I know, here on FujiRumors you are used to get answers about upcoming Fuji gear, and not questions.
But today (with the expressed permission of a source) I decided to share the Fujifilm X-E3 “rumor-riddle” in reply to all those asking me information about it via email and in the comments.
The question is the following: “Will there ever be a Fujifilm X-E3“?
You might remember how back in January I’ve shared some “Wild Rumors” (Nr.1 and Nr.2) of a dc.home forum member called joofei. It was a very long list of rumors, some plausible, others pretty weird. I’ve contacted my sources and we talked about it.
For now I can confirm just one thing that joofei said over at dchome: there really was (and probably still is) a debate inside Fujifilm, about whether they should make or not the Fujifilm X-E3.
Will the Fujifilm X-E3 ever become real? As soon as any of my sources has 100% certainty about Fuji’s final decision, I’ll post an update for you here on FujiRumors… so stay tuned and follow FR on Facebook, Google+, RSS-feed and Twitter.
Now I’d like to hear what you guys think about it. Should Fuji make an X-E3 or not? Vote the poll and feel free to drop your considerations in the comments.
[poll id=”83″]
123 Responses
It depends on. If they make the cheaper X-1 capable, there is no need for the X-E3. Any other case, yes.
No X-T or X-Pro for me. I’m X-E2 owner an will buy an X-E3 or nothing.
The other ones are too big.
Fuji should forget about X-A2 and invest in an X-E3!
Too big? There is almost no size difference at all in practical use between the X-E2 and X-T1. Though the X-Pro1 indeed is a bit bulky.
http://camerasize.com/compact/#520,493,258,ha,b
There is key difference, as T1 with 27m won’t fit in my pocket, while E1/E2 fit perfectly.
There will be no need for X-E3 with X-Pro 2 on the market
I guess the first question ought to be how well the X-E series has performed for Fujifilm. I was under the impression it had done reasonably well; not, perhaps, as well as the X-T1, but certainly better than the X-Pro series.
The X-Pro has a HVF, not sure how that will play out in the Pro 2, but the X-E has the EVF, like the X-T, but with the rangefinder styling. The body would seem to need a price point above the X-A (which Fuji is mysteriously continuing) but below the X-T and X-Pro. That’s a pretty big gap, and something ought to be there.
Both Fuji and Olympus seem to have success with their SLR style cameras. Olympus made three OMDs going this route, I can see Fuji ditching the X-E series for a lower end X-T slr style.
Personally, I like the rangefinder style, don’t like the ISO dial of the X-T1
I’d like it to move upscale in quality…an equivalent rangefinder version of the X-T1
I am waiting to purchase an X-E3 because of the small size. I realize one person or a group of fanboys aren’t enough to make enough broad consumer demand for a camera. Still, it’d serve me well…
It is an almost perfect camera that needs only one thing, better AF. A flip-out screen would be nice, too. I do NOT want a bigger or heavier body. Please don’t send me back to Sony when I have bought numerous Fuji lenses.
Love my Xe2. With the 27mm it fits the pocket of my coat, and with the additional hand grip and the 56mm or the 10-24mm etc. I have a “close-to” pro package… Which other x line than the e series can do this? lets have a xe3 in a year from now.
It seems to fill a gap in their offerings. I specifically chose the X-E2 over the X-T1, partially because I wanted to wait for an X-Pro2, but also because I just prefer the rangefinder form factor. I gave up my DSLR for Fuji, I don’t need the awkward center hump viewfinder if there is no mirror to necessitate it.
Embrace the EVF. Better focus on improving the quality of the EVF on a rangefinder-style body (along with improving manual/auto focus aid software) than to keep pushing the hybrid viewfinder which is basically a “not a rangefinder”+”a decent EVF”.
Keep the X-T line and merge the X-E and X-Pro lines into something like a X-EPro (under whatever name you prefer).
Loved the idea of a corner VF at first (one of the many reasons i bought a X100), but every time i pick up a SLR style camera with centered VF it just feels so much more natural. Just raise it up to the eye and there it is, where you expect it to be. You’re looking ‘through’ the lens at a natural angle. Something seems off with a EVF in the corner. It’s a bit better with the OVF though since you’re actually looking through it, but then it’s the resulting image that always seems to be a bit off. Can’t get used to it, or well .. i can, just not completely feeling it.
While I love the “boxy” form factor of my X-E bodies (perfect for storage and transport as a backup camera)… While I totally dig the left side position of the EVF (less traumatic on my shnobel)… I have to admit that the EVF needs serious improvement. Compared to EVF of the X-T1 it’s a joke.
I sold my X-E2 and bought an X-T1 instead purely on the feel of the X-E2 in my hand. It really needed a little more grip – like the Sony NEX-6 I’d owned previously. Otherwise a good camera, but somewhat let down in features compared to updates offered to X-T1.
If there was an X-E3 I would hope it’s treated as a flagship like the X-T1 – merely a choice of form factors, rather than the way the X-E2 was relegated to an also-ran.
I would say yes, to much over lapping camera’s
Wasn’t there a XT10 rumour? Wouldn’t that kinda be a XE3 in terms of product range placement? (I know the form factor won’t satisfy you rangefinder style people!) Also, isn’t the Sony A6000 the XE camera you always wanted!! #blasphemy
Fuji seems so light on new camera models thus far in 2015, it does PERHAPS imply they’re having a long hard think about their priduct range….
Careful XE lovers… You might force Fuji to make a X-EPro, with no hybrid VF!!! #riotsinthestreets
Its their best camera in terms of price/performance. Its the perfect size. It handles well and looks good. Why would they discontinue this line?
