>1" sensor
>Fixed.35mm equiv f/2.8 lens
>17MP
>Cold shoe
>OVF (no EVF)
>Fixed LCD screen
>No stabilization
>No dpad/controls
>JPG only
>$850
What was Fujifilm thinking?

>>4428567 (OP)
who cares

>>4428567 (OP)
>"half frame"
Fujifilm turned into leica for poor retards after they realized that with the right marketing, they could sell out releasing the same fucking camera with 0 improvements over and over and over again.

Just remind them that their images are made of computerized squares instead of silver halide grains and watch the cope
https://ymcinema.com/2025/05/20/you-dont-need-fujifilms-anticipated-x-half-kodaks-50-ektar-h35-is-the-real-deal/
The funniest part is fujifilm digital is literally half frame already, 1" is 1/8th frame.

Sirs... Sony already did this, but better.

i'll be buyding two for full frame

>>4428576
>snoy colors
lol no

>>4428580
skills issue, (You) problem

>>4428590

>>4428599
yes, skill issue

>>4428599
>Panasonic colors

>>4428599
>>4428605
>my dream camera is better than your dream camera

>>4428599
wtf?

>>4428605
Hello sanjay. This thread is about fujifilm, not panasonic.

would absolutely buy one if it was half the price but unfortunately used fuji prices are fucking insane so this will never drop

>>4428567 (OP)
Ahahahahahahahahha

>>4428567 (OP)
>1" sensor
fine who cares
>Fixed.35mm equiv f/2.8 lens
good
>17MP
fine who cares
>Cold shoe
bad
>OVF (no EVF)
good
>Fixed LCD screen
who cares if you suck on it
>No stabilization
>No dpad/controls
nobody cares nobody cares
>JPG only
extremely bad
>$850
probably too much for a jpg camera

my review:
not interested/10

>What was Fujifilm thinking?
they don't need to sell any of them they just need youtubers to talk about fuji so that people will buy the x-whatever

>a leaf shutter combined with a cold shoe
really sounds like they want people to look at this camera on youtube and then buy something else

>>4428666
>>a leaf shutter combined with a cold shoe
>jpeg only
or they want non-camera people to buy it and then grow out of it quickly so that they buy another fuji camera

>>4428599
For how many years have you been spamming this exact picture now?

>>4428667
>>4428666
It’s a accessory. It’s not meant to make "good pics". It’s meant to look pretty hanging down your neck and make "vibe"y pics.

>>4428670
i don't know what this means. if you were a poseur, why wouldn't you pick up a thrift store ccd or a film camera

fujifilm makes sexy, fun cameras for young, sexy people. its. not. for. you. cooped up on your japanese incel anime website crying about specs.

although i do have to say, jpg only and no hotshoe (just cold shoe) is really lame.

>>4428567 (OP)
>35mm
>cold shoe
these are the only things here that matter. 35 is too tight and why even include a shoe mount at all if it's not going to fire a flash?

>>4428681
Most thrift store cameras don’t look that cool. And those that do (eg a Leica) are more expensive. Might as well get a new accessory from Fuji.

>>4428685
35mm is probably the most classic street photography focal length.
And for a camera like this, which is meant to be super casual and without ICL, it also makes more sense over a 28mm or 24mm. Those two focal lengths absolutely suck if you want to take a portrait of your friends, or focus on individual subjects without getting in their face. 35mm is going to create viable portraits filled with character and more varied compositions.
Cold shoe is basically there for Japanese hobbiysts to set up a gopro to make youtube and instagram videos with it.

The main issue is this camera costs $850 when you could instead get a GR. This would be more interesting if it was like $500.

>>4428682
trvke

>>4428567 (OP)
>The feeling of capturing the moment without distractions
Just don't look at your fucking social media and shit when you take a photo with your phone.

Seriously, why buy this camera when your phone will take equal, if not better, photos?
I'm at minimum getting something better than phone cameras if I'm spending money on a camera.

lots of poor, angry losers without friends in here. this will sell like hotcakes. I can't wait to add one to my collection of fun film-like cameras from Fuji

fujifilm is selling experiences rather than actual cameras now

>$850
Make it a $500 something and I'd consider but it's too much to ask for a gimmick camera.

