Fuji's X-Pro3

[WvE]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica M's "competitor" is about to launch its new X-Pro 3. Looks like it has some interesting features which Leica better take a close look at before it releases the M11... 

 

[indergaard]

49 minutes ago, WvE said:

Leica M's "competitor" is about to launch its new X-Pro 3. Looks like it has some interesting features which Leica better take a close look at before it releases the M11... 

 

You think the M11 should be bigger, thicker, boxier, have a lot more plasticky buttons, a worse viewfinder, a gimmicky film simulation (JPEG setting) screen, and have a crop sensor? Ok...

I purchased the X-Pro1 at launch day. I did the same with the X-Pro2. And I've owned them side-by-side with the M9, MMv1, M240, M10 and M10-P, and, uh, there is no comparison. Especially when you slap a good lens on any of the M bodies. You can't get away from Fuji's sterile and digital look (by comparison).

For the X-Pro3 to be remotely interesting it would need to be smaller and more streamlined than the M10. It is not. The Fuji is significantly larger and boxier, and has a smaller sensor, and a comparable battery.

None of these Fuji's has ever been or will ever be a direct competitor to a true rangefinder camera anyway, so a direct comparison will always be flawed.

Edited October 16, 2019 by indergaard

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[WvE]

3 minutes ago, indergaard said:

You think the M11 should be bigger, thicker, boxier, have a lot more plasticky buttons, a worse viewfinder, a gimmicky film simulation (JPEG setting) screen, and have a crop sensor? Ok...

I purchased the X-Pro1 at launch day. I did the same with the X-Pro2. And I've owned them side-by-side with the M9, MMv1, M240, M10 and M10-P, and, uh, there is no comparison. Especially when you slap a good lens on any of the M bodies. You can't get away from Fuji's sterile and digital look (by comparison).

For the X-Pro3 to be remotely interesting it would need to be smaller and more streamlined than the M10. It is not. The Fuji is significantly larger and boxier, and has a smaller sensor, and a comparable battery.

None of these Fuji's has ever been or will ever be a direct competitor to a true rangefinder camera anyway, so a direct comparison will always be flawed.

Admittedly, the M is in a different league but the X-Pro 3 seems to have some interesting features. I don't think the the dimensions differ that much, and it's significantly lighter. I shot the X-Pro 1 before and I found it to be a fun camera to use with pleasant IQ, even though it's not a Leica M. 

 

[indergaard]

24 minutes ago, WvE said:

Admittedly, the M is in a different league but the X-Pro 3 seems to have some interesting features. I don't think the the dimensions differ that much, and it's significantly lighter. I shot the X-Pro 1 before and I found it to be a fun camera to use with pleasant IQ, even though it's not a Leica M. 

 

If features is what you want from a camera then the Leica M is the wrong camera to pick in the first place.
I always found the Fuji X-T cameras the more sane version of what the X-Pro series always tries to be (jack of all trades, master of none.. rangefinder, hybrid rangefinder, EVF, zooms, primes, and all sorts of bells and whistles).

[ianman]

49 minutes ago, indergaard said:

You think the M11 should be bigger, thicker, boxier, have a lot more plasticky buttons, a worse viewfinder, a gimmicky film simulation (JPEG setting) screen, and have a crop sensor? Ok...

I got an X-Pro 2 during the time when my M9 had corrosion and was away for replacement. I found the simulations in the jpeg files really good. Especially classic chrome. In fact jpegs produced by the camera seem to be universally praised, even if they are "just" jpegs and people still shoot raw anyway.

As far as size?.... I just compared the X-Pro 2 to my M4-P and there are almost identical, a couple of mm difference height but nothing significant. The footprint is identical.

Obviously I don't have the same pleasure or quality as when using my M9 but all in all I find that it's a very pleasant camera to use, no need for menus and the files are far from sterile. I suppose it depends how you use it.

The only new feature I find interesting on the X-Pro 3 is the screen. I'm not sure about the need for the info/Film simulation to be shown as the settings are already right there, set on nice hardware knobs. As for the pull-down screen, I'm not sure about this. I guess it's like the advance lever on the M10, people will hate it or love it. Whatever, I think Fujifilm are the most interesting camera manufacturer out there.

Not sure why this thread is in M10 though because it's got nothing to do with the M10 🙄

[WvE]

5 minutes ago, ianman said:

I got an X-Pro 2 during the time when my M9 had corrosion and was away for replacement. I found the simulations in the jpeg files really good. Especially classic chrome. In fact jpegs produced by the camera seem to be universally praised, even if they are "just" jpegs and people still shoot raw anyway.

As far as size?.... I just compared the X-Pro 2 to my M4-P and there are almost identical, a couple of mm difference height but nothing significant. The footprint is identical.

Obviously I don't have the same pleasure or quality as when using my M9 but all in all I find that it's a very pleasant camera to use, no need for menus and the files are far from sterile. I suppose it depends how you use it.

The only new feature I find interesting on the X-Pro 3 is the screen. I'm not sure about the need for the info/Film simulation to be shown as the settings are already right there, set on nice hardware knobs. As for the pull-down screen, I'm not sure about this. I guess it's like the advance lever on the M10, people will hate it or love it. Whatever, I think Fujifilm are the most interesting camera manufacturer out there.

Not sure why this thread is in M10 though because it's got nothing to do with the M10 🙄

 

33 minutes ago, indergaard said:

If features is what you want from a camera then the Leica M is the wrong camera to pick in the first place.
I always found the Fuji X-T cameras the more sane version of what the X-Pro series always tries to be (jack of all trades, master of none.. rangefinder, hybrid rangefinder, EVF, zooms, primes, and all sorts of bells and whistles).