Yes, bring X-E3! X-Pro1 size was too big for me, X-T1 with centered EVF I found very uncomfortable and inconvenient for fast framing and shooting with nose on my thumb, no way I will ever buy X-T, I just do not feel this camera at all, not to mention I do not like its JPEGs compared to X-Pro1/X-E1. X-E1/X-E2 is almost perfectly designed reagrding size, handling with small grip, VF usage and fast framing – I am street shooter and photoreporter, actually I went for Fuji only because of X-E1, though I like X-Pro2 apart from the body size. The question is wether X-E3 will share the same features as X-Pro2? If it receives them really less than I will probably not buy it and will go for X-Pro2… on the condition X-Pro2 will get smaller…
If they don’t make the X-E3 then they should make the X-Pro2 a bit smaller. Then I’m fine without making a X-E3.
Otherwise: Make a X-E3 Fuji!!!
I went with Fuji for the ability to get a consumer rangefinder. I love, love, love (did I mention love?) the form factor and don’t need all that the X-Pro2 will offer. If there is no X-E3, then I may actually make the jump to Sony, cause if I’m going to have a center hump, may as well have FF to.
Same here – X-E3 would be my next camera. If the new X-Pro will be the same smaller size, if it won’t be too expensive, maybe… nah, it will be too expensive. FF is too close. XE-3 would just be it.
We already know that the X-Pro2 will be approaching $2k, so I find it hard to justify spending that much for a camera. To me their pricing is going to end up being their Achilles heel, unless of course they are gunning for Leica buyers.
Whichever features they add, I’m waiting for the XE-3. I don’t want the extra bulk of the X-Pro series, and I like the little built-in flash. I bought in to the X series thanks to the XE-1, and am not interested in the DSLR shape. I can travel light and enjoy taking photos with the XE-1. I am keen to update to the next XE that has enough updates to make it worth the jump.
What I really like about the XE series is the corner viewfinder. With a centered viewfinder, you have to lean forward, slightly rotate your head to the right and press your nose against the screen. How uncomfortable ! The corner viewfinder feels so much more natural, you can finally stand up straight and look at a scene as you would with your naked eyes.
On a mirrorless camera, there is no need to place the viewfinder above the lens mount. A mirrorless camera is not a DSLR nor a rangefinder, it can have any shape.
I wish Fuji would make a camera with a built-in grip and a viewfinder in the corner, a bit like the Mamiya 6. And with an EVF hump in the corner, there wouldn’t be any size limitation to the viewfinder.
So I hope Fuji won’t take the opposite path, an XT-10 with centered viewfinder and no built-in grip. This would, in my opinion, be the worst choice for ergonomics.
Standing up straight is a terrible idea for photography 😉
Apart from that I agree with your opinion about the placement of the VF.
What about the new x-e2 firmware? upgrade the video mode!
All you right-eyed people with your love of corner viewfinders…
Seriously, I would be curious to hear the internal arguments for and against continuing the X-E series. I can imagine the argument against goes something like this:
The small but vocal group of users who are potential purchasers of an X-E3 are not enough to justify the expense of development and distribution as well as the diversion of resources away from SLR-style bodies that are likely to sell in much greater numbers. Additionally, the X-E3 consumer is less likely to purchase premium zoom and fast prime lenses due to ergonomic considerations. The bottom line is that an X-E3 doesn’t pencil out in a world where developing it takes away from other, more lucrative projects.
I seem to recall a Fuji exec implying something to the effect that he was not so certain the X-System would even be sustainable until the introduction and subsequent success of the X-T1. (Think it was a 2014 interview with dpreview, maybe from Photokina.) This suggests a lot to me about the success of the X-E1 and X-E2—along with the fact that Fuji doesn’t seem to want to bother with firmware upgrades for the X-E2 despite it being a current model.
Is it really for right-eyed people ? In “landscape” orientation, sure it should be used with the right eye. But in “portrait” orientation, try the left eye, it is much better. 😉
If Fuji drops the corner viewfinder, what will make them different from the DSLRs? What will make them stand out ? The analog-style dials ? I’m already reading many requests for overloaded DSLR-style commands. What will be left of what made Fuji unique, of what made the “X” philosophy ?
Exactly. I have an X10 and tend to switch orientations based on need. I don’t think left/right eye has much to do with it.
I’m left-eye dominant and prefer the corner VF of my 100 simply due to it giving me a bit more space between my face and (large) hand. I enjoy my T, but I got it because of the EVF. If the E or Pro lines had better EVFs, I would not have thought twice before taking one of those instead of the T.
If you can give the Es EVFs as good as the Ts without screwing up the rangefinder-style form factor and a build like the Pros, I’d rather have an E than a Pro. But that’s me. In the meantime, I’ll keep enjoying the 100 and T I have right now.
Being left eye myself the only downside to it is constantly having you nose smack in the middle of the LCD. Always having to clean those things. (The LCD and my nose)
I’m hoping this is just more misinformation and wild rumors. With timely updating I see the X-Pro/X-E line and the X-T/X-10 (if legit) as two separate lines, appealing to different sets of users. Besides working professional who might purchase multiple copies of the same body, a lot of times typical users might want a similar but cheaper body as backup with similar button layouts. The X100 line could fill in as a backup to the X-Pro but not in all scenarios.
IMHO Fuji should merge X-E and X-M lines. The line should have basic EVF and should be as cheap as X-M1. Thus a standard lineup will be formed.
Amateur X-A
Consumer X-M and X-E hybrid
Semi-pro X-T
Pro X-Pro
I would skip the X-A line because it messes up the UI unification of all the others, but apart from that – I totally agree!
X-A line is the only really cheap one. Some users just stuck with the system they get initially. Thus X-A line may increase the number of people that use more advanced Fuji cameras just because some started photography with Fuji X-A.
That might be right, but I think a new, slightly downgraded spec-wise X-E sitting slightly above the X-A/X-M price point would be a much better magnet and would pull more users into upgrading once they learn to appreciate the UI and comfort of the rangefinder style body.
That’s almost what I suggest: X-M with EVF and price slightly above X-A. It’s probably better idea to continue the X-M name even if it would be closer to X-E because upgraded X-M sounds better than downgraded X-E.)
