A little over three years ago, I published Is Fujifilm Losing Its Soul?, which was my personal criticism of the direction the brand seemed to be heading at that time. “Fujifilm has already lost its soul,” I wrote. “It’s done gone. Elvis left the building awhile ago.”
In that article, I argued, “Fujifilm’s philosophy for their X-series cameras was analog-inspired innovations with a focus on the photographer’s experience (both while using the camera for photography, and as customers of the brand). This was their soul. That philosophy, which seemed to be clearly understood, is what drove the camera department of the company. From the design decisions to the Kaizen firmware updates and everything in-between, this philosophy oozed out—it was both obvious and attractive, and is why Fujifilm was suddenly successful….”
My two main arguments were that Fujifilm had abandoned Kaizen (which, for a time, they had… hello, X-T3, and even X100V and X-Pro3), and they were more focused on attracting new customers from Canikony brands than they were on making their long-time loyal customer base happy. There was a time when that seemed to be very true. But we’re more than three years since now, is it still true today? Or has Fujifilm regained its soul?
While I’d love to see even more Kaizen (such as giving the X-T50 and X-M5 the ability to save Recipes in FS1/FS2/FS3), Fujifilm did show some love when they gave the X-H2s, X-H2, X-T5, and X-S20 the Reala Ace Film Simulation. After a pause, Fujifilm did bring back Kaizen, but it’s time for a little more of it. I understand that the firmware department is probably swamped, and providing updates for older models probably isn’t as large of a priority as making firmware for upcoming cameras, but this should still be an important aspect of the brand, and not neglected. So I would say that progress has been made on this front, but there’s room for improvement.
As for the types of cameras that Fujifilm makes and what the intended customer base is for those models, I think Fujifilm has done a great job over the last couple of years with this. They listened to their customers, and took some risks. I think they have begun to realize what their actual advantage is over the other brands, and have done a much better job communicating why that might be preferable. Again, there’s definitely room for improvement, but they seem to have pivoted slightly, and they’re on a better course now, in my opinion.
Fujifilm’s largest asset is not a product—it’s the community that has sprung up around straight-out-of-camera photography from their cameras (think Film Simulations and/or Film Simulation Recipes). This community is passionate, helpful, and kind—generally, just good people. And this community, which has grown and grown and grown, has done far more to sell Fujifilm cameras than any marketing campaign could ever dare to achieve. Fujifilm could do more to support and facilitate the growth of this community, but 1) they recognized the existence and importance of this large group and 2) they’re doing a heck-of-a-lot more now than three years ago. Fujifilm has made large strides, and are even making products and design choices with these people in mind. This community is an important part of the brand, and Fujifilm finally figured that out. Much of the success that Fujifilm has experienced over the last few years has been because of these people.
The question is: what should Fujifilm do moving forward? I already mentioned more Kaizen. An X-Pro3 successor is already in the works, so I’ll skip past that. I think a flagship model with retro styling and traditional tactile controls should be high on Fujifilm’s to-do list… that could be the upcoming X-Pro, an upgraded X-T6, or a brand-new line—the long-time loyal base shouldn’t have to settle for PASM (I know that some people prefer PASM) in order to have the best-of-the-best X-series camera. The GFX100RF shouldn’t be the only retro-styled GFX offering, either. Fujifilm should make programming Recipes into their cameras easier (I’m happy to help with that, btw, if Fujifilm is interested). There are probably a thousand ideas that I could propose, these are just scratching the surface—hopefully someday I’ll have the opportunity to share them with the company.
To answer the question asked in this article’s title, Fujifilm has taken many steps towards regaining its soul in the three years since I wrote that article. Elvis has returned for an encore, and what an encore it has been! But there’s certainly more that they could and should do. It’s not all rainbows and lollipops, but I’m quite happy with the path that Fujifilm currently seems to be heading down. In my opinion, I think they briefly lost their way, but they’re back on track, and have been for a couple of years now.
Fuji have the best C sensor. Their medium format sensor rivals the compact Hasselblad.
Their lenses are second to none. Such a pity they do not have full frame coverage.
Skin tones were always the best.
With your assistance, the main criticism, the lack of a Warhol style palette is also abated.
I love your Vivid Velvia. Will need little else non technically.
Possibly, the justification for the whole exercise.
Size only doesn’t matter if your ambitions only involve a couple of minutes of viewing arc.
Customers demand the smooth resolution from lots of pixels.
Handling of large files is cheap.
If it is worth taking, it is worth going to at least A3 size. Have a proper look. Revel in it.
So, price for image quality, Fuji is the best.
Best image quality period, when using rigs that vignette at full frame.
