It still has the same sensor and performance. Fuji has added ibis, the new battery, and flip screen instead of tilt. It could easily be a mk2.^ How so? IBIS is a huge deal.
Sure. Something iterates each time. Where you put the index is your call."Canon 1D" is a product line; "1D Mark II" makes sense.
"Sony A7" is a product line; "A7 Mark III" makes sense.
Fuji X-T is basically a product line and the upcoming camera is implicitly "X-T Mark 4" but they simply choose not to use that terminology here as it's not necessary.
Sometimes I think Nikon should have gone the mark route as well."Canon 1D" is a product line; "1D Mark II" makes sense.
"Sony A7" is a product line; "A7 Mark III" makes sense.
Likewise with Olympus E-M1, E-M5, E-M10.
Fuji X-T is basically a product line and the upcoming camera is implicitly "X-T Mark 4" but they simply choose not to use that terminology here as it's not necessary.
Let's remember that Panasonic has always been crap at naming and numbering their products so it's very good that Fuji doesn't follow their example!
I also like to shoot in the dark, but I hardly ever see people complain about high iso behavior in the Fuji bodies. The XT4 largely goes after the things most folks have complained about.I would love to see a xtrans 3 sensor reworked for better high iso performance. Put into the new X-T4 body/specs. The 3 hit a sweet spot for me.
I’m not complaining about the current iso performance. But if it could be better, I wouldn’t turn it down.I also like to shoot in the dark, but I hardly ever see people complain about high iso behavior in the Fuji bodies. The XT4 largely goes after the things most folks have complained about.
If Sony really does have a 43 MP APS-C sensor in the wings, that may take a step backwards. But who knows? The only thing we do know is that Sony has a real edge because it controls almost everyone's sensors.I’m not complaining about the current iso performance. But if it could be better, I wouldn’t turn it down.