I would agree with this apart from the last 2. They should have equal standing i.e. both Pro.
As a working pro, I prefer to use a camera with a vertical battery grip for studio shoots while offering a large EVF so I can see exactly what I’m going to get rather than a good idea of what I’ll get through a OVF. On a RF style camera…. the OVF just doesn’t handle the longer focal lengths well at all. They should both exist as options but both should offer the best sensor / processor tech etc
Well that’s true. Nevertheless it’s easier to justify the higher price of X-Pro calling it a pro camera with X-T positioned as semi pro. It’s just relative categories not global ones. IMHO Fuji still has no professional camera as all current cameras lack the durability. Being an enthusiast I love Fuji cameras but I understand that if I was doing photography for a living I would get pro DSLR system for $$$$$
Talking about X-E, it seems to be too expensive for an entry camera.
Na… I sold the FF Canon 5dmkii and L lenses in favour of the Fuji system. Better glass, more accurate AF (not as fast but it is more accurate)… lighter. I can carry more alternatives for the same weight. Never had any client complain it wasn’t from a DSLR but, I don’t work as a sports or red carpet photographer. I’d want something that has fast AF, good off camera TTL flash system with very long fast lenses. The difference in IQ between APSC and FF exists but it is marginal when compared to MF or LF.
Well I’m not talking about IQ or clients opinion. There is no doubt that one can make fantastic images with Fujis but there are other kinds of problems. If one looses half of his wedding shoot because of the dead SD and no secondary SD that’s not professional. Loosing frames because of too late low battery warning is not professional. Loosing frames because it takes too long to switch off preview in manual mode to start flash photography immediately after available light photography is not professional. There are plenty of such little problems but all in all these lead to a non-professional camera. No big deal. Nikon do pro Digital since 2001 and Canon do since 1999. Fuji has just started their way in the new field of digital mirrorless photography and they need some time to figure out all little tweaks to become a pro system. They are just not there yet.
No, they would be good improvements, good risk protection. That said, I’ve never had an SD card fail and if you use the vertical battery grip, not only does the battery last the majority of the day. Also, when one battery dies (the one in the grip first) just change it at a convenient time. Your more likely to screw up the data of the card on transfer. Software that makes dual copies to different drives is more important to me.
What they need to do (from my point of view)…increase MP to around the 24mp mark, standardise buttons on the backs of their cameras. Improve Tracking and AF speed. Keep on improving EVF. Add a FN button or two to the Vertical Grip so you can trigger AF point selection easier. Improve Flash system. I mainly work in manual mode but good TTL would be nice. Beef out lens options further, longer primes and slightly slower and lighter versions of current fast lenses while keeping same level of IQ as their 50-140 / 56mm lenses.
I would say there is more to be done away from the camera than with the cameras themselves. More evolution now.
For the majority of pros, it’s lens selection that will hold them back from trying the system (excluding those that need extremely fast AF). The glass is way more important than the camera. Cameras come and go but you’ll keep a good lens for the life of a system.
You’re talking like an enthusiast not like a professional. Camera reliability is everything for a professional. Of course SD cards rarely fail but the single happening is enough to get into big trouble. One needs to have reliable options in any situation not just when using battery grip or anything else. And these are not all. There are a lot more. Just check out the top DSLRs like 1D and D4 and you’ll understand what I’m talking about.
Other options and lens lineup are important too. And Fuji will definitely work on these. Nevertheless these options are important not for everybody but for those who need these features. And reliability is important for every single professional.
Haha. Ok, I thought we were being civilised rather than chucking insults… Let’s not forget (by your own admission) you are the enthusiast and I am the working professional receiving 100% of income from what I love doing. The improvements I suggested were “From my point of view”. In other words, they’re what I would like. Everyone has different requirements.
I agreed that the improvements suggested would be really good but not critical. Simple risk management can protect you against these problems. Yes it would be better if these were implemented but it hasn’t stopped me from doing my job since moving away from DSLR 4 years back. Not having the right lenses available however would stop me. I left Sony for that reason. No UWA or long lenses of any quality at sensible pricing. As I said, glass is king and always will be.
As a mountaineer, the 5dmkii with 100-400L lens was excellent but added to an already extremely heavy backpack. In the studio it was great but, there is nothing like being able to pick up a camera and instantly know where each button / function is, no matter if it’s a T1, Pro1 or X-E whatever. Muscle memory, you don’t want to have to keep thinking about what camera it is and where the buttons are. That’s one thing the DSLR’s have nailed and it is a dull but really important feature. For this reason I use 2 X-T1’s rather than having two different cameras or makes.
Hitting the wrong button and screwing up a shot will account for more lost images than a failed SD card. Which I carry many of but even after a soaking, freezing at 6000m heights I still haven’t had a fail…. I protect against it but I don’t worry about it as it is one of the smallest risk I encounter. It certainly wouldn’t stop me from buying a camera (lack of dual sd slot)
If you feel the need to spend $$$$$ if you became a pro and it felt right to you then that’s good…. it’s what works for you and the type of photography you specialise in. But, it’s not a requirement of being a pro. People get all to hung up at times on DSLR’s, they’re just another piece of kit/tech that is starting to age and will be replaced. As will mirrorless. What’s pro is how we go about our job, the results we achieve and keeping the customer happy. Being Pro is inside and not just a piece of kit.
All the best and Enjoy your shooting.
I’m sorry if I’ve offended you. I didn’t mean to.
I wasn’t arguing with your suggestions. They are surely great and have high demand. My point was just the importance of each feature. But you’re right. Too much people have different demands. And one cannot split the missing features into two categories like pro-required and welcome. Nevertheless to my style of shooting Fuji X is still not perfect and I feel top DSLRs to be more reliable at the current moment.
I voted No, because you have the XT1 and the XPRO camera. Unless the Pro is weather sealed and the best tech, then the XE line could be the gateway X camera.
