Fuji's X-Pro3

[J.Nordvik]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think this comes from the early days of mirrorless cameras. At the time of when M9 was launched there where no full frame mirrorless, so M9 was was the only option.

M9 was obviously not the camera they wanted, but it was as close as they could get. They should not have bought a rangefinder camera, they should have waited for an EVF instead.

[Kwesi]

1 minute ago, J.Nordvik said:

I think this comes from the early days of mirrorless cameras. At the time of when M9 was launched there where no full frame mirrorless, so M9 was was the only option.

M9 was obviously not the camera they wanted, but it was as close as they could get. They should not have bought a rangefinder camera, they should have waited for an EVF instead.

Actually it comes from the early days of the Xpro1. At its introduction Fuji had only three lenses so they put out a pamphlet and adapter showing all the different M lenses that were compatible with it. They did all they could to give one the impression that it could used as a "modern day" M 

[Advertisement]

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

[J.Nordvik]

I did not know that. I remember though that is was, like you say, a "modern day" M.

[Ko.Fe.]

Every time I hold their  X series "RF" cameras in hands it feels so flimsy and overloaded with something which big boys still playing flight simulators are finding as useful.

Also, IMO, X Pro in particular is so unattractive...

I'd rather get their 50R, than any X.

[ianman]

42 minutes ago, J.Nordvik said:

I think this comes from the early days of mirrorless cameras. At the time of when M9 was launched there where no full frame mirrorless, so M9 was was the only option.

M9 was obviously not the camera they wanted, but it was as close as they could get. They should not have bought a rangefinder camera, they should have waited for an EVF instead.

Who is "they" in this scenario?

[WvE]

Of course the X-Pro is a different camera but I'm pretty sure it competes with Leica M's. For instance, people who do not want to spend all that money on a Leica but still want a "range finder" style camera or people who simply cannot afford to buy a Leica. But back on topic, the upcoming X-Pro 3 seems to have some interesting features which Leica may want to have a look at, like the hidden display. No, I'm not saying Leica should copy all that...   

[lucerne]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, WvE said:

Of course the X-Pro is a different camera but I'm pretty sure it competes with Leica M's. For instance, people who do not want to spend all that money on a Leica but still want a "range finder" style camera or people who simply cannot afford to buy a Leica. But back on topic, the upcoming X-Pro 3 seems to have some interesting features which Leica may want to have a look at, like the hidden display. No, I'm not saying Leica should copy all that...   

I’m afraid that your arguments for a pseudo rangefinder and cheaper camera are unrelated to ownership of a Leica rangefinder and I don’t see any reason for Leica to (illegally?) copy anything.   The fundamentals of a competitive product have been described earlier but additionally, competition is really for the £($, ¥, €) in the pocket of the consumer. Buyers only have a certain amount of money available for purchase and that’s the basis of any purchase decision.  If a purchaser can’t afford a Leica, they might consider the Fuji or any other make.   I doubt that most leica owners base their decision on cost. The Fuji -therefore- isn’t competing with leica for spend.
are you hoping that leica will produce a Fuji clone for Fuji prices!  If the Fuji features impress you then Buy the Fuji.  Unless I’m looking to downgrade to own a single camera to replace my M10, or for a cheap camera to use side by side with my Leica I won’t even examine it in a store.   I’m not interested.

This thread shouldn’t exist.  Perhaps the OP should be advising Fuji owners on their owners website.

good luck with your Fuji.

Edited October 17, 2019 by lucerne

[jdlaing]

19 hours 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

 

Edited October 17, 2019 by jdlaing

[jdlaing]

6 hours ago, WvE said:

Of course the X-Pro is a different camera but I'm pretty sure it competes with Leica M's. For instance, people who do not want to spend all that money on a Leica but still want a "range finder" style camera or people who simply cannot afford to buy a Leica. But back on topic, the upcoming X-Pro 3 seems to have some interesting features which Leica may want to have a look at, like the hidden display. No, I'm not saying Leica should copy all that...   

Rangefinder “style” is not a rangefinder.

[becker]

Am 16.10.2019 um 12:41 schrieb indergaard:

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.

 

Hm, a tool is always and only limited by its user, the fuji system is not bad at all, I do not compare, there is no sense in it. 

But who wants a real rangefinder and a true non autofocus system, which is the only unique fact  in Leica M, must have one, the rest is expensive voodoo and the others have more choices.  

[M11 for me]

Hi Becker, Very nice to hearing from you again. Are you calling Leica VOODOO? Do you not believe in the extraordinary sharpness of the M lenses? Do you not see the unique Leica colours? Do you not see the outstanding contrast in Leica photographs? Do you only believe in Lightroom where you can do all of that? No worry. To a large extent I believe that you are right.

With Leica I love its beauty, its size and weight. I like how comfortably you can carry it. A few years ago there was here some comparison with a Hermes bag. Yes overpriced and nothing special. but once you had one in your hands you know how different it is. And its very similar with the M. It is just so different that I never tried to justify its price. That would help absolutely nothing. And besides all that the lenses of the M and the M's sensor are just an excellent combination. I use my M and my lenses for travelling, for landscape and for slow photography. I love the results. For all other situations I use other cameras. Of course. 

