I’m going to rate Fujifilm’s class of 2025 gear releases. I’ve never done something like this before. I’ve seen plenty of other people do end-of-the-year camera gear grading, which I sometimes agree with and sometimes don’t. Since 2025 is nearly over, I thought I’d try my hand at grading all the cameras and lenses that Fujifilm’s released over the last 12 months.
Specifically, there were five cameras—two GFX and three X-series (one is only sort-of X-series)—and three lenses, one of which is a GFX cinema lens. That’s eight items in total. For the sake of this article, I’m excluding Instax. Let’s dive in!
Cameras
Fujifilm released five cameras in 2025: three X-series and two GFX models. We’ll grade each camera individually, then each series as a whole, and finally grade all of the cameras as a group.
First up is the Fujifilm GFX100RF. This is a medium-format fixed-lens compact camera, and best thought of as the GFX equivalent of the Fujifilm X70. It’s the smallest, lightest, and cheapest medium format camera-lens combo from any brand. It’s the only retro-styled GFX camera currently being made, and only the second ever (the long-discontinued GFX 50R is the other). This camera is high on my bucket list, and I hope to someday purchase it, but at $5,600 it’s well outside of my current budget.
Common complaints about the GFX100RF are that 1) it lacks IBIS, 2) it has a maximum aperture of “only” f/4, and 3) it’s not fully weather-sealed (an adapter and filter are required to fully seal it). I’m perfectly ok with point three—it’s no problem for the X100-series, and it shouldn’t be seen as an issue for the GFX100RF. As far as points one and two, Fujifilm has said that the camera would need to be significantly larger and heavier to accommodate either of those, and especially both. Interestingly enough, the medium-format camera-lens combo that’s closest in size and weight to the GFX100RF (the Hasselblad 907X plus CFV 100C back with the 28mm lens) also lacks IBIS and has a maximum aperture of f/4 (but is much, much more expensive than the GFX). Fujifilm could certainly make a larger, heavier, and more expensive camera that’s similar in concept (just like they made both an X70 and an X100T), and I hope they someday do. Anyway, the GFX100RF deserves a very high grade, so I give it an A+.
Next is the Fujifilm X half, which is currently the smallest X-series camera; however, it’s not X-Trans. It’s a compact fixed-lens model with a vertically mounted 1″ sensor. Sitting in-between an Instax Evo and the X-M5, it’s intended to deliver an analog-like experience in a simple package. The designers took inspiration from half-frame 35mm cameras. The X half is a ton of fun, and great for snapshots of family vacations and things like that. I enjoy using it, and so does my wife.
Common complaints are that 1) it’s too expensive for what it is, 2) it has some flaws like the lack of a proper flash or hotshoe, and 3) it’s a gimmicky concept. I agree with point one, as the camera should be around $650-$700 in my opinion. I also agree with point two, and I hope those are addressed in a future iteration. As far as point three, I think it’s not really intended for the majority of people who typically buy X-series gear. Fujifilm had in mind a bridge between Instax and the X-series, a pathway for Instax customers to move up (remember, Instax is much larger than the X-series and GFX combined). From what I’ve seen, it seems to be successful in this regard, so, even though the usual crowd might bemoan it, the camera is largely a hit with those whom it was made for. I grade the X half a B-.
Third is the Fujifilm X-E5, which is the closest you’re likely to get to an interchangeable-lens X100VI. This camera is a much different model than its predecessor. The X-E4 was a minimalist low-budget model, serving as Fujifilm’s smallest, lightest, and cheapest camera with an EVF. Inexplicably, Fujifilm discontinued it when it was in high-demand, with months-long waitlists. The X-E5 is the long awaited successor; however, Fujifilm gave it many notable upgrades, and the camera is no longer minimalist or entry-level.
Common complaints are that 1) it’s so much more expensive than the X-E4 and 2) the EVF should have received an upgrade. For point one, the X-E4 was the cheapest (both in price and quality) of any X-E series model, while the X-E5 is the most premium iteration, so it stands to reason that it would be significantly more expensive. I agree with point two; however, it’s not a major issue whatsoever in practical use, only a minor point. My biggest complaint is that Classic Negative was left off the Film Dial, which is inexcusable. The X-E5 is one of my favorite cameras, and I give it an A.