You can live with everything else, and I do. Many things I hate.
Picking from so many massageable colour palettes clearly has a sizeable following.
Important in the financial scheme of things?
Malcolm.
Absolutely, Fujifilm has the best APS-C sensors, period. I appreciate the input!
The problem now is that Fuji seems to be trying to plug obvious loss of income through third party lenses by just trotting out rehashes of the same camera essentials in various different body shapes – charging significantly beyond any price increases that might be justified by inflation for certain models, be x-e5 the worst offender, but also x-t50 and x-s20 are guilty. The x-t5 and x100vi show in real terms, prices did not need to increase for the new sensors and ibis.
With the x-t30ii still popular, and the x-t50 already lower in price now, not forgetting the imminent change anyway to the gen 6 surely in late 2026 or 2027 – the x-t30iii seems unnecessary. Fuji could just have dropped the RRP for the mkii. The x-t50 is €300 more now – for a lot more camera – Fuji could have reduced that price by €100. Except of course a mkiii allows Fuji to justify keeping prices at their highest for this line – not forgetting the CEO publicly announced Fuji’s goal was to keep prices high and so also value for existing owners.
I think Fuji has indeed changed tack. Unfortunately. Looking at lenses that need updating and gaps there must be close to 10 lenses the system needs, but Fuji is sadly so focussed on the popularity of it’s more classically designed cameras and equipping all with hardwired film sim selection controls that it is neglecting the most important aspect of any system and it seems to simply be happy to allow others to fill the gap.
Well, I disagree with a lot of your points.
Rehash of the same camera? The X-T30 III is that, sure, and it was completely expected—I’ve been predicting it (almost exactly …the Film Dial wasn’t in my initial prediction) for a year-and-a-half. I’ve already written a whole article about why this camera makes a lot of sense, and was smart for Fujifilm to release. But beyond that, which model is a rehash? The completely redesigned X-E5? The all-new X half and GFX100RF? The revived and completely redesigned X-M5? This point of yours falls very flat with only an once of consideration.
The X100VI at announcement was $200 more than the X100V (it’s an additional $200 more in America now due to inflation/tariffs, so $400 more total). The X-T5 at announcement was only $100 more than the X-T3 at announcement (it’s now $300 more in America due to inflation/tariffs); however, the X-T3 was discounted to $1,100 for the WW version (no standalone charger), which is $500 cheaper than the X-T5 at launch (the X-T4 has IBIS, that’s why I’m skipping that model). So, yeah, the sensor and especially the IBIS does increase the price, but just how much isn’t 1:1 from model-to-model.
The X-E5 compared to the X-E4 is a major change. The camera went from minimalistic, cheap, entry-level model (which isn’t necessarily a bad thing… I’m personally a fan of small, light, inexpensive cameras) to a mid-tier model with a one-piece machined aluminum top plate, IBIS, 40mp, etc.—basically an interchangeable-lens X100VI, or at least as close to that as one’s going to get. To expect that the price wouldn’t jump by a significant amount is absurd and unrealistic.
That’s just the response to your first paragraph! I disagree with almost all of the rest, too, but I don’t have the energy to reply right now. You can have your opinions, but I would urge you to think a little more deeply about them, because you might change your mind on many of your points if you were to do so.
As to what I agree with? Fujifilm changed tack, at least a little, yes. I see it as very good over the last two or so years, so I guess we disagree there. I do believe that there are a couple of gaps in the lens lineup (certainly not 10, though; which 10 would that be?), and there are a couple of lenses in need of a refresh. But which APS-C system has a more robust lens lineup (not including third-party)? I can’t think of any, I don’t think there is any. I just asked AI, and it says Fujifilm has the most native lenses out of all companies for APS-C. So again your points fall apart with just a little deeper thinking.
Deeper thinking requires taking inflation into account. You can’t just ignore it, you don’t ignore tariffs. And you have to compare launch prices not different stages of their lives or repackaging to not include a charger.
The X-e5 is the worst offender of course, the x-e4 costing $850 compared to X-e5 at $1700. Twice the price. In real terms the x-e4 launch price would be $1020 in 2025. 15% tariffs do not explain the rest. Not does a new top plate. Already Fuji moved the x-e4 to beyond cheap travel camera to Leica-lite. The major changes to the 5 were sensor and ibis. In some areas it got an upgrade in others it gets worse parts than the new now budget level x-t30 (LCD). It’s still a long way from an x100vi – but they are very different cameras.