I say keep it, give it a flip screen and ditch the XA and XM
As long as the X-Pro line continues, I can live without the XE line. (Not that I don’t love my X-E1…) The X-T stye is very nice and the lower end X-T camera would fill the market spot of the X-E anyway.
we will not see any x-camera until December! …no sense these rumors!
x-pro2 will be ready for December..with Sony A7 III (no 2, III). with more megapixel …e nothing more…oh yes, 4k (already present in my samusung phone)
I like my x-t1..but instead and x-pro2 with more mpx and 4k I will prefer Iphone 7s
I think 4 cameras is the best line up. From the dirt cheap XA, maybe even push it downmarket a little to really compete with the D3x00 and rebels; something between the XM and XE like the cheaper XT; and then the XT and XPro at the top end with similar internals but differentiated hardware. Kinda like how Panasonic used to have GF, GX, G and GH lines that were well defined.
I did my part — bought a new X-E2 from Adorama last month. 😉
Hmm this isn’t good news. If both the consumer X-A and X-M lines are done, there are big question marks over the X-E and even X-Pro lines, is the X-T the only Fuji X body we’ll have in the future?
More likely than not, there would be new X models like an X-T10 or an X-T100 or whatnot all in a SLR form factor which is pretty much the preferred style of cameras anyway.
RF type cameras appeal to a very limited market. Hadn’t been true, we would have seen more RF style cameras out there since the early 60’s before the majority of the market switched to the SLR style camera.
Personally, I prefer RF style but I can tell you 90% plus of the other photographers I know wouldn’t even look at fuji till the X-T1 was released and many of them now still say they wouldn’t consider Fuji till there are more SLR styled models.
There’s a very simple reason for that development: SLRs have a major advantage compared to RF cameras: you see through the lens. That means you know for sure what is in focus and you can preview the DOF. It also greatly expands the possibilities for using vastly different focal lengths from extreme wide angle to super telephoto. For that reason photographers just got used to the SLR style.
Now with mirrorless cameras with EVF the placement of the VF is irrelevant and you still have all those benefits (and some more). Change always takes time but I believe more and more people will start to see the benefits of the RF style and then the X-Pro2 will give us the best of both worlds (EVF and RF). The main reason for the X-T1 being so successful is in my opinion the greatly enhanced AF, the direct access to all important control dials and the larger grip which most modern photographers are still used to because they carry the weight of the camera in the wrong hand. Had all that appeared in the X-Pro2 I believe it would have been almost as successful as the X-T1 was now.
Mirrorless has become a serious problem for the manufacturers. This is especially true for Fuji, which uses the same sensor in all its cameras. The problem is: without mirror mechanism, PDAF sensor, RGB light meter, VF prism and different sensor sizes, there isn’t much left to justify major price differences between different bodies. A few more buttons, a little bit more buffer, a slightly better viewfinder and better body build do not justify a price difference of a thousand bucks. Even adding a HVF won’t justify that. And when you consider the economy of scale I would even question whether it is cheaper for Fuji to put a lesser EVF in an X-E body rather than buying larger quantities of the X-T1 EVF. Compare that to all the possibilities Nikon has to vary between a D3200 price and D810 or even D4S price. Sadly, manufacturers haven’t embraced that as a new chance but have instead created artificial differences between their lines.
For example there is absolutely no reason why the X-Pro line should cost more than the X100 line. I believe that is why Fuji is hesitant to release the X-Pro2 and say that they need more new technologies. When the X-Pro1 was released it was new and great (mostly) and had a new sensor and everything. If Fuji released an X-Pro2 now with basically the innards of the X-T1 and the HVF of the X100T (like many are suggesting) people would ask why it costs so much in comparison.
I personally love the rangefinder form factor especially for portraits. It doesn’t cover much of your face and is therefore (and because of its general size) much less intimidating. My son cares a lot less about me taking photos of him with my X100S compared to my D7000. Also having your nose on the screen (which happens with a center VF) can lead to smearing due to breathing moisture (depending on the weather). But I don’t believe the differences between X-E3 and X-Pro2 would be big enough to justify both lines.
In my opinion the Fuji lineup should consist of 4 body lines at two price points:
– X-E (E for Entry level): simple corner EVF, fixed screen, no WR, cheaper body build, at 500$ (can be done, remove the lens and flash from X-A2 and replace with a simple EVF)
– X-F (F for Fixed lens): the X100 line like it is now, but at 1200$
– X-R (R for Rangefinder): the X-Pro2 at 1200$. Let’s face it, all those mirrorless cameras are overpriced and this line has no reason to cost more than the X100 line
– X-T (T for Tough if you like): keep the X-T line like it is for those who prefer a centered VF and all those dials, also at 1200$
All four lines should have the same internals (only a higher buffer on the X-T line) for economy of scale. So they all have the same AF, same firmware updates and the three expensive lines are all WR. Update the pro lines every two years (all three at once) and the beginner line every other year with new firmware also for the pro lines. Rely on the used market to fill the gap between 500 and 1200$ or keep the previous generation around at a lower price point. And if you feel generous give us the choice between 12 and 24 MP.
My 2 cents.
“But I don’t believe the differences between X-E3 and X-Pro2 would be big enough to justify both lines”.
Fuji could diffentiate both cams more by puting in X-E3′ sensor Bayer filter (same as X-A1 got). There are many users who love X-A1 images but call for EVF and better features, and many who compain on X-Trans II and moved for Sony or stay with X-E1/X-100/X-Pro1. So X-E3 with Bayer would justify both lines far more and at the same time would answer on different needs. I see it as better offer. Better to have X-Pro2 and X-E3 with Bayer, than X-Pro2 only.
I agree. I wish they would put a bayer sensor in the X-Pro 2, assuming that will ever be released. While a bayer sensor is not much better, it should have slightly better resolution and slighly less artifacts due to the less complex algorithm.
