susanjane

I held back buying the xp3 because of the screen, but a while back I caved and purchased the 3 in Dura Silver (black was OOS). I couldn't be happier with it. I thought the screen would become a PITA, but now realize I don't chimp as much as I thought I did. No ragrets (not even a vowel). love their updated custom menu screen, stiffer exp comp dial, better AF. The dura silver contrast looks great with the black lenses too. I'm an xpro shooter for life, or until they jump the shark.

I think the answer to this question depends on the criteria used to measure "success". And also success for who? For Fujifilm? For you? For me?
I can't find any sources that breakout sales for Fuji cameras by model, and of course it would be impossible to know what Fujifilm's criteria for success might be, even if we had that information. It has always struck me since becoming aware of X Series cameras that Fuji seems to attach a great deal of value to the design proposition of Electronic Range Finder cameras. It's a pretty distinct form for modern mirrorless cameras and they might value the distinction so much that break-even or even a manageable loss on X100 and X-Pro lines is totally worth it to them.
Maybe for you or other X-Pro2 users, the X-Pro3 isn't compelling enough for an upgrade. I get that. The X-Pro2 strikes me as a great camera. In fact I decided to get the X-Pro2 and was saving my money when they introduced the 3. So I am totally into that being a thing.
For me, the X-Pro3 is a total success. I have never owned a digital or mirrorless camera before buying the X-Pro3. The details that others dismiss as gimmicks were compelling enough for me to want them. The sub monitor doesn't feel or look like a gimmick to me at all. I like it. People who ask about my camera are always surprised and delighted by that detail. They are fascinated by the fact the LCD folds down and out. I like this too. I don't want to even be tempted to chimp, but it's super nice to have a screen available that isn't smeared with skin oil when I want to double check a result or make a wait-level photo if I'm unable to crouch or kneel.
I purchased the FUJINON XF16mmF2.8 R WR as my first lens because I love the wideness. Is it a problem the viewfinder doesn't have framelines for this? It hasn't been for me. Maybe because of the way I compose things? Maybe I don't care? I certainly never once was "disappointed" or found myself wishing for those framelines. I also use adapted Pentax Takumar M42 screw mount lenses on the camera, including a Super Takumar 300mm F4. Does using this long lens make the "rangefinder" useless? Not entirely. You certainly have to trust that what you saw before you brought the camera to your eye will still be the case for the lower right of the frame. But that's where the functionality and flexibility of the ERF is so great: A simple push or pull of the viewfinder mode lever lets me see the electronic view. I can switch back and forth if I want. I can stay electronic if I want. I can have both. And I don't have to be "pure" or do one or the other. I can just do what I want.
It's not just looks, or living a rangefinder-pure life that the X-Pro3 brings, but wonderful flexibility. The instrument helps me and facilitates me.
This camera makes me want to pick up and shoot. It inspires me and instills me with confidence.
X-Pro3 a success? For me it absolutely is.
https://youpic.com/photographer/JonWhipple/

Hi All. I've attached a sort of guide/user manual for the Fuji X-T10. It started out as just a bunch info & tips from around the web that I collected. I started it because I'm an old fart who recently switched from manual film Nikon's to the Fuji (because of the manual controls). A friend also just made the switch so I starting organizing the info and making it look prettier for him. I'm posting it here so feel free to do whatever you want with it, including throwing it in the trash if it's a waste of time.
 
Jan 8, 2017: the newest version is attached
 
 
Fujifilm X-T10.pdf

Keep it. It's a nice camera. I wish someone would give me a gray market X-T1. 

This post may be rambling, but I have spent a lot of time and money trying to determine the right '3-4' lenses (for me).
 
At one time or another, I have owned all of the Fuji offerings except the 27, 50-140 & 100-400.  I may pick up a 27 eventually, but I have no interest or need for the 50-140 or 100-400. If I wanted to carry a bag of bricks around I would have kept my Canon FF 'L' kit. 
 
I shoot travel, cityscape/ landscape almost exclusively. I shot portraits professionally, but I haven't done so in a few years now.
 
My goal is to carry as little as possible, while maintaining the ability to capture most any shot I see. I also hate changing lenses on the fly. 
 
I have distilled my current kit down to three lenses:  16/1.4, 35/1.4 & 18-135.  These three lenses do just about everything I need them to do.
 
I carry two bodies - X-Pro1 and X-T1 each with a lens mounted.  The 16 and 35 are my 'fast prime, walkabout kit'.  The 16 and 18-135 are my 'landscape kit'. 
 
The 18-135 is an underrated lens. I have done some pretty extensive A-B comparisons between the 18-135 and the 18-55/ 55-200 combo and can't find much difference between them. The weather-resistance of the 18-135 (and 16) is a feature not to be overlooked for landscape photography. Not to mention that the IS of the 18-135 is at least one stop better than the older pair.  (better 'macro' too!)
 
Of the lenses that I have owned, the only two I really miss are the 56 and 90. Both of the lenses are awesome.
 
For landscapes - I highly recommend the 16mm. It offers practically no distortion and is crazy sharp (even at f/1.4!). The 14mm is great and a little wider, but it is two stops slower. That is a BIG difference if you want the lens to double as a walkabout or event lens.  The 10-24 is also great, but IMHO the forced perspective of any lens wider than the 14 make landscapes appear unnatural. (I also trend toward primes.)  You do however, need at least one zoom for landscapes, because you can't always 'zoom with your feet'. 
 
Portraits and weddings make the 56 or 90 indispensable.  
 
So -
 
Three lenses: 16, 56 and 18-135. You shoot: Landscape (16, 18-135) , Portrait (56) and Wedding (16, 56) - done, done and done.     
 
Four lenses: If you believe that an ultra-wide is a must, you can add the 10-24 or, for a lot less money, the Samyang 12mm f/2 is superb. 
 
Or, if (like me) ultra-wide is not your thing, I would go with 16, 35, 90 & 18-135.  Those three primes are killer for street/city/event and weddings. The 18-135 will be your 'Swiss Army Knife'. 

As far as I know the OIS in the first version is rated for 3 stops so the difference is very small.
 
The first version is almost a no brainer considering the price difference.

In the meantime I got a response from Fujifilm Germany ... the only difference between the two lenses is the improvement in the image stabilisation. The OIS II is rated for 3.5 stops. Apart from that, the lenses are identical.