>>4194140the reason the fujislug says the x100v competes with the leica is not because they want a stylish vintage look camera.
it is not because they want a compact camera to travel with.
it is because they want a leica.
if it can not be mistaken for a leica from a distance, it's not in the running. do you get it?
200% of the x100v and xpro cameras reason for existence is to pretend to be a leica.
the only thing that truly competes with the x100v to them is another shameless cheap chink leica clone.
they will say everything but this while using as many obfuscations as possible to actually say it.
"i want people to think i have a leica, without actually buying a leica"
essentially you are discussing the purchase of fake rolex watches assuming the other party is interested in the style or the functionality of an accurate and fairly durable watch that works without batteries, recommending sinns, omegas, and even seiko turtles, and you are failing to understand that no, they just want other people to think they have a rolex, and they are trying to say that without actually saying it because they are fully aware of how pathetic that is and how insecure and consumerist they appear if they say it literally - "i want people to think i have a leica, and i want to even think i have a leica, but i can't afford a leica".
because that is 100% a pathetic and embarrassing thing to admit for many, many reasons. especially when a real, made in germany leica m3 with a refurb and a decent lens costs as much as an x100v, and the only downside is that it costs a small amount of money to use it. not that much, unless you are a spray and pray hack. now imagine admitting that you are... it just adds to how pathetic and embarrassing it is to desire FAKE LUXURY GOODS over all the other similarly styled, as/more functional alternatives that simply lack the possibility of being mistaken for the real more expensive thing!
