p.1 #1 · Why is Fuji not sticking to one user interface?
The value of a consistent user interface (control layout) can hardly be overstated. It makes it possible to use different camera models from different camera generations without thinking about where the fingers of your right hand find the controls.
Fuji seems to disagree. Not sure why, but their design team changes the control layout with each new camera. The user interface even varies between camera models of the same generation.
My X-T3, X-E3 and X-Pro3 all have different user interfaces.
Fuji should have a team of real photographers develop the best possible user interface and then stick with it unless a change is required for major reason.
p.1 #4 · Why is Fuji not sticking to one user interface?
JadedWriter wrote:
Because a lot of their lines are aimed at very different people. Always have been. If you want consistent buy the same camera.
Aimed at different people How so? I have the X-E3 for size, the X-Pro3 for fun, and the X-T3 for the larger lenses. I use them in parallel. I sure others do, too. And that doesn't explain the different layouts within the same line of cameras.
p.1 #5 · Why is Fuji not sticking to one user interface?
They are internally designed for different demographics. I personally use the XH series for larger lenses and event work where I have to use flash since I thought the XT series was designed poorly for that line of work for example. The XE is supposed to be the "fun" size camera. XPro was designed for pro's actually since it used to be the flagship for two generations...now it's just in a state of limbo. Nielk Mike wrote:
Aimed at different people How so? I have the X-E3 for size, the X-Pro3 for fun, and the X-T3 for the larger lenses. I use them in parallel. I sure others do, too. And that doesn't explain the different layouts within the same line of cameras.
p.1 #6 · Why is Fuji not sticking to one user interface?
There’s an inherent UI difference between a PSAM cam and an older genre, all-manual cam, and Fuji chose to offer both — and I for one am glad they did. The XT line appeals to the latter group while still allowing users to obtain combos that mirror PSAM, even though you have to change about 3 different settings on dials and at least 1 in the internal menu to get to a working A mode from M (and especially so if like me you prefer changing aperture with the front command wheel). That’s the main reason I cannot come to grips with the XT line even though I like its retro styling. The XH line is conventional PSAM, and far easier to get between A and M mode than the XT series for those like me who regularly switch between those modes. Ironically, the internal menus of both are structured very uniformly within the confines of their manual dials.
p.1 #7 · Why is Fuji not sticking to one user interface?
Not talking here about the X-H line - just the X-E/T/Pro/100. I know many folks who use some or all of them in parallel, and who use different generations of those lines. It is quite normal to use an X-T and X-E together, or an X-Pro for the OVF, but an X-T for all else. So no, the argument of having different customer groups in mind is not valid.
p.1 #8 · Why is Fuji not sticking to one user interface?
Nielk Mike wrote:
Not talking here about the X-H line - just the X-E/T/Pro/100. I know many folks who use some or all of them in parallel, and who use different generations of those lines. It is quite normal to use an X-T and X-E together, or an X-Pro for the OVF, but an X-T for all else. So no, the argument of having different customer groups in mind is not valid.
Well I like to use the XE and XH together, and I find them pretty close, closer than the XT to the XH, though I wish the exposure comp dial was a PSAM instead.
p.1 #9 · Why is Fuji not sticking to one user interface?
I guess I've always considered the different layouts to be Fuji's strength, that they are willing to have a lots of different models to appeal to peoples wants. When the market has punished mistakes like X-T4 flippy, X-E minimalist layout, they have reversed course. So I think they do listen, at least to sales figures. That's what drives any company, what is selling well, and that is really to be expected these days. I'm sure they have considered a more universal layout as a cost saving measure but have to weigh loss of sales against that. For me, moving from X-T to Gfx is not huge deal but I would pick and choose to make the perfect "SGNorcal" Fuji. Not to worried that's never going to happen.
p.1 #10 · Why is Fuji not sticking to one user interface?
My Xpro2 and Xt3 and 5 are all pretty much the same, main difference between Xpro2 and tge Xts is tge position of the review button, but I have that programmed to a function button anyway.
p.1 #11 · Why is Fuji not sticking to one user interface?
gyoung143 wrote:
My Xpro2 and Xt3 and 5 are all pretty much the same, main difference between Xpro2 and tge Xts is tge position of the review button, but I have that programmed to a function button anyway.
Gerry
And then comes the X-Pro3 which has completely different control interface that the X-T3. And the X-E3 is different again.
p.1 #12 · Why is Fuji not sticking to one user interface?
If you go to Fuji's YouTube and look at the marketing videos for every camera and lens it's very obvious that not everything is speaking to the same demographic. They are all pros, because they're ambassadors but they images used are not for the same person. You would never see...especially now the sports people talking either the X-E or X-T line. The street people usually get the X-Pro or X100 series, the more casual ones get the X-E, X-M line, hardcore pros get the X-H line. The X-T feel like the wedding/portrait crowd these days, though I think it's getting to the point where the GFX line has crossover with this. Your friends can do whatever they want, but when it comes to how Fujifilm markets their cameras there isn't overlap. There's a clear delineation. Nielk Mike wrote:
Not talking here about the X-H line - just the X-E/T/Pro/100. I know many folks who use some or all of them in parallel, and who use different generations of those lines. It is quite normal to use an X-T and X-E together, or an X-Pro for the OVF, but an X-T for all else. So no, the argument of having different customer groups in mind is not valid.
p.1 #13 · Why is Fuji not sticking to one user interface?
JadedWriter wrote:
If you go to Fuji's YouTube and look at the marketing videos for every camera and lens it's very obvious that not everything is speaking to the same demographic. They are all pros, because they're ambassadors but they images used are not for the same person. You would never see...especially now the sports people talking either the X-E or X-T line. The street people usually get the X-Pro or X100 series, the more casual ones get the X-E, X-M line, hardcore pros get the X-H line. The X-T feel like the wedding/portrait crowd these days, though I think it's getting to the point where the GFX line has crossover with this. Your friends can do whatever they want, but when it comes to how Fujifilm markets their cameras there isn't overlap. There's a clear delineation.
Respectfully disagree. Just talking X-T, X-E, X-Pro and X100 lines here. All those lines may serve different customer groups - but most customers do not only own one model. They own two or more and use them in parallel. They use different generations of the same body, or different generations between those bodies. So keeping the user interface from model to model would help a lot using them without much thinking as to where the controls are.
And even if that argument about the different customer groups had merrit: Why would a user of the X-E3 find it helpful to have the replay button (only one example) at the bottom of the right side of the camera (where I think it should be), while the customer of the X-Pro3 should find that replay button as second from the bottom as useful, and then again the user group of the X-T3 finds the replay button at the top left of the EVF a good idea? It just makes no sense!
Keeping a basic control layout between bodies would greatly enhance the usability of camera bodies from different lines and generations. Me, I think the control layout of the X-E3 was perfect and should used with the other lines.
How so? I have the X-E3 for size, the X-Pro3 for fun, and the X-T3 for the larger lenses. I use them in parallel. I sure others do, too. And that doesn't explain the different layouts within the same line of cameras.