19
May
2014

Digital Medium Format Camera from Fujifilm coming by the end of summer? (new + anonymous source)

 photo FUJIGF670W_zps24f76c44.jpeg

Tell me, why go “just” Full Frame? According to a new and also an anonymous source, Fujifilm will launch a digital medium format mirrorless camera.

Of course, for now, be very careful with this information and take it with the usual grain of salt. That said, here is what the 2 sources told me:

New Source

Fuji will launch a digital Medium Format camera by the end of summer.

Anonymous Source

Fuji is working on a digital medium format mirrorless camera. The prototype is said to look like a X-PRO1, with hybrid viewfinder, but more of a size of the Fuji GF670. The prototype is using the same Sony CMOS sensor present in the Pentax 645z.

_ _ _

It’s a tough battle in the fiercly contested mirrorless market! Latest rumors suggest that also Sony will launch a Mamiya 7 style MF camera (source-SAR). But, as the saying goes, when the going gets tough, the tough get going! And Fuji seems to be ready to face the challenge.

Keep in mind that the Sony and the Fuji rumor are both still NOT confirmed by trusted sources.

However, if the rumors are true, then also Fujifilm has some trump cards to pull out of its sleeve. A Medium Format digital mirrorless camera, the rumored X200, X30 and the X-PRO2. (OMG, lots of rumors I have to work on! ;-) )

Ok, I’ll put my best also into this rumor and see if I can confirm the MF Fuji ASAP. Of course, feel free to help me and to make my work a bit easier. If you decide to share some information, you can do it completely anonymously via rumor box (if you don’t mind, use a nickname, so that I can eventually recognize you in future), or contact me via email at fujirumor [at] gmail.com.

stay tuned for more
facebook, google+, RSS-feed and twitter

  • Shai Silverlight

    2500$ please.

    • Gluon

      2500$ would be the price of a film camera (GF670w).

      The GF670w went out the same year as the x100, I think this rumor is about an updated film camera…

  • nwcs

    Seems like a fan’s wishful thinking masquerading as a Fuji leak source. It’s always possible, as anything is, but it is very unlikely. Given the $8K US price of the Pentax 645z, a Fuji version would be priced in that neighborhood and it would definitely be a niche product. There’s money there but is there enough to justify it?

    Doesn’t pass the smell test in my opinion.

    • bmassao

      Actually, $8K is pretty much of a low price considering the digital medium format market, especially with Hasselblad and PhaseOne’s cameras and backs at the $30K US house.

      If Fuji manages to give a good quality camera at $8K, I can see a lot of medium format shooters jumping in, like they did with the Pentax 645D and are now doing with the Pentax 645z.

      Let’s be reasonable: medium format in film isn’t for everyone already, it’s fair that medium format in digital isn’t too.

      • Chang He

        Though I think this is the logical direction to go. Compact cameras are a losing proposition, and as smartphones get better, APC-C will look less good in comparison. The only way to maintain an edge, and hence a reason to purchase a stand-alone camera, will be to get bigger sensors. I agree it’s probably a fan’s wishful thinking, but I hope there’s an element of truth to it.

      • nwcs

        The question we don’t know is this: are there enough paying customers to make the product profitable long term? Given the downsizing body trends and reduced overall market size I just can’t imagine it would be a good long term decision.

        What I’d like Fuji to do for long term success is this: make it easier to get photos from camera to destination. Sure, they have some steps along this but it’s still clunky, Make it as simple as a smartphone. Next, really work to streamline and make clear/consistent the UI of the cameras (UI means everything from LCD to dials/buttons). Lastly, open parts of it up to third parties. Let developers write plugins to enable new functionality that is photographically useful (customized bracketing anyone?), enable third parties to build the flash system, etc. Think in terms of Made For iDevices from Apple. Very profitable and provides a lot of stickiness and gives customers options that are unique to their needs.

        • bmassao

          I think that Fuji is ditching the “film” from its name. The GF670 mentioned in the article is currently in line, so you can buy a new one from Adorama or B&H. Fuji looks like is giving an option to the photographers that still shooting with medium format rangefinder cameras like the Mamiya 7 and the GF670. Is it profitable? I doubt it. But the GF670 isn’t giving any profit at short term as well.

          • nwcs

            That’s the key thing, other than prestige why go with a product line that isn’t profitable? The halo effect really isn’t there. They’re nearing break even financially in cameras so it seems like the time to focus on profitable segments only and not just iterate but really nail the products.

          • Tv

            Fuji were the masters of fixed lens medium format cameras back in the 1990s

        • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirk23/ dirk

          You should send an application to Fujifilm as a one-man market research department. They could probably save a whole lot of money. ;)

          Please forgive my sarcasm. But quite often I get the idea that people think Fuji (just like any other company) does not have a team of highly qualified people, trying to guesstimate what the market wants and is willing to pay for.

          • nwcs

            I’m sure they do but I haven’t seen the fruits of that given the inconsistencies. Consider only the aperture ring on lenses. How many different ways have they implemented it from resistance to movement to markings to stops/continuous?

            I’m not the only one who thinks in these terms. Consider, as just one additional source, this thought on Nikon’s inconsistencies: http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/whats-the-plan.html

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirk23/ dirk

            I know, I hate the ring on my 14mm. But nobody and nothing is perfect. And a bad ring is better than none, right? ;)
            Also hate the non-marked on the zooms. I would pay more for markings but maybe not everybody would…

  • jon

    I would rather a fully featured camera which takes instax wide, full manual control and a nice bit of glass for lovely bokeh. Cheers, Jon

  • SL

    just waiting for the x200 … please some rumors about that one :)

  • http://sonaten.se/ Jonas N

    Interesting! I wonder what the end result will look like if it’s a fixed lens camera, both as for price and size. I’m really only interested if it’s fixed, and I only expect it to be too if there’s any truth to this.

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirk23/ dirk

    Could be interesting. The “Medium Format” sensors are only 33×44 mm. So not that much larger than FF. A digital fixed lens camera therfore could be much more compact than a real medium format 6×4.5 camera. Or the 670 in the picture.

    • Ratty Mouse

      The camera in the picture is a GF670W. THe GF670 is a folding camera w/bellows.

  • Scott

    I don’t know but as a long time MF shooter and I miss it. Probably be a wide and I rather have normal view.

  • Rich

    a 50mm view is better for Leica like photography. Wide is not that easy to use for pro use without shift control or it would get a lot of distortion in perspective.

