[bdery]

Has anyone seen the hoopla on the screen on the X-pro 3? I think it's brilliant. I feel like the people who complain about it are missing the whole point of the camera.

You mean that the point is to cripple usability while becoming a conversation starter?

I also think that Pentax should do something similar. Make a digital version of the K1000 with no rear lcd . Make it real retro

Retro is not always better...

I do not think this design is any good, honestly.

First they use the tiny rear LCD mostly to show the film effect in use. That's Instagram logic, nothing more. It's certainly not innovation.

Second if someone wants to refrain from using the back LCD in their workflow, it's possible to just turn it off. No need to physically prevent it. It's just forcing a particular workflow on your users for the sake of that retro look. It won'T make your pictures better, and for the majority of users it won't make the process of taking pictures easier.

[Winder]

You mean that the point is to cripple usability while becoming a conversation starter?



Retro is not always better...

I do not think this design is any good, honestly.

First they use the tiny rear LCD mostly to show the film effect in use. That's Instagram logic, nothing more. It's certainly not innovation.

Second if someone wants to refrain from using the back LCD in their workflow, it's possible to just turn it off. No need to physically prevent it. It's just forcing a particular workflow on your users for the sake of that retro look. It won'T make your pictures better, and for the majority of users it won't make the process of taking pictures easier.

From a manufacturing point of view, whatever sells better is better. Retro sells really well to enthusiasts and they are a big percentage of the market. I have no interest in the camera or the design, but I'm glad Fuji is doing what they are doing and trying to stand out in a competitive industry. The X-Pro 3 is going to sell really well and there will be an X-Pro 4 and if this feature is a success Fuji will keep it on future models.

[Serkevan]

Fuji's part of the market share is probably retro-enthusiast-heavy, so appealing to the "hipster" or "cool" or, well, "retro" factor is not necessarily a bad business decision. There is no way I'm paying more than 2000€ for a camera (in general), but if it works for them and their userbase, then I see zero problems. And, yes, it's great that Fuji has the resources to maintain a separate high-end line for people that don't want the "All-terrain/Do-everything" camera (which from my understanding is the X-T1 series?).

[Dartmoor Dave]

Folks, it's not about "retro" and it's not about trying to look "cool". There are some people for whom it's a camera that genuinely perfectly suits the way they prefer to shoot. No, it's not cheap. . . except that compared to a Leica M it actually is cheap. And that's the sort of photographers it's aimed at -- people who don't like conventional DSLRs and MILCs, who enjoy the rangefinder approach to shooting, and who can't afford a Leica.

[Serkevan]

Aha, so it's the rangefinder itself? My apologies, I was thinking it would call out to you because of the real Shutter speed/EV/ISO dials and the electronic aids to manual focusing.
I honestly didn't realize that the point was the entire archetype of camera, my bad.

That explains a lot about the, and forgive the word (can't find anything else), "defense" of the new X-Pro. It's a shame that there are no options apart from this or a Leica.

[Dartmoor Dave]

Aha, so it's the rangefinder itself? My apologies, I was thinking it would call out to you because of the real Shutter speed/EV/ISO dials and the electronic aids to manual focusing.
I honestly didn't realize that the point was the entire archetype of camera, my bad.

That explains a lot about the, and forgive the word (can't find anything else), "defense" of the new X-Pro. It's a shame that there are no options apart from this or a Leica.

For me personally it's mostly the manual controls, but I've used rangefinders extensively with film and I do find that a very appealing thing too. I came very close to switching to the X-Pro 2 a couple of years ago, but ultimately didn't simply because my Takumars are actually easier to use on a Pentax DSLR body -- focusing by eye using the optical screen, not relying on auto confirmation.

I'm not "defending" the X-Pro 3 because it doesn't need defending. Mostly I'm expressing mild frustration with those who don't seem to think any camera should be allowed to exist that doesn't conform to their expectations.

I wonder if there are car forums where people who prefer automatics go around demanding that no vehicle with a manual gearbox should ever be made. . .


