In 1978, Pentax surprised the photographic world with the Auto 110, a tiny interchangeable-lens SLR that used 110 film cartridges. It was the smallest ILC ever made. For only $249, you got the body, a 24mm f/2.8 lens, a case, and a strap. Pentax discontinued the Auto 110 in 1986.
The concept of this camera was portability and simplicity. It was the smallest and lightest SLR ever made—probably the only one that’s pocketable. It was one of the most simple SLRs to operate. In order to accomplish these goals, Pentax built it around the 110 film format, which was considered subpar and only for amateurs. And that was the paradox: interchangeable-lens SLRs were for enthusiasts and pros, while 110 film was not.
Serious photographers would never, ever use 110 film. The camera was fully auto except for focus; at the time, anything auto was largely considered for novices, as “real photographers” used full manual. Interchangeable-lens SLR cameras were the standard for hobbyists and professionals. The Pentax Auto 110 occupied a weird space of being too robust and expensive for the uninitiated, yet too lackluster for anyone remotely serious. Who would buy it? While plenty of photographers scoffed at the Pentax Auto 110, it sold fairly well, and Pentax continued to make it for eight years—a pretty long run. So how did Pentax pull it off? Why was the camera not a flop?
There is a market for compact, unique, fun, less-serious cameras. The Pentax Auto 110 was able to get the most out of the small film format, delivering image quality that was plenty good enough for everyday moments. No, the pictures weren’t going to grace the cover of magazines or hang on museum walls, but they could be placed into photo albums, or in an 8″x10″ frame and hung in the hallway. It was so small and lightweight that the camera didn’t get in the way, and could be easily carried everywhere. It was simple enough to operate that most anyone could do it, as the complications of larger SLRs were removed. At the very least, it was a conversation starter (still is).
The Auto 110 was more affordable than other SLRs, at only $249. The Canon A-1, released the same year, was $625 (with a 50mm lens). Pentax released the iconic K1000 two years prior—in 1976—with an MSRP of $299 (with a 50mm lens), so for just $50 more one could get a much more respectable camera. It’s pretty interestingly if you adjust these numbers for inflation: $249 in 1978 is $1,230 today, $299 is $1,477, and $625 is $3,087! None of these cameras were cheap, not even the Auto 110.
Which brings me to what I want to discuss today, and that’s the cost of the Fujifilm X half. Unless something unexpected happens, this will be the last post about the new camera until after I get back from the B&H BILD Expo next month, so if you are tired of hearing about it, just bear with me a moment—I promise that we’ll get to other things. Let’s dive in!
Probably the biggest criticism of the X half is the price. $850 seems like a lot of money, because it is. The camera is a little expensive. I’ve seen plenty of people say that if it was $400 or $500, that would be the right cost. If it was 2015, I might agree, but there’s been some significant inflation since then. $500 in 2015 is $680 today, which is what I estimate would be a fair price for this camera (I said $700, but close enough). The reality is that things are expensive in 2025. And if you consider that the X half is probably the first to be adjusted for the tariffs, I think it’s more of a foreshadowing of what’s to come across the entire camera market in the coming months.
Yet the X half is still much cheaper—$380 cheaper—than the Pentax Auto 110 was in 1978, accounting for inflation. I knew the late-1970’s were rough economically, but I didn’t realize just how expensive things were. While there is plenty that’s divergent, I see some parallels between the Auto 110 and the X half, namely portability, simplicity, and casual fun. If the X half was transported back in time to 1978, it would sell for $172, which would have been considered a good bargain for the time; however, in 2025, $850 is a lot of money for what it is. Even as prices seem to skyrocket, it’s still much better than it was in the late-1970’s.
So where does that leave us? I think it’s good to have a healthy historical perspective, but that doesn’t help the wallet feel any less empty. I don’t know the future, but I think it’s unlikely that the tariffs are fully settled, and as things fall into place over the coming months, the opportunity to lower the price is a strong possibility. If the camera sells really well, and the backorder list is long, even if Fujifilm could drop the price, they would be silly to do so (but who knows, maybe they will). I don’t see the historic X100VI demand, but all indications are that preorder sales have been strong. I believe that the camera will do quite well for Fujifilm. Time will tell, though.