That said, a 1:1 sensor with Fuji colours and descent high-ISO (up to ISO 3200) performance would be far better than either a bayer or X-trans colour filter. Unfortunately, it will not happen
I didn’t write it this time but I believe Fuji should offer every camera with Bayer or X-Trans CFA or drop X-Trans altogether. I personally believe that the extra hassle in workflow and the higher processing power needed are not worth it anymore. The new Sony 24 MP sensors have become so good.
The price difference between Bayer and X-Trans exists (as Fuji has said) but it in no way justifies two different lines. Rather offer both versions in the same body. If you look at my suggestion again the XE line would basically continue to exist as the successor of the XA line (just slightly cheaper build).
Use a Pana-Fuji organic sensor on all : problem solved.
I personnally like Jano market segmentation.
I also feel Fuji prices are a little bit to high and difference in price between ‘pro’ and others models is too big.
Similar hardware (including Pana-Sony sensor) and the production cost would be lower, firmware update easier…
Expand the lens line-up with small WR f/2 (or 2.8) lenses and the X-system will be very attracting for everybody !
I have an X-E1 and I’ve been waiting for the X-E3 to upgrade, I’ve never seen the need for an X-M, and and I don’t need the weatherproofing or the cost of an X-T1 or X-pro. I think Fuji has made it pretty clear they don’t see their future in selling budget cameras. I may just give up on Fuji completely if they don’t come up with something similar in cost to the X-E2, but with better autofocus.
Yes, but first X Pro2 and X T1s.
May have already been said better by someone else but IMHO…
They should have and ‘Entry’ and ‘Pro’ model for each of the two categories (DSLR & RF Style). This way all bases are covered and even Pros have econo options for backup units that are fully compatible with the Pro models.
The XA and XM were bad ideas as they had no VF at all and the batteries really were not able to drive that big display for as long as the consumer P&S models could.
Just my 2c worth… Now, where the heck is the XP2 Fuji 🙂
Lets see what the X pro 2 is fist. I got the XE1 and 2 over the PRO as the diopter was needed!
4 cameras is too many, especially in this new era of longer release cycles.
In the end, they only need two current camera models:
Mid-priced and Expensive.
Maybe, Cheap, Mid and Expensive, though this strategy carries more risk.
All of these cameras should include EVFs. The Mid camera looks destined to be an SLR-styled model.
If they include a Cheap camera, it and the Expensive camera should both be rangefinder-styled. The Mid-priced should remain slr-styled.
Fuji has been pretty clear in interviews that their Cheap camera strategy (XM1, XA1) has largely been a failure. They also stated that teh X-T1 and instant film cameras have saved their camera business from going under for the time being.
The X-PRO2 will be expensive, largely because it appeals to a small niche and they need to earn a higher margin per unit. An XE-3 also appeals to the same small niche, but the profit margins are smaller, so I can’t see Fuji making it at all unless they spec and price it very low.
Actually xa2 seems to be doing well at least in Asia. It could continue in the future. And with the rumored another Xt1-like body, there might be no more xe line. Two dslr style and two range finder style might be enough.
I would prefer an XE3 with XT performance over an XT. Yes, please make it. But don’t make it low end. If Fuji needs to trim the product line, ditch the XA and XM. Make everything with the great Fuji controls and an EVF.
Sounds like you’d be satisfied with an X-PRO2 (I’m in the same boat). Will be annoying to have that OVF/HVF and never use it but ever camera has features you don’t use, and it will be fun to play with now and then 😉
Yes. But I do like the considerably smaller size of the XE. I feel the same way about the OVF as you
Yeah. Hopefully the X-PRO was bigger than it had to be and they’ll make the X-PRO2 more like the X-T in size using various miniaturization magic perfected in the recent releases.
Personally I feel that Fuji will look at the line from two perspectives – Cameras that are DSLR styled and cameras that are Rangefinder styled. I expect the ultimate lineup to be two cameras in the DSLR line – a semi-pro body eg. XT1 successor, and a lesser body – XT10. The semi-pro body will have higher resolution, and all the bells and whistles, the lesser body will be say 16MP , no weather sealing, smaller buffer, maybe smaller EVF.
In the rangefinder line there will be the XPro2 – similarly spec’d to the XT1 successor, but with the hybrid VF, justifying a price premium. Under that there will be the X100 range (no change), and an entry level rangefinder styled cam, like the XE2, but at a lower price point. Same buffer and EVF as entry level DSLR body, but more compact.
This means cost savings across product lines – XT1 and Xpro models using same sensor, buffer etc, XT10 and XE models using same sensor, buffer, EVF etc.
The X100 line will stand outside this setup, as it’s really a different product line – not being a MILC. It’s future will continue to depend upon sales, but I’d expect slower product replacement going forward, or only minor upgrades.
Agree with almost everything, though the current X-T1 isn’t much bigger than the X-E2. The only real size difference is between the ancient X-PRO1 and all the other cameras. Hopefully they’ve learned enough that the X-PRO2 can narrow that gap and the cameras can mostly be the same size.
Yes please with the sony a6000 autofocus & a flip screen. thank you XE2 owner.
I was going to move up from XE1 to XE3. If they don’t release one I’ll just stick to the XE1 and buy a dirt cheap XE2 when no one wants them anymore. I’m assuming Fuji knows what they’re doing, but in the end cameras are starting to plateau in terms of image quality (when you go to print). To be honest I am still SO happy with my XE1 and I LOVE the photos it produces that I can wait another product cycle or two. Slow camera, sure, but then speed has never been an issue for me. Miss a moment? Keep your eyes open, keep looking and shoot the next one. So much more rewarding than having everything handed to you at the click of a button. Maybe by the time I upgrade the xpro II will be priced just right.
Though when you have a living subject it’s pretty awful to tell them to keep posing while your camera writes to card 😛
Just last week I was in Laguna Beach California and someone mistook my x-E1 for a Leica. “Nice Leica” they said. “Thanks” said I. Just saying. I like my X-T1 much better though and sales of the X-T1 and its styling are bound to be major influencers in the future product line.
