Would you buy the upcoming Fuji X50 for $600?

75 Comments

1. This is an interesting compromise and the zoom would be handy. How it handles and the quality of the VF will be the deciding factor for me. That said, I use an LX5 as a ‘go everywhere’ with the EVF ‘permanantly’ mounted and am happy with it. There is no perfect camera.

2. I am a “mountain photographer” , I shoot with a LX 3 witch is a very good camera excepted the fact there is no wiew finder.

   Today I am looking for something better and my dream would be:
   -an optical wiew finder, not like the ridiculous one of Canon G, connected with the zoom and the focus ring.(is it technicaly possible without a rangefinder I do not know)
   -a bright and razor sharp lens better coated than the LX 3 one (a real mess when shooting facing to the sun)
   -a 3 or 4 x zoom no retractable: one electric motor less and no risk of mechanical play after more or less time.
   -no flash: it give more room for a big and bright wiew finder.
   -everything manual: focus,zoom, aperture ring and shutter.
   -of course no video and program modes.

   I am not really upset by the sensor size: hight Iso do not really matter for lanscape pictures and electronics components are improved days after days, may be I am wrong but in my opinion the quality of the lense is the most important, sensor come after.

   So if the futur Fuji X50 offers this I buy one right now

   • I told you what I was expecting for the Fuji X10 / X50 but the result is, for me,disapointing: too many bullshits a photographer do not care: video, flash, program modes and so on (fortunatly there’s no GPS), but the worse is the wiew finder: due to his location it is impossible to have a 100% frame without seeing the lens body that why, I think, Fuji choised a 85%; four or five millimeters more on the left would have solved the problem.
     More: it seems to do not display aperture and shutter informations,that means when you want to shoot: first check theses informations on the LCD and go to the view finder for framing, no diffrence with a Canon G or a Nikon P 7000
     OK there is a couple of good things: 4 x manual zoom, magnesium alloy body, gorgeous aesthetic…not enought to buy one, my LX 3 will stay with me for a long time.

     • “too many bullshits a photographer do not care: video, flash, program modes and so on (fortunatly there’s no GPS)”

       Careful with the broad strokes there. Your definition of “photographer” is not the same as mine, and personally I would like to see a flash on the camera, and for people who do a lot of landscape photography, GPS can add some useful information to a picture. And, depending on what you mean by “program modes”, they can be useful to some people too.

       Hey, even video is useful to some, and if it doesn’t negatively affect the user experience of the camera in any way, there is no problem with it, and I don’t believe the time spent adding it could in any way have been used more ‘constructively’. I can appreciate the desire for a stripped-down minimalist camera, but as Mike Johnston said (and John Camp elaborated on in the featured comments), everyone has a different idea of which features are essential, and which are superfluous.

3. I think asking X100 users if they’d consider an X50 is like asking any professional if they’d consider getting their tools off the rack instead of custom fabricated. A pro who can and will justify a $1200 camera has little or no reason to consider a probably inferior camera (keep in mind – it ain’t out yet).

   So the poll should perhaps be targeted at the camera’s target group, readers of seriouscompacts or 1001noisycameras, where interested amateurs hang.

   Or perhaps the question should have been which camera would you consider: G12, XZ-1, S95, LX5 or X50?

   And finally: has anyone seen any sample pix yet? No? So what’s the premature huff all about then?

4. Don’t fret – you won’t likely see it for two years! Am I the only one getting turned off of digital camera marketing ‘strategies’? Over the last few years I can’t tell you how many people have moaned that they were looking for a quick, rangefinder type camera with excellent image quality as a supplement or alternative to their dSLRs. There has been no shortage of suggestions and wish lists and none, to my recollection, required 24mp or FX sensors or HD video. Heck, I don’t even need a 3″ LCD with a million dots, IF it had a ‘decent’ optical finder. Menus? If you must include 37 custom scenes and lighting conditions and formats, the secret to usability and navigation is to let me strip out or hide all that I don’t want. Let me rearrange them. It can’t be that difficult.
   And… why, why must everyone play this stupid waiting game. We all waited eight or nine months to get our hands on a Fuji X100, reading review after review. In the end; underwhelmed. Not by the IQ which appears to be stunning but by the ‘what you get for what you pay after the frustratingly long wait’ feeling. It is a very nice $800 camera. Look at the more common review sites and there are frequently ” GH3 in stock at B+H – Better HURRY” messages. What ever happened to a company introducing, producing, and making it available for sale everywhere? I know this is 2011 and manufacturing is different but this is also a time when people like to buy when they want something. Sorry for the rant.
   Chris