  • tuscon

    I would love to see Digital MF is going the same direction as 35mm FF….cheaper and cheaper….as could be seen in D600/10, 6D, Sony A7 (r),,,,please Fuji, Sony and other join Pentax….make Hassy and Phase One struggling…Hassy is already nearly k.o. i think sony will buy hassy and olympus if m43 /imaging business will be sold/dying….

    But i was always impressed by the High Iso capabilities of the fujis in comparison to other aps-c and even to ff dslrs but now i know it better….

    As you can see from 32:02 on………………..

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtDotqLx6nA#t=1923

    fuji is cheating …they rated the iso 3/4 stops slower than the other manufacturers…..that is the first time fuji make me really angry and sad….

    That’s an UNBELIEVEABLE SCANDAL!!!!!!!!!!……
    SHAME AND BLAME ON YOU FUJI!!!!!!!!!!!

    So hopefully MF system (interchangeable lenses) but i think it is much more realistic that they are going to introduce a complete ff setup/system with the announcement of the x pro 2 ff sensor (maybe organic??) rather than a mf system..

    just two cents….

    Cheers+ regards despite the fact being heavily shocked!!!!!!!!

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirk23/ dirk

      That video is a joke. Especially this ISO-comparison. Nowhere near a scientific measurement.
      And don’t get me started on the BS about ISO in the beginning.

      • tuscon

        hmm…nevertheless i cannot understand why the fuji admin doesn’t report about this video /discussion……..clarification is required somehow or other….with reasons/evidences why it is / he is true/right or wrong/false…..so please i think every fuji customer wanna know or is interested/excited about that….

        • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirk23/ dirk

          There is no need to spread wrong or poorly researched facts. In fact the less people talk about it, the better.
          If you want to learn about this stuff, wikipedia is your friend. :)

        • Patrick

          Because the video has some crucial errors: http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/updated-the-errors-in-tony-northrups-cheating-accuse-video

          FYI, I also didn’t shared Tony’s review of the X-T1, where he said that it has a very slow focus! Then somebody asked him to change his completely wrong settings and also the lens… he used the 60mm lens, the slowest of all lenses out there and set, for example, the focus box to its minimum size. You can be sure that it won’t focus quickly. Not very professional. He simply should be a bit more accurate.

          Oh, and I’d also recommend you to check Ale’s (43rumors) reply to Tony’s video in the comments to the video.

  • hexx

    Would be definitely interested in this camera, sure I probably won’t retire Mamiya 6 thanks to collapsible lenses but ‘never say never’.
    I’ve never used Fuji’s MF rangefinders – anybody with experience, what were the lenses like?

    • Tv

      Hi I have the gf670 and the ga645zi both gave excellent, sharpe lenses.

      • hexx

        Thank you

    • Herve

      if i’m correct, Fuji was making the lenses for Haselblad, so they definitively know how to manufacture quality MF lenses…

      • hexx

        From the owners of both H and V systems – they prefer lenses for V system (Zeiss). I can’t compare, I have only V system.

  • http://batman-news.com Jason H

    I’ve been thinking of getting the GF670, but if a digital version came out… I’d sell a couple limbs to get it. I’d love for this to happen.

    I just hope I can afford it.

  • Peter

    I’m sure they are going to do something like this at some point. Zack Arias has been lobbying for something like this as well. And if it really is “fan’s wishful thinking” as stated by many people here, well, then that’s a very good reason for them to consider catering to that demand, isn’t it.

    For me, I don’t really see the huge advantage of a mirrorless system at that kind of size. It’s ok for a MF system to be slightly on the bulky side, and an optical waist-level viewfinder is just a beautiful thing. Personally, I’d also prefer a really large sensor with fewer megapixels over a small, portable one. But then again, nothing would prevent them from offering a whole portfolio ranging from something like a digital Plaubel Makina (or a medium format X100/X-Pro1-type camera) to a more bulky studio-type offering.

    I think the following factors would currently distinguish a new MF system from the competition:

    1) AF speed/quality and ergonomics (all current digital MF cameras suck at the former, most at the latter).

    2) price (current cameras are still way too expensive to ever be attractive to a mainstream market). This is a tough one to crack, though limiting the resolution to sane levels might bring the costs of the rest of the electronics down.

    3) ISO performance (current models are useful in controlled lighting only, except the very latest generation). Again, probably solved by reasonable resolutions.

    4) lens quality (looking at you, Pentax) and weather sealing (looking at you, everybody else!). Shouldn’t be a problem for Fuji at all.

    5) sensor size (bigger size than the current crop MF systems, but lower resolution for less costly support electronics, faster processing and better low-light quality – just imagine an 8 fps capable MF camera that you can shoot sports with at at insanely high ISO.

    There are already enough MF cameras with insanely high resolution. The real attraction about MF for me (and probably a lot of other people) is the look that you get because you can use longer focal lengths at the same distance from your subject.

    • hexx

      Check out Pentax 645Z, there are currently also 3 weather sealed lenses for it – 25, 55 and 90mm. It’s pretty much K-3 with MF sensor inside and huge VF.

  • http://shashinkaichiban1.wordpress.com/ 写真家

    I been saying this for two years. I want parade when it releases.

    • http://www.an-chan.net/ Antoine B.

      Ha ha! yes, and I made a similar assumption a couple of months ago. The difference between APS and FF seems a bit thin, considering the trouble of creating a new mount and full lens line-up, so the step to 433 MF seems interesting.
      The Pentax 645 (wrongly named) opened the way a few years ago and remains the only affordable option for non-pro. Designing a mirrorless equivalent would bring a bit of (welcome) compactness and the Fujinon lenses could be awesome. Add weather protection, like the Pentax and that brings a fierce competition in the portrait and landscape photo world.

      Can’t wait to see if this news goes anywhere in the real world!

  • DouglasGottlieb

    Interesting, but isn’t the magical, mythical “organic sensor” supposed to deliver medium format performance on small sensors? If that is real, why would they release a large camera with “old” sensor tech?

    And why did B&H just release a brand new video review of the XPro-1? Maybe they’ve got info that a new model is not coming soon and that there’s lots of inventory to move?

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirk23/ dirk

      Or they got info that a new model is coming soon and there’s lots of inventory to move. ;)

      • DouglasGottlieb

        I hope you’re right. Price is down to $999 for the body. Getting pretty tempting. A kit discount with the 23 and/or 35mm would move a lot of them.

        • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirk23/ dirk

          I know what you talk about. Can be bought for under 900 € in germany.

    • Peter

      The big advantage of MF is not necessarily just the (admittedly gorgeous) image quality/resolution/dynamic range. You are using longer focal lengths for the same field of view, meaning you can photograph portraits and other subjects where retaining proportions matters (architecture, dancers, catalogs, …) closer to the subject without getting perspective distortion.