>>4428706
Considering how a lot of other industries developed over the last two decades this is a winning strategy
>>4428703
Why would you need more than 1 tho

If you realize that instax is Fuji’s biggest seller of all products, this makes a lot more sense. It’s an “easy” camera for women who can’t afford a Leica but want to have that aesthetic. Women won’t give a shit about any of the spec bullshit (again, look at instax), they’re just going to share the pictures in Instagram or whatever anyway. I hate this camera cause at that price get an rx100 or a gr or literally anything else, but it’s probably gonna sell well.

>>4428599
skills issue, (You) problem

>>4428717
Instax does more in revenue than all of Nikon Imaging for reference

If this was $500 I would have bought and EDC'd.
One thing no one is talking about though is the new companion app they're releasing to go with it. The original Fuji camera remote and their new XApp both suck mega dick and they seemingly have zero interest in rectifying any of the issues they both have. If their new app specifically for the Half is anything like basically any of their other apps then social media normies are gonna be foaming about it 24/7.

>>4428567 (OP)
I kinda want one. With Fuji aps-c I never shoot jpg because I want the best out of the raw files. I only have a Fuji GFX now and it's huge and heavy.. buying this little toy as a daily could be nice. I started with a Pentax Q that had an even smaller sensor and still today I look at the old pictures and I'm impressed by the quality back then.

I wait for the X-E5 reveal and then I get the half as a daily or the X-E5 coupled with the xf23mmf2. Lets see..

>>4428605
I will only accept&respect panasonic if they finally make consumer versions of their fine anamorphic cine lenses for l mount.

The bullying of Lumix-losers will continue until this happens.

feels like a spiritual successor to the R-D1 in a way

>>4428567 (OP)
SOVL

>>4428576
Gearslop

>>4428754
Fuji has you on that consumerism treadmill
>hmmm ill buy this $900 toy that doesnt even shoot raw that's a great idea because its like the same brand
ffs why? it's not even that small

>>4428782
late stage capitalism has melted your brain. pathetic. it's asian electronics. soul can not apply. it is soulless, targeted marketing, consumerist junk. there is no such thing as a soulful digital camera. all asian electronics are by definition soul black holes. if none of us ever had to take a stupid snapshit or selfie for another person we would all shoot film.

>>4428703
>Poor
This fits on a teenagers credit card.
>Angry
Yes, we are angry at soulless consumerists and their mountains of E waste. You are destroying the plant while society crumbles around you. You are the lowest of the low, you go to work, you buy a toy, you go to sleep, you repeat. Overgrown children.
>I can't wait to add one to my collection of fun film-like cameras from Fuji
A photographer has one camera, usually a film SLR or film rangefinder. If they are poor they might have a DSLR instead.
You have this

>>4428712
Who the fuck cares what's winning in the "free market"? The free market is objectively bad. State control is required to stop companies from being this stupid and perpetuating this soulless stupidity.
>OH BOY I CANT WAIT FOR MR SEIKEIROSUTAINO GORUDOBERUGO TO RELEASE MORE CREATIVITY FROM MAGICAL JAPAN!

Consumerism culture honestly needs to fucking die. It's the antithesis, the antibody, to art, to creativity, to soul. Have you noticed photography stagnating lately? Yes, that's because photography has gone from being about taking photos, to being about taking photos, and then buying a new camera, and taking the same photos to ooh and aah at how they look slightly different.

>>4428785
The reddit comic has never been truer
>okay what if we make
>a camera
>with the same quality as every 1" sensor camera ever made
>that doesnt even fit in a pocket that well so its just for looks
>but it's FUJIFILM branded, and it's $850
>but we'll call it an, uh, experience. a lifestyle. in storytelling. made for social media.
It's like whoever heads up society decided linkola and kaczsynski needed to look like genius heroes

>>4428783
>ffs why?
It has the film sims I like (nostalgic neg), it's small and light and most important: It looks fun to use. No need to copy to the HDD with an PC and SD card reader. No need to edit in LR. Just shoot, upload on my phone and paste on my Instagram or send to family/friends. For serious work I have the GFX. Only alternative is using my phone and while the IQ isn't all that bad.. it's not fun to shoot.

>>4428567 (OP)
welcome back yashica y35 digifilm.

>>4428785
> guy who is communist bc he doesn't like a camera
loser

>>4428791
Don't you see the red flag?

