There is a pattern to the ebb and flow of cameras that always seems to work against me. I'll find something I really like and it is inevitably discontinued by the maker. If it's a camera other than a Canon Rebel or one of the other widely sold models it becomes harder to get and, as soon as six or eight months later the used prices rise to the point where they exceed the last posted "new" price and the ones that are available are charitably labeled, "well used."
One of my favorite examples of this was the Sony Nex-7. It was a great camera but it was a bit complex to use until you got comfortable with the twin dial set-up. Sure, the sensor was a bit noisy but it was one of the first really small, interchangeable lens Sony cameras with a 24 megapixel sensor that could really deliver the goods (at lower ISOs...). I went to buy one last year and found that mint versions were trading at a premium. After a few days of looking at "bargain" versions available at "like new" prices I just gave up and let it go.
Leica went through this in the film, rangefinder days. The M4 was widely considered one of the best crafted M cameras ever. It was made cheaper and less likable in the M4-P version, but even the P version was demonstrably superior to all of the M6 variants that hit the market near the end of the last century. Mis-aligned rangefinders, more limited fine-tuning adjustment controls and a severe, recurring issue with quality control made getting a good M6 straight out of a new box a bit of a crap shoot. Leica users in Austin were lucky to have two stores that were Leica dealers; one of which was a full service repair shop as well. If you were one of the unfortunate customers who got a misaligned camera you stood a good chance that Jerry, the owner and head repair person at Precision Camera, could fix it for you.
And, don't get me started on the legendary Nikon D700 and all the cameras that came afterwards (600&610, we're looking at you).
So, why am I bringing this up now? Well, I do have a point but first, in addition to pointing out that some of our favorite cameras some times exit the market and become scarce, I also want to talk about the general trend in machines that combine digital technology with precision, mechanical technologies, of being made cheaper and cheaper when digital solutions are able to "replace" some aspects of the mechanical ones, but with a cost to aesthetics, haptics and some design nuances.
Coming to my point.... When I first considered Fuji products I was very happy with nearly every lens I tested. Incredibly so with the ones considered a bit "eccentric." Those would include the 35mm f1.4, the 60mm f2.4 macro, the 14mm f2.8 and a few others. I was encouraged by those lenses and decided to give the system a trial run so I bought the camera that was currently being gushed over by the largely insensate blog-press of faux-tographers; the Fuji X-T3. While it's a fine camera and creates very nice photography and video files I have never warmed up to it to the point that I'd want a second body as a back-up. In fact, even though the X-H1 is currently cheaper I'd gladly trade the almost new X-T3 for the X-H1.
But why? My perception is that Fujifilm made some decisions a few years back to try and attack the professional market by offering two distinct cameras that, while using the same sensors as many other cameras in their line up, were built to a standard that is distinctly better than the others. A build quality that adds stability to the bodies via thicker metal structures and more advanced mechanical engineering. The metal used to make the "skin" of the X-H1 is advertised at 25% thicker than all the other models. The shutter system is more complex, quieter, less prone to vibrations. The body is bigger to compensate for the inclusion of great image stabilization capability, and the larger body also enabled their engineers to design a system that could deal with heat issues much more effectively. In short, this is an over-engineered body meant to take maximum wear and tear while delivering high reliability and offering a more stable platform for larger, high speed lenses.
Even the lens mount was designed and made to higher standards to better support a new family of heavier, faster, and longer lenses.
But what did the average consumer see? He saw that the X-T3 has about 2 more megapixels of implied resolution and that they body is smaller and lighter. That's all. That was the litmus test for selling the product. Smaller and lighter. More horsepower.... The consumer didn't take into consideration all the tangible and intangibles of heavy duty design and construction. Longevity. A better grip. A more solid platform. Etc. As a result the X-H1, a highly superior product, languished on dealer shelves while the X-T3s flew out the door.
I loved the lenses in the Fuji system but I was vacillating about getting more involved in the system. And then there was the day that I was buying lens cleaner fluid at Precision Camera and I spied a used X-H1 along with its battery grip and the extra batteries, all for about $850. I thought I'd buy it and give it a try. No risk as Precision Camera had a policy of taking back used gear within ten days that didn't meet customer expectations.
The X-H1 clicked the switch in my brain that informed me that this was a camera body you could build a system around! And that's exactly what I started doing. But the more I researched the sales of X-H1s versus other cameras in the Fuji system the more I became convinced that (like electoral politics) Fuji would eventually cave to consumer culture and stop the (largely financially unrewarding) production of exquisitely engineered and manufactured cameras and just give consumers what they craved: a smallish body attached to a list of specifications that real users would find of secondary value compared to what was on offer in the bigger camera.