If you can accept the X half for what it is, and forgive it for not being what it’s not, it could be a really fun camera for capturing everyday moments. It’s not a serious camera for serious photography, yet it is priced nearly as if it is—just like the Pentax Auto 110 was. If you think you’d enjoy it, then consider grabbing one at some point; if not, it’s very easy to pass, and consider a more advanced model instead—you can get a Fujifilm X-T30 II with a lens today for less than a Pentax K1000 with a lens cost in the late-1970’s, adjusting for inflation. There are plenty of options for those that want an enthusiast or pro camera. The X half is one of a kind—the most unique digital camera ever made—and as such, it’s not going to be for everyone, and that’s ok.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Fujifilm X half in black:
Amazon, B&H, Moment
Fujifilm X half in charcoal:
Amazon, B&H, Moment
Fujifilm X half in silver:
Amazon, B&H, Moment
The first camera I ever bought was a 127 cartridge point and shoot, not exactly state of the art in 1969. But it was fun and easy and affordable and cheap to shoot. The up-front cost of the Fuji half seems a bit steep for cheap fun (that’s a lot of pizza and beer, we used to say), but it is probably easy and fun and cheap to shoot. If it was square frame instead of vertical, I would likely get one myself.
I’m not sure that anyone makes a square camera sensor. Would definitely be interesting if such a thing existed. Square photos aren’t unheard of within the film realm by any stretch.
I really like the concept of the Half X, I just can’t justify over $900 when you include tax for it. If it was $400 I would gladly buy one.
With Canon, Sony and Nikon all stating that they will be increasing their prices soon, I suspect that sub-$1,000 cameras will be a very rare thing really soon, unfortunately. I suspect a similar announcement will come from Fujifilm before long. I would guess that the X-M5 will be $999 before the end of the year.
Well, Fujifilm has made a lot of money in China, in our country, Fujifilm cameras can hardly buy new products, and even have to increase the price to the launch price is even higher, and Ricoh in China, whether it is a new camera, a second-hand camera, or even a CCD camera, after 5 years it will be much higher than the initial price, and people even think that the Laika camera is more cost-effective than the Fujifilm camera haha
I heard that something like nearly half of all the X100VI preorders worldwide came from China. Would be great to visit someday, and meet some of the Fujifilm photographers there.
As a older photographer who grew up in the film era this little camera would be a trip down memory lane. I still have my old film camera’s from Pentax & Nikon but film is expensive here to buy and process. The Fuji Half X sounds fun but I live in Australia and the price here is a huge $1298 Au.
So will I stay with my XT-5 & XE-4.
That’s about the same price as in the US, accounting for the exchange rate.
Good article Ritchie, and in fact an important one as discussing the brand new Fujifilm camera with quite a concept and being innovative digitally. That’s why I like Fujifilm to try out things. So please continue Ritchie!
Well as I wrote in a previous article on the X-Half, I was able to test it this WE at the Fujikina Brussels 2025.
It is definitely a very fun, small and pocketable camera. And I like very much the whole concept.
The dedicated app is not out yet, so could not try it and enjoy the digital contact sheet with the artificial development process (upload process to the smartphone), doing post-edition diptych, etc…
Nevertheless very simple and enjoyable to use.
A) I’ll begin with the bad:
1) Tiny OVF, no indication at all even no central circle or else to indicate the center and other thing useful (did not ask how to the beautiful hybrid OVF of the X100 line, but…).
Bare from bare. And visibility is not that great especially in bad light condition.
2) I do not know if it’s me, but it looks like that even at medium distance, the OVF parallax is not there. I ended up many times to frame what I considered a centered subject in thinking to make a diptych afterwards for exemple, and see in the resulting picture in the tiny rear screen the subject being not centered and a bit at the right of the image. Frustrating to say the least after doing a snapshot.
3) Rear screen is tiny, but more so not bright at all at default setting (I know you can adjust brightness, but was unable to find it during my test period having no manual to base myself on and did not have the time to look around and swap all the menus as it’s a touchscreen only). Ending up that reviewing an image or wanting to change a setting in bright outside sunshine, well you do not see anything. You need to hide in the shadow.
4) When the diptych is created it is displayed horizontal of course, hence the resulting image is displayed in reduced size. You want instinctively to zoom or more so change the orientation so the resulting image fill the screen size completely (you can do it, but I’m not sure that in doing so in the edit mode you actually rotate the image itself).
5) Like Chris from Petapixel point out, actions on the touchscreen sometime is slow or did not grab the action you’ve asked for. You need to repeat it. The battery gives enough juice, so I suspect that the processor is not a speedy one. Giving the same impression of the XF10. Strange considering that a lot has been stripped out compared to standard X camera.