Fourth is the GFX Eterna 55 cinema camera. I’ve seen it in person, I’ve talked to a couple of people who have personally used it. From what I understand, it’s not perfect, but it will likely be highly appreciated by certain segments of the professional cinema crowd. At some point in the coming few years, a major motion picture will be recorded using the Eterna 55, I’m certain. It’s Fujifilm’s most expensive model, but it’s reasonably priced for the segment that it’s in. I give the Eterna 55 an A-.
Last but not least is the Fujifilm X-T30 III, a mild refresh to the X-T30 II, which was a mild refresh to the Fujifilm X-T30, released in early 2019. It fills an important role in the X-series lineup, which is an affordable interchangeable-lens model with an EVF. While it doesn’t have all the bells-and-whistles of the more expensive models, it is very capable, and is the overall best value within the X-series. Fujifilm will sell a whole lot of X-T30 III cameras. I grade it a B+.
Now, to the overall grades, beginning with the X-series. To recap, I gave the X half a B-, the X-E5 an A, and the X-T30 III a B+, which puts the overall grade for the 2025 X-series releases as a B+. Now, to GFX. To recap, I gave the GFX100RF an A+ and the Eterna 55 an A-, which puts the overall grade as an A. That puts the total grade for both the X and GFX lines combined at an A-.
Lenses
Fujifilm only released three lenses in 2025: two X-series and one GFX. I’m not going to spend nearly as much time on this as I did the cameras. I’m going to grade each lens, and then give one overall grade for all the lenses.
First is the Fujinon 23mm f/2.8 pancake. I’ve long advocated for more pancake lenses for the X-series. The 27mm f/2.8 is one of my favorites, while the 18mm f/2 is barely a pancake, and is need of a refresh. The 23mm f/2.8 pancake has been long requested, adds a solid third pancake option for the X-series, and is a great performer; however, the 23mm focal-length is now a bit crowded with several options. That’s really the only complaint, if there is one. I grade this lens an A-.
Next up is the Fujinon XC 13-33mm f/3.5-5.6 kit zoom. I prefer primes, personally. This lens is the smallest X-series zoom, and the closest Fujifilm has to a pancake zoom, but I’m not excited about it in the least. I’m sure it’s good, and some people will really love it. I give it a C.
Lastly, we have the GF 32-90mm cinema lens. If I’m not mistaken, this is the first and currently only GFX lens offered by Fujifilm specifically for filmmaking. Unsurprisingly, this is the most expensive lens for GFX cameras. I don’t know much about it, but the little I have heard has been very positive. This rating is more of a shot in the dark, but I’ll give it an A.
To recap, I gave the Fujinon 23mm f/2.8 pancake an A-, the Fujinon XC 13-33mm zoom a C, and the GF 32-90mm cinema lens an A. Between the three, the overall grade is B+.
Conclusion
It’s also important to consider if the gear that Fujifilm released is the gear they should have released. Did they do enough? Did they introduce the wrong things? We should take that into consideration.
The largest hole is the very-long-overdue X-Pro3 successor, which probably should have come in 2023 or 2024; it’s the end of 2025, and we haven’t seen it yet. My guess is that it will arrive next year, probably within a few months, but that’s only a guess. I get that they might wait for it to be extra special, and perhaps it will be well worth the wait, but I do think some points need to be deducted for its continued absence. Fujifilm should make this camera their top priority for 2026.
The lens lineup has matured over the years, so it makes sense that they might release fewer and fewer new options each year, but there are still a few holes that I’d like to see them fill. Between X and GFX, four or five new or updated lenses each year is probably a better number than just three. I’m a big fan of one of their 2025 lenses, but overall it was a ho-hum year for glass, mostly because the class was so small.
I gave the cameras an A- and the lenses a B+. When factoring in the lack of an X-Pro and the small number of lenses introduced, overall I have to give Fujifilm a grade of B for the gear they released in 2025. Do you agree or disagree? What grade would you give Fujifilm for their class of 2025 gear? Let me know in the comments!
Excellent summary. My only potential disagreement is regarding the XC13-33. I prefer zooms and I really can’t wait to get one to pair with my X-E5. The physical size and focal length is about perfect for a walk around EDC on the X-E5 for my shooting style. I realize the maximum aperture was a trade-off for size and weight but I have other options for those situations.
I’m sure it’s an excellent little lens that you’ll enjoy using. I’m just not a fan of zooms, personally, especially ones without an aperture ring. But I totally get and freely admit that I’m the odd one, as most people use zooms and really appreciate them.
