[Why Fuji should release a video based camera]

At this moment B&H is showing 81 different video broadcast and production Fujinon lenses compared to the 21 for the X-system. They range in price from $3,900 to $233,490.00US. If Fuji wanted to build a video camera, would this not be the better market? Since they don't have a camera in this marketplace by now, I expect they are happy just making Fujinons.

With quite a number of enthusiast-level camcorders on the market that were designed for comfortable movie-making, it seems like a bit of a waste to bring a still camera up to full video specifications. For just under $700US you get a 4K video camcorder with a 20× optical zoom ready to head into the field. B&H lists their highest priced enthusiast video camera for $2,698.00. There is a Sony that uses interchangeable lenses in Sony A and E mounts for $2,899.00.

 

Within these parameters there is a wide variety of equipment with loads of features from which to choose. All are designed primarily for video. Basing a hybrid still/video cam on the chassis of a still camera could not help but come up a camel—horse designed by a committee. A substantial third-party industry has sprung up to rig and support dSLRs so they shoot somewhat like real video cameras. I just can not see Fuji coming up with a profitable solution.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ns=p_PRICE_2|1&ci=3926&setNs=p_PRICE_2|1&N=3907816577&srtclk=sort

Just offering an opinion as a long time video shooter that's actually used a Fujinon lens on a beta-cam. I think it could be profitable if it didn't require extensive re-engineering the XT2's internals, kind of like the Sony VG10/20/30 is basically a rehoused Nex5.

 

Canon created a cinema line from nothing and it's been a huge hit, so it can be done. I don't think it'll ever happen either. Just fun to speculate.

 

Cheers

[Why Fuji should release a video based camera]

I agree with the OP on most points, but if they're going to build a "proper" video camera, it needs XLR inputs, ND filters, controls on the body for all functions - along with a histogram visible while recording, peaking, and other video-centric features. And put a stinking full size HDMI on it for external recorders.

 

Anything without 10-bit 4:2:2 internal recording would be a wasted effort. With a log profile, 10-bit solves lots of issues Sony and Panasonic have - in many situations 8-bit log files are just too compressed. I hope Fuji is working hard to minimize those issues with flog out of the XT2 - but since its still 8-bit that probably won't be the case.

 

Black magic pocket and Micro Cinema cameras record Prores HQ and even raw to SD cards. That should be Fuji's goal.

 

4k60p and 1080p/120 or 240 fps would be needed to be a compelling alternative to others.

 

A parfocal cine version of the 16-55 would be nice too, no focus by wire. Fuji has been making broadcast lenses for decades, they know how to build them.

 

But all the above would be a $5000 camera, and then you're competing with the Canon C100 and Sony FS5 - so it had better be good.

[Survey: Fuji X-T2 or Fuji X-Pro2?]

Buying a XT2 to take on a long term test drive, don't like the OVF, the ISO dial or the fixed LCD on the pro.

 

Would prefer the rangefinder body, but a tilt screen is a must. I decided when I sold my 5d3 and moved to Sony I'm done lying in the muck to get low angle photos.

 

Cheers

[IBIS degrades image quality]

I shoot with the A7rII and I haven't seen any degradation between IBIS on and off. It may happen with lens based systems, I don't know, but a lot of this discussion falls into the internet myth category, much like the FF look.