30 Jun Why my next camera might not be a Fuji
My Fuji journey — from the X-E2 to the X-E5 announcement
November 2018, evening. I bought my first Fuji, an X-E2, in the parking lot in front of the Romanian Patriarchy. I paid cash for it, it was second-hand, and for the 18–55 kit lens, I traded a Sony 35mm f/1.8. I still don’t know if it was the best trade, but it was the most advantageous one for me, and that was the kit I entered the Fuji world with.
Fast forward to June 2025: around 30 published articles for FujiXPassion, one photography book written, 7 photo albums published and others in progress, prints, international contests, distinctions, and over 100 awards.
What drew me to Fuji — and what my heart still loves
Before I begin, I have to confess something. Those who’ve read my articles know I was in love with the X-T1, which I consider perhaps the best camera Fuji has made, with the most beautiful colors, but in terms of form — maybe influenced by the Leica, the X-E2, the X-Pro — those were the ones that captivated and drew my attention. For me, these rangefinder-style cameras — I don’t know — they have something special. I’ve always wanted a camera like that.
Even though so many years have passed since that November evening, I still have the XS2 — I gifted it to my girlfriend — and from time to time I hold it in my hands, play with it, and even after all these years, its layout, its buttons, its shape — I like them more than 90% of the cameras currently on the market. Of course, that’s a subjective thing — it’s my passion, this is my article — others may hate rangefinders and feel more comfortable with other types of cameras. But for me, this has always been the form I’ve most wanted in a camera.
Where Fuji falls short — and why I’m second-guessing the next purchase
Unfortunately, after I looked at the prices, the pricing, the image — I started thinking about a few things that are extremely important to me. And I’ll start with the most obvious one: the price. First of all, the price.
Launch price: $1,700. In Europe, in Romania, this price will hover around 1700 to €2,000 for this camera.
At €2,000 I can buy a Z6II, Z6III, Sony, Canon — any full-frame cameras.
At some point, it seems like this line no longer exists, this separation. At some point, the prices overlap.
And when Fuji reaches prices that are similar to full-frame prices, maybe it’s time for me to take a step back, take a look, and truly understand what I want from a camera.
The sensor. 40 megapixels. I know — I constantly hear this excuse: “you can crop down.”
Fine, I have a Nikon D850 and I shoot sports with it, where yes, it’s true that you need to crop.
But with anything I shoot with it, I try to frame as best as possible so that I don’t cut anything out of the shot.
The point is that I don’t buy a 50–100 megapixel camera so that I can crop to 2 megapixels — I buy a camera with that many megapixels because I want to enjoy that photo quality.
A lot of people are using — in Fuji presentations, starting with the X-T5 or whichever was the first 40MP model — this excuse that now you can crop down.
For me, the idea is not to crop down — the idea is to enjoy those megapixels.
And why am I saying this? Because it connects a bit to the next point, namely: Fuji lenses.
But before we get into the lenses, I want to share my opinion about this sensor.
If on full frame I have the D850, where 46–47 megapixels are absolutely gorgeous — on crop sensor, I think it’s overkill.
I believe the biggest mistake — and this is just my point of view — that Fuji made was that after launching an X-T1, which was absolutely superb, they jumped immediately to 24 megapixels, then again 24–26, then to 40.
Fuji had the chance many years ago, when they released the X-T1, to make the next iteration — the X-T2 — with 20 megapixels and focus on autofocus.
That way, maybe we would have had a Canon R6 years ago.
Can you imagine the image quality that the X-T1 had in its launch year — but with a fast autofocus processor?
How far could that camera have gone?
In fact, that moment — after the X-T2, maybe X-T3 — seems to me to be the moment when Fuji said stop, maybe, to real improvements, and shifted focus toward influencing, recipes, and things like that.
Because no one can deny that the X-T1, X-T2, X-T3 had — and still have — excellent image quality.
After that moment, most updates focused on video features, film simulations, button removals, etc.
That’s where I think they went wrong.
Well — not wrong from their business point of view.
But for me, as a photographer who would have wanted better autofocus, better ISO performance, etc. — that was the moment when Fuji started becoming a brand more for influencers and less for photographers.
The lenses. The lenses are small, they’re beautiful, if we’re talking about the Fujicrons. If we’re talking about the 90mm f/2, yes — super sharp, beautiful, no problem.
But if we look closely, we realize that reality is a bit different.
What do I mean here? I hear millions of voices saying Fuji has the best lens lineup, with hundreds of lenses for crop sensor.
That’s not quite true. And I’ll tell you why.
Yes, there are hundreds of lenses — but if we look at how many versions of 23mm, 27mm, 35mm, 50mm there are, we realize that the focus of Fujifilm, Samyang, TTArtisan, Sigma, etc. for Fuji is concentrated in just 4 or 5 focal lengths.