5. Hi – I know Fuji is not know for their straightforward thinking, or heavy investment, but I would love to try one out:
   I bought a Panasonic LC1 about a year ago (£270 very second hand). Its got the small sensor, a manual focus, manual zoom (28-90 f2.4), manual shutter and aperture, all with instant auto positions. Its a 5mp camera with only two iso setting 100 & 200 (400 = count the dots). Its shoots beautiful mono jps (just add contrast to suit mood). If you are not cropping and not printing bigger that A4 (300 x 210mm) the colour images are just fine.

   I shoot with Nikon D7000, Fuji S5 Pro and an old D70, unless you print real big, or photo in the dark; then lets not kill off this product till its been given a fair trial.

6. The 2/3 sensor is bigger than the one in most high-end compacts, but the difference is actually fairly small. For example, the S95 uses a 1/1.7″ sensor, which has a diagonal of 9.5mm. The 2/3″ Fuji sensor has a diagonal of 11mm. That’s a 15% improvement.

   In low-light, the Fuji X50 won’t have much of an advantage over something like the Olympus XZ-1, despite the body being much larger (lens is 1/3 stop faster, sensor bigger than the 1/1.7″ one).

7. Fuji should make x100 with 4/3 sensor and interchangeable lens…meanwhile I keep using my 55mm Fujinon lens instead.

8. I own the x100 and am very happy with it. So I don’t need the x50, but I think it will appeal to a lot of people who want a high quality compact with external controls, good build quality, zoom and OFV.

   IMO Fuji is playing this right marketing-wise: first introduce the un-compromised enthusiast camera- x100. Get a lot of press/attention with this unique, high visibility camera. Then offer a less expensive, wider appeal (e.g. Zoom) version for larger sales volume.

   I just hope any future “x200” version with interchangeable lenses will have the SLR sized CMOS sensor and NOT 4/3.

9. Oly E-PM1 (which has a bigger sensor than X50) just announce its price is USD500. Whereas Fuji which has a so much smaller sensor but costs more. I always cannot comprehend why Fuji cameras’ price is always so much higher??? Fuji are u listening. Pls let us have more competitive prices. Smaller sensor, bigger price beats our logic…..

10. Fuji really messed up here by not including their FAMOUS hybrid viewfinder. Had they done so, and knocked $100 off the MSRP ($450 street), the world would have beaten a path to their door. You need at least TWO hot and new features for the world to take notice. Those would have been some combo of image quality, hybrid viewfinder, or price. Seems like the F50 will only have one of those three. Then again, it also depends upon how bulky the camera is……

11. I couldn’t get on with the X100 so the X50 will be a no no for me. That said, I couldn’t get on with the M9 either (many reasons). Now, if Nikon were to bring out a full frame, interchangeable lens true rangefinder with manual focus, I’d be first in the queue. You know it would just work perfectly from day one and be a joy to use. I can but dream.

12. I already have the X100, and I think it’s small enough, the X50 is redundant.

13. My $600 bucks will go toward the NEX-7, which has a larger sensor and interchangeable lenses. I’ll wait for the next incarnation of the X100 to see what happens. However, I do think the X50 will find a market with P&S shooters who simply want a camera with a retro look and aren’t willing to hand over close to $1,300 dollars for it.

14. And don’t forget… Fuji is also hinting that there will, in fact, be some kind of interchangeable lens camera based on the X100 template coming next year. This as-yet unnamed camera is the one that many suspect will be a micro four-thirds entry. Hey, it’s all good. With my K-5, I’m set for a “genuine” DSLR. But I’ve got a G3 micro four-thirds kit as well as an LX3. I love this EVIL/MILC story.

15. Hahaha, of course this is only Steve’s imagination, I don’t think this camera is coming to the market. It is just a joke! 🙂

16. Nah. The point of the X100 (anyway, one of the points) is that it’s a (relatively) small camera with a (relatively) large sensor. That makes it nearly unique.