Hi there, I bought the XE-5 and I will say that I would appreciate a lock on the Film dial, it’s just bothering me when I want to shoot and that my camera settings have suddenly changed and I don’t understand why. After a while I see the change with the film dial, but it’s crazy. I settled the problem since I don’t use the film dial with a piece of black Gorilla tape so it won’t move accidentaly, the same goes with the exposure comp dial, I prefer the back command dial for this. The viewfinder is smaller than my XT-5 but I get use to it. All in all, except for the two issues mentioned above, I like the camera with prime lenses it’s a go everywhere, extra light combo for travelling. Happy New Year to all of you!
I’ve gotten used to checking all of the dials before use on all of my cameras. I had an incident several months back, for example, that I was having the hardest time figuring out, and it was driving me crazy. It turns out that on my X-E5, I had accidentally bumped the shutter dial to P, and hadn’t noticed. Took me probably 30 frustrating minutes to figure that out. Now, I check the shutter dial every time.
The Film Dial can be extremely useful on the X-E5; it’s a shame to not utilize that tool.
I got the X-E5 early absolutely love it because it begs me to take it everywhere and the photos are so great. I love the 23mm lens because it preserves the small size of the entire camera and is an outstanding lens in its own right. I have a 13-33mm lens on order, but unlike you I’m excited about its potential. I’m not excited about the variable aperture and hope it doesn’t bug me. I’m hoping that the pancake-ness of it will make it just as much fun as the 23mm.
I’m sure the lens will be a lot of fun. For me, I’ve just never gotten into zooms. I’ve tried, but always find that they’re just not for me. A zoom without an aperture ring is most certainly not for me. But, I completely understand and openly admit that I’m the odd one; most people like and use zooms frequently. I’m sure the lens will be quite nice, and you’ll appreciate owning it.
I dropped the XE series when then XE-4 went backwards instead of forwards from my well-liked XE-3. Just give it a decent EVF instead of the tiny slow one still on the latest version. My XE-3 with a tiny zoom was my only true carry-it-everywhere all-the-time camera, even more so than my various X100 cameras. Heresy! Now it is a Leica d-lux 7.
The X-E5, as the most premium X-E iteration, is definitely a “step forward” from the X-E3. I don’t really consider the X-E4 as a step backwards so much as a different concept entirely: small, light, minimalist. If you want the smallest, lightest, and most minimalistic X-series camera with an EVF, the X-E4 is the one to get. If that’s not what you want, then obviously it’s not the one to get.
I kinda rate the lenses differently.
The 13-33, while a XC kit lens and not an XF lens, also brings Fuji into the broader trend of 20-XX lenses, and it’s good to see that. It’s smaller than the older 15-45, has a wider field of view, and ditches the awkward power zoom*. I think it represents a good step up in the kit lens segment, even if the kit lens segment is a small one, and one that doesn’t really make sense for most shooters already established within the system. Grading on a curve for kit lenses, B+.
The 23/2.8, however, is a lot more awkward. While it gains a little bit of compactness, the 23/2 wasn’t too big and the 27/2.8 is also small and fantastic. It can focus a bit closer and has better close-up performance, but otherwise isn’t any better than the older 23, and pixel peeping might find it worse. Meanwhile, the fact that the 23/2 WR could have used a update (it’s not bad, but it’s just been power-crept by newer lenses), as well as that OG trio with the 18/2, 35/1.4, and 60/2.4. Personally, I’d leave their optics as is, since they have that glorious vintage rendering, but getting new focus motors, upgrading the housing to WR, and adding a physical focus limiter switch on the 60 would be fantastic.
Anyhow, the 23/2.8 doesn’t feel like it adds anything meaningful to the Fuji lens lineup, while possibly forestalling more important lens upgrades. I’d probably only rate it as B-, based on how it fits into the overall system.
* There is a place for PZ lenses, but that’s typically for more serious video lenses, particularly when they’re designed to prevent focus breathing. Budget PZ isn’t really worthwhile.
I’d like to know if the lens quality/configuration is better with the 23mm vs. the 27mm and, if it is better, if the 23mm focal length makes it easier to create a high-quality lens in the pancake form-factor. Fuji is simply too savvy as a camera company to create just a “me too” lens just for the hell of it.
When I bought my X-E5 I just got the body and got wild and crazy and got the Voigtlander 27mm f/2.0 manual lens because the YouTube sites said it was so much better than the Fuji 27mm. I don’t know about that (I’ve never had the Fuji 27mm) but I rate the 23mm f/2.8 much better. With a 40 megapixel sensor, it’s easy enough to crop to a 27mm with no issue, so why not have a wider range of view?