Internally it’s the same as the x-t50 of course – a rehash in another body. But the x-t50 launched for $1400, pre tariffs. But the 15% on Japanese goods only could account for half that difference. X-t50 Vs x-t30ii… The x-t30ii launch price (900) would be $1040 when the x-t50 launched. No tariffs to explain the extra $360 – a huge leap of over 30%.
X-s20 similar with post-inflation prices about $150 higher.
The xt-3 however launched for $1500 in 2018, the x-t5 for $1700 in 2022. Taking into account inflation, the X-t3 launch price would be $1750 in 2022. The x-t5 fell in price in real terms.
X100v launched for $1400 in 2020, the x100vi for $1600 in 2024. That $1400 would have been $1700 in 2024. In real terms the camera went down in price.
In that context it should be recognised the x-t30mkiii also fell in price in real terms. But the vi and x-t5 fell in price getting new sensors, processors and ibis.
Deep thinking requires considering all factors. Inflation is THE most important one. And AI does not consider the gaps or replacement needs of lenses when asked self-fulfilling questions. AI is rather the opposite of deep thinking, but skin deep scraping. The thinking starts once you get the results from your prompts. With AI question everything, or don’t rely on it at all.
10 lenses Fuji needs? For a start…
new wider lens around 12mm
14 2.8 update
16 1.4 update
18 f2 update
New fast 27mm
Proper optical update of 10-24
60mm “macro” update
70 or 75 f2 ish
50-140 update (16-55 mkii treatment)
100-400 update (Ditto)
300mm
XC wide
XC 50/55
135mm
Fisheye
Now you might have another theory how Fuji is compensating for lost sales to third parties. Maybe the flurry of bodies and price increases at the mid level are just a coincidence in your eyes?
But now you can clearly see the price increases in real terms.
I don’t accept your theory that Fujifilm is taking some big loss to third-party lens manufacturers. Fujifilm seems to be doing better financially than they ever have before. I see no evidence for it, and I see plenty of evidence of the opposite. So I disagree with your basic premise from the get-go, I think it is incorrect. Besides, wouldn’t that also apply to every single camera maker, since they all deal with third-party lenses? Why would this be a uniquely Fujifilm issue?
As far as the X-E5 vs X-E4, I have both cameras. They are very different, probably the most different of any two X-E models. They’re not in the same class (one entry-level, one mid-tier). The price increase makes total sense to me. Interestingly enough, the X-E5 is the same price outside of the US when compared to the MSRP of the X-E1, accounting for inflation. Nobody complained then that the X-E1 was grossly overpriced; those complaining about the X-E5 price are barking up the wrong tree, in my opinion.
As far as the X-T50, that’s a brand-new camera line (not the X-T30 II’s successor). I said that a year-and-a-half ago in my X-T50 review. Why did I say that? Because Fujifilm said it first. So how can a brand-new camera line be a rehash? It makes no sense. And how can you say it is a price increase over a non-existent predecessor? That also makes no sense.
Even your inflation numbers undermines your premise. If Fujifilm is hurting so much financially, shouldn’t their prices be even higher, when you consider inflation? Shouldn’t they be charging $250-$500 more for each body, since there has been so much inflation? Shouldn’t the X-E5 be even more expensive, especially compared to the MSRP of the X-E1? Maybe don’t share that data with Fujifilm, they might realize that they can raise the costs more, accounting for inflation.
As far as the lenses, that’s a stretch for that list of 10. You even kind of gave up at the end (the last four).
First, you said there were holes in the lineup, then proceeded to list a bunch of refreshes. Obviously if a lens exists, there’s not a hole. Could a better lens be made? Sure. I agree that the 18mm f/2, 60mm Macro, and 100-400mm are due for updates, maybe the 16mm f/1.4, too (I have no idea on that one, I’ll take your word). I think a 10mm to 12mm fast ultrawide is missing. 135mm is missing, too. Maybe a 70mm f/2 (although sandwiched in-between the 60mm and 80mm, I’m not sure how well it would do). 300mm? There’s an excellent (but expensive) 200mm, and with the teleconverter I think it’s pretty close to 300mm. I don’t like fisheye, so I won’t advocate for that. So maybe an argument can be made that 4 lenses are missing in the lineup (something I’m sure Fujifilm will get to in time), and maybe four or five that could use a refresh (these aren’t holes, just things that could be better).
I guess the way I would conclude this is that the glass is not half-empty, or even half-full. It’s just a little below the brim. The complaints seem to be that it isn’t all the way to the brim, and that it needs to be at the very top, and Fujifilm should take it in the shorts while filling it up.