      This doesn’t just make a huge difference optically, for people photography it also means you can interact with your subject much better instead of shooting from halfway across the room with a 70–200. A waist-level viewfinder make this even nicer since you don’t have to have a big intimidating camera in front of your face and can actually make eye contact. And a huge optical viewfinder image with a ground glass just offers a connection with your scene that no EVF in the world can match.

      As a side effect of the longer focal lengths, your depth of field is also even more shallow, which apparently is a big deal for some people. As far as I’m concerned, you can get some very nice and fast lenses even for APS-C, making DOF a non-issue for me.

      But if Fuji can really can figure out how to build a product that makes MF go mainstream, that would be amazing.

      • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirk23/ dirk

        My alert for confusing focal length and field of view went off.

        You can have the same perspective with a mft or a large format camera. From the same distance of course. That is not a benefit of medium format.

      • Robert

        I think that you do not mean perspective distortion, which you will get anyway, you mean that it is easier to design longer focal lengths without too much, if any, rectilinear corrections. This will indeed distort people less. That is why it is also easier to avoid distorting people with FF than APS-C for the same field of view. It is also one of the reasons for why APS-C is the smallest sensor format I use.

      • tesilab

        Instead of “closer to the subject” I think you meant to say tha tyou can fill more of the frame with subject without getting as close. (Since the perspective distortion you speak of is solely a matter of distance to the subject and not the focal length.)

      • http://lenmetcalf.com/ lenmetcalf

        field of view doesn’t change… the differences are in the depth of field… An equivalent lens will be have the same field of view… The advantages are in the mega pixel count and quality of each pixel… This is about quality in a portable size… I work as a landscape photographer and a portrait photographer… I am an early convert to mirrorless systems and love them…

    • El Aura

      The Hasselblad H series was developed largely by Fuji with some contributions from Hasselblad and was sold in Japan as a Fuji. ‘Was’ because I haven’t seen any reports that it was still available as such for many, many years.

      • http://ohm-image.net/ ohm image

        Not sold as Fuji, sold as Fujifilm. There are thousands of companies called Fuji here, 99,9% that have nothing to do with photography. We call it Fuji all the time, but need to be careful as it is easy to hear Fuji and think that an advance made elsewhere in electronics from a company called Fuji conflate with what Fujifilm are doing.

        But your point about H cameras is true.

      • jk

        no Hassy H system never sold as “Fuji” here in Japan, they are always sold as Hassel Balad, but you are patially right Fuji mainly designed core parts of the H system.

  • D

    For under $5k for the body, with a set of high-quality lenses, that would be better than full frame; and, would definitely create a buzz. The sensor is definitely available, but I highly doubt they will go this route. Too expensive for most.

  • C.

    I hope it will not use the same Sony sensor. If it uses the Sony sensor, it is more of the same “old” stuff, or in any case of the same stuff that Sony and Pentax have doing. We need something innovative here and Fuji has always delivered on steady innovation.

  • Per K

    By MF go from expensive CCD sensors to CMOS, price can become more competitive. (Proven by Ricoh/Pentax)
    Still MF cameras will be above my budget – which I regret….
    It is good for Fuji NOT to be a single sensor format manufacturer like PanOly. Development is towards larger sensor areas will continue as manufacturing price goes down and it is important for a manufacturer not to be locked in to just one format. ( Olympus locked themselves into 4/3 with a huge amount of huge, expensive and excellent lenses – with just a 4/3 12 mpix sensor to support them. No balance performance-wise.)

    • nwcs

      Or, you could say that laser focus and well defined/refined products can easily tolerate a single sensor size. At least until profits and market are there to move elsewhere.

  • Yard

    I have to work on! too.

  • bob lebart

    If they use a Sony sensor, that makes them Sony’s bitch. They need to use the awesome X-Trans sensor so it will be a 100% Cool Fuji camera.

    • nwcs

      You do realize that the X-trans sensor is just a 16mp Sony sensor with a custom color filter array designed by Fuji on it?

      • bob lebart

        Fair enough…long as Fuji uses the X-Trans filter array.

      • Yama

        Just a Sony sensor? Nothing wrong with that! The Fuji X-Trans array is what delivers that unique and magical quality. I liken it to what certain automatic watch manufacturers can do with a base ETA movement. Modification/innovation is a great thing sometimes, I respect those who dare to think out of the box, rather than just jump on for the short profitable ride.

        • nwcs

          I dunno, color filter arrays have plusses and minuses. I’d rather them figure out not to have an array but have full color and do it better than Foveon. Sony sensors are good but the CFA isn’t all that magical. I think the processing engines from the sensor have more to do with the “secret sauce” than the sensor itself.

      • jk

        Wrong, it is a Toshiba sensor, look into Toshiba patents. and Sony’s main CMOS fabs are all sold to Toshiba in last April.

        • nwcs

          Technically it would be Toshiba then. Question is, is it a Sony design currently made by Toshiba? I saw plenty of articles describing a Sony design and only a few anonymous posters saying it was Toshiba.

          But that’s neither here nor there. My main thing in replying above was to say that Fuji doesn’t fabricate their own sensors now. Most sensors are outsourced. So worrying about whether they are outsourced or not doesn’t matter.

    • Clint

      As others already pointed out Sony makes the sensor for the XPro….
      Anyway, what’s your beef with Sony?? Sony also makes the sensor in the D800/D800E….widely considered two of the best sensors out there right now.

      • jk

        you are very wrong, Fuj has never bought any Sony sensor and will not use Sony sensors , thus this rumor is plain BS. they are working with Toshiba and the X trance sensor is basically Toshiba designed /made sensor with special color filter design. the organic sensor Fuji has been working on is being tested at Toshiba’s new semi fab , which Toshiba bought out from Sony a few months back since Sony needed to sell something to immediately pay off some of its huge amount of debt. Sony is about to sell a few CMOS fabs in Kumamoto prefecture of Japan, and it will still have a lot of debt to pay. its main business bank is Mitsui and Mitsubishi UFJ ,which is the practical owner of Nikon corp. So Sony and Fuji do/will not work together, the Japanese business relationships are extremely complicated and irrational , so it is not so easy to understand it.

  • Yard

    Digital MF OMG. It’s very very cool…!!! Bye Bye DF…!!!

  • EHRMAGERD_MERDIUMFUHRMERT

    BAM! HOW DO YOU LIKE ME NOW?

  • Jack

    So fuji is skipping the full frame step… And going for a MF which is going to be costly and have quirks like the first x’s had in the beginning.

