5 would still offer outstanding DoF and low light capabilities so I would settle for that too! I have the Fuji 690 iii and that has a f3.5 and it’s a wonderful lens…….. If they could a digital MF 6×9 I would probably wet myself, they may, in like 10yrs time…..
I have the wonderful Planar 80/2,8 for my Rollei X-ACT 2. Amazing amazing amazing lens.
Very nice!
A mirrorless medium format camera with interchangeable lenses, but sadly it would likely be far too expensive to justify. If not, a full frame X-Pro 2 with a set of fast primes, but we know that is not going to happen. So, I will settle with an APS-C sized X-Pro 2 with an organic sensor (or something else with exceptional dynamic range and resolution). Hopefully, one of the latter two are announced and available this fall.
If they are gonna continue using the X-Trans sensor, they better provide their own bare bones raw converter or the ability to convert the files to 16-bit TIFF using the in-camera converter. Either one will do, but they would stupid to continue ignoring this issue.
Canon 5d IV…oh, Fuji are going to release another slow focusing, 16 mp body with 200 min iso ….loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool
i would love both dials on the x-t1 to lock, not just the iso dial they get bumped to easily and switch shooting modes.
Bingo. Worst design decision apart from splitting aperture and shutter speed into two separate control parts each.
Edit: clarified.
Really?????!!!! Please unlock everything! Getting tired of pressing the ISO button to rotate it. A waste of time and finger – not ergonomic at all. Never changed settings (apart from aperture) by accident. You people must have huge eyebrows or roll on the ground with your camera… Haha
My eyebrows can be huge but my wife takes care of that….lol I may roll on the ground or it just hits my hips and switches modes. I had a canon eos 7d that you sent to CPS and they could put a locking dial on it. I loved the locking dial. That would be something i would enjoy. To each their own.
RF, optical “like” EVF, don’t waste effort on hybrid, full manual controls. Should output clean HDMI for occasional but serious video capabilities, but no need for crippled or wasted resources on internal video recording.
How can you have a RF with an EVF? And what is an ‘optical “like” EVF’? I agree on hybrid controls. Controls need to be simplified and non-conform parts removed.
Uniformity is what I want.
“How can you have a RF with an EVF”
Easy as pie. Just like traditional RF setup, with a pair of spatially separated lens systems.
This is actally exactly what is going on when using the “digital split view” (or whatever they call it?) just on a much smaller scale.
In a digital-electronic RF camera, one of these lens systems would be your photographic lens and sensor and the other a compact lens-sensor system built into the camera body. The nice thing about this setup is that no moving parts are really necessary. (Except for moving the focus helicoid obviously..)
I thought I had replied. I guess I did not.
Apart form its magnification functions and other focus aids, the EVF works exactly like the SLR TTL OVF does. It can’t in any way mimic an RF shooting experience.
A ground prism is a sort of rangefinder, but the way you interact with the camera, the lens, and even the way you look at the world/subject, through an EVF or TTL OVF is completely opposite to how you look through either a coupled or uncoupled rangefinder camera. There is no overlap.
So you can’t have a rangefinder-style without either eliminating the VF all together and relying on external finders and depth scales, or coupling finders and focus mechanisms into fixed finders.
You still would be emulating the SLR, not the rangefinder. And the style of shooting (the mechanics behind it) is still SLR-style, not rangefinder-style.
MF fixed-lens leaf shutter ideally similar in look to the GF670 with a 55 f/4ish lens with DoF scale, flash sync comparable to the X100 line with radio trigger sync built in and PC sync backup, XT1’s soon-to-be new AF system, X100T like viewfinder scaled up to size, WiFi and NFC built in, allow an option in the menu to tether to your phone to sync files on card to a cloud service (or your home computer if you have mad networking skills), comes with Capture One software for RAW conversion that has Fujifilm specific plugins already installed, somehow keep all of this under $8K
A 24x24mm sensor with existing X mount.
I want an X-Pro with uniform controls:
1. shutter speed in 1/3 increments from the shutter dial
2. flash sync speed labelled on shutter dial
3. Timer mode moved from shutter dial and onto drive mode dial, or like Leica, the ON/OFF switch with the following options: S,C, and T
4. ISO on front-mounted ISO dial like Leica C, or settable similar to current X-Pro 1, but with user-selectable left-right or right-left movement.
5. Add LCD-only playback mode
6. user-selectable method to disable ALL eye sensors
7. remove lock on shutter speed dial
8. give non-programmable buttons for instance, AF-ON button a different size and push feel depending on utility
There are other things that need to change. But I just hope that Fujifilm focus on making the X-Pro 1 fit an obvious and intended user base. Do NOT put superfluous sports-oriented functions in it. Make AF fast and reliable, but don’t poke controls all over it to make it fit every user out there.
Design with intent. Slough bad/redundant controls. Focus.
Here is how I’d like my X-E3. I find it interesting that we try to address the same issues with different solutions…
Sensor : good old Bayer matrix, 12 MPix APS-C optimized for dynamic range, with 16 bits raw output.
Form factor : corner EVF like rangefinders, but with a grip like DSLRs, housing a large battery.