If we take just the 23mm focal length, we can see there are somewhere around 10–12 lenses.
Well, that means diversity for people who are not necessarily professionals.
And I’m sorry to say this — and I know many people will jump on me for it — but if we look at Nikon, for example, you’ll see a 50mm or 85mm at f/1.4 and f/1.8.
Not at f/2.8, not at f/2.0, not at f/2.4, not from 700 other companies making the same specs.
The problem with Fuji is that people think there’s variety, but they’re not looking at lenses like 120–300mm, 300mm f/4, 500mm f/4, 600mm f/4, 200–400mm.
There are dozens of lenses and focal lengths that professional photographers use, and they’re completely missing from Fuji’s offering.
And unfortunately, I don’t think they’ll ever be part of it.
Autofocus system. This is point three. I know — I hear and see lots of people saying, “OMG, it’s just as good as the R6 II,” “it’s better than the Z8,” “it’s better than…”
No. Nonsense.
In this world, there are a few massive press agencies.
Getty Sport, Associated Press, etc.
Photographers who work for professional teams, for national leagues, for world championships, for the Olympics.
And we’re talking here about the highest level of photography.
And Fuji is nowhere to be found.
The fact that you take a picture of your dog running toward you and his eyes are in focus — that’s completely irrelevant.
We’re talking about the highest level of photography.
There are people photographing the Olympics with Canon R6 II or Nikon Z6 III — cameras that cost the same as some Fuji bodies — and the autofocus performance is years ahead.
And I ask you to look at that, and see how many of the people I listed above shoot Fuji.
And it’s not about laziness or being resistant to change.
The truth is extremely simple and easy to understand — as long as you’re not a fanboy of a brand.
A professional photographer needs a system they can trust.
A system that can be thrown on the ground, used, abused, taken through rain and snow and ice.
Because yes — when you’re shooting professional sports, the cameras you use go through things that no vacation camera will ever face.
And the fact that there are no such people using Fuji systems should make us think a little.
What do I mean by that?
I mean that even though the prices of the bodies and lenses are often similar, true professionals don’t use such cameras.
When we look at the X-H2S, considered Fuji’s sports camera, we see that it’s more expensive than the Canon R6 II, the R6, than the Nikon Z6 III.
We see that it’s only €300–400 cheaper than the Z8.
We see that it’s more expensive than many Sony models — and the performance is way behind.
When we look at the Fuji 50–140mm, we see that it’s more expensive than a Sigma 70–200, than a Tamron 70–200, and we see that at full price, it’s almost the same as a 70–200 from Nikon.
Now I need to clarify something:
Depending on where you’re reading this, prices might vary a bit.
I’m speaking strictly from my situation and the prices I see in shops and used gear sites in my country.
You’ll say… okay, everyone knows: Fuji is more for street, vacation, travel, etc.
Okay — but you should know that even in street and that kind of work, reaction speed is extremely important.
That depends a lot on the type of photographer — and I’ll touch on that in another article —
but if you’re the kind of photographer who reacts, you’ll be disappointed with the autofocus system.
If you’re the type who plans a shoot, who waits — then yes, you won’t have any problem, even with manual focus.
But we’re talking about the capability of the camera to react — in all conditions — and to lock focus in extremely fast situations.
Fourth point — and maybe the last — is availability.
I don’t know what the policy is.
I don’t know if it’s a marketing strategy.
I don’t know if more money is made from second-hand reseller sites than from new sales.
But what I do know is that there is no other camera supplier with bigger problems in terms of stock, warranty, and repair time than Fuji.
Which leads to massive growth of the second-hand market.
Simply put — when you want to buy a Fuji camera, and it’s not available anywhere, you’re forced to buy from certain second-hand platforms, where prices are outrageous, or from individual users — like eBay, etc.
It’s like a mania — or maybe just madness — the fact that many cameras have ended up costing much more than they did at launch, even though years have passed and, honestly, there’s no reason for those unjustified price increases.
Broadly speaking, these are the reasons. And I’ll tell you why they matter to me.
Right now, I shoot with two systems.
One system that I take on vacation, and another that I use professionally for sports.
I really wanted to have just one system.
I really wanted a single system I could trust.
I deeply wished that Fuji would release certain focal lengths I need to shoot professional sports.
And, of course, for the autofocus to work like it does on other cameras.
You know, this article isn’t written because I hate the brand — but maybe because, in a way, I love it.
It’s just that there are some issues.
I’m extremely grateful that I learned photography with Fuji.
I’m extremely grateful for all the beautiful photos I’ve taken.
For the fact that the cameras are small, and people don’t stare when you shoot with them.
I’m extremely grateful that — honestly — the buttons, everything, for me it was never a problem learning to operate a Fuji camera without digging deep into menus or settings.
I have to be objective and say that, right now, I don’t clearly see a desire from my side to continue with this brand.
