Fujifilm X-E3

You can get the X-T4 relatively cheaply. Unlike the T3, it has a fully articulated screen and in-body image stabilization. I have the X-T4 and X-E3, both of which purchased used for much below the price of the newest models (about $800 each). No regrets, and I love both equally. The E3 is my stripped-down pocketable camera; with the Fuji 27mm pancake lens, I can fit it in a jacket pocket or shoulder strap bag, and it weighs almost nothing, less than my iPhone. This combo is pretty much equivalent to the immensely popular X100IV, but much better value for money. The T4 is the bigger camera I use for nature and macro shooting. Tons of settings, more advanced features (focus bracketing and "picture in picture" focus closeup are important to me), more advanced dials. It's heavier and bulkier, but also more solid (IBIS, weather sealing). For some reason Fuji appears to consider yellow focus peaking (which IMHO is the best colourbfor it) to be a high-end feature reserved for the T4, which is annoying.

I don't know, but I recommend trying it, you might be surprised. The X100IV is awesome, of course, and if I could afford it, I'd probably own one. But it's more than 2x what I paid for my X-E3. A fixed-lens camera is built around the limitation of having just that lens. To me, if I only bring the 27mm with me when shooting, then that is exactly like a fixed-lens camera. But it also means I have the option to take it on a bird-watching trip using my Fujifilm 70-300mm lens — something you just wouldn't be able to do with an X100. That flexibility is worth something, which in my opinion makes the lower price of the X-E range even more of a bargain compared to the X100.

I still use my Fujifilm XE-3 from time to time but use my Canon DSLR rarely--mostly for situations that benefit from very wide angle or telephoto lenses. And, yeah, if I'm going on a trip where I'm mostly only going to take some snaps, much less a local hike, I'll almost certainly just take my smartphone. And this is someone who still has a Flickr Pro subscription and used to spend many many hours in the darkroom. I can imagine buying a new Fujifilm body but not sure I can imagine getting a new Canon at least so long as my current one works.

I also have an X-E3, which I recently took on an international trip. Its compact, but but a key feature is its low value which means its not especially precious. Its one of the best featured cameras where I wouldn't be upset if it was damaged or stolen; I could just buy another one. I adapt lots of lenses, even Leica M mount, but I like the Fujinon XC35mm f/2 which has the same optics as the WR version. I would like to see an X-E5 with the same control layout, but with IBIS.

I admit to really liking the X-E3--though the X-E4 wasn't obviously an upgrade. But I might just have stuck with Canon (I have a 5Diii) if I were going mirrorless today. Fuji (although later getting into the X series), did pretty much what Kodak eventually did--mostly applying emulsion and chemical expertise in addition to legacy pro film business plus commercial printing--but, as you say, much smaller and much more insular. As I've written about in the past, Kodak gets held up as a classic example of "marketing myopia"--see any Marketing 101 textbook. But, for the reasons you cite, Kodak should just have pivoted harder into digital doesn't really hold up.