The more I shot with the X-H1 the more I realized that if this model were to disappear and not be replaced by a camera similarly aimed at the professional market I'd be stuck with a bunch of really great lenses, surrounded by a bunch of decent but unexciting, consumer camera bodies...
With this in mind I set about to buy two more of the X-H1 bodies as a hedge against mindless consumer inertia and camera manufacturer common marketing sense.
As a working professional photographer and videographer I could not be happier with my collection of X-H1 cameras, each mated with its own battery grip and extra batteries. And so far, in about eight months of use I've never been let down by this curated subset of Fuji product.
But there is another side to being a photographer and that's the reality that it's also my hobby, passion, my art and all around focus. While the X-H1 cameras are some of the finest and best sorted cameras I could ask for in professional use, they can be large and heavy to use as daily carry ART cameras. I tried to delegate that responsibility (being the "art" cameras) to the Fuji X-T3 and the small X-E3 but they generally got left at home. After a number of false starts with them I started taking the battery grips off one of the X-H1s and pressed it into service in this other side of my photography lifestyle. All the time wishing I could find a camera that created an equally good photographic file while offering the panache and shooting style I had enjoyed decades ago with a brace of Leica M series cameras and well chosen selection of Leica lenses.
Enter the first X-Pro2, Fuji's art camera. If you have worked with bright line finders and various Leica M series cameras it's hard NOT to love the X-Pro2. I bought a well used one and started taking it everywhere. It immediately eclipsed the X-T and X-E to the extent that the X-E is now gone and the X-T languishes in the no-man's land between the X-Pro2 and the X-H1.
A quick read of Fuji's literature reveals that the hybrid OVF/EVF finder is a very complex and expensive to produce feature. They could have stuck a high res EVF behind the little window and been done with it at a much reduced cost but optimism springs eternal and they tossed the dice, betting there was a ready market of former Leica aficionados and rangefinder lovers (it's not technical a rangefinder camera in fact, just in spirit) who would pay a premium for a camera that's strikingly different than almost anything else out on the market. Whether they were correct is beyond my ability to suss out. But I will say that for a photographer of a certain age and background the camera is amazing and so much fun to shoot with.
I loved the camera and, after reading the technical discussions about the finder, the shutter, and other tweaks, I loved the philosophy of the camera as well. I rushed to source a second used one in better shape (there's nothing wrong with the first one other than a few small scuffs and paint scratches. It's maybe a VG on KEH.com...). As luck would have it one surfaced shortly into my search and I snapped it up. Now I had two of the best art cameras I had owned since I last owned a Leica M4. The 23mm and 35mm f1.4, and the 56mm 1.2 APD were amazing beyond expectation as well. I added the smaller versions (Fujicrons) of the lenses for those times when I wanted to travel light and I felt I'd come home to the cameras I'd started with so long ago. Engineered for hard use. Designed to delight. Created to provide exemplary images. In short, cameras I can rely on to work they way I think cameras should work.
Lately I've been making some travel plans and started looking closely at the way I've been working on my own photography. I'm traveling to put a coda to one part of my life and to re-energize myself for the next part. And every time I considered cameras I came right back around to the X-Pro2s and a small assortment of prime lenses.
But just as I fear that Fuji will discontinue both the product and the idea behind the X-H1 I also wonder if they will also kill of the most expensive APS-C camera currently on the market, the X-Pro2. Will the next variation eschew the OVF for cost savings? Will the next variation be more electronic, less touch-worthy? Will the knobs still be machined from solid blocks of aluminum or made less expensively from cast plastic? Will the things I love about the camera be replaced by electronic crap that appeals more to techno-geeks instead?
With this in mind I went searching for a third body for this mini-system-within-a-system as well. It arrived today in Like New condition and I used one of my precious Tamrac straps (which are no longer offered, having been replaced by cheaper, tawdrier and less workable straps) to make it supremely portable for my general, non-commercial use.
Now, at least, if they are discontinued I have enough of both bodies to keep working and shooting with their great lenses until such a time as I can corner the market on shipping containers full of back up cameras.
I know this will make sense to very few people but the tools are a vital link in the process and when you find stuff you love it just makes sense for (relatively few dollars) to ensure you can make photographs with cameras you like. Even if they are NOT Fujis. (To put all this in perspective the three X-Pro2s and the three X-H1s combined (and mostly bought used) add up to just a tiny bit more than the $6000 I spent on one Nikon D2Xs camera about 11 years ago. So there!).
Just thought I'd toss this out there.