I won’t bring up, like others have, things like image quality, colors, the difficulty of processing RAW files.
I have hundreds of contest-accepted images.
Dozens of award-winning photos from various jurors.
Published photographs — and no one has ever complained about their quality.
As a side note: I used cameras for photos taken in specific conditions.
I didn’t use Fujis for sports or photojournalism.
I didn’t submit astrophotography with Fuji.
I used it for landscapes, nature, travel, street, color, black and white.
In fact — and again, I know people will jump on me for this — but everyone’s allowed to have an opinion, especially if they try to justify it.
Right now, I believe Fuji caters more to influencers, maybe videographers, people who want to make little clips and videos — and no longer to real photographers.
Real photographers — and I’m just talking about photographers — don’t need all the bells and whistles.
They don’t need all the simulation buttons, all the recipe modes.
Real photographers work their images and take them where their vision leads.
Unfortunately, this shift toward influencer appeal, to certain people who just want fun cameras with film simulations, is pulling the market backward for those who want true performance from their gear.
I’ve said many times that for me, the ideal camera wouldn’t even have video capability.
I don’t believe there’s a big enough difference in image quality between the X-T2, X-T3, X-T4 to justify the prices.
And I don’t see enough difference between the X-T4 and X-T5 either to justify those prices.
Everything is simply marketing — or people’s need to buy the latest thing, without understanding that, cliche as it may sound, these cameras won’t make them better photographers.
And, more than that, they won’t use 60–70% of the capabilities of the cameras they buy.
You know, I avoided writing this article for a long time.
Some time ago, in year 5, I started writing a piece called “5 Years with Fuji,” which later turned into “6 Years with Fuji,” from which I cut a lot of parts that I saved for this article.
Now, I don’t want it to sound like I’m dead set on never buying a Fuji camera again.
That’s not the idea I wanted to get across here.
What I wanted to highlight is this:
I need a single system that can do it all.
I need a reliable system.
I need a system that can take a beating.
I need a system whose performance I can trust 100%.
Even though I’ve been happy with Fuji over the years, there are many things that have frustrated me — things I’ve touched on in various articles: editing, Capture One vs. Lightroom, file size, noise, autofocus performance, etc.
The big issue comes when new cameras are launched — cameras that attract me with their form — but at a price where I could buy something much superior.
And I think that’s where the real problem is.
I don’t see Fuji prices worth more than half of what they are now.
And I know a lot of people will say I’m crazy — that it’s research and development, etc.
But that’s not exactly true.
I know there are a lot of websites — or fanboys, or paid users — who will try to tell you it’s about R&D, simulation, working conditions, etc.
It doesn’t matter.
Those things aren’t reflected in the final quality you get for that money.
When a camera like the Fuji X-E5 ends up costing almost €2,000, we start to realize that we’re slowly returning to the ’90s –when professional gear was only accessible to 2 or 3 people.
What Fuji did at the beginning — with affordable cameras, affordable lenses, and good quality —
because, honestly, no one had so many problems with the X-T1 or the X-Pro1 —is being undone in recent years.
Maybe it’s because the brand became viral, global, etc.
And now the focus isn’t on a user base of passionate photographers who’ve stuck with the brand for years —but on, I know it sounds harsh — indoctrinating as many people as possible and pulling them into this cult.
For me, as a closing thought — it’s a bit sad.
It’s a bit sad because I’ve always wanted a rangefinder.
The X-Pro3, at the time, was overpriced — and as we all know — it had plenty of issues.
There are lots of YouTube videos where people who bought it ended up selling it and going back to the X-Pro2.
The X-E5, which looks gorgeous, comes at a prohibitive price and isn’t worth the money it’s being sold for —which makes me dread the thought of the X-Pro4, if it ever comes out, and the price it might launch at.
Because between the X-Pro4 and the X-E5, there should be a huge difference —the Pro being, in a way, a flagship model.
And as final words or final thoughts, I’ll just say this: I’m not yet decided on whether to sell my Fuji gear.
I’m not yet decided if the next camera I will buy will be a Fuji or not.
I’m not yet decided if I’ll switch fully to Nikon or maybe save enough to finally get a Leica — the one I’ve been dreaming of for so long.
But one thing I know for sure: I’m a little disappointed with Fuji and the direction they’ve taken in recent years.
I haven’t brought up a lot of other issues in this article — plenty of complaints.
I know people talk about the lack of Kaizen philosophy that was there in the beginning.
I know they talk — as I mentioned above — about processing, file sizes, too many simulations, the missing D-Pad, flimsy build, low construction quality, etc.
I didn’t touch on those things.
I stuck to what I consider important: the price — which from my point of view is no longer justified — and the lenses — which don’t cover all my needs.
Now, I think all that’s left for me is to keep playing with the cameras I have — and to hope that one day, I’ll manage to save enough money so that Leica won’t seem so expensive anymore.