    A smaller camera with a smaller sensor….. that just joins a huge crowd, and at a relatively high price.

    No sale.

17. The new Digilux2 with much better high iso performance? ⅔ sensor, manual zoom lens, f2 etc
    http://www.fotoactualidad.com/2011/08/es-esta-la-finepix-x10.htm

18. naaahh.. I’ll pass on that.
    the X100 is just right.. Fuji kinda push it too far with the X50. it’s an easy one. NO 😛

19. Wow, a lot of ridiculous remarks here. This camera will succeed and will allow Fuji to make the X200 you so desperately want.

    Also, this has a zoom. How will they make that VF work with a zoom? I think this is one step towards making an interchangable lens camera with the X100 VF.

    Finally, the people on this thread are not the target audience. If Fuji listened to what people on this forum wanted, they’d be out of business.

    • I don’t think the remarks are ridiculous, but I think you missed the topic. This is not about market analysis it is about the question if WE want to buy an X50.

20. with the 2/3rd sensor NO WAY IN GODDAMN HELL!!! hey fuji, incase it wasnt abundantly clear to you already from the Pentax Q backlash, NO ONE WANTS A SMALL SENSOR PREMIUM CAMERA! -takes breath.- ahh

    • although i will say if it is a actual 2/3rd sensor like Fujis old bridge cameras and the Digilux 2, aka not a 1/2.33″ which I’m sorry but there is a 90% likelyhood it is with the way allot of Japanese camera makers have been behaving… maybe.

    • Really, “no one”? The popularity of the Ricoh GR-D series is evidence against that claim.

      • Ricoh doesn’t pull enough numbers in sales to be used as evidence against anything. 😉 Not to mention non of their cameras actually stand on their own without fanboy bias.

21. Everything depends on the sensor. It looks like the readers here are already doing the math. 2/3 would be about one stop slower than the mft cameras? And one stop faster than the Canon S95? That seems like a good compromise. It looks slightly smaller than the XZ1, and on paper it should take better pictures. If so, it might be worth $600.

    The XZ1 is an outstanding camera, and if you can beat Oly at their own game, you get to charge an extra $200.

    Still, I wish Fuji was improving on the X100 instead of the XZ1. I want a small-box large-sensor camera that I can also use for sports photography. Right now, almost every camera that can do sports photography has “Nikon” or “Canon” written on the side. They make great cameras of course, but I am surprised that Fuji doesn’t want some of that market.

22. I might be the only one here, but it’s piqued my interest. My LX3 was recently stolen and I’ve been looking for a replacement for a while now. I don’t really see the reason for upgrading to the LX5 other than the improved ergonomics. I loved the wide and fast lens and really never zoomed.

    f2 looks good. I’m a little skeptical about any lens that zooms 4x. The most compelling thing here for me is the optical view finder. I personally don’t like EVF’s. While others praise them, I find they strain my eye and are just not pleasant to look through.

    The thing I’m most skeptical about is the size. The LX3 is about as large a camera can get and still fit in your pocket. It’s the camera I carried when I didn’t want to carry a camera. I’m afraid that the x50 might be just a little too big.

    Life’s a compromise and I wouldn’t rule it out until I know more. If it doesn’t fit the bill, I probably have another LX3 in my future.

23. I give it a “no”. All the technical fuzz really does not appeal to me. I like the X100 because
    – the image quality is ok
    – it fits good in my hands and in my belt bag
    – the hybrid viewfinder does a good job

    So why should I jump on the X-hype to buy a camera that does not have these attributes? Sorry, no way.
    Even an Xn00 with a larger sensor or different lens would not do the job for me.
    A system with exchangeable lenses would be fine although then it would directly compete with my M9.

24. Small point and shoot sensor for 600 bucks?…. No
    It’s cute though.. in a MinyMe kind of way

25. No, but I will buy the Sony NEX 7 that’s coming out in November!

26. all of the above.

    I think it will be a buy based on it’s looks. does seem a little pointless.

    I’ve got an x100 (the look was a bonus for me) and while it’s quirks are somewhat troubling, it’s still a great camera. the x50 isn’t for me, or anyone like me, an enthusiast/semi pro.

    I think a lot of “cool” people will buy it. meh.