No I think Fuji is going high-end only.
X-Pro / X-Tx and a MF camera for the most demanding photographers.
This is where the money is and this is where people who like photography and who take it seriously are heading towards. Competing against smart phones with lower end camera’s is a waste of marketing dollars and research capacity.
Just my own opinion though.
That would be disappointing. Having recently switched to Fuji from Sony precisely because they seemed more committed to their camera line up and having gone with the X-E2 preferring the RF style it would be a shame to be left only with the much more expensive and larger X-Pro 2 as a future option. I would much rather have an X-E3, but I suppose i could learn to live with an X-T2.
“Competing against smart phones with lower end camera’s”. Seriously, I have an XE-1. While it is undoubtably less expensive than the XT and X-Pro, it is a fantastic camera. I won’t upgrade until we have higher than 16mp resolution bu would buy a 20+MP XE-series in a heartbeat. FYI, the XE replaced a Canon EOS-1DsII. So I’m not comparing it with smartphones….
Most important problems with X-E1 (I own one) are :
– focusing in dim light (very annoying…)
– tracking
– buffer and overall speed
– video
– EVF
– few ergonomics errors (selecting focus-point, on-off button too soft… joystick or touchscreen would be nice)
– lack of functionality (intervalometer, wifi…) => corrected since X-E2
I would upgrade for a camera with same image quality which correct those points (most of them improved with X-T1).
Exactly. I hope they aren’t comparing sales of X-E2 to X-T1 as if they are just different price points. The X-E2 is a generation behind and none of their rangefinder ILCs can hold a candle to the tech in the X-T1.
They need to release the X-PRO2 and see how it sells compared to the X-T1 before they can really know which format is more popular all else equal.
This only makes sense if the X-Pro2 is a reality.
The square Pro/X-E form factor is very Fuji and they will want to keep that.
I’m all in for X–E3. I’m currently with X–E1, I don’t need to switch into E2 (I work in higher ISOs and the plastic skin, ugh…). T1 is too big for me, Pro1 also. X100T is nice, but I need more lenses. 🙂 So, yeah, better sensor in X–E3, usability improvements from E2, manual controls for film maybe, and you have a buyer.
Have you used an X-T1? When I finally held it in my hand I was shocked how small it is. The only way it’s really “bigger” is that it’s not flat on top, which I hate but really the lens is always going to add to the size much much more than the EVF hump.
Here’s a front comparison. From the top they are similarly almost the same size:
http://camerasize.com/compare/#493,520
These ~15mm was too much. E1/E2 with 27mm fits me perfectly. T1 with 27 — sorry, could not fit it easily in my pocket, it’s just too big. Even when I forced it into my jacket’s pocket, well the hump was all the trouble. 🙁
Ofc when used with 56, 55-140, etc — T1 nor E is not pocketable at all, but at least with E’s I have the option of going pocketable pancake way. 🙂
I suspect you are in the minority of X-Ex users who feel they have a pocket it can fit in, and overall I doubt Fuji is going to make any product decisions on the basis of a few people fitting the camera into a pocket with one of their least popular lenses on it. They want the ILC cameras to sell their big high quality lenses.
You realize that the X100 series is exactly what you’re looking for right? A small relatively-pocketable camera with all the quality. It even has a faster lens and all the benefits of leaf shutter. They are clearly dedicated to the X100 concept, and since it solves your problem so fabulously I bet they won’t worry too much if the X-PRO2 is too big for pockets with the 27mm on it 😉
X100 is not exactly what I want. You see I mention other lenses too, and I buy and use them. It’s just that Ex are versatile, one day small, the next day capable of handling bigger glass. I like that, because I can’t afford buying more bodies. So it’d be nice if they do something capable yet pocketable again. If not, it’s not the end of the world — I’ll check their solution, and if it would suit me, I’ll adapt. In the end it’s just a camera, right? 😉
Wouldn’t make sense to only have expensive “pro” lines in the Pro and X-T, and then have an entry level with the X-A/M…. what about the mid level users?
Rumored “X-T10” cheaper X-T camera is the answer. Fuji is just choosing the SLR form for their mid level camera instead of rangefinder.
Oh no! i’ve been waiting for an X-E2 successor that would finally get it right before switching to Fuji, it makes no sense to discontinue a line that isn’t selling well before it even reaches maturity . The X-T1 is not only popular because of it’s form factor, but also because of it’s great EVF, better AF, flipout LCD etc.
I think the fans of the RF-formfactor, like myself, are more interested in stealth, compactness and portability. The SLR-formfactor fans are more demanding in terms of ergonomics and performance. Making an X-T10 instead of an X-E3 is misinterpreting the success of the X-T1, not everyone wants an SLR-formfactor, people are not buying the X-E2 because it just isn’t good enough yet. The sony a6000 proves that small, well performing RF-camera’s can be a great success in terms of sales. What Fuji should to is make the X-E3 just a little smaller than the X-E2, and give it the X-A2’s sensor. That way it will appeal to the masses in a way that the a6000 does: a small, discreet, portable camera that is usable outside (EVF) makes great pictures (X-glass) and is useable (Bayer filter). The only reason i haven’t bought a nex-7 or a6000 yet is because i can’t fit an XF-35 F/1.4 on it!
I whole heartedly agree with your sensor comment. The xtrans is uniquely capable, but there are trade offs that have prevented myself and others I know from making the jump to fuji. I’d love for them to give the choice of xtrans and bayer.
Stabilised primes would also be nice, in lens or body I don’t care!
As for form factor, both xt and Xe have benefits, I’m on the fence!
I doubt they will discontinue it. X Pro and T1 on the high end. XE – 1 for middle /low end. Entry level cameras discontinued.
Dropping a mid-level line makes no sense. Imagine if Canon only made the 1DX and the 750D and scrapped everything inbetween. Every company makes a range of products spanning cheap and cheerful to expensive, strictly-pro units, and for good reason. Not everyone is going to be happy with the M line as their backups and not everyone will be shelling out for multiple Pro/T bodies, either. The E line is in a superb position.