For me, the “pancake-ness” of a lens with the X-E5 is a big deal. I’m glad I have it. I’m prefer the 23mm focal length to the 27mm focal length for my pancake lens. Someone else may not care about “pancake-ness” and prefers an f/2.0 lens. If Fuji has two 23mm lenses, so what? Let customers decide what to buy.
Good to know the XC 13-33 dumped the power zoom. That was my second highest complaint of the combo I used of X-E3 and 15-45 Zoom. The first was the small EVF. Going from a Fujifilm X-H1 to the X-E3 was like going from a billboard to a playing card. I put up with it for the small camera size, and the low cost didn’t hurt. The cost of the new camera is no longer that attractive.
I like small lenses, both pancake and snub-nosed. I went crazy, too, and bought a bunch of Voigtlander and Zeiss manual focus lenses, some for Fuji X-mount and Nikon F-mount, but most for Leica M-mount, which I use with adapters mostly on a Fujifilm X-pro2 and a GFX50R, and on one Leica CL as well!
The Fujinon 27mm f/2.8 is one of my absolute favorite lenses. Great quality, great character. I was hesitant to buy it because a maximum aperture of “only” f/2.8 is nothing to get excited about, but I’m so glad that I did because it’s just so great. I’m sure the Voigtlander is great, too, but I can’t imagine it being “so much better” than the Fujinon, only because the Fujinon is already so good.
As far as the Fujinon 23mm f/2.8, I feel that technically it’s as good as the 27mm, and even has the advantage of better close focus, but it lacks some of the great character that I love about the 27mm. So, clinically, it’s just as good if not slightly better, but artistically, I don’t like it as much.
Fujifilm has made four 23mm lenses:
23mm f1.4 R
23mm f1.4 R LM WR
23mm f2 R WR
23mm f2.8 R WR
While I know that they’re different sizes and weights, and each will be appreciated by different people, I do think it’s become a bit crowded, and a different focal-length might have been a better choice. And I totally get that they wanted a pancake option for the X-E5 with the same focal-length as the X100VI for marketing reasons. I understand why they did it.
Anyway, I have both the Fujinon 27mm f/2.8 pancake and the Fujinon 23mm f/2.8 pancake, and 80% of the time I use the 27mm. I only use the 23mm when I want to go a little wider, or I want to focus closer.
I’m definitely an advocate for pancake lenses. It’s a shame that there were only two, and one was only sort-of pancake. The addition of a third option was long overdue in my estimation. With that said, I would have preferred a different focal length over 23mm, just because it’s already crowded, and because it’s not majorly different than 27mm. Still, I’m glad that they added a third pancake option. I hope that the 18mm f/2 get a long-overdue refresh soon, and perhaps they consider another couple of pancakes… a wide-angle, perhaps in the 12-15mm range, and a telephoto, perhaps 40mm-ish.
I almost never shoot ultra wide, and I’ve already got the 10-24/4 WR if I want to… but the TTArtisan 14mm f/3.5 is tempting. Pretty small lens, 31mm long, about the size of the TTArtisan 27mm (so not quite as small as Fuji 27, but smaller than the Fuji 18).
//
Pentax had a pair of Pancake short telephoto lenses for APS-C–40mm f/2.8 and 70mm f/2.4 (only 26mm long!). However, that is K-Mount DSLR, so the long flange distance is more conducive to physically small telephoto lenses. On mirrorless, you probably don’t get much smaller for a 40mm lens than 40mm. The Nikon 40/2 is 45mm, just about same as the Sony 40/2.5G and the Sigma 45/2.8.
While there obviously exist optical construction techniques for constructing telephoto lenses physically shorter than their focal length… my guess is that it’s impractical for something like a 40mm lens on APS-C.
//
Meanwhile, in that rough length of 45mm, there’s the 35/2 and 16/2.8. I’m not anti-pancake, but sometimes I think there’s too much of an obsession with them. A 45mm lens is still pretty dang small. Would a pancake be nice to have? Yeah, sure. But there are a lot of great, quite small Fuji options already out there, and it’s best not to forget that dreaming after pancakes.
I have a vintage Pentax 50mm f/2.8 lens (plus the adapter for Fuji X) that is the same length (and less width) as the TTArtisan 27mm f/2.8 AF, so it’s definitely possible, but might require some creative engineering. I can see a 40mm f/3.5 being about the same size as the 18mm f/2.