27. I was hoping for a similar Fuji in m4/3 mount. I have a sizable investment in m4/3 lenses and am anxiously awaiting a rangefinder style body or an E-P3 with build in EVF. Give me the Fuji body in M4/3 with interchangable lenses AND add image stabilization and I will reach a state of ultimate bliss.

28. The sensor is bigger than the one used in the existing “high end” point and shoot cameras. And it has an integrated VF! So it could set new standards for P&S. As far as design goes, I prefer the minimalistic GRDIII. And since the X50 will be no match for the Ricoh’s class leading user interface, I’ll stick with the GRDIII.

    • The GRD3 is what I thought of when I saw the picture, although the X50 having a zoom lens sets it apart from the Ricoh. Presumably the viewfinder will be similar to the X100 in that it’s switchable between optical and electronic.

      Whether I’m interested or not depends on the controls. By far the biggest reason I bought my GRD3 was the user interface (second was the lens). The sensor may ‘only’ be a small one, but the body around it enables me to get shots that would be difficult with a different camera. It’s just such a pleasure to use.

      That will be the deciding factor here, I think, and is what put me off the X100, even though there are so many things in its favour; right now the EP3 and Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 is appealing to me slightly more.

29. Steve, if I’m not mistaken, while a 2/3 sensor isn’t as large as a four-thirds sensor – and certainly not an APS sensor – it’s larger than sensors in cameras like the Canon G12/S95, Panasonic LX3/5, Olympus XZ-1, et al. Those cameras feature 1/1.6 or 1/1.7 sensors. Here’s the part where I might be wrong: Would a 2/3 sensor be equivalent to a 1/1.5 sensor? Someone keep me honest here. Either way, though, I suspect this kind of sensor might produce some decent images. Right now, I won’t buy a camera with a sensor smaller than a 1/1.7 – even for holiday/vacation happy snaps. But if Fuji’s new camera works out the way I hope it will, my minimum standards might be about to go up a bit.

30. This looks a lot like the specs for a new version of what had been a classic digi cam the Leica Digilux 2/Panasonic DMC-LC1 Lumix. This could have the potential of being a great little camera if it is in fact a true to form update of the same concept. I’m not going to write it off just yet. A few working pros still use the Digilux 2 in good light today.

31. Why would you buy this camera with such a small sensor when you can get an e-pl1 for almost half the price.

    • Because then you have to buy a lens, and quality m4/3 glass is expensive (comparatively)

32. Small sensor cameras simply do not appeal to me. May as well use the iPhone 4.

    Can’t blame Fuji however. They may be hedging their bets against the upcoming Pentax Q and Nikon XYZ.

33. Steve,

    Are you sure it’s a 2/3″ sensor? I’ve been seeing some rumors of a smaller than four thirds but bigger than a compact sensor for this new Fuji. Somewhere about the size of the Nikon mirrorless product. If that was the case I would definitely be interested in the X50 at that price.

    Also, what’s the advantage/disadvantage of a constant apeture lens? I know I could wikipedia this but the answers here tend to be much more relevant.

    • Nevermind. I thought you meant 1/2.33″ sensor. With a 2/3 sensor my vote is yes definitely! The only things still on my wish list is a Fuveon-type sensor and a combined exposure compensation and ISO dial, like the Canon G12.

34. It’s interesting, for sure. it seems aimed squarely at the G12/XZ-1/LX5 group of cameras, which apparently is a growing market, but seeks to bask in the reflected glow of the X100 and bigger sensor to justify it’s ~$100 premium. If it’s quality piece of kit, it’ll be a contender in a much bigger market than the X100 addresses.

    It’s not for me, though. I already have an S95 and I don’t have a need for another advanced p&s camera.

    The X50 did spark to mind what I’d love to see in an “X2” from Leica: APS-C sensor (12MP is fine, but with better noise and dynamic range than the X1’s sensor), a bi-summicron, say a 35-50mm f2 switchable lens, availble screw on .75x/2x adapters (to get 24mm and 100mm focal lengths), competitive CDAF speed, and roughly the same size and price as the current X1. Price it for around and I’d be figuring out how to buy one on day 1. Won’t happen of course 😀

35. X? x50? oh my, they just degrade the “x” series.

36. GRD3.

    [img]http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6140/6013022579_3aeccd606a_m.jpg[/img]

    Q.E.D

    • Nice!