6) Slow AF, which takes its time and do pretty much what’s it wants in busy scenery or bad light conditions. Definitely giving the impression of slow processor, which is strange for the price tag requested and having a light operating firmware.
7) On shooting, no indication on the screen what is wrong. You have only a small light on the left of the OVF flashing when it is not happy or not willing to operate as you have forgoten to operate the clutch after taking a shoot for example. Helping the user with the display on the rear screen would have been great. We have a rear screen after all!
8) When On the clutch is always slightly out. It does not come back in. Frustrating when you have known manual film cameras. You always want to put it back in, but simply can’t. The clutch mechanism is extra simple. Fells cheap for the price tag requested, and on the Instax mini Evo, the clutch does get back in every time… It looks like they made it too simple.
9) Artificial shooting sound being too muted. The shooting sound is the only way to know if you have take a shot for sure (well you have the light on the left side of the OVF blinking green, but). You need to be in a quiet environment to able to hear it. I hope a setting to raise the volume exists.
10) Operation light on the left side of the OVF. Necessary and convenient but you get a blinking light in your eye. If someone as eye / light brightness issues, it might prove troublesome (which I’m suffering a bit for the moment, so definitely not pleasant after some time of use).
11) Way too expensive for what it is and what it’s offering.
B) The so-so considering the camera:
1) No button, everything is touch base like a smartphone, except for the aperture ring operation and power on button, which are nice to operate.
2) Do not forget to put out the plastic lens cap. Happens quite a few times in bright situation when the screen visibility is extra low. Having to wear glasses without them you cannot tell the difference
3) Well it is a 1” sensor, while it’s capable do not push it to very high ISO.
Digital noise will then be extra heavy, going beyond what I was used too with a underexposed Superia 1600 during a night shot. But having an XQ2, well basically 6400 ISO on the Half is 3200 on the XQ2. If you have experience also with the XP line waterproof cameras, well you know.
Do not expect miracles.
4) Many times slow to operate, slow to take a shot. You have to wait it acquires the focus on none people subjects which are not standard or in a busy image, bad light condition, etc). Like Chris from PetaPixel pointed out. Feels strange in 2025, with processor capabilities, the standard NP-W126S battery (!) used and more so the price tag requested.
Feels pretty a stripped down X-Camera and more so like an Instax Evo camera (especially the Wide).
5) Little camera but not as little as a XF1 or XQ1/2. Which are in respect much more capable cameras even now and have zoom lenses not so bigger than this fixed lens.
6) The X-Half is a X camera, but its operation feels more like an advanced Intax Evo camera (cross between the Mini and the Wide) rather than a XF1 or XQ1/2 or XF10. The XQ1/2 get a X-Trans sensor and had the same operation usage of much bigger X-T/E cameras at the time.
7) No recipes possible as reported, you only get the selected film simulations.
8) No speed dial, you can adjust the speed but only via the touch screen which is tiny.
You have the nice aperture ring, I would rather preferred the speed dial instead of the exposure compensation one…
9) Tiny screen with tiny menus and buttons, if you have big / fat fingers… Sometimes if you want to change a setting, like speed, ISO, it can be difficult.
10) A pity that the film mode do not gives you a 24 roll possibility.
C) Now the good:
1) Extra very fun little and pocketable camera.
Eric Bouvet, French X-Ambassador and (war) photo reporter (5 World Press Photo Awards). He came to the Fujikina Brussels. He loved the X-Half. He used it with great satisfaction all over the WE. Of course it is capable of what it can, he was not expecting like me too much out of it. What he said during his workshops and when discussing privately with me: with the X-Half you can have a camera everywhere/any time like your smartphone. He recalls the maxim : have always a camera on you and more so out of your pocket so to be able to take a shoot immediately when a good subject arise
He recalls also a personal experience: being on beach, he stumbled on a very famous photographer. This one said to him: “Do you have a camera?”. Eric responded like an child : “Well, I only want to be on the beach and get the chance to swim…”. Eric was very embarrassed as he repeated “Do you have a camera?” Implying, even here you show be able to take a picture as you are photographer. Now Eric has always a camera with him. So he loves the X-Half for that, hopping younger generation will use it everywhere / every time over a smartphone.