If anything, I suppose I can see them thinking the E3 would be too good, creating too much competition for the Pro2 if the only difference ends up being one having an optical viewfinder and the other not. But in that case you just work to make sure the Pro2 is as good as absolutely possible, and you make the E3 to a certain budget, knowing full well you won’t be fitting all of the Pro2’s quality in the E3.
Please see my comment below: in mirrorless there really isn’t anything pro price-wise. A mirrorless camera needs a lot less parts than a DSLR and so there is absolutely no justification for a 6000$ or even 3000$ Fuji body. Even with a FF sensor I wouldn’t see a justification for anything above 2500$.
And there are few ways to differentiate multiple lines financially. The cost of building an X-Pro vs. an X-E isn’t going to be that different. So Fuji could only artificially cripple the lower-end bodies through software but as we know, consumers don’t like that sort of behaviour. So I realistically don’t see the need for an in-between line. Make one cheap line for entry into the system (around 500$) and then sell the rest of the lines slightly above the 1000$ mark, which is still mid-level pricing in terms of CaNikon DSLRs. And make those all equally great, only with different form factors. That’s how I’d do it.
Price is relative. The Pro1 here is about the same cost as a second hand 5D2, and it’s more than twice what you can get the E2 for. So sure, compared to a brand new 5D3 or D4s the Pro is very cheap, but relative to its own line, it’s not exactly pocket money. With the typical deals on, you can get an E2 and a couple of lenses for the same as the base Pro1 and T1 cost. That’s a pretty absurd difference and I think it goes to show there absolutely is a space for a cheaper body like the E line. If removing the E meant the Pro came down in price then sure, go for it, but we all know they’re not going to be putting out the Pro2 at a lower price than the Pro1, let alone anywhere low enough to balance scrapping the E line.
Yes, price is relative but you can’t compare apples with oranges. I don’t know where you live but here in Germany I’d pay 600€ for a new X-Pro1 and 1100€ for a new 5D2 (at least 800€ used). But still, you just can’t compare the price of a used previous generation camera from 2008 to the price of a new current generation (though slightly old) camera from 2012.
Of course there is space for a cheaper camera like the X-E line and I love the fact that we have it. But it doesn’t make any financial sense for Fuji. Tell me exactly what makes the production of the X-Pro line more expensive than the X-E line! Only the HVF and maybe 2-3 buttons. And hopefully the WR the X-Pro2 will have. The HVF is a prism and some cheap glass, nothing really expensive. Buttons go for pennies. WR might cost a bit but isn’t anything wildly expensive, it’s mainly just a bit of rubber. I’ll bet my behind that the production cost of the X-E2 is less than 200$ lower than the X-Pro1. So selling it at a much lower price will create far less profit for Fuji.
It would make much more sense to drop the ridiculous notion that the X-Pro line is more “pro” than the rest and just sell it as a different form factor to the X-T1 for the same lower price. Then instead of killing your own profits by selling an X-E line with much less profit rather rely on selling the previous generation (with now lower production costs) at a reduced price. Apple has been doing that for years now and it has served them very well! The only condition is that you continue to support and update the software on the previous generation, else people won’t buy them anymore.
Sadly I don’t see Fuji going in that direction so I agree that there will be something missing. But imho the solution is not the X-E line but rather an adequate price for the X-Pro. We all know how fast Fuji prices drop anyways so why not just price it right from the start?
FWIW you guys are all ignoring the rumored cheaper-X-T camera, which would fill the gap left by missing X-E cameras with what seems to be a more popular form factor cloned from Olympus et. al. (though I prefer the X-E format)
Jano I’m with you about the “pro” thing though, they need to back away from that. The rangefinder format is definitely not more “pro” than the SLR format, and if anything it’s more artistic/quirky/slowphoto. It appeals to the Leica crowd who were still manually focusing in the new millennium. It makes sense that they called the first camera PRO to make a point (it’s not a toy), but why stick to that in the long run if it doesn’t reflect how the cameras are likely to be used?
They should:
– Let the X-PRO be what it is, a high-end camera for photography lovers that love the personal experience of the OVF.
– Make the X-T1 line as high-end and 1Dx-esque as possible with high framerates, infinite buttons etc.
– Let the cheaper-X-T line be the “Rebel” option, implying the real pro camera but saving costs wherever possible.
Of course modelling their business on Canon is not a good idea, Canon isn’t winning, they are losing ground if anything and their immensity is based on history not the present. IMHO they have too many cameras at this point and Fuji should try to have a more use-based rather than cost-based lineup.
I do know about the X-T10 or whatever. But I didn’t write what I believe they will do, rather what I believe they should do. I don’t think the X-T10 is a good idea but I agree with you that it will probably replace the X-E line.
Many people are claiming that the X-T1 is so successful because of its form factor. I think that is absolutely wrong. It might be relevant to some but I don’t think that is the majority. The success of the X-T1 is imho due to its great EVF, the first very good AF performance in an X camera, the WR and all the direct controls that many enthusiasts want and pros need. Three out of those four could have been achieved in the X-E3 and would have made that camera extremely successful.
Many in this thread have stated that they prefer the RF form factor which supports my view. All else equal the decision would boil down to “more direct controls” vs. “Rangefinder”. I’m sure both camps would be large. And if Fuji had managed to put a few more dials in the X-E3 it might have been even more successful than the X-T1. Who knows…
“Many in this thread have stated that they prefer the RF form factor which supports my view. ”
Unfortunately this thread is a terrible source of polling data. No one but RF enthusiasts would even consider “there will be no X-E3” to be a story, let alone take the time to write comments in an already-filled comments section 😉
This is dumb if true. The X-E3 is the camera I was waiting from Fuji and should mirrors the XPro 2. Unless they shrieked the Xpro2 to X-E3 size, I oppose this idea.