Edit: And before some wiseacre jumps in and says it: yes, I'm one of those people who longs for a Leica M9 but can't afford it. But only the M9, you understand. . . CCD sensor and all that. . .

[photoptimist]

.....

Mostly I'm expressing mild frustration with those who don't seem to think any camera should be allowed to exist that doesn't conform to their expectations.

....

Yes, it is a frustrating problem.

Some of that resistance is from narrow-minded or insecure people who perceive a personal threat from "something different."

But some of the push back arises from fear about camera company's financial viability in the current times of sagging sales. Some fear that despite the vocal supporters of a proposed set of features, the actual sales volume and price of product would be too low and it would threaten the company and future products for everyone else.

[Serkevan]

I'm not "defending" the X-Pro 3 because it doesn't need defending. Mostly I'm expressing mild frustration with those who don't seem to think any camera should be allowed to exist that doesn't conform to their expectations.

That's why I used the airquotes, I know it was not the best word choice (or even close to that).

Edit: And before some wiseacre jumps in and says it: yes, I'm one of those people who longs for a Leica M9 but can't afford it. But only the M9, you understand. . . CCD sensor and all that.

I'm seeing the M9 on ebay and it's barely under 3000€, ouch. And it's not like the glass is cheap either. I imagine the pain

[pres589]

I think the camera would have made more sense if there were a couple of display modes to let the user turn the screen off, show minimal information with the film emulation mode being applied (and Fuji should license other film emulation types either from DxO, Kodak, etc) along with basic ISO, exposure, etc, or else a fully functional 'all the mod-cons' screen type. And then make it fixed so that the back can be made more slim and the hardware more reliable with fewer possible weak points in the hinge, cabling, etc.

I really like the control layout as shown online. If I really get feeling sassy I might rent one just to see what it's like to use for a weekend out walking. The lens selection for these cameras is probably the biggest weak spot I can see.

[surfar]

I don't see many spots myself.

[Dartmoor Dave]

The idea of an X-Pro 3 with the 23mm/1.4 and no other lenses at all is very tasty indeed. For the whole of the 1990s I used nothing but an Olympus XA with its fixed 35mm lens, and I took a lot of the best photos of my life in that period. Several times over the years since I went digital I've come close to ditching the DSLRs and lenses and going back to that simpler approach, and this thread is really making me ask myself why I've never taken the plunge. 90% of my DSLR photos are taken with the just one focal length anyway.

Of course, on my budget it would have to be a used X-Pro 2 with the 23mm/2.0. And I could use my Takumar 20mm or 17mm on an adapter when I wanted to go wider. Hmm. . .

[StiffLegged]

You don’t think Fuji are launching this model to give the InterWeb samurais something to seethe over?? Just a thought...

[Dartmoor Dave]

Maybe they heard about a 100 posts in a month contest on Pentax Forums and decided to help me out.

[Rondec]

I don't really care what Fuji does, so I'm fine if they would release a fully manual digital camera with no auto focus and no video. They won't really do that, because I don't think such a camera would sell really well.

I think these sorts of discussions between manual folks and automatic folks end up being like the discussions between couples about home temperature where one likes the house warmer and one colder. Of course, they will never actually agree on a temperature that works for them both, but the one who likes it warmer (hopefully) comes to the realization that it is easier for them to put on a sweater than for their significant other to strip down to his skivvies. In the same way here, it is actually fairly easy to turn off or just simply not use features that you don't want and don't like. There is a way to turn off the rear screen and you can put your camera in manual mode and just leave it there. It is just easier to turn off features that exist than to enable ones that don't exsist.

At least that's my perspective.

[Dartmoor Dave]

Or maybe it's more like a street of houses where one family still has an open fireplace that they enjoy using, with storage heaters in the other rooms for when needed. And all the neighbours are appalled because it's so much easier to have central heating, with a digitally controlled thermostat that'll keep the whole house at exactly the temperature you want all year round. Then you can block up the fireplace and put a big TV there, with a video of a fire playing when you want that nice cosy feeling.

I'm sorry, I know I'm being childish and I promise I'll shut up now.