mkay

still waiting for the windows version.. 

is there something like the domke f-803 but in leather? i like the relative small width and the size. but the design is a bit to bland for my taste.

I really want a 70mm, at least f/2 but ideally f/1.4. I'm not fussed about reaching the spec-sheet-boasting f/1.2 since I'd rather keep the size and weight down. The one thing I really miss from my DSLR and medium format kits is a 100mm-105mm equivalent portrait prime for the classic hollywood look. The 56mm isn't quite long enough. The 60mm also falls just short, is a fraction too slow for when I really need the light and the focus is that one step behind the other lenses. The 90mm is going to be too long; I hated the 135mm lens I had for my Canon system. I made my name with 100mm f/2 (DSLR) and 210mm f/4.5 (medium format) portraits and when I switched to Fuji I thought either the 56mm or 60mm lenses would get me close enough to keep my look, but they just don't. That extra 10mm-15mm makes a hell of a difference when you're getting up close to someone. If Fuji make a 70mm f/2 or faster, I'll pre-order one on the day of announcement and pay any price.

And I know it would be harmful to their own product line, but a 15mm f/2 would make life much easier instead of stressing about whether to take the 16mm f/1.4 or the 14mm f/2.8!

Or, in my wildest dreams, a true crop equivalent of the standard 24-70mm f/2.8 zooms Canon and Nikon have. In crop sensor terms it would need to be something like 16-47mm f/1.8. Sigma has the 18-35mm f/1.8, which is the right idea, but it falls just short on each end. (And you can't get it for Fuji mount.) I'll happily give up some of the wide end, and if they gave me that 70mm lens I want I'd let a little of the long end go, so 18-45mm f/1.8 would be perfect. Doesn't need OIS, doesn't need weather sealing, doesn't need macro. Just get me the focal length and the actual equivalent aperture.

+1 on everything citral said. Picking up Fuji and then complaining that their video isn't good is just ludicrous. If video was important to you before, you could have easily researched what Fuji's video is like before switching. If you only got interested in video after switching then it's really not on Fuji to change their product line to match what you like now.

As far as video goes, that is the one area which makes no sense for Fuji to bother with. There's literally no argument in favour of it. Of all the things Fuji could improve upon, video is the one which will be of least benefit to Fuji. The kinds of people who are looking for great video are already invested in Panasonic, Sony or Canon. Most video fans already jumped from dedicated video cameras to Canon DSLR, then to Panasonic systems, then back to Canon video cameras if they're career professionals. They're not going to now jump to Fuji as well; there's nothing Fuji does or can add which isn't already being done by other systems, systems those people already have in their hands. Fuij could put IBIS in a body or IS on every lens, they could put dampened gear focusing on a zoom lens with a completely free aperture ring, they could put in 4K, mic and headphone jacks, a larger grip with triple battery life and double their noise performance and they still wouldn't be quite up to par with the systems videographers already own.

Use your Fujis for stills, pick up a second hand GH4 if you're charging for your video or a GH3 if you think it'll be part of your business but you're not entirely used to video production yet. If video is or becomes your main port of call, get at least a C100.

Oh, and you definitely do not need 4k. Nobody does. It's going to be another 5-6 years before 4k displays become accessible to consumers at a price point which will actually shift units. It's still a decade away from being a broadcast standard. Right now its only worth is for cropping and archival purposes, both of which are great if you ever work for a major television or film production, but are near-useless otherwise.

I mean, I've done video work for the BBC and that was done with a C100 for one short period and a GH2 for most of it. Mostly shot at ISO 3200, some scenes up to 12,800. That was an hour-long HD BBC television broadcast and the GH2 did fine. At no point did I think "boy, I wish this was a Fuji camera" or "this sucks, oh if only I could get 120fps and 4k."