9.V.III

So far the only "arguments" that anyone can come up with are straw-man arguments and endless spouting of opinion. First, saying this is a "Screen Only" design is an outright lie. You're twisting reality to fit your own story. Aside from that you only offer speculation and opinion. We're talking about an interface that nearly every human being in the Western World depends on every day, this is already more prevalent in daily life than the motor-vehicle ever was. Like the others, the foundation of your argument is that the camera does not have any controls except the touchscreen, you're all blatantly ignoring what the camera is and pretending as though it's nothing but an oversized smartphone. The points being made are asinine. Fuji has never shipped a camera with no manual controls and they actually haven't reduced the number of manual controls on this camera, with the fourth wheel it actually has more physical inputs than the X-E2. It would be reasonable to say this is a "different" camera than the X-E2, but so far all the complaints have amounted to nothing more than "people don't like change." For a company making consumer goods, you can't give customers what they want, you have to give them what they didn't know they wanted. https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidsturt/2014/01/03/delight-your-customers-by-giving-them-what-they-didnt-ask-for/ Again, the X-E3 has more physical controls, and Ansel Adams would have been just as frustrated with the lack of a touchscreen given how clumsy navigating menus with a d-pad is in comparison.Analog cameras don't have a computer screen. This is actually one of the most interesting comments about using a touchscreen, I suspect that Citral will be ecstatic about the idea of a touchscreen on a rangefinder body now that we know you can select your AF points with your nose!

Given that all three of the people in the world who don't like touch screens have now voiced their hatred of this camera here, I can say with absolute certaintly that any potential customer looking to buy an X-E3 is going to expect it to have a touchscreen.

The NX300 has no exposure dials, none, there is nothing about the X-E3 that deserves to be mocked like this. The X-E3 adds an extra dial, and a joystick, and a touchscreen, that's a list of extra controls that everyone should be jumping for joy to have. Analog cameras didn't have that many buttons to begin with. I can agree that it would have been "nice" to have a few dedicated "custom" buttons on the back, maybe they'll do that for the X-E3s, but as-is 99.999% of Fuji's customers are going to see this as a "best in class" feature list compared to any other camera in this price range.

The fundamental disconnect here is that you need to realize a touchscreen is now an absolute requirement for virtually any electronics device that has a screen, especially something that's going to retail for $1,000. Touchscreens have become a basic language, it's a method of human communication, at this point it's probably safe to say that the majority of humanity is familiar with this type of functionality. For Fuji to purely fit within your vision of their products would be like trying to publish a modern book in Latin because ancient poetry just doesn't sound the same translated to English. Fuji still has all the ancient poetry, in fact they have more of it than anyone else, but for the sake of connecting different eras of humanity they have some side references in modern language. This discussion makes me think of the Leica M-D: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/leica-m-d-typ-262/leica-m-d-typ-262A.HTM There is your perfect camera, exactly as cameras were half a century ago. It's a neat idea but the thought of living with something like that every day is horrifying.

Compare them side by side: http://www.fujirumors.com/enjoy-first-images-fujifilm-x-e3-front-back/ (There's a nice .GIF up now) The X-E2 looks nice of you like cluttered aesthetics, but the X-E3 looks much more appropriate for the modern market.

I see FOUR dials! (If you can click the front and back dials that'll make up for two of the lost buttons.) The new clean look is fantastic. This is the best looking Fuji ever made.

Why would you ever consider the X-E series at all? This whole situation just sounds like someone shopping for a food processor in the carpentry section of a hardware store.

Maybe Fuji can enable focus point selection with the touchscreen and use the Joystick for Custom Functions. People love using the touchscreen for focusing (even while using the viewfinder) on other systems, this would be the perfect camera to implement that system. At that point, again, you've gained a huge advantage through the touchscreen that would be impossible to reproduce otherwise. Full touch functionality in the menu gives the potential for virtually infinite customization. Touchscreens don't just stop working after 4 years, moreover the only camera that I've ever had fail was when a button got smashed. My smartphone is 10 years old and works perfectly. The only reason for anyone to be upset about this is if they're just upset about "change" and want to oppose any new ideas regardless of merit.