Nothing you said has anything to do with what the camera actually does except for the dumb jpeg preset
It's all about a theoretical "experience" that has been implied in advertising but not confirmed to exist.

Do you think the phone transfer abilities will differ from any other fujifilm camera?
Do you think it will be more or less frustrating than shooting jpeg on any other small camera and using a pocket SD card reader that works with phones?

And don't you realize a 1" sensor is literally phone image quality? It's not a camera, its a phone app being sold as an "experience". Fuji could just release a phone app and it would be the exact same. The more time passes the more fujifilm in particular becomes impossible to respect as a company. Even their "good camera" (GFX) is astoundingly stupid
>full frame is a whopping 1.2x crop, sensorlets!
wooooow

>>4428795
I'm not a communist or a capitalist. The idea that there is a harmonious, ethically correct, self consistent system that everyone will just follow because it is clearly right is absurd.

Instead I believe in arbitrary rule. The ideal society has a fluctuating but measured amount of freedom reigned in with absolute government control applied not according to a set of self consistent rules and philosophies, or according to a religion, but as the need arises. Western civilization ran on this system for a long time and it worked great but recently the control part has been slacking and let itself get steamrolled by "rights, liberty, and internally consistent behavior". Now copyright lasts 70 years longer than the author and corporations are people.

>>4428567 (OP)
I feel like they just made a worse X70.

>>4428799
it is beyond a worse x70

it's a camp snap with fujifilm branding

why do people get upset about products that aren't for them

>>4428802
>why do people get upset at consumerism as a social institution? let me buy my funko pops they just aren't for you.
its a wasteful cancer upon the planet that generates mountains of toxic waste and depresses peoples chances of genuine success roughly as effectively as drug addiction. consumerism is this
>dude weed doesn't make my life worse at all, i have to have a job so i can buy more weed. see?
this camera at this price is a step too far, it's not just an up to date tool so professionals can cycle out their worn out shit and renew their warranties, it's officially funkoshit now.

>>4428803
you don't even smoke weed

>>4428798
copium. Poors shouldn't have rights. Log off, grind at work and come back when you got a million bucks in the S&P500.

>>4428813
>Trying to pose as an upper classman
>$900 toy
It's not for rich people. It's for stupid people. This garbage is what mcdonalds wagies are thinking of when they say having kids is too expensive.

The poverty line is drawn above the cost of a harley davidson mobility scooter, not below it. Try not to be "4chan rich":
>Stamped metal rolling NEET cave
>"i spent slightly more than average on a hobby, enough to buy something good even though i didn't, and nowhere near enough to buy something better, u jelly poorfags? clearly because i overspent on garbage, money is no object for me, despite the fact that i can not afford a lowly leica Q"

>>4428803
>its a wasteful cancer upon the planet that generates mountains of toxic waste and depresses peoples chances of genuine success roughly as effectively as drug addiction
true, but so is 4chan
anyway, not gonna bash fuji this time for making a camera that tries to be a bit different

The camera itself looks like one of those "8K" cameras that try to look expensive on Temu.

>>4428838
And I think that’s why the anons who have said it’s basically a fashion accessory that takes photos are spot on. This is like a shiny new piece of jewelry for women and effete japense men to coordinate with the rest of their outfit. They don’t care about how it works or what it does beyond “takes cute insta photos”, and that it looks good. Gear nerds and gas faggots are not on the radar for something like this despite however much they may seethe about it

>>4428567 (OP)
forgot
>led flash instead of xenon
>no custom film recipes

>>4428785
>A photographer has one camera, usually a film SLR or film rangefinder.
photogs can have plenty of cameras!

>>4428860
>gear nerds and GAS faggots
Unfortunately, those categories you are always angry about (every fuji/m43 fanboy is angry about them lmfao) include every photographer of note, historically or artistically. Basically everyone who got their photos into the MoMA was a "gear nerd" or "GAS faggot" or "soulless gearfag" etc etc etc

Not gearfags in the "MTF" chart and "PDR" chart or video codec way (like a G9II/XH2s fag) but more in the tonality, rendering, color science, and 3d pop way.

>>4428567 (OP)
Wait they said it's half the 35mm but why is it smaller than micro four thirds?