    Why can’t they just do what sony did with their a7′s but just better with better lenses…

    Sigma, Sony, Ricoh are trying to make those new and full of innovations products which have no competition like the a7, rx1 the merril, Quattro, gxr and now fuji with this (rumoured MF)…
    No competition also means that they don’t need to have a well matured product, and each one comes with big flaws

    • bmassao

      Pentax hit the medium format grid without going fullframe for their DSLRs, and they pretty much did well. Sony, on the other hand, have an awesome fullframe mirroless line up, but the lack of lenses are pretty much pissing everyone that has been using their cameras for the past years.
      Personally, I have 3 or 4 friends that gave up on buying the A7/A7r because they knew the lack of lenses would limit they somehow. Which is really sad, because it’s a great camera.

    • http://lenmetcalf.com/ lenmetcalf

      I think this is a great idea… and they should all get together and make a new open standard, like micro four thirds…

  • Thomas

    OMG. Where can I buy this camera?

  • MrGecko

    I just don’t buy it. Sounds more like shades of grey. Bet this is more to do with the medium format quality of the organic sensor not an actual new line. Still betting on an X200 with that Organic announced this year followed by the XP2 with same sensor. …. then a Gen II down the road before you ever see a medium format sized sensor. My Money is on that new sensor almost ready to go into production. NOTE manufacturing supply orders happen about 6mo prior to production. JIT allows for 45 days slack. No company commits to buying resources unless they that a launch date in mind.

  • ronin

    Reminds me of that Fuji GA645 I had back in the 80s. What a sweet little folder, a superb lens. There were weaknesses with the bellows linkage some reported, but I never experienced it.

  • svx94

    put out a digital back for GX680 too, put that wonderful camera back to work!

  • hexx

    What could Fuji do is designing it from ground up, is following:
    - X-Pro1 like design, mirrorless
    - weather sealed from start
    - interchangeable lenses
    - hybrid viewfinder
    - leaf shutter to offer high flash sync speeds (Pentax doesn’t offer this)
    - articulated LCD – replacement for waist level finder for those who want/need it
    - AF points covering large portion of the capturing area (nobody is offering this)
    - no X-Trans please, if you going to use 50mp sensor, I want every single pixel out of it, we know there’s weakness in greens in X-Trans CFA
    - DNG – they will need to rely on Adobe’s support – forget support in CaptureOne, they don’t really support direct competitors, there’s no support for Pentax/Hasselblad

    • bob lebart

      “we know there’s weakness in greens in X-Trans”
      Oh yah? Who is “we”? Not me, and not a lot of others who love
      Fuji’s film-like color, right out of camera. Greens are just fine, and
      the blues are a gem.

      • hexx

        Greens lack detail, I have apart from X-Pro1 (and X100) also other cameras. While X-Trans does render in a way less noisy images on higher sensitivities there’s something strange going on with greens, they’re mushy a bit.

      • http://ohm-image.net/ ohm image

        I have to agree with hexx. RAW processing is slower and more problematic than cameras with Bayer sensors. Unless your work relies on feeling rather than per-pixel quality, X-Trans is, in many cases, a liability. I like it for still life stuff that doesn’t matter so much or isn’t printed large. But I could never use X-Trans in a still life audiophile environment. I think I could if I was doing ephemeral creative stuff. It’s not just colour quality, it’s details that sometimes are blurred out, smeared, swirled, about repeating patterns that turn to grates, and other problems.

        The cameras themselves are great, but X-Trans really is a win/lose system.

        • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirk23/ dirk

          Stop using adobe/aperture.

          • http://ohm-image.net/ ohm image

            Dirk, it’s not just Adobe/Aperture or other big names. It literally is every one of them. On certain patterns such as tight concentric rings, flannel wires, etc. (which appear on almost every audiophile device), X-Trans makes quite the mess.

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirk23/ dirk

            Those are aliasing effects that are not exclusive to x-trans. They only occur in different cases (probably less) with x-trans than with a bayer pattern. Have you taken the same shots with a bayer-sensor without optical low-pass filter?

            It should be possible to reduce those effects with less sharpening. You will of course lose detail in other areas, too.

            The conversion from continuous to discrete will alway suffer from aliasing if you do not smudge it enough. This is also a compliment to the Fuji lenses if you will, because aliasing only occurs if your lenses resolve down to pixel level. ;)

          • http://ohm-image.net/ ohm image

            I do not get the same artefacts with anything but the X-Trans sensors (of which I have two). It’s not the patterns you are thinking about. It’s a LOSS of detail on these patterns no matter the lens used.

            I don’t find the Fujifilm lenses any sharper than any other lens I’ve ever used. I find bokeh and colour on XF lenses to be excellent, but sharpness is pretty much on par.

            I have taken the same photos with a D800, an A7r, and X cameras. The X are, every single time, unusable, no matter the RAW converter. There are certain photographs to which the X-Trans isn’t suitable.

          • hexx

            yep, that’s pretty much my own experience too. that’s why i use my X-Pro1 where it excels – low light

          • http://ohm-image.net/ ohm image

            It is pretty good at low light, but its abilities in low light pale next to a D800. It’s a great compact camera, but I can’t put it up next to same-gen FF cameras.

            I’d love it to be FF.

          • hexx

            nope you can’t – but you can easily take it with you for an evening walk if on holidays somewhere – D800 I would probably leave in the hotel :)

          • http://danielteolijr.tumblr.com/ Daniel D. Teoli Jr

            Can’t say about D800 and low light. But you would have never got this shot in a million years with your bulky, bloated D800.

            Fuji will kill an D800 for street work. For your staged photography, fine go with an 800. But for those that want something other than phony, set ups…you nee a Fuji, Leica or something in that size range.

            http://danielteolijrcurrent.tumblr.com/image/56422193364

          • http://ohm-image.net/ ohm image

            I don’t understand what isn’t possible about that shot with a D800, but that doesn’t matter to me. I actually dislike the D800 very much. It is too large. The X-T1 is the same seize as a traditional Nikon SLR and the D800 is twice that size. It is ridiculous.

            Designed well, electronics should make components smaller. Designed with no specific intention in mind, you get the D800.

            I did a LOT of street ‘work’ with a D200, which is the same size as the D800. I’m not a street photographer so I can’t say that what I did was good. But a big advantage of the Nikon systems over X-Pro 1 (and to a lesser extent, over the X-T1) is that it reacted immediately. The moment I brushed the shutter, it shoots, no waiting. No waiting for on/off, or EVF lag.