I recently read a blog from a wedding photographer taking photographs with an M and the 28mm f/2.8. He wrote about the super sharpness of that lens. I must agree that I do not believe all of that. The sharpness of my DSLR camera lenses is stunning. No need to go for Leica unless you find out that by magnifying 300 times there is an edge better in the right corner. Who sees that and who is interested in that.Still i love my M and I have it with me all the time. But I do not compare to others.

Edited October 17, 2019 by M10 for me

[M11 for me]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb M10 for me:

 

Sorry, wrong post

Edited October 17, 2019 by M10 for me

[tom0511]

I prefer the Leica M(once had a x-pro 1) but I would say the x-pro series has just a lot in common with Leica M:

Optical viewfinder, arrangement of viewfinder, analog wheels, overall design, compact lenses. IMO it has a lot in common with Leica M.

 

[tom0511]

I prefer the Leica M(once had a x-pro 1) but I would say the x-pro series has just a lot in common with Leica M:

Optical viewfinder, arrangement of viewfinder, analog wheels, overall design, compact lenses. IMO it has a lot in common with Leica M.

 

[M11 for me]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb tom0511:

I prefer the Leica M(once had a x-pro 1) but I would say the x-pro series has just a lot in common with Leica M:

Optical viewfinder, arrangement of viewfinder, analog wheels, overall design, compact lenses. IMO it has a lot in common with Leica M.

 

Yes but it is never an M. You are right with whatever you say. But an M is different.

[Viv]

1 hour ago, jdlaing said:

Rangefinder “style” is not a rangefinder.

Of course it's not.

Just as a zebra is not a horse-style stripy animal

 

[Viv]

The last recent competitor to the Leica (film) rangefinder cameras was the Zeiss Ikon.

I had one and loved it. Better viewfinder than Leica, better meter, ingenious and simple exposure compensation dial, lovely "feel" to the film advance lever. It was compatible with Zeiss ZM lenses and Leica M lenses without an adaptor.

I begged Zeiss to produce a digital version,  selling for about 5,000 euro. They told me that there was no market for such a camera ... IMHO it would have destroyed the Leica M9.

[Narsuitus]

I used a Fuji X-Pro1 while I waited for Leica (or anyone else) to produce a digital rangefinder that I like.

I would like a rangefinder that:

1. Is about the same size as my Leica M6.

2. Uses my M-mount lenses without adapters.

3. Has rangefinder manual focusing as fast and as accurate as my Leica M6.

4. Produces high-quality color and B&W images.

5. Is well-made and dependable.

6. Is reasonably priced.

The Leica M10 looked like the camera that I wanted.

For a brief moment, I owned one but had to return it because it had mechanical and electrical problems.

After I returned it, I bought a Fuji X-Pro 2 to use it until Leica (or anyone else) produces a digital rangefinder that I like.

The Fuji X-Pro3 offers nothing that makes me want to upgrade my X-Pro2.

[DwF]

I own the X Pro 2 because my MM was hung up in NJ for 9 mos getting a sensor and wanted a nice camera to keep me busy. The X Pro 2 Fuji has a more direct comparison to the Leica "digital" CL.

The X Pro 2 is not a rangefinder, nor is the the CL, but the Fuji sports a nice hybrid finder, and offers analog controls and provides a very striking look to images it makes, with colors that are not Leica. I recall times shooting my M2 that I rejoiced in Fujifilm Provia or Neopan 1600 over Kodachrome or Tri-X...just for a change. I have photographer friends  who do not identify as "Leica" shooters who really love the Fuji look, and I do as well. It is in no way a threat to Leica cameras that I have and love. With the X Pro-2, Fuji offers features  like 2 card-slots arguably better high ISO performance, a hybrid viewfinder that the CL does not have, and at a price that allows a photographer to purchase more glass. The camera is well thought out, and while it is not an M, I never feel using mine that it is flimsy or cheap. I rather like it.

David

I find nothing sterile in the rendering from my X Pro 2

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited October 17, 2019 by DwF

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[WvE]

20 hours ago, lucerne said:

I’m afraid that your arguments for a pseudo rangefinder and cheaper camera are unrelated to ownership of a Leica rangefinder and I don’t see any reason for Leica to (illegally?) copy anything.   The fundamentals of a competitive product have been described earlier but additionally, competition is really for the £($, ¥, €) in the pocket of the consumer. Buyers only have a certain amount of money available for purchase and that’s the basis of any purchase decision.  If a purchaser can’t afford a Leica, they might consider the Fuji or any other make.   I doubt that most leica owners base their decision on cost. The Fuji -therefore- isn’t competing with leica for spend.
are you hoping that leica will produce a Fuji clone for Fuji prices!  If the Fuji features impress you then Buy the Fuji.  Unless I’m looking to downgrade to own a single camera to replace my M10, or for a cheap camera to use side by side with my Leica I won’t even examine it in a store.   I’m not interested.

This thread shouldn’t exist.  Perhaps the OP should be advising Fuji owners on their owners website.

good luck with your Fuji.

I'm afraid that you haven't read the content of my earlier message very well. The word competitor was between brackets. All I said is that the Fuji X-Pro 3 may have some interesting features, I'm not saying Leica should follow suit. Fortunately, I consider myself to have op open mind and I do not outright dismiss any camera or feature that doesn't come from Leica. I'm a Leica fan but I'm not a blind supporter of Leica.