I’d love an X-E3 with a larger EVF, faster AF and a swivel screen… please don’t give up Fuji.
All I want is my X-E1 but with the new features that are in the X100T (which are mostly also in the X-T1 now).
^THIS^ 😀 [incl. lens shutter for HSS… what?! man can have dreams… ;)]
If X-PRO2 will have tilting screen and OVF/EVF and weather/dust sealing , X-E3 will have normal screen and EVF and wont be weather/dustsealed)
I would go with X-E3
The X-E line has a lot going for it – the most compact Fuji with interchangeable lenses & viewfinder, and less expensive than the X-Pro or X-T1. It could use some refining design-wise, and would be great for it to get the latest technology.
BUT it’s very clear that the X-E2 has not been selling well. The X-T1 has obviously done much better for Fuji.
Rumors of a cheaper version of the X-T1 (without weather sealing and with a cheaper EVF) would cover a lot of the ground you mention and fill that cheap fuji ILC gap the same way the X-E cameras did for the X-PRO. If the X-T1 form factor is really more popular that would make sense.
That said the it’s annoying to compare sales of X-E2 to X-T1 because the X-T1 is WAY more advanced even though it’s only a little bit younger. The X-E2 is still far more crippled by the early X series issues like not refocussing during continuous and not having silent shutter.
The sizing isn’t that different overall is it? I’d be happy with an X-PRO2 as long as it’s not wildly expensive, though from what we’ve heard so far it sounds like it will be even more expensive than X-T1.
IMHO the X-T line should be the expensive one since it has more dials, but the OVF adds significantly to the price so both make sense.
The x pro 1’s size is pretty different vs the xe1 and 2. It’s larger in every dimension.
Yes I didn’t realize the X-PRO was so big (figured it out later answering another commenter).
My prediction is that Raist is right, X-PRO2 will be about as big as all the other cameras. I bet when X-PRO1 came out they were worried people wouldn’t take it seriously because of size, but no one complained the X-T1 was too small, so clearly it’s no longer an issue if it ever was.
Excellent points, though I don’t think it’s clear if people actually prefer the SLR or rangefinder simulated structures in their mirrorless cameras. The a7 is just as lusted-over as the a6000, and there’s no proof a SLR style a6000 wouldn’t be even more popular.
As long as Fuji keeps making a cheaper version of their line-topping APSC camera I bet it will keep selling really well. I love the form of my X-E1 but I’d be willing to choose between paying more for the X-PRO2 or switching to the SLR format with the “X-T10”.
Unless Fuji starts selling a lot more units they need to limit the number of models they produce. They would know better than us which formats are desirable to people.
a bit late for a response:
you do have valid points on the a7 being popular and on the fact that fuji needs to limit their amount of bodies. however i think mid-range consumers tend to look more for compactness and discreetness… and top-range buyers are looking for maximum performance and a decent grip to balance their larger lenses. that is why i think a RF-typology is more suitable for mid-range models, and an SLR-typology is more suitable for a high-end model.
we’ll see how successful the x-t10 is, i still hope they change their minds 🙂
Of course. They’ve indicated many times that the X-PRO2 is in the works AFAIK. They’d be crazy to give up on rangefinder ILC considering the popularity of the X100T and the number of X-PRO1/X-E lovers.
The idea that a cheaper X-T1 would be a replacement for a future X-E3 makes me sad. If I wanted a DSLR styled camera I would have kept all of my Nikon gear and not sold it all for my Fuji X-E1 and X-E2. I love the compactness of these cameras. Not that I couldn’t live with and X-Pro 2, but I really don’t need the optical viewfinder. But I do need an EVF. It’s really not about the price. It’s the functionality I need. I would say most of us who love the X-E series do so because we don’t need all the bells and whistles that come with a camera like the X-T1 or X-Pro. But we don’t want a stripped down camera like an X-M or X-A either. The X-E is nice middle ground.
The X-T1 and x-pro1 are on the same shelf and are both to stay there since they are flagships and for two different markets
Yet they need a mid ranger. I think they are asking themselves if an EVF is worth a new model. Maybe they could come with a shoe mounted evf like the pen series for the x-a2
One thing i would scrap is the x-m1, a x-cam without an x-trans… get an X30 instead if you cant afford something better
I think they are going to keep the X-M1 as the low-end equivalent of EOS-M and Sony a5000. Some people just want interchangeable lenses and don’t care about EVF or manual controls. Also makes a small, light, dirt-cheap second body.
The X-M1 has an x-trans sensor but the X-A1 & 2 hasn´t.
I would also love a choice between bayer and xtrans, but personally I am hoping it comes in the X-T10
If price isn’t a factor you’ll be fine with the X-PRO2, it’s “bells and whistles” won’t get in your way and it doesn’t have to be much bigger than the X-E2 (I bet it’s smaller than X-PRO1)
It’s an odd situation. If Fuji does come up with an x-t10, it might be able to replace the x-e2/3. However, I don’t really see how Fuji could have the X-pro2, X-T2 and X-t10. The X-T10 would just feel like a purposely crippled x-t2. The x-t10 would need to have the new 20-something Mpx sensor, I’m guessing it wouldn’t have weather sealing, a smaller EVF… other wise it would be the same camera.
The x-e2 makes sense because it gets you a nice body with an EVF with which you can use the x-mount lenses. You get the same sensor and image quality as the higher priced models but lack a few doodads. On the flip side, you get the smallest possible body. At this point, fuji needs a body that’s closer to the price of the a6000.
As one who prefers the “rangefinder” style over the DSLR style, I’d love to see the X-E3 get made. It could be identical in specs and features to the XT-10, but arranged into the X-E type body.
What makes Fujinon famous was the RF style XE-1 and their high quality lens. Who want an SLR ‘style’ camera which actually is not an SLR? If Fijinon makes XE-3 (with XT-1 function), a lot of Fujin fans will be very happy!!!