>>4106023>This is Fuji derangement syndrome. Whole post drips of vitriol and basement dank.No, that's just how guys talk on the internet. I'm defending it because it's right. It's ugly, faux-retro with an apple-esque whitewash so even if it had heritage it would be wiped out. It has the photographic utility of a budget camera while being about $100 in price away from a pro camera (and that close and sometimes ahead of many other pro cameras). And it has nothing special about it that makes that all worth it. It's not small enough, it's not high quality enough, it's pretty much, yes, a toy for people who aren't responsible with credit cards (conspicuously well under babbys first credit limit). The first thing fuji mentions on their website for the x100v is the design. Of course.
The funniest fucking thing about the X100V is fujifilm makes a camera that is THE SAME IF NOT BETTER, as far as I can tell, for $500 less. But with no offset leica-looking viewfinder it's hard to sell false nostalgia to zoomers.