Everything you've said is obviously a facade, this is nothing but sad excuses to convince yourself not to upgrade (or more likely you want to find an excuse to purchase of a different brand). Of course you're not wrong to keep using the same camera but all you're doing right now is complaining about everything with no sense of direction or logic and sitting here blasting Fuji when all they're doing is listening to consumers and improving their system. Maybe that's not first degree trolling but it's not far off. 1. The X-E3 has just as many dials as the X-E1/2 and X-Pro1. 2. If you think the existance of an "Auto" mode is a bad thing you should join a Leica club. Having an easily accessible "Auto" switch is a legitimate improvement to any camera (a.k.a. Bigfoot Mode). 3. Here's where I know you're trolling. The X-E3 is getting the Joystick the same as the X-T2 and X-Pro2, but you complain about the lack of a D-Pad? The most common "low end" feature of "entry level" cameras? That's some fantastic mental gymnastics. 4. Again, the X-E3 has no fewer manual controls than the X-E2 or your own X-E1, it is simply a superior camera to anything Fuji has made before. If you don't like a touchscreen you never have to use it, but the way you're acting makes it sound like adding more features is ruining Fuji, this has got to be one of the worst cases of "Kids Get Off My Lawn" syndrome that I've ever seen.

I haven't seen anything to indicate that this is less of a camera than the X-Pro 2, the rumors still indicate nothing but moving the X-E3 closer to the high end feature set (as we should expect if the price goes up). -The Best Autofocus -Focus Point Joystick -4K Video Having a swivel on the screen is very handy I agree, but it also conflicts with the goal of making it as compact as possible. As long as they keep the wireless remote in good working order then the lack of a tilting screen isn't as much of an issue. Blutooth functionality could have good implications for the wireless capabilities. Fuji has always been strong in their hardware quality and photographic capabilities, but the UI and software capabilities has been a weak point.

Wow, after reading those last two comments my computer screen got saturated with enough negatively charged energy it sucked the cat right off my desk. Statler and Waldorf would be proud of you guys.

Better touchscreen functionality is very important in this day and age, that news is highly encouraging. Everything sounds great so far.

The X-E3 is still sounding like an ideal camera for me. I hope the price doesn't change too much from the X-T20, but if it's a full featured and well developed product then $1K USD might seem reasonable. Issues like viewfinder blackout at 8FPS turned me off of the X-T2 and X-T20, but for a more "slow paced" body the current capabilities seem more reasonable, and that's more up my alley anyway. Can we make Dual Card Slots standard on the X platform? Please? That would go a long way toward pushing Fuji into the hands of people who might otherwise not look at the brand. All the "big players" are still trying to segment their users with features like Dual Card Slots (especially now that we've seen Nikon REMOVE Dual Cards from the D7500). This seems like the perfect feature to differentiate the brand. Maybe X-A3 users wouldn't take advantage of it but I feel like all the "X-E" and "X-T" series bodies should be ready for more professional applications, let the X-Pro and X-T2 sell on their own merits without removing features that can sometimes be critical to any photographer, regardless of whether you're getting paid for the pictures.

That specific comment (saying that Fuji should give up), was sarcasm. Look at the conversation on this thread, I'm one of the few people who wants large professional lenses on the Fuji ecosystem and half the other comments are honestly telling Fuji not to even try to get into different markets because of the mirrorless body (which Sony has obviously proven is wrong). The biggest thing holding Fuji back is their fans.

I know right? Around here any mention of Fuji getting into sports photography is met with about as much positivity as someone selling ice cubes at the North Pole. "Some people" keep saying it's impossible, and here Sony is just doing it anyway. Everyone on the Internet is extremely positive about the A9, but apparently it's some sort of crime against photography to suggest that Fuji could do just as well.

Hey would you look at that! Sony made a professional Mirrorless camera that shoots faster than anything else on the market! And it's the same size as the X-T2!What a bunch of miracle workers they must have over there at Sony. Fuji should probably just give up and stop making cameras since Sony now has the ability to defy physics and is the only company with the technology to make such high performance mirrorless cameras so small. http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-a9/sony-a9A.HTM http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/fuji-x-t2/fuji-x-t2A.HTM

I just saw the "why don't people buy Fuji" poll and didn't find any really adequate options, so I thought I'd go into more detail in the forums. This thread seems to be close enough to the same topic. I was pretty hyped for the X-T2 all the way until I found out that the live feed in the viewfinder only works up to 5fps. For fast action, that effectively makes the camera no better than an entry level SLR. Apparently Sony has viewfinders that keep a lag free image in the viewfinder even at a 24fps burst. I still want a Fuji, but I can't look at the X-T2 without feeling like it's crippled or unfinished. Fuji should continue to work on the overall user interface as well, I'm not a fan of the funky three quarters articulating screen, and it should be a touchscreen. Hopefully their next mid-range body is a well rounded device.

