If you don’t make frequent use of your 24-70’s zoom range, then great, seems like a good idea. If you do, the limitations are obvious. I would review your existing pics and see what focal lengths you use most frequently first. You mention architecture- well a 35mm equivalent isn’t ideal for that.Small cameras are also more fiddly to use. I find this particularly true of the aperture dial on the X100 series. If Fuji had put it at the front of the lens - like the old Olympus Zuiko lenses - it would have significantly improved the handling.If you find the 24 -70 zoom range useful, an XE4 (or used XE3) and a few primes might be a better option. It isn’t as fashionable as the X100 series, but it has a lot of virtues. While a lot of people lust after the X100, and maybe fancy themselves a sort of latter day Cartier Bresson, the reality is that X100 is a lot of money for what it is - and I say that as someone who has owned two and sold them both. It’s a potentially good second camera, but quite limiting just on its own unless you like that idea.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying about the two cameras being that same size.Darngoodphotosposted a comparison photo in this thread (seehttps://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65026612)and the slsize difference is huge even with a fixed lens on the D7000.Am I missing your point?

Just purchased one. LOVE the size. Like the snap focus. Having trouble with the 28mm FOV. Have the video (been told the video is rubbish but haven’t used it yet) function button set up to shoot at 35 and 50mm using digital zoom. The 35mm zooms into ~16megs. 50mm is ~6megs. Also like the touch screen to focus and shoot. Who needs a shutter?Mask on Nurse Marty

LarryB2 wrote:I have an X100V and a Ricoh GRiii. For ease of use and compactness I prefer the Ricoh hands down. There is a high learning curve figuring out the Fuji.The Ricoh can fit in your pocket.+1  on all of that...

I used to be a canonist, with a 5D Full frame and several lenses... I used to carry another body (20D) just in case... all in all, it was heavy.One year I decided to buy a small camera to have it with me all the time, and I bought a Sigma DP2... but I didn't "feel" it... so I didn't use it much.On 2011 the X100 was released and I bought it to carry alongside my 5D... and after a month using it (in a trip to the silk road) I found that 70% of my pictures where shot with the Fuji.It was easier to carry around and much more fun to use, but I must admit that some pictures NEEDED my multi-lenses equipment.Nowadays I use a XT-1 and a X100F, the first is mostly used with tele or wide angle lenses, when X100F, even with conversors, wouldn't reach.I'm saying so because you said:>When traveling my pictures are almost exclusively things that don't move so - architecture & landscapes mostly, never people.I think that you may find the 35mm eq. lense of the X100V a bit too "narrow" for architecture or landscapes... even if you use a converter to 28.I belive that the X100 line is a great camera that gives back the joy of taking pictures... but if your main subject is architecture or landscapes you could feel deceibed.I would suggest you to rent one for a few days and play with it before commiting.My two cents.

I thought I'd try it out at home and see how it works for my favorite subjects and try "zooming with my feet" . It the 35mm (equiv) is lacking often enough I'll get the 28mm accessory lens and see how it works out. My current zoom is only 24mm at the wide end and the diff between 28 and 24 is pretty small.

timoteotresgatos wrote:I thought I'd try it out at home and see how it works for my favorite subjects and try "zooming with my feet" . It the 35mm (equiv) is lacking often enough I'll get the 28mm accessory lens and see how it works out. My current zoom is only 24mm at the wide end and the diff between 28 and 24 is pretty small.I have the 28mm WCL and am not very impressed. It has some barrel distortion, which the camera automatically corrects (for jpegs), but in doing so it crops the field of view so that its effective field of view is equivalent to a lens closer to 30 mm focal length (FF equivalent). 30mm is so close to 35mm that it is not worth bothering. Especially for its $350 price.I suggest if you try it out, buy it from somewhere that you can easily return it.For architecture, especially interior, 35mm (or 30mm) is very limiting. Which is OK, provided you are choosing to be thus limited.