Fuji's prototype looks great.
The never-ending debate [here] of Fuji's finances, marketing plans, et al, seem to me to be so much tilting at windmills. It [likely] doesn't matter to a corporation if an occasional product, on it's own, fails to pay its way. It is possible some products, due to quirks in the make-up of the human mind, boost sales of other things, making a net gain for the company.
It is a very interesting camera. I'm not a fan of electrical shutters, and will soon be in possession of three Rollei TLRs, all overhauled with new screens by Harry Fleenor. Thus, I have no real "need" for the Fuji. However, it interests me greatly, and I'd consider buying it to make a statement in favour of such products.
Imagine if Eric Clapton [and others] puts aside his M8 and goes about with a GF670?
I now know it costs about $1,000 for a fully overhauled Rolleicord or garden-variety Rolleiflex 3.5, with a Maxwell screen. I doubt the Fuji could sell for less. And, I doubt it would be as good, optically and mechanically as a 50-yr-old Rollei TLR that has had a reasonable life and recent overhaul. Perhaps that is damning a GF670 with faint praise, yet I mean to offer my enthusiastic endorsement.
In the same vein, I'm very keen on the new "low-cost" [quotation marks for obvious reasons] Leica lenses, which cost about $1,500 each, and I'd expect a good, simple, long-lasting, MF camera to cost $3,000. One fear I have is that a GF670, if produced, will come and be gone within 5 years, making overhauls unlikely in ten years. My M3 delights me in its longevity and repairability.