            I don’t use AF, but if I did, Nikon’s AF-ON is brilliant, fast, and works without contortions at any angle. I used just older Ai/pre-Ai converted lenses. Instant is key for what I did. When I changed to the quieter, lighter, and much smaller X-Pro 1, I thought I would shoot more street for fun, but I didn’t. I came from the film world, where a press of the shutter meant an exposure. It was instant. So was writing. The Nikon cameras are so much closer to that that moving to a FUjifilm X-Pro 1 was very difficult. I took fewer images.

            Conversely, when I had time to ‘stage’ things a bit: hiking, walking around older places, and think about what I wanted, the X-Pro 1 and X-T1 were far better than the D800. But I don’t buy ‘the dSLR cameras are bad for street photography’ mantra.

            Much of the best humanistic photo work I’ve seen from the street is taken with 5D/D700 style cameras, and from Leica digitals. There are exceptions of course, but not blanket.

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirk23/ dirk

            Well, the D800 has a low-pass filter that deals with the aliasing. The A7r has a higher resolution. You will not see the same effects but you will still encounter aliasing if you go to even smaller structures (that the lenses can resolve). And of course the demosaicing algorithm also has some influence in this game.

          • http://ohm-image.net/ ohm image

            I know what you are trying to say. I love the X-Pro 1 and X-T1, but quite simply, they are not suited to the photography I do. They are great with people and some fabrics and natural stuff, but are not good at all for what I shoot. It’s not the aliasing, it’s the X-Trans messing up placement of some pixels.

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirk23/ dirk

            X-Trans doesn’t mess anything up. It is always the raw conversion that messes things up. X-Trans only records what is there.
            Every sensor has different Nyquist frequencies for different colors and directions. For X-Trans those are varying more than with bayer which gives it some advantage and in specific cases also disadvantages. But first and foremost this makes X-Trans data more complicated to convert.
            Raw conversion is some pretty complex math and I am not an expert in it. But with most algorithms it is always a trade-off between maximum quality in most cases and maximum robustness in any possible case.
            Sensors with low pass filter make sure your signal stays below the Nyquist frequency. So you will never see that stuff there.
            Bayer sensors without filter will also give you messed up data if you throw repetitive pixel or subpixel sized structures at it.
            But you can always get rid of the mess by changing your conversion algorithm, if you can do it. Usually you have very little influence on that. As I said, sharpening is probably your best option.

          • http://danielteolijr.tumblr.com/ Daniel D. Teoli Jr

            What kind of photos are you taking where a messed up pixel is ruining your shot?

            Fuji X’s have superb sensors, just outstanding. If you are taking ‘real world’ photos, you can have lots of messed up pixels that won’t hurt a thing. The problem with Fuji X is the lack of manual controls. But their sensor is one of the best I’ve used for its class.

            http://31.media.tumblr.com/a7122170390e7280069f91f5f125aa22/tumblr_mymhzxrJHD1to3hzso1_1280.jpg

            http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2d/Peephole_Bikers_Mardi_Gras_Copyright_2013_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr_MR3.jpg

          • http://ohm-image.net/ ohm image

            I take ‘staged’ crap that’s absolutely worthless to your higher preferences and regard. It’s called still life and my subjects are audiophile amplifiers and headphones and the like. The awful work I do has lots of fine fine repeating patterns such as concentric circles not visible to the eye until magnified to 1x or so, has fine straight lines paralleled by other fine lines and rubbed by marbled texture.

            It’s crap.

            But it needs a more traditional layout, or a Foveon, to look right. If I was taking awesome kill shots like what you take, the X stuff would be perfect. I could angle it perpendicularly to the ground to get perfect angles on dead eyes and a little blood in there as well.

            For blood, X-Trans is perfect.

        • enases

          I remember seeing some test shots comparing Fuji X-M1 vs X-A1 (with Bayer pattern).

          The shot was a building under construction with some workers on it, wearing yellow helmets. On the shot from the X-A1 you saw the helmets as you would expect as as cluster of yellow dots (helmets where far away, and therefore small) but on the X-M1 shot you couldn’t see any yellow at all!

          That clearly shows because of the less red and blue subpixels, compared to the Bayer-pattern some slim areas with different colors just aren’t recognized by the sensor.

          I think no demosaicing in the world can recreate details, that the sensor just doesn’t “see”. Only thing that could help here would either be a denser packing of the sensels (subpixels) or use a bigger sensor to get more megapixels that way.

    • Frederic

      I couldn’t agree more with your wish list. I bought into the x-trans thing only to have to live with the raw processing problems of x-trans files, a shame really. It is unlikely I will ever buy an x-trans sensor again. JPEG is probably better but I never use that format. Still, the x series cameras are very user friendly cameras. Now if as you suggest they scale that up to mf with a bayer filter and allow uncompressed or non-lossy 14 or 16 bit raw files that would be great. Failing that, at least do 16 bit files going forward or provide an option for such.

      • hexx

        If they use the same CMOS sensor from Sony (don’t know of any other medium format CMOS sensor out there), it will be 14-bit. Who knows if Sony already isn’t working on one with phase detection on it.
        MF needs to become more accessible. I’m not saying it’s going to be cheap, but if price of 645D/Z is anything to go by, I’m in.

        • Frederic

          I’m in too but only if Fuji’s processor gives me all the data the sensor can produce, even if it is 14 bits only. The processor for hasselblad and phase 1 use the sony sensor (not sure if it’s the same as the Pentax) and generate 16 bit files. Companies providing these kinds of products cater to an audience that understands that going forward one will have to upgrade desktop computing power and storage needs significantly if s/he goes the mf route. Photography has been and will continue to be expensive but if you are a commercial photographer or artist mf is the route to go as it was in the film world.

          • hexx

            There’s a thread on LL on this mystery 16-bit on PhaseOne/Hassy – this Sony sensor is 14-bit and, by the looks of it, most of the digital backs from past years were not 16-bit but produced 16-bit files. According to that thread there, last two bits were just noise. I’m not scientist, have had to read it few times to get my head around it but it does make sense.

          • Frederic

            Check the threads on this written by an electrical engineer: http://blog.kasson.com/?p=4823

    • http://lenmetcalf.com/ lenmetcalf

      agree :) I think these rumours are around the sony sensor…

  • Carlos

    I want a camera-system, that I can take with me, without a bag, just taking 1-2 lenses into my pockets. How does retro-old-large-format cameras help, beyond a X100-like or XE2 with pancake/primes?

    I have what I need. Only like to see a X200/X-Pro2 full format, with E2/T speed. Nothing changed there.