37. Nothing wrong with small sensors. The commentary on them is about as informed these days as that about DOF and small sensors. There is no reason why a 24 megapixel FF sensor with the middle section cut out for a 8-10 would not work the same. Indeed it does.

38. The X100 was what I was waiting for. I love the cam especially for the fact it carries a big SLR sensor, that makes the x50 obsolete for me no matter how tiny it is.

39. Absolutely not. I’m already well invested in micro 4/3 and (thanks, Steve (?)), just got a Ricoh GRX kit and have the M-mount module on order. When I first saw the headline, I almost thought this was a spoof. With the X100 being the darling of the gear acquisition set, seems like they can only diminish their success.

40. It’s a joke, isn’t it?

    I miss the point.

    At 600$, the X50 would be an expensive compact, with no other compelling feature than its look and possibly build. Ok, it’s gt manual zoom… but OTOH I doubt a compact optical zoom finder would be very comfortable or accurate, and it looks like the X50 would remain bulky by compact standards.

    At least the X100 is unique and fills a niche.

41. While I appreciate the size, I don’t appreciate small sensors. If I want something small, it is because I can’t take my other gear. And, if I couldn’t take my other gear, it would be because either I didn’t want to risk my expensive gear in an unsafe/bad weather environment or because I needed to travel light and fast. Either way, the X50 doesn’t compare well to the other options. It’s too expensive compared to other P&S options.

    I, too, feel that they should focus on the niche they dominate. They really killed Leica with the X100 at the price point they chose. While its not comparable to a M, the X100 is a great product. And, if they could speed up the focusing and add an exchangeable lens option….wow!

42. At least its sounds more reasonable than the vastly overpriced X100 toy camera. The X50 is a toy camera too, but at least its reasonably priced. A nice little point and shoot with some neat lens is well worth the 600$, the X100 isn’t worth its money. Its just a very expensive point and shoot ..

    • I’m happy with this ‘toy’. No complain at all. Do you have one yet?

      • It is a toy, yes. I had one, sold it. Finder is horrible, autofocus misses half my shots and controls are completely borked. Its a nice try from Fuji, but that camera will need some 2 or 3 generations to become useful. In the meantime i rather stick to my M’s. those are tools, not toys.

        • I have to disagree (politely). I have kept with the X100 and with every new firmware update, this camera gets better and better (currently v1.11). I have shot Nikon (D300, D700), Fuji S5, S3 and many high-end compacts (G12, S95 DLux5, LX5, XZ-1) and the X100 blows them all away in most respects. I have taken some of my best work on the X100 with detail far greater than many of the above (esp the very over-rated XZ-1), and equal to the D700 on almost all of my shots. Its a wonderfully easy camera to use in the right hands and is absolutely a photographic tool. Zone focussing is a breeze and exposure and colours almost always bang-on. This is no toy and I am not a fanboy. I have been so fed-up carrying my SLR kit around and am totally over the moon that I no longer have to carry it as much. Another benefit… I actually think harder about my composition now and feel more able because of it. Finder is just fine by the way; it just depends how you use it. Closer focus? Use the EVF. Everything else, OVF is superb. Great camera that is undoubtedly not for everyone but, for me with over 20 years behind the VF, it’s a gem and a keeper.

    • If the X100 is overpriced, I’d love to know what you think about the X1 or heaven-forbid the M9.

      • I own multiple M cameras, including digital ones. I also played around with the X1 but decided against it because of the horrible autofocus. You dont have to tell me stories about expensive cameras, i got enough of them. And compared to those, the X100 is vastly overpriced for its performance.

        • Show us your “multiple M” cameras and your “expensive cameras”, just a little picture of your impressive collection will do it. Otherwise I have to doubt that you ever looked through a Leica M viewfinder, or else you would not call the X100 finder horrible. It’s simply brilliant.
          Greetings from an M9, MP and X100 shooter.

          • I got two M2 (one modified with M6 finder), an M6 “Big”, M7 with MP finder, M8.2 and M9 here. The X100 finder is horrible compared to any of the M’s finders. Its tiny, its cluttered with all kind of useless info and the brightness of the frame lines hurt the eyes. Its not a pleasant camera to look trough. Greetings from someone who still thinks the X100 is a toy camera.