Controls :
– exposure compensation from +3 to -5, with a lever underside (XT-1
style) to switch between metering modes (auto/matrix, AF-linked spot and
menu-customizable weighted metering)
– shutter speed dial with a lever underside for -1/3, 0 and +1/3 EV
shutter speed fine tuning (instead of using the command wheel)
– eye-controlled focus point selection (as with Canon ECF) to choose the AF frame simply by looking at it
– X100/Xpro1 style red front lever for depth of field preview, flash
exposure preview on/off (for flash/ambient light balancing) and because
it looks cool ^^
– instead of the on/off switch, a switch for off/single/burst, a bit like on Leica cameras
– rear thumbwheel for ISO control
– autofocus mode selector with an additional trap focus mode
Auto exposure : full-time automatic exposure to the right (ETTR),
with live raw histograms and blinking clipped highlights display in the
EVF
Shutter speed control : built-in image stabilization (IBIS) and
shutter speed adjustment tracking user motions when in a
camera-controlled shutter speed modes.
Viewfinder : EVF with 0.70-0.74x magnification (to keep it small), with a large eye relief (30mm ?), and a good eye cup
Other features :
– Radio controlled flash system for multiple off-camera flash with independant metering for each flash
– Weather sealing with ingress protection rating IP54 or more
Full frame. Either body style but with the xt-1’s iso dial and magnified viewfinder. Weather sealed with a faster processor/bigger buffer.
I just would love a X100WR no larger sensor, no other Lens,no video just a X100 with “go everywhere protection”.
Maybe a larger Viewfinder.
Great !
Full frame. All manual dials, X-Pro 1 styling, compact. Large magnified electronic viewfinder. Organic sensor (if it lives up to its film-quality hype).
+ A set of small but tough manual only Fuji primes. Not that any company other than Leica would do anything non-autofocus these days.
If Fujifilm could rid the redundant controls from the X-Pro, I’d love a FF version. But keep the optical window, maybe even remove the zoom from it. If the EVF is nice enough, people that want zoomable optics have the EVF.
Keep the OVF, make it larger with maximum angle of view just wider than the 18mm lens on the wide end and the 56mm lens on the long end.
You are right: Fujifilm wouldn’t do manual primes. They’d be too expensive to manufacture.
They don’t need to change much! Here’s my list!
1. Base ISO 100 expandable to 50
2. 1/8000 MS.
3. Better sensor. It can still be 16mp. But with more pdaf point, cross type, similar to Samsung.
4. Better AF.
5. Significantly better video. Add 4k in for photo grabs for me.
6. Larger battery. Doesn’t need much. Maybe 300mah.
7. Stick with apsc. I actually enjoy using lenses with my camera. Since there are not any FF lenses….no point in a FF camera….
I totally agree with that. Realistic and needed improvement.
I’d add (not as realistic but I’d like it in a not so near future) :
– full rotation screen (with screen protected by camera if needed)
– touchscreen (set focus area in photo/video mode)
– IBIS (good partner with all the non-stabilized Fuji primes and legacy lenses)
– faster read-out sensor : better electronic shutter / video ?
– dual SD-slot
– dual battery slot (+ grip)
Ah yes! I forgot touch screen!! Yes please! Much better for moving the focus point!
I would also love a tilting screen of any sort!
Ultimate XPro:
1. Zeiss Ikon’s bright viewfinder + rangefinder focusing
2. Sigma’s Foveon sensor
3. Keep XPro1’s shutter sound
No need to add fancy digital things, keep focusing on pure joy of photography and photo quality the No.1 priority.
Full Frame Xpro2. So that none of the current lenses will work. Make body same size as XE. Replace shutter speed dial with PASM/Art filter dial. Movie mode button (that glows in the dark). Move viewfinder to center (with big hump) so my nose can rub on the LCD.
I would like a new version of X-T1 withe the electronic viewfinder at the left side like the X-PRO1…
Some current lenses with rectangle rear apertures and/or hoods will not work with this sensor.
EDIT: added ‘hoods’
Not too much of a fix. Major gain in sensor area and no need to rotate camera in 1:1 aspect ratio. Can still shoot normal APSC for those rectangular shooters. 24 MM is the height of a “Full Feame” sensor so you would have the same image advantages all things being equal if you are a 1:1 shooter in FF. this would give max bang for the buck and little changes.
5 axis IBIS.
4K Video and log files
Leaf shutter
HSS
PUT THAT INTO THE X-T1 and watch the world burn!
The leaf shutters would need to be in all of the lenses, not the body
That’s actually not true. While rare, there are camera bodies with leaf shutters. And being that this is a dream camera….just saying.
A left-handed X-T1 (at the same price).
small styling like the xt10 or x-e2, but with larger grip so that holding with large lenses isn’t an issue. let’s forget this optional grips, just build it into the camera, the lens is going to stick out that much anyway.
20-24mp sensor.
Fix the video issues. Get the moire and aliasing out of there. 4k would be nice at 24, 25, 30. 1080p at 60, 50, 30, 25, 24. Full manual control for video including focus peaking and optional zoom in for manual focusing. When shooting video, allow autofocus with half shutter press, not just continuously trying to figure out what to focus on.
Auto-iso with minimum shutter speed and the ability to set that to ANY shutter speed you wish, like Nikon.
Fast auto-focus with more phase detection points.
5 axis image stabilization. I get the arguement that it can soften your image, but if you are worried about that, shut it off until you need it.
A much faster processor/buffer than the current breed of cameras. I want to be able to shoot 30 RAWs before the buffer fills up. 7-8 FPS would be fine though. If the latest M 4/3 can do it, so should the Fujis.