  • Forveon4LifeYo

    Already have MF quality covered with a Sigma Merrill.
    Would be nice if Forveon was licensed out to more camera producers, so that more investment $$ could be poured into improving ISO and AF

    • hexx

      I have both digital MF and Sigma DP Merrill and can tell you that you don’t have MF covered with it ;)

      • hexx

        Although, it is very close ;)

    • http://ohm-image.net/ ohm image

      Foveon provides unparalleled details, but does not provide at all an MF experience. It’s not all about details, etc., it’s also about lens movements, about freedom.

      I don’t think Fujifilm would design a MF back. They will design a full camera system, which I think is a shame. I’d love a back to use on 4×5 and 6×7 cameras, but that would preclude loads of lens sales. Fujifilm probably will shoot for a fixed lens or an interchangeable MF system camera. You sacrifice on a lot of the plusses of MF that way, but you multiply captive sales.

      I am looking at an X100s now to use for events, but I’m put off by the manual focus feel of its lens. Leaf shutters are truly great additions to event photography. Not that the events I do would need MF, but the option would be great.

      I’m sort of holding out for an X100 series with different focal lengths, similar to what Sigma offer.

  • X-Proof

    Finally interesting news after doing two years nothing else than this continuous bug-fixing and niche-filling X-exercise. Yes, now a part of the world assumes the X-T1 is the best camera in the world uncle Fuji in Japan is now ready to release something even better? A shift of focus towards a market that was once targeting world’s very best studio photographers with the GX680-system. In complete silence abandoned and now back…why does it all sound so familiar…why do I have some difficulty to fully believe anything Fujifilm is doing in the camera market even when it looks they are listening to the professional photographer? Yes, I like and liked Fuji before but my fear is they are not really understanding where the red line is in their business model. If this MF-story is true, aren’t we missing the much more obvious and mainstream ‘FF-component’ in the whole Fujifilm range? Or is that now the big surprise we have to expect at Fotokina for the X-Pro2?

  • romi.foto

    maybe somewhere along the way, something about a new sensor (organic?) that provides MF quality was misinterpreted as a new MF camera. js

  • Héctor Muñoz Huerta

    Maybe a digital Xpan, that camera used MF lenses.

  • http://www.an-chan.net/ Antoine B.

    I tried the GF670 and although it is a large beast, it is quite nice to handle.
    Would it be possible that the rumored X200 would infact be a X433??
    Probably much easier for Fuji to start with a fix-lens camera and test the market briefly before investing heavily into a mostly unknown market (mirrorless MF)

    • http://ohm-image.net/ ohm image

      Because The GF670 uses semi-large format film (6×7), it will be larger/wider than a MF mirrorless digital camera. Technically, even using a body similar to the X-Pro 1 in style, the size wouldn’t have to be that big. The mount would have to be redesigned, or the lens would have to be built-in. But the camera body wouldn’t have to be that large because the sensor is tiny in comparison to 6×7.

      • http://www.an-chan.net/ Antoine B.

        True! I didn’t think about that… but it seems that digital models are always much bigger than the film models even with equivalent format…
        But at least it confirms that it’s not so difficult to create a rather compact MF camera with built-in lens (the X100s lens with leaf shutter is super compact).

        • http://ohm-image.net/ ohm image

          Digital always is larger than film, but since digital MF is much smaller than the smallest film MF film, some of the digital bloat is ameliorated. If MF digital is made by today’s consumer electronic companies, the outcome will be divisive. I hope that, due to consumer camera makers getting into the fray, MF backs/cameras become a viable option. Looking at how Fujifilm make cameras, I think there is a lot to look forward to. But only if they make a camera, not a gadget to attract hobbyists. MF digital photography needs a viable maker that is NOT Sony- a maker that understands what matters in photography, and that works on perfecting existing hardware/software.

  • Ash

    I can see this camera being really huge if they offer two things:

    1. a lens with tilt-shift movements
    2. the price is not TOO high

    Could be a real modern classic.

    • DjB

      Indeed. This would make sense, and provide us with a system that has very little competition in the market. Something that could truly become a reference in the market, where so much of the X-series fanboys are longing for. But if true, it won’t be with the APS/C X-trans. The X200 story is something that could be a confusion with these plans – but, but,… but.. it makes me feel very much that this is not the end of the story and a range of mature FF-cameras is indeed present in the R&D dept – it makes more sense than ever.

  • http://lenmetcalf.com/ lenmetcalf

    A mirrorless medium format, with a digital viewfinder… I am so in… I just need a fast normal or telephoto prime to go with it… not a fixed lens wide angle… and weather sealed… while I am making my wish list… ;)

  • Hendricks

    Sorry but I’m a newbie about medium format. If APS-C is 1.5x factor against full frame. What is that of full frame against medium format?

    • BdV

      Somewhere around 0.6x.

      • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirk23/ dirk

        0.8

        • BdV

          Yes, I just found out the sensor is expected to be smaller than 6×6, so surely it won’t be 0.6x.

    • http://www.an-chan.net/ Antoine B.

      well, I guess that depends on the Medium Format… 4×33 and 6×45 are both considered MF, no?

    • przemur

      For film, it depends on the actual frame size and desired framing. http://photo.net/equipment/medium-format/focal-length-conversion

      Digital sensors are smaller though. In case of e.g. Pentax 645Z digital sensor it’s just 0.8x (or 0.73x, if you compare the smaller dimension).

  • Kyle

    I don’t understand. Why hybird viewfinder? Why doesn’t Fuji use just superb EVF? i.e. maybe the EVF in X-T1?

    • http://ohm-image.net/ ohm image

      EVFs are getting better and better all the time. However, in many cases, they cannot replace the eye. Things like dynamic range, like shadow detail, like the constantly normalising amp, like low resolution, like contrast: all these things are dings against EVFs. Having the option for a fixed view OVF at the very least eliminates amp-gain noise and stutter in low light, and allows a photographer to shoot more naturally when she wants to use it.

      If only an EVF is available, all the plusses of the OVF are gone. Maybe in 5 or 10 years, EVFs will be up to snuff, but not yet. Every time I pick up the X-T1, I’m impressed by how helpful the EVF can be, but also by the million ways in which it is slower/more deliberate, less contrasty, less helpful in focusing the same nikkor lenses at speed, than a good OVF. Of course, the OVF in a mirrorless camera (assuming this MF camera is mirrorless) would be closer to the X100s/X-Pro 1 and therefore not TTL, but overlaying focus information, magnified views, etc., in the OVF could make a non-rangefinder coupled, fixed OVF usable in its own right against the competition.

      Fujifilm can go Pentax’ route and make a MF dSLR that doesn’t bring anything but price advantage to the table. Or, they can continue in the X vein, and make cameras that have their own flavours, and adapt their bodies to the needs of THEIR customers, not try to capture everyone on the planet in a single product.