2) Extra light, but do not feel too plastic like the Instax Mini Evo. A bit the same than the Instax Wide Evo. But the later feel build like a tank for an Instax product.
3) I like very much the vertical concept. I shoot quite a lot vertical and pano nowadays, even more so having now with my GFX100RF where I abused the ratio dial.
Here no need to turn the camera. Feel natural/at home in our smartphone era.
4) The dedicated user interface is well built, and you have all what you just need to operate the camera for its purpose. No extra “fat”. Super easy to use only in a touch way. Great job Fujifilm.
5) The camera slows you down. You need to take your time to operate it (well you have no choice and considered the slow processing power).
Nice for change. You take your time and you do not rush (well can’t so).
6) Doing in camera diptych is extra fun. And the camera creat them quite fast (for a change. Expending the SOOC way of doing things. Bravo again Fujifilm, I love it.
Creating a diptych is absolute no brainer. Real pleasure to create them ouy of this little camera.
7) Very good image quality in standard situations. The X-Half can deliver. Like the XF1 and XQ1/2 or X10/20/30. The XF10 is of course way above. But do not ask too much especially in difficult light situation. Just consider it in the old fashion way.
8) Gives as intended the analog film era feeling, the film mode is very enjoyable.
It is a very smart concept from Fujifilm, like the Film Simulation dial. It will bring to young generation the analog film era feeling / mode / way of operate in a digital format.
Very cleverly implemented. And you can exit whenever the film mode (so I could in fact create easily a 24 film roll). Images from a roll are stored automatically in a separate folder.
9) The small side vertical touch screen is THE operating innovation on this camera. You can select with one swap the film simulations, the modes, root menu settings, go back. Way easier to use than scrolling root menus using the tulip keypad or now the joystick. I would have wished it at least on my X-Pro3 for the little always on rear screen.
Now will I bought one? No compared to an XF1, more so a XQ1/Q2 or even the XF10, which was sold around 500€ at the time of its production.
By the way on the EXIF, the exact camera name of the X-Half is X-HF1…
I would prefer over the X-Half to pay for the same price an used XF10. Knowing that for all of them price as rocketed to wild fees on the secondhand market. Crazy, but that’s the law of offer and demand, and demand his very high.
Compact cameras are trendy for the time being. During another workshop, a young photographer animating it, said to me that he is intending to redesign his apartment in a full 70’ look. Get a manual clutch car from that era, get an vintage automatic watch. So this era vibes a lot to this generation. Amazing.
The Instax Wide Evo is by the way very expensive too. But its price tag is not as high as the X-Half.
Here in Belgium it is under 500€. That would be the fair price I would play to get the X-Half, like many people at the Fujikina who tested it said to me.
“Very fun to use, clever concept and unique design, very appealing but too expensive for only playing around and having fun”. “For the actual price requested and a bit more, you much more and better elsewhere for the bunks you put on the table”. I share the feeling. And compared to the Instax Wide Evo, I’ll stick to the latter for the moment.
Nevertheless the X-Half was the king at the Fujikina for the Touch & Try activity. Very high demand. I had difficulties to grab one over the 2 days.
But you are absolutely right Ritchie to put it back in perspective for the pricing, inflation is there, Fujifilm asks more now. And Fujifilm is also more confident + price on secondhand as rocketed for all the cameras it has produced. So they have to make money too.
I simply recall when I bought my X-T1. Now the X-T5 is nearly twice the price of the X-T1.Thought comparing both of them, the X-T5 offer much much more. And I’m willing to pay the huge extra for that. On the other hand the GFX100F is the cheapest and compact of medium format from Fujifilm and elsewhere. The ratio given by the GFX100RF between price / onboard tech / image quality / etc is just incredible. Compared to a Leica Q3…
Hence why I find it difficult to justify it consider its weakness. But if the price drop in the future, I will get one for sure, as it is just so much fun and unique in digital format and fit directly and exactly in my SOOC philosophy.
So I hope the X-Half will be a huge success. And if so Fujifilm might consider to bring back to life the XQ line or the Xyz line
The “slowness” reminds me (at least in description… I’ve never used an X half) of the XF10. It was not a quick camera, and it felt like it needed just a bit more processing power. Fun? Yes! It was good for throwing in the pocket. The snap focus mode made the slow speed tolerable. I wonder if the X half uses the same processor?
Thanks for the report! Great to hear the pluses and minuses. I’m sure it will help some to make a more informed decision. I think that’s a very fair assessment. I appreciate the detailed comments!
