More expensive than I hoped but I'll be preordering one. Checks all the boxes for me as a travel/walkaround camera; I have an X100V for that today but have been hurting for some more lens flexibility when I don't want to lug around a Nikon FF.
Yes, the X-T5 technically gives you more for the same price, but the compact size and rangefinder styling sells it for me.
Nick Dakota wrote:
Buying the ZF has completely changed my view. Manual controls, awesome files, great MF support, vast lens choices. What I've been craving for Fuji has already happened with the ZF.
While I don't disagree (and it's why I sold off the X100), the one area the ZF can't compete is lenses with aperture rings. Nikon control rings don't count, and the only lenses that have them are 3rd party lenses, and with no consistency. Nikon REALLY needs a line of small lenses (their versions of Fujicrons) with rings to replicate the same tactile experience you get on the Fujis.
Plus a lot of brands are juicing up the prices well beyond the tariffs using them as the culprit.
It will be very interesting to see what happens with prices if there is a tariff reduction in the near future as there are 'ongoing negotiations. Unfortunately if there is demand at these price points, new levels may have been set.
voltaire wrote:
Seems like the price is reflective of the additional tariff as Patrick hinted. It’ll be interesting to see what the prices are overseas.
RoamingScott wrote:
While I don't disagree (and it's why I sold off the X100), the one area the ZF can't compete is lenses with aperture rings. Nikon control rings don't count, and the only lenses that have them are 3rd party lenses, and with no consistency. Nikon REALLY needs a line of small lenses (their versions of Fujicrons) with rings to replicate the same tactile experience you get on the Fujis.
Yup. My brain needs those clicks! Aperture ring is a lot more important to me than shutter/ISO dial. Something Sony has done well too. I've been shooting A7C and X100 side by side and it's been frustrating how much I want it all in one system. Nikon is very close though.
True. Sony lenses work well on the ZF, but it's not ideal. Nikon lenses in general are very large.
You can definitely make a nice small tactile kit with Fuji.
RoamingScott wrote:
While I don't disagree (and it's why I sold off the X100), the one area the ZF can't compete is lenses with aperture rings. Nikon control rings don't count, and the only lenses that have them are 3rd party lenses, and with no consistency. Nikon REALLY needs a line of small lenses (their versions of Fujicrons) with rings to replicate the same tactile experience you get on the Fujis.
ottokbre wrote:
Yup. My brain needs those clicks! Aperture ring is a lot more important to me than shutter/ISO dial. Something Sony has done well too. I've been shooting A7C and X100 side by side and it's been frustrating how much I want it all in one system. Nikon is very close though.
Just gotta convince yourself you can live without AF and suddenly the ZF + CV kits are perfection.
I can't believe all the Eeyores here. It's laughable that so many complain because the camera costs $200 more than they think it should. I've seen some of the same commenters write here over the years and I know most of you have bought/sold/flipped cameras repeatedly and I know you lost hundreds of dollars in the process feeding your GAS, as have I, so I understand the affliction firsthand. And a good number of you also own Leicas yet complain about price points and value. But I welcome your negativity because I think the X-E5 is an excellent camera and I want one, so I won't have to get in line behind you on June 12.
There are a few things at play regarding the price. #1: Fujifilm is constantly in demand, and running out of stock for new, especially good looking, items. This will help temper that a fair bit. #2: US Tariffs are built into the price here I'm sure. It probably would have been in the $1,500 range otherwise. #3: It's still cheaper than an Olympus OM-3.
However, I don't understand why there is this trend for putting lower spec EVFs in higher priced bodies. A 0.62x 2.36M dot EVF was reasonable when Fujifilm put it in the X-E1 in 2013. Yes, that's right - the exact same resolution and size as the ORIGINAL X-E from 12 years ago. It might be acceptable if this was a $999 body like the X-E1 was (and maybe, maybe even at the $1,375 that the X-E1 would cost today due to inflation). But at $1,700 that is a HARD pill to swallow. Now, they may have improved the optics, and the panel itself is likely better than the original X-E1 finder, but still...that's rough in a body this price. My Z50 II EVF is also 2.36M dot, but it's also 0.69x, so notably bigger, and Nikon's optics are awesome so the view is actually quite nice. But that body is also $910.
Jman13 wrote:
There are a few things at play regarding the price. #1: Fujifilm is constantly in demand, and running out of stock for new, especially good looking, items. This will help temper that a fair bit. #2: US Tariffs are built into the price here I'm sure. It probably would have been in the $1,500 range otherwise. #3: It's still cheaper than an Olympus OM-3.
However, I don't understand why there is this trend for putting lower spec EVFs in higher priced bodies. A 0.62x 2.36M dot EVF was reasonable when Fujifilm put it in the X-E1 in 2013. Yes, that's right - the exact same resolution and size as the ORIGINAL X-E from 12 years ago. It might be acceptable if this was a $999 body like the X-E1 was (and maybe, maybe even at the $1,375 that the X-E1 would cost today due to inflation). But at $1,700 that is a HARD pill to swallow. Now, they may have improved the optics, and the panel itself is likely better than the original X-E1 finder, but still...that's rough in a body this price. My Z50 II EVF is also 2.36M dot, but it's also 0.69x, so notably bigger, and Nikon's optics are awesome so the view is actually quite nice. But that body is also $910. ...Show more →
And compare to the Z5ii's gorgeously bright 3.7m EVF, a camera that is...checks notes...$3 cheaper
It's hard to not consider this new version of Fuji an unfunny joke.
