The X-E3 Poll

[Jano]

Dear fellow X-E lovers,

 

with our hopes high that Fuji is actually working on an X-E3 now, I've been thinking a lot about what I would want the X-E3 to be like and for which features I am actually willing (and able) to pay. Since I've read all sorts of things about what people want ranging from "as cheap as possible" to "make it an X-T2 in rangefinder format" I decided to make a poll to collect all those opinions in a meaningful way. I am hoping that many people here (and from FR) participate so that I can generate some interesting statistics from the data. Patrick has done some polls but without a bit of background information I believe the value of those polls is quite low (sorry, Patrick ;-)

 

So, here's the link if you want to participate (it shouldn't take long):

https://goo.gl/forms/LixLzXFAzOH6SwYx1 » Poll is now closed!

 

I am planning to leave it open for about a week and then do an analysis which I will of course publish here in the forum or maybe as a guest post on FR.

If you have any comments feel free to drop them here.

 

Thank you!

Edited April 13, 2017 by Jano

[Patrick FR]

Will share it also on FR

 

good job!

[Aswald]

Done.

[elmacus]

Done.

[Patrick FR]

Done...

and shared too: http://www.fujirumors.com/fujifilm-x-e3-poll/

[didiergm]

Done,

Don't forget to share the results on FR too! So that it gets maximum visibility for Fuji

[renes]

Done.

 

I am dissapointed you have not listed the eyecup need - it's really a pain shooting with X-E2 in strong back/side lighting. I found the Fuji eyepiece with no eyrcup attachement one of the worst part of its cams.

Edited April 9, 2017 by renes

[mdm]

withdrawn.

Edited April 9, 2017 by mdm

[mikehessey]

Done. I'm not sure I have ever tried to fill in a survey like this without being annoyed by some of the questions and the allowed replies, so congratulations as this one didn't cause any of the usual aggravation!

[johant]

@TS: great idea; I submitted my answers too.

Edited April 9, 2017 by johant

[kjphoto]

Thank you, Completed the survey.

[Leonard_O]

Poll done.

 

What I am looking for in an X-E3, is a compact rangefinder which maintains the general size of my X-E2, but at a minimum includes the 24 MP X-Trans III with X-T2 firmware. Some of the additional features such as the joystick would be nice, but not so it exceeds the price point of the X-100F.

[jlmphotos]

Done

[renes]

Improved EVF is most improtant for me. I hope X-E3 offers at least .70x of magnification like A6500.

[Ulver]

X-E3 will be last model in this line, so it should mature to quasi pro level rangefinder in this target price range. It should have a build quality of x-pro1 and OVF from x-pro1 + EVF (from x-e2), no bells & whistles, just stable pro xtransIII (sensor & processor) base in solid rangefinder body. Without: 4K, tilt & touch screen, dual iso dial, flash. Would be nice to have: PDAF, additonal electronic shutter and WR, but not necessary. In 3-4 years time x-pro2 will be on Fujifilm sales for a 1000$ for a body, so it's a last time for Fujifilm to end this line with a style, as we already know that X-pro3 will go Medium, as Fujifilm skipped FF, and building new lens lineup.

[mdm]

...as we already know that X-pro3 will go Medium...

 

No, I don't know. Where you've got this info from?

[milandro]

The X pro 3 won’t be a medium format camera.

 

Fuji is very unlikely to throw away the entire work done on building a entire and complex lens system AROUND  the Aps-C  format.

 

Those lenses aren’t usable for a larger format.

 

Having made the choice to have a medium format line, they will keep both lines. Sony has announced the possibility to provide 100 or even 200 Mp. medium formats 

 

It is therefore possible that the pixel density of the Aps-c too will grow, although to me the principal question will always remain, why? I’s rather have a better sensor rather than a “ larger” one.

Edited April 12, 2017 by milandro

[mdm]

I just may guess that larger megapixel count is not the goal but side effect. When the chipset manufacturer transitioning to a new technological process, it can not keep the old sensor's density. So that's why we are getting 16 - 24 - 32 etc.

[Ulver]

Basic facts: 1. Fujifilm going MF by huge investment in GFX and new Medium Format lens line-up, and not FF. 2. Decission about going MF was taken a couple years ago, because it takes not only a couple of years to design a one lens from scratch, but also it needs changes in engineering lens and camera departments, they needed to move more people from actual products line-up, to work on future products. So basicly if we got already GFX on market, that means that best teams are working on MF line-up and not FF, because behind this move was strategic decission, to skip FF. 3. FF market already taken by other companies. 4. MF image quality advantage over FF. 5. GFX system should be most affordable for FF pro camera users from fashion, commercial and landscape niche(official fujifilm statement). 6. Fujifilm camera nomenclature, "pro" products gets the best technology avilable, and Fujifilm analog MF rangefinder history of products. Complementarity of digital product lines (x-pro vs. x-t) like GFX vs. new digital GW (i.e. GW960), and the lack of digital MF rangefinders on the market, which is a great opportunity for Fujifilm to be the first on the market in this niche.

[Ulver]

Fujifilm can't compete on todays market in 2000$ price range for a body with 24mp aps-c cam, when clients for this money can already buy FF camera with higher MP count. So they moved to MF, to avoid MP war on FF market, already taken by other players, especialy Sony (which sells sensors to Fujifilm). We should also remember Fujifilm analog MF products and R&D already done in field of MF lenses. There are many factors which tells us that MF x-pro3 is not just real possibility, but a logic choice for Fujifilm.

[sukeren]

Done....

Can't wait the result

[milandro]

I just may guess that larger megapixel count is not the goal but side effect. When the chipset manufacturer transitioning to a new technological process, it can not keep the old sensor's density. So that's why we are getting 16 - 24 - 32 etc.

 

 

 

Yes, but I still fail to see the logic of it, it is like putting a bigger and bigger engine in every new model of a car although the speed limits  and the tire size stays the same. But I guess, it is indeed a byproduct of the bigger, better, improved and more expensive paradigm.

[Aswald]

I'm waiting for the 30mpx APS-C X-Pro3 which shoots 16 bit raw, and newer, faster lenses to hit F1.2 and F1.0. When that happens, the line between APS-C and FF will be blurred.

 

Don't need MF resolution. Will leave that for the die hard studio, wedding and landscape photographers.  

[Sella174]

Is it too late to ask for a square sensor?

[milandro]

you already have one   , just crop it ! If you mean a larger square sensor, it would require a completely new range of lenses .