      The X-T1 is a bit of the latter, but I hope Fujifilm will go back with the next X camera to its roots.

  • Mike

    I think this would be a great product IF it becomes a MF X100 style camera: small, light, fixed 35mm FF equivalent FOV, silent shutter, high sync speed, reasonably fast AF and operation speed (think X100s), usable ISO 3200, at least 3fps, OVF/EVF combo and a battery life upwards of 400 CIPA-shots. And weather sealing as icing on the cake.

    With the new Sony CMOS sensor and Fuji’s know-how this shouldn’t post a problem but would probably be way too expensive for 99,9% of the world’s population. Unfortunately including me :-(

    But if they could pull it of at Sony’s RX1 rate, so around 3,000 EUR… HABA HABA HABA ;-)

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirk23/ dirk

      Usable ISO 3200 won’t do for medium format.

      • Mike

        How do you mean? ISO 3200 is what I consider usable on the X100s. Until the latest Sony CMOS sensor anything beyond ISO 800 was more less impossible on MF, so ISO 3200 would be an achievement.

        If you wish to compensate the – by definition – slower lenses, I don’t think Fuji would put anything slower than F2.8 in it (if the camera should have a fixed prime, that is). This means it’s only a one stop difference compared to the X100. No biggy ;-)

        • hexx

          Pentax has some samples at ISO6400 – looks pretty good to me. 645D was apparently usable at 1600. I hardly ever use my back over 200 and 99% of shots are at ISO50 :)

        • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirk23/ dirk

          Yep, as your said. 3200 is usable on the current aps-c sensor. So I would expect a lot more from a sensor 4 times the size. :)

          And given the not that big size of the sensor I would also hope for a lens between 40 and 60 mm with around 2.8. Should not blow it up that much.

  • PRL

    Lets hope that there is a wide angle version for Landscape and architecture photographers and that it doesn’t have the filter system usage problem that the film version has. Otherwise can’t wait!

  • Benny

    I have only one concern – size and weight of MF glass.

    Given the size of lens of MF cameras like Pentax 645z and Leica’s MF, how large will the lens of this new Fuji MF digital mirrorless be? I’m bored of carrying FF glass DSLR, so I will keep observing until the real thing reveals.

    • Tv

      A good point when talking about medium format SLRs but much less relevant to range finders/fixed lens range finders. My Medium format Voigtlander Bessa III (aka fuji GF670) all up inc its lens is less than 1kg and it is compact – as is my Fuji GA 645zi. Very portable – the perfect travel camera.

    • hexx

      Pentax, Hasselblad, PhaseOne – all are SLRs. Look at something like Mamiya 7 or even better Mamiya 6 and its collapsible lenses – very portable system which I always take on holidays.

    • Roy

      Good point. I too believe that this won’t work. Native, auto-focus lens of this system will be very huge.

      Another concern is the file size. D800 and A7r produce raw file about 60MB by average. Thus, the raw output of this sensor must be a lot bigger.

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirk23/ dirk

      Don’t forget the 645 has a flange distance of 70mm. This requires retro focus for wideangle lenses and blows them up quite bit. Could be significantly more compact in a mirrorless system. Not that much larger than a FF mirrorless and the RX1 has given a good idea of what the limit is for those.

  • Xpro10

    Makes much more sense than a “me too” full frame. MF is part of their heritage. A slightly bigger than Xpro1 would be a perfect landscape camera. And I wouldn’t worry too much about size, they already have reasonably small offerings.

  • pj

    I think this would be an incredibly smart move for Fuji. Most folks I’ve talked to who have used the X system are happy with it. They appreciate the small size of the cameras and lenses and that small size is part of the draw of the X-system. A full-frame 35mm X system would lose some of that size advantage and perhaps only with an incremental increase in quality.

    Instead of competing with other full-frame 35mm size systems, it would be amazing if fuji offered a medium format mirrorless digital camera. While the price would be higher than a full-frame 35mm system, the camera would be really competing with current MFDB systems which cost tens of thousands of dollars.

    Also, speaking personally but I think other pros might agree, I trust Fuji. That’s important if you’re buying into what will be an expensive system. There have been rumors of a sony MF mirrorless camera as well, but sony seems to be focused on selling cameras and new tech instead of building a system. The A7r is nice, but there are few native lens options, it has compressed/cooked raw files and shutter vibration problems.

    I’m pretty confident that Fuji would get it right, and so lots of pros who shoot landscape and other kinds of work on MFDB systems would buy into the system if Fuji offered an MF mirrorless pro-level system.

    This system might not appeal to the majority of X-shooters, who tend to shoot street and documentary work or other kinds of work that require fast lenses, low-light performance, speed and portability. But that’s kind of the point. It’s smart to offer two systems that don’t overlap too much. Ones that will appeal to different kinds of photographers, or to photographers who shoot different kinds of work. It was very common in the days of film for photographers to shoot with medium or large format for one kind of work and 35mm for another. The combination of a high quality system of smaller, faster cameras and an ultra high quality system with larger, slower gear makes a lot of sense.

    A MF kit doesn’t need superfast lenses, just give us moderate-aperture lenses; preferably normal, semi-wide and semi-long lenses to start with. The camera doesn’t have to be tiny, but if it’s mirrorless it will be smaller than a Hasselblad or Phase One for sure. The lenses will be large, as required by the large sensor. But if they can keep the cost for a camera to $5k and lenses to around $1500, they’ll sell like crazy.

    I really hope this is more than a rumor.

    • hexx

      fully agree, they would just need to provide what they did with introduction of X-Pro1 – 27/50/90 (in 135 terms). That would be all I would ever need.
      They should go for leaf shutters though, quiet, higher flash sync speed.

    • hexx

      although, I’d be surprised if the price would be around $5000 – i believe it would be more (much more) but would like to be wrong :)

      • pj

        Well, maybe I’m being optimistic. But if there is any way they could keep it around $5k, they’ll attract more amateur shooters and pros on a budget. At $8k it would still be a deal…

      • tim

        Why should it cost so much? The Pentax costs 8k but its a big system camera … something based on X-pro/x100 should be 2 to 3k with lens.

        • hexx

          That’s what we thought when first rumours of X-Pro1 appeared – how much was it when it was introduced?

          • tim

            ha, and how much now? Not a whisker above 1k, so take the same package, add a bigger sensor = 2-3K with lens.

            Keep in mind its Fuji, the value camera company … and this would be a novelty camera not a real system camera like the Pentax.