At $850 just get a fucking used olympissed lol

>>4428880

>>4428882

>>4428567 (OP)
I get it, it's for the "experience" not for the photo quality or specs. But if they cared about the experience so much, they really should've used better materials than just slapping plastic all over it. I would've bought it for the money if they used quality materials.

The craziest part
>film sim mode
>you select a film stock and 36, 48, or 72 shots
>you cannot see any of the shots on the back until you finish and load them on your phone later
>you can't change the jpg settings either
It's like a joke about fuji "film sims" but it's real. It's not required but an option if you want. Pretty silly.

>>4428896
well yeah, it's an emulation of the film experience. There are many that tries these type of "silly" experiences like leica m10d or fuji xpro3

>>4428896
the experience of spending $10 on film and $50 on a canon demi

now without the film or anything that looks like film
only $900

>light leak filter is a selling feature

Wake up, new brain rot camera

>>4428567 (OP)
is that Jordan lmao

>>4428882
1. wait, is fullframe the same thing as vistavision?

2. There are too many standards for "smaller than fullframe". Apsc, m43, half frame, super36… It’s enough standards!!! And every single one has a dozen lens mounts and minimum image circle specs.

>>4428580
>I will let Fujishit rob me of 850 dollers for JPEG presets

>>4428869
lmao no way

>>4428860
My issue is that the Instax cameras and the Leica version of them kind of serve that function already. I think it's a bit much for a quirky fashion accessory.

>>4428896
I think theres a market for this gimmick... but pricing it at $850 is insane. $200 would be right, then double it for Fuji tax and $400 at the most in 2025 sounds alright. Curious to see if this sells or is a flop.

>Ricoh in panic mode
>Quick, quick, quick, release the GRIV specs and pics!

>>4429310
Ricoh in mocking fuji mode
>nice you rebranded a camp snap
>here’s ours. wow look we improved our camera thats still smaller than anything you make.

>>4428567 (OP)
They want to sell the "film experience" while they're discontinuing their actual film lineup. Completely out of touch.

>>4429334
fujifags will now say wanting to use real film is soulless gearfaggotry for people who aren't capable of making art, just like fuji convinced them the same was true of real digital cameras

>>4428567 (OP)
Why does it look so cheap? As overpriced as the x100 series now, at least it looks good.

>>4429337
fuji’s new design language looks like shit. no soul anywhere. the gfx rf sold to a lot of soulless gearfags so they assumed the design was good.

>>4429346
This looks like an aliexpress camera what the fuck

>>4428708
No raw is a dealbreaker for me
Specially with the small sensors

Fuji have the worst ergonomics, worst colour science, and worst glass of all of the big hitters. I was really happy when they brought out the 100 megapixel cameras but it's a shame that none of the other big brands followed suit. Because I don't want their shit gradients and crushed Blacks.

>>4429369
Fuji GFX killed everyones faith in MF

Remember the AF isnt bad because big sensor. Its bad because its a fuji. They put slow ass motors in $2k primes and cant even make AF on their most expensive apsc body beat the cheapest walmart canon.

I checked tons of sample shots and it keeps me wondering: Why do the x-half images look much worse than the jpgs from my old Pentax Q despite having a sensor twice the size? It can't be the lons only right?

>>4429369
Hasselblad uses the same sensor, same MP, different glass, different color science.

It might be a "luxury" brand with luxury prices but with a fuji gfx you're deep in the 4 digits anyway so who cares if it's another few thousands more

>>4429523
I was wondering the same thing. I feel like the jpegs from my GoPro look better. They all have that mushy mid-2000s point and shoot look. Not to mention that the colors on some of the film sims look markedly worse than their x-trans counterparts. I’m a hipster with disposable income and I want to like it but…yuck.

>>4429523
Fujifilm is like that. X100vi jpegs look like a phone.

>>4429734
>>4429523
Fuji first timers? This is their signature look lol.

>>4429739
yes, more like a hp photosmart 7xx than film

that will be $850 plus tip

>>4429347
Who the hell signed off on this? "yeah make it extend just a little bit beyond the pleather so it looks like we changed it last minute and didn't have time to machine new flanges"

>>4429863
>Who the hell signed off on this?
me :)

>>4429863
That is very common design though

>>4429865
Where? The designs it is trying to rip off do not look anywhere near as sloppy. Either it does not intersect at all or intersects in a clearly deliberate, visually appealing way.