      • I had the Leica X1 before I had the Fuji x100. For low light the Fuji nails it.
        The Leica did not feel or perform like a $2000 camera.I was disappointed and returned it.
        The Fuji x100 takes beautiful photos,not perfect in every way but quality of images is the best I’ve seen in a compact that I’ve actually owned. Having this camera in public really draws out the curiosity seekers..So good and bad-be careful of which part of town you play with it in!
        It looks expensive and feels very sturdy.

        Linda Matlow,Pix International

    • The X100 is actually almost a bargain. Have a look at prices of (non metal build) mft cameras with outstanding prime lenses such as e.g. the new Olympus 12mm or Panasonic (Summilux) 25mm.

      • The other MFT cameras are toys too. Overpriced toys, just like the Fuji is.Neither the Fuji nor the other MFT’s have any place in professional photography. The Fuji is a neat looking camera for people that have the money to spare for a walk around point and shoot camera. I bet the very most who own an X100 have it as a secondary travel camera, and not as their main, “work”, camera. And simply because of that the Fuji is an overpriced toy-camera. I dont want to shell out 1200 $ for a piece of camera that i just carry around for fun .. The X50 on the contrary is really appealing, since it has a pretty good lens, decent image quality at half (!) the price of the X100. That is a point and shoot camera worth it, the X100 is not ..

    • Expensive? I reckon you are the first person on the Internet to call the X100 expensive. X100 is actually bargain, metal body, stunning f2 lens/sensor its all there.

      • The X100 is no toy IQ from raw files is outstanding……. Not far short of my M9 and being able to use flash at 1/2000 and higher of a second is hardly the Mark of a toy. As Tom says do you have one or just talking a pile of garbage

        • As i said before too, i had one and sold it. Its just a point and shoot camera, nothing fancy. It looks neat and thats prolly why everyone is orgasming all over the place. But try to use it professionally. Its just a toy you wont get anywhere with. Manual focus is a joke, so is the autofocus. Finder is horrible and controls are completely fubar. For 1200$ you can get a gazzillion different cameras that perfor far far better. Though they are not nice looking and this small. But that cant be the only thing that makes that camera good, huh ?

          • Could we please have a link where we can see your professional work shot with “non-toy” cameras. Thank you!

          • Seems there are already a ton of X100 fanboys. Sebastian makes some great points and they need to be heard. There are a few professional bloggers taking a stand on this camera but most of them are gushing about it without taking into account the focusing issues. I think people who love this are hobbyists and thats perfect, but for professionals it misses the mark.

43. I might’ve considered the Fuji or even the Olympus EP-3 had I not already picked up a Ricoh GRD III this summer (my first digital). The upcoming Pentax Q is also looking pretty neat! I love the little cameras since they’re what got me into photography back when I was 5 or so…that is, until I started appreciating higher functionality equipment like Rollie, and then Leica, in the 80’s.

    Of course, it might be a different story if cameras like the X50 were made with large sensors. But I have a strong hunch that’s where this current market trend is leading. We’ll have to see what the future holds.

44. A constant f2 aperture and 2/3 sensor? that would make a nice bokeh!
    also, im not sure, but i think 2/3 is more then twice bigger then D-LUX 5\LX5 sensor

    • It won’t be a constant f/2 aperture…

45. It would never cross my mind to buy the little “X” so here is the real question….

    1) Do they really not “get” their own market for the X100?

    2) What do they know that the rest of us don’t get?

    3) Do they think they missed their target market with the “big” sensor version?

    Am I clueless because I just don’t get it. If I am clueless the majority of the readers in the poll also don’t seem to get it either, so they must be clueless as well. So let’s assume they are going after a completely different market – the point and shoot market. I would guess that this market values zooms and other P+S default features and the fixed lens thing just won’t fly. right? still clueless?

    RB

46. If it has true mechanical manual focusing, unlike the stupid and worthless fly-by-wire system the X100 had, I would possibly consider it. But if its a true point and shoot, I might as well buy something waterproof.

    • Will not have true manual focusing…

47. They should have spent their R&D $ on an X200

    • Agree — I hope they are thinking of upgrading the X100

Comments are closed.