        • http://danielteolijr.tumblr.com/ Daniel D. Teoli Jr

          Yes, that is about right for pricing. I hope Fuji has been thinking of a Leica rangefinder knockoff For $3000 as well.

  • hexx

    I will wait for more info about this development. Been thinking about Pentax 645Z, but if Fuji is thinking about mirror less MF that would be even better. Don’t get me wrong, I like my Hassy with Leaf back on it, but I can’t use it in light rain and it usually requires tripod.

  • http://flyingtanooki.blogspot.com/ Flying Tanooki

    Woohhoo! A digital GF670. Hope its “affordable” though.

  • nwcs

    OK, I’m amazed at how many people just assume this rumor is factual. It doesn’t make any sense for Fuji to go in this direction. The R&D + low volume production costs + profit / number of real customers doesn’t make this likely at all. It’s just fantasy land.

  • Paul s

    @nwcs:disqus actually, i would say “The R&D + low volume production costs + profit / number of real customers” is exactly what makes this a possibility. fuji already has the smarts and capability to create its own sensors, all of their cameras are already semi-niche products, and they have a growing number of “real” customers, who strongly connect with the philosophy and brand fujifilm is creating for itself with mirrorless cameras. given that, there’s likely no other camera maker that could even consider this.

  • VoidVoidVoid

    About 6 months ago someone I know who works for a camera magazine here in Japan told me that Fuji was working on a square sensor MF camera for the end of 2014. He also stated that the square would be smaller than 6×6. That’s all I know but it’s possible that it was true and they’ve moved it up to a summer release.

    • http://www.an-chan.net/ Antoine B.

      square MF smaller than 6×6?… the mystery is increasing!

  • uncle Jim

    This is what Hasselblad should have made 2 years ago instead of flushing the company down the shitter with the Lunar.

    I loved my old 6×9 medium format Fuji. Fixed 90mm lens, all manual…the Jaguar E type of cameras.

    • http://danielteolijr.tumblr.com/ Daniel D. Teoli Jr

      What Hasselblad needs to make is an affordable FF 6mp back for the old film cams. Something around $3000. I’d love to shoot my SWC, but only as a FF.

    • Jorge

      Please don’t insult the camera by comparing to to a british automobile.

  • peevee

    Why buy a very expensive (any doubts?) camera without interchangeable lenses, let alone with a fixel focal length lens? Unless it has something that cannot be bought in FF, like f/1.4 UWA zoom for night landscapes and short DoF full body and group portraits.

  • Fred

    It would not be hard, I suppose, to install a dual mount, MF/FF, so that one could use existing lenses too (e.g. Nikon FX) in a cropped format, Highly desirable. Silent shutter (electronic) would be a vast boon (the latest Sony has finally lost the ‘clunks’). In-body IS/VR, regardless of lens. A super wide (21 mm equivalent) would be essential for landscape, but f4, or less, would quite suffice.

  • Jeffrey

    Wow.. This would be so awesome! I would love to see a price competitive choice for medium format digital. Hasselblad and Phase One prices are insane. Great cameras… but insane.. lol. Fuji.. Please make this a reality!

  • Jim Peterson

    Very interesting, but I’m quite sure it wouldn’t need to be anywhere near the size of that GF670W shown above. That camera is designed around a 6×7 (55mm x 70mm) frame compared to the very tiny 33x44mm Sony sensor. That is about one third the size of 6×7!

    • renes

      Tiny 33x44mm sensor for Medium Format? No, thanks. Make 60x40mm sensor at least, three Manual lenses (35 format eq. 24/45/80mm), I accept only electonical viewfinder like that X-T1, put many in camera settings like Highlights Ton, Shadow, colour, film simulations, etc, build in ND filter – and other filters – and I will go for it. It will be digital landscape camera forefer! No fixed lens please.

      • Rene

        and exellent 25-1600iso range!

        • Rene

          and call it “Fuji 64″ (with 64mln sensor resolution).
          Next – in future – step should be “Fuji 96″ with 90x60mm sensor and 96mln resolution.

  • Isaac Medina

    Finally a rumour worth registering and signing in for.
    This is what I emailed the X-series crowd about 3 months ago.
    And this is what the photography world needs.

    Full manual control
    manual rangefinder focusing (+ new unheard of hybrid autofocus to please the masses)
    optical viewfinder
    35mm to Medium format

  • jvossphoto

    What about lenses?

  • Blackdog

    This will be perfect for my aerial photography. Fixed lens preferred, “normal” focal length is best. and lets hope they can make it RAW properly.

  • Victor

    Admin: is there any news for this great camera?? :)

    • Patrick

      no news until now.

  • John B

    This appears to be the camera I’ve been waiting for. And, summer is here…any “new” news on a delivery date?

  • EJPB

    What a lot of people expect: a larger sensor X-Pro2, doesn’t get built. Oh, no, we’ll have to do with an entry level Sony 24MP sensor + another weird X-trans CFA repackaged in a camera that will cost about the same as a FF-one. What no one expects and will finally only appeal to a microscopic small segment is going to be released soon (prior to this X-Pro2, prior to Fotokina). If this rumor is really true (and it’s btw not the first time it appears in forums like this) once again it indicates for me the sales strategies & R&D are running on a very awkward logic. One that might kill the entire beautiful story, because not really knowing what to do and just trying out some niches is the most important ingredient for a complete disaster. I’m more and more getting convinced that from a strategical point of view, Fuji doesn’t hold the golden bullet and will be passed by soon by better and more clever concepts.

    • John

      I sure hope it’s true. They may even make a MF camera with a fixed lens as far as I am concerned. As long as it is around 50mm eq :)
      It will need a big finder (hybrid preferred) and very simple in design and controls. No more then 3000 bucks and I’m getting one for sure!

  • Mazen Jannoun

    this is what i said to people on dpreview forums 5 years ago, when everyone was shoveling the grave of fujifilm brand in the earth. i said, fuji will crawl on the digital market and eats half of it as it crawled on kodakchrome and ate most of it by the early nineties. when fuji was still releasing crappy pockets with a slightly punchier colors than the competition, people thought they will die like minolta in a year or 2. I said no, they will develop up slowly but steadily, making more sophisticated cameras with nicer punchier tones and colors, but slowly up the scale. they will charm the amateurs and low end users such as weddings, enthusiasts etc… then they will charm the semi-pros and pros a little with even more attractive features and better color capture than the rest then eventually they will enter on the pro market with an established system capable of delivering features, color and resolution better and more attractive than the rest. i can’t find my comments on the forums, maybe they were in an older profile which i forgot about.. anyway.. good for fujifilm.. because they understand dramatic color that pops nicely (not disgustingly), and not just pixel count and resolution.