My argument is that cameras are expensive, and there has been a lot of inflation (plus tariffs in America). Fujifilm is doing pretty well balancing rising prices and rising demands with meeting customer needs. The X-T30 III is an excellent example of it. My guess is that Fujifilm has an extremely narrow profit margin on that particular model, and they chose to do so because prices on other units have gone up so much so quickly (thanks to inflation, tariff, and product improvements) that it was important to them to offer something affordable. Perhaps the X half sales are allowing them to keep the price low on the X-T30 III. There’s something for everyone. But prices for Fujifilm and every other brand has gone up this year. It’s the new norm across the industry.
I’m quite new to fujifilm cameras, I had an XT30ii and nowadays using a XT4 and thinking about getting an XE5. I had no experience on any older fujifilm cameras, until last week.
I borrowed an XE2 from a friend to test it out. First couple hours was a disaster until I figured out the camera and slowed down to its pace. Clicked a few shoots and transferred them to my phone to check the colors.
When I see how the pictures are looking on a decent screen I realized what we lost in the last decade. That old and slow camera has an amazing look that so natural yet punchy and distinctive. Images from my 4th gen camera is looking so digital and processed compared to output of the old 16 mp sensor.
New cameras are easy to use and full of features that will help you capture amazing photos. New fujifilm cameras are brilliant, everybody wants them, sales are high, but if we are talking about soul, we are definitely missing something. I’m enjoying that xe2 so much, I’ll buy one for myself instead of the xe5. I hope new generation of fujifilm cameras brings that kind of joy to shooting again. Thats the soul of fujifilm for me.
This is a really interesting topic, and I’m glad that you brought it up. It’s going to take me a little bit to weave through this, so hang with me to the end.
Over the years, now and again I’ve heard people say, “X-Trans II is magical!” Or, “X-Trans I has the most film-like colors.” Or, “Nothing beats the original X100.” And things like that. I never agreed personally; while each generation has been good, I’m more of a fan of the newer cameras, and how they render pictures. I would pick X-Trans III or newer any day of the week, especially X-Trans IV or V.
I always kind of thought that there was something more to this discrepancy in opinions, but couldn’t figure it out. What really explains it? Recently, though, I found the answer.
While I was at a Fujifilm event earlier this year, a long-time (and highly knowledgable) Fujifilm employee said something fascinating: each generation of Fujifilm cameras has been infused with a unique picture-rendering charm. This was done intentionally, so that each generation would appeal to certain people. By doing this, no Fujifilm camera will ever be obsolete, because some people will desire the unique charm of that generation. Also, the release of a new camera shouldn’t automatically trigger upgrading, because if you’ve found the charm that you like most, the new camera might not actually be an upgrade to you personally. It’s more about finding what you like best instead of having the latest-and-greatest.
People don’t talk like this about other brands. Nobody has ever said that they prefer the pictures from the A6100 more than the A6400. Nobody has ever said that the T6 has better colors than the T7i. But people will say that they prefer pictures from the X-E2 over the X-5, or the X-E1 over the X-E3, and vice versa. Fujifilm considers this a feature of their cameras—not an accident or fluke or mistake.
For you, it sounds like you found the charm that you like the most: X-Trans II. For someone else it might be X-Trans I. For someone else it might be X-Trans V. Etc., etc.. For some people, it might be Provia from X-Trans I, Velvia from X-Trans II, and Classic Chrome from X-Trans IV. There’s no right or wrong answer, only what each person appreciates individually. It’s a very personal thing. For example, Omar Gonzalez likes X-Trans III the most.
I don’t think what you described is a loss of soul, but it is certainly an aspect of Fujifilm’s soul. It should be understood as intentional, with the purpose that each generation has its own unique charm—some will prefer the charm of an older model, some will prefer the charm of a newer model; neither are wrong. Fujifilm only hopes that you find the charm that you like most, even if that means not buying a new camera, but getting an older model instead. They would be happy with your decision to buy an X-E2 over an X-E5, so long as you are happy with it. Me personally, I’d choose the X-E5 over an X-E2 every time (the only X-E cameras that I’ve never owned are the X-E2s and X-E3)—this is only because of the charm that I personally appreciate. Each of us can be equally as happy (and equally as correct) in our quite opposite decisions, and this is by design. I think that’s really cool. Older models like the X-E2 are still relevant in 2025 because of this, and the X-E5 will still be relevant in 2035 because of this.
I hope that all makes sense.
Hey, there I am! that was a very special day in Ann Arbor. I was going through something difficult and having fun that day meant a lot to me.
I’m so glad that you were able to come out and be a part of that walk. This comment means a lot to me, and I’m truly honored to have played a small part in helping get through a rough patch. I hope we get to photograph together again sometime in the future. Take care, my friend!