Very welcome Ritchie. I’ve made a promise, so 😉
And it was a very enjoyable testing.
About the XF10, yeah definitely. Upon seing Chris YouTube review, I thought immediately about it.
And then experience it in the field.
But on thinking back on my long detailed report (which I hope will indeed of help for some), I thought about my Instax Wide Evo and how it is behaving.
I forgot to add 2 good points and the last one will make the direct // with the Wide Evo :
10) Very good selection from Fujifilm of its film simulations. You have all the good and popular ones. It’s more than enough to play with. And goes way above older models like the XQ2 or XF10. Congratulations Fujifilm on this part.
10) While the AF does struggle. Many times you do not really know if the focus is really done unless you take the shot and review especially in very bright or low light conditions.
But when you have someone, face detection is working well with standard human behaviour (thought do not ask too much).
I was happily surprised with my Wide Evo, especially compared to the Mini Evo. A big step up.
And there, the Half has the exact same behaviour the the XF10.
+ The Half take backs a couple of ‘new’ advanced filters from the Wide Evo (leak one to mantion only one).
So I took back yesterday my Wide Evo and made some trials.
I begin to really wonder if it’s in fact the processor + algorithms of the Wide Evo which has been taken as a framework / being tweaked heavily).
The Wide Evo is not (too) sluggish in its operation or menus as the Half can be sometimes.
Might be also a // with XF10 as it would be ‘logical’ in fact. Fujifilm like many others (Nikon for exemple) as an industrial producer, reuse its parts.
You see that with each prossesor / sensor generation evolution.
So I would suspect that the Half has been built around the Wide Evo.
Then putting extra power via the NP-W126S, you can overclock the processor.
And then with a higher compute there will be the experienced bottlenecks.
But only a teardown could tell… I’m very curious.
I think the correlation between the Instax Evo Wide and the X half are the most correct. The camera is a bridge between the two systems, with a foot on either side, but maybe the most similar to Evo.
As to the OVF, one thing the Pentax 17 did very cleverly was place their optical finder centerline with the lens. This minimizes one axis of parallax. If you put something on the long vertical center, it’ll stay there in the middle. What happens at the edges isn’t quite as important, but if I want something in the middle, I really want it right in the middle.
The guidelines for minimum focus distance are pretty accurate, too. It’s not that there’s no parallax, but that the parallax has been made manageable, and it feels really nice to use.
With the Xhalf or any other camera with an offset viewfinder, you’ve not got two axis of parallax to deal with, which is pretty awkward for simple OVFs.
//
I wanted to want this camera so badly. The small size and vertical seem like fun. I could compromise on final IQ and noise and such from the small sensor.
But the lack of full recipes, the lack of raw, the slow speed… those are too much to handle, with the price jacked up by asinine tariffs. A half-size, full-power Fuji was so tempting to me, but it seems like the power (processing power, flash power, etc) is what’s lacking.
//
While I personally prefer EV Compensation (how bright I want an image typically matters more to me than the specifics of aperture or shutter speed in many situations), I kinda hear that about the speed. DOF is already going to be super wide due to the small sensor. It’s roughly equivalent to something about a full-frame f/8 correct?
In that case, I almost figure the aperture control doesn’t matter. Shutter and EV Comp would be the two where there are real decisions to be made. The depth of field difference between f/2.8 and f/5.6 and f/11 on this camera is pretty minimal, but being able to control 1/30th vs 1/125th vs 1/500th is a pretty large change in the look of the final image.
A lot of vintage fixed-lens rangefinders were shutter-priority (Konica AutoS2 was the one I grew up with), and that would have made sense here, I figure.
I think the camera will be massively popular among young people, some who wouldn’t consider themselves photographers necessarily. But it’s a bit of hard sell to those who take photography seriously: not enough quality for the price.
I love the way you compare this with the pentax auto 110. I’m primarily a 110 shooter in this time and age (believe it or not, check my instagram @tinyframetales).
and all your point about a camera being fun, is definitely the reason why i’m getting the x Half.
I see the X half as a modern take on 110 photography. It’s definitely not 1:1, but the “vibes” seem right, if that makes any sense. Also, cool IG account!
How nice @Tinyframetales. I remember shooting 110 film.
It was something special. I liked the experience with micro cameras.
In this case you’ll be very happy with the X-Half for sure.