The short flange distance should still be beneficial beyond (shorter than) 18mm, even though you're still building a traditional retrofocusing lens at that ploint. The offset between the flange and focal distance on a 13mm Fuji lens would be about the same as building a 35mm lens on an SLR, and 35mm lenses tend to be pretty solid as far as IQ goes, where nearly all of the 24mm lenses compromise corner IQ and have complex distortions. Which is still not to say that a 13mm lens is the same as a 35mm lens, but on the larger mounts you can see that good IQ becomes harder to accomplish (especially at wide apertures) the farther you deviate from the flange distance.

I can only think of one reason that moving the rear element forward would be worse than a natively longer flange distance, and that's simply the amount of leverage being applied to the mount, and if we're only talking about a difference of a few centimeters, it's still practically irrelevant. There's nothing wrong with having a short flange distance, but that doesn't mean a 20mm Pancake lens on a Hasselblad will actually work. In practice they may as well have gone with a 30-40mm flange distance, but if the lens designers think that they can pull off something that works in the sub 30mm range at some point then it dosn't make sense to design the mount to prevent that entirely.

The inherent lag in the system is a bit of a problem, but then again, people could (someday) turn the nature of that system into an advantage.We already have cameras with image recording functionality to pull pictures out of a video stream, maybe someday you'll be able to push the shutter button and get high quality pictures of what was in the viewfinder half a second ago. Not that we're anywhere near this kind of functionality now (outside of 4K video), but as the concept is refined I'm betting people will someday prefer the EVF for just about everything.

Even the pancakes stick out way farther than the current grips do, there is no actual use scenario where you would lose portability by having a moderately sized grip.

While a slight increase in capacity would be appreciated, really Fuji should be designing cameras with batteries that are twice as big. Really all these mirrorless cameras should be "L" shaped with super large batteries in the grip, having a large grip sticking out the front doesn't actually impact portability because lenses always stick out at least an inch or two anyways. And it would make the cameras much more comfortable and secure to hold, I'm really surprised so many flat faced cameras made it to market, keeping the grip flat doesn't improve the user experience in any way.

http://www.fujirumors.com/fujifilm-x-t2-turbo-boost-evf-will-have-an-amazing-100-fps-refresh-rate/ Sigh, more techno babble marketing. This couldn't be more wrong. Yes the cells in your eyes can only send a signal repeatedly at a given rate, but they don't fire in unison, new information is sent dynamically in response to stimulus, your brain effectively interprets data in an analog signal. Anyway, the market is full of 144hz computer monitors right now and we're only going higher, anyone who uses one for gaming daily can immediately tell you when the framerate drops. Nvidia is doing experiemnts with 1,700hz monitors right now, something like that I can see being about as good as you could possibly want, but the whole subject ultimately comes down to diminishing returns, the amount of power you would need to run a 1,000hz display isn't worth it right now. 120hz is a good balance of cost to benefit, but absolutely nothing close to any sort of natural human limitation. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:IsZhdiWMFq0J:https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1vy3qe/how_many_frames_per_second_can_the_eye_see/%2Bhuman+eye+cell+refresh+rate&client=safari&hl=en-gb&ct=clnk A quick google search turns up reports of people identifying objects at an equivalent of 220hz. The conclusion of the top comment that human vision can be trained to perform better in certian metrics also agrees with what I've read on the subject. Again, this shouldn't be taken as any sort of absolute limitation in the visual system, but just the best result people have achieved in a specific task, you will be able to see the difference in framerates up to thousands of hertz.

Fuji can pay people to use their equipment, Canon brings millions of dollars worth of lenses to the Olympics for people to borrow, but if the lenses for this application don't exist then it's physically impossible to represent your brand on the sidelines of these venues. Bingo. That's pretty much me in a nutshell. I had a 5DMkII and I still use the 400f5.6, but I use it with a Rebel because the compact form factor is way more convenient, both in every day use and when hiking with a large lens strapped to your body. I love that camera in that application, but the SLR design doesn't do manual focus very well and the low end body doesn't have a lot of manual control. Fuji is moving in exactly the right direction to suit people moving away from an enthusiast SLR design to a high end compact system. But it's clear to me now that this is really the wrong direction, Fuji would have to be stupid to even try and compete with existing SLR systems, they're never going to have AF that's good enough and people who like compact bodies are never going to want large lenses. Actually, I just realised that I was absolutely crazy for looking at Fuji to fill both applications at the same time, the very concept of using the same convenient, compact body for street, portrait, sports and wildlife is utter nonsense. Man what a crazy trip that was, sheesh, I'm glad I've come out of that phase.

Because Fuji actually has different priorities than you do. Precisely. We need a 200f2.0 and 300f2.0 on the X-T2, then people will want to shoot the Olympics with Fuji.