Yes the Pro has probably too many features but still it doesn't hurt to look beyond Leica every now and then. 

[WvE]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

16 minutes ago, ianman said:

I got an X-Pro 2 during the time when my M9 had corrosion and was away for replacement. I found the simulations in the jpeg files really good. Especially classic chrome. In fact jpegs produced by the camera seem to be universally praised, even if they are "just" jpegs and people still shoot raw anyway.

As far as size?.... I just compared the X-Pro 2 to my M4-P and there are almost identical, a couple of mm difference height but nothing significant. The footprint is identical.

Obviously I don't have the same pleasure or quality as when using my M9 but all in all I find that it's a very pleasant camera to use, no need for menus and the files are far from sterile. I suppose it depends how you use it.

The only new feature I find interesting on the X-Pro 3 is the screen. I'm not sure about the need for the info/Film simulation to be shown as the settings are already right there, set on nice hardware knobs. As for the pull-down screen, I'm not sure about this. I guess it's like the advance lever on the M10, people will hate it or love it. Whatever, I think Fujifilm are the most interesting camera manufacturer out there.

Not sure why this thread is in M10 though because it's got nothing to do with the M10 🙄

There's no separate M11 topic yet, so I thought I drop the ball here. 🙂

[Viv]

So the XT-4 can't be far behind?

I have an XT-1 and quite like it. Of course, it ain't a Leica.

[Matlock]

1 hour ago, indergaard said:

 

For the X-Pro3 to be remotely interesting it would need to be smaller and more streamlined than the M10. It is not. The Fuji is significantly larger and boxier, and has a smaller sensor, and a comparable battery.

None of these Fuji's has ever been or will ever be a direct competitor to a true rangefinder camera anyway, so a direct comparison will always be flawed.

I have my M10-D and my X-Pro1 in front of me. They are almost identical in size with the M10-D noticeably heavier. Aside from that there is no real comparison but both are great cameras in their own right.

Edited October 16, 2019 by Matlock

[Stealth3kpl]

I'll worry about all this when I've got through 400ft of Delta.

Pete

[jdlaing]

On what planet is a non rangefinder camera a competitor to a Leica M?

[Viv]

13 minutes ago, jdlaing said:

On what planet is a non rangefinder camera a competitor to a Leica M?

It's not a matter of competition. Some like rangefinders, some like autofocus. Some like simplicity, some like additional features.

I loved my Zeiss Ikon rangefinder, but never got to like the Leica M9 despite persevering with it for two years.

I keep a Fuji XT-1 as a backup camera to my Leica, for use mainly when I need longer reach.

[jdlaing]

1 hour ago, Viv said:

It's not a matter of competition. Some like rangefinders, some like autofocus. Some like simplicity, some like additional features.

I loved my Zeiss Ikon rangefinder, but never got to like the Leica M9 despite persevering with it for two years.

I keep a Fuji XT-1 as a backup camera to my Leica, for use mainly when I need longer reach.

It became a matter of competition when the OP stated it was a competitor. It’s not a competitor. It a different camera.

[Viv]

Just now, jdlaing said:

It became a matter of competition when the OP stated it was a competitor. It’s not a competitor. It a different camera.

I am glad we agree.

Of course, if it were not a different camera it would not be a competitor.

[jkcampbell2]

4 hours ago, jdlaing said:

On what planet is a non rangefinder camera a competitor to a Leica M?

Of course it's a competitor, there are people out there who will make a choice to buy into the Leica system or the Fuji system.  For me Leica is my main system but I also have an X-Pro-1 that I picked up cheap. It's a good camera and Fuji makes good lens. Horses for courses. Cheers, jc

[indergaard]

7 hours ago, Matlock said:

I have my M10-D and my X-Pro1 in front of me. They are almost identical in size with the M10-D noticeably heavier. Aside from that there is no real comparison but both are great cameras in their own right.

Well, I find the square shape of the X-Pro series makes it feel and look a lot bigger and boxier. The rounded shape of the M cameras make them appear far slimmer, smaller and smoother by comparison. I don't have an X-Pro any more, so I can only go on what I remember.

Edited October 16, 2019 by indergaard

[jdlaing]

1 hour ago, jkcampbell2 said:

Of course it's a competitor, there are people out there who will make a choice to buy into the Leica system or the Fuji system.  For me Leica is my main system but I also have an X-Pro-1 that I picked up cheap. It's a good camera and Fuji makes good lens. Horses for courses. Cheers, jc

To be a competitor it would have to be a full frame rangefinder manual camera. Otherwise it’s just another camera.

[LocalHero1953]

To a business, a competitor is someone whose products a customer might buy instead of yours. 

[Guest]

Always amazes me how some people want the leica m to turn into just another digital camera.

Keep it unique i say.,

Leica has ordinary digital cameras with EVF,auto-focus etc so why mess with the rangefinder?

Makes no sense at all to me.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Kwesi]

13 hours ago, WvE said:

Leica M's "competitor" is about to launch its new X-Pro 3. Looks like it has some interesting features which Leica better take a close look at before it releases the M11... 

 

The Fuji Xpro series doesn't compete with the Leica M10. It really never has and never will. Very different cameras, very very different approaches to digital photography. The same person may own both but one cannot replace the other.

Edited October 16, 2019 by Kwesi
but "one" cannot