If a person is truly interested in photography across a wide swath of applications, Fuji is one of the worst values for the money. Perhaps a better value if you're too broke to wear a Leica and still want to command a certain cache of tech fashion among the gen z bourgeoisie.
We’ll find out when we know the non-US prices what this camera will really cost. Since the tariffs, US prices are no longer indicative of the manufacturer’s overall pricing.
Aside from the price, which is twice what the X-E4 launched at, the biggest disappointment for me is that Fuji kept the same low resolution EVF at 2.36mp with a tiny 0.62x magnification, which feels really small by today's standards. Yes, the camera is compact, but so is the X100VI, and that one has a 3.69mp EVF. Even the leaked LCD resolution looks lower than the E4. Wow Fuji!
Fred Miranda wrote:
Aside from the price, which is twice what the X-E4 launched at, the biggest disappointment for me is that Fuji kept the same low resolution EVF at 2.36mp with a tiny 0.62x magnification, which feels really small by today's standards. Yes, the camera is compact, but so is the X100VI, and that one has a 3.69mp EVF. Even the leaked LCD resolution looks lower than the E4. Wow Fuji!
Fred, I agree. Hoping these two specs are a mistake, that the VF and LCD is at least as good and hopefully better than the X100vi. If not, it’s a HUGE misstep by Fuji.
And the big shame of it is...all those lovely Voigtlander lenses go great with that body size. Better EVF would have made that experience a hell of a lot better!
Fred Miranda wrote:
Aside from the price, which is twice what the X-E4 launched at, the biggest disappointment for me is that Fuji kept the same low resolution EVF at 2.36mp with a tiny 0.62x magnification, which feels really small by today's standards. Yes, the camera is compact, but so is the X100VI, and that one has a 3.69mp EVF. Even the leaked LCD resolution looks lower than the E4. Wow Fuji!
Fred Miranda wrote:
Aside from the price, which is twice what the X-E4 launched at, the biggest disappointment for me is that Fuji kept the same low resolution EVF at 2.36mp with a tiny 0.62x magnification, which feels really small by today's standards. Yes, the camera is compact, but so is the X100VI, and that one has a 3.69mp EVF. Even the leaked LCD resolution looks lower than the E4. Wow Fuji!
I think that speaks to the problematic combination of high end aspirations and low(er) end specifications in the XE, coupled with a(n arguably) high end price.
It would be one thing if Fujifilm took the XE concept and built it into something more robust — that higher resolution EVF, full manual controls (like the X100vi, XT5, etc.), a redesign to accommodate the newer battery. The pricing moves it beyond the entry-level market but the features don’t.
You can use the XE with glasses — I did at one time and I know others who do today. But…
I don’t take it personally, as the XE isn’t in my future no matter what. But I do care when Fujifilm makes missteps like this.
- - -
In other news. some posts in this thread have pegged my snark-o-meter. It is almost like the snark is the point sometimes.
It got me thinking back to a fun exchange recently in a different thread in this very forum.
Guy #1 wrote: “ Oh my God…you mean a photographer’s skill makes the image…not the camera.”
Guy #2 approved: “That's almost as crazy as saying that a chisel didn't make the cabinet ... the woodworker did.”
gdanmitchell wrote:
I think that speaks to the problematic combination of high end aspirations and low(er) end specifications in the XE, coupled with a(n arguably) high end price.
It would be one thing if Fujifilm took the XE concept and built it into something more robust — that higher resolution EVF, full manual controls (like the X100vi, XT5, etc.), a redesign to accommodate the newer battery. The pricing moves it beyond the entry-level market but the features don’t.
You can the XE with glasses — I did at one time and I know others who do today. But…
I don’t take it personally, as the XE isn’t in my future no matter what. But I do care when Fujifilm makes missteps like this.
- - -
In other news. some posts in this thread have pegged my snark-o-meter. It is almost like the snark is the point sometimes.
It got me thinking back to a fun exchange recently in a different thread in this very forum.
Guy #1 wrote: “ Oh my God…you mean a photographer’s skill makes the image…not the camera.”
Guy #2 approved: “That's almost as crazy as saying that a chisel didn't make the cabinet ... the woodworker did.”
To be fair, they did include their latest sensor, processor, and IBIS, along with a few options that were removed from the X-E4 like the drive dial and some others. But still, my main complaint was the EVF since this is an EVF-only camera and not a hybrid like the X100 series. The specs are just too low for a new camera at this price (Same for the X-T50 which was already overpriced). I personally can't justify it, especially since I already own a low-resolution EVF camera, the A7CR, and I don't enjoy the experience. At least the Sony has a magnification of 0.70x.
If Fuji cameras are such junk and we Fuji admirers are so pathetic, why do you even participate here? And if you own one then how do you account for your hypocrisy? Just because it's fun to be a troll?
RoamingScott wrote:
And compare to the Z5ii's gorgeously bright 3.7m EVF, a camera that is...checks notes...$3 cheaper
It's hard to not consider this new version of Fuji an unfunny joke.
If a person is truly interested in photography across a wide swath of applications, Fuji is one of the worst values for the money. Perhaps a better value if you're too broke to wear a Leica and still want to command a certain cache of tech fashion among the gen z bourgeoisie.
