Topic: Fuji X100 (Read 25604 times)

Steve Weldon · « **on:** February 18, 2011, 11:47:02 am »

Anyone have any thoughts on this soon to be available camera?

I'll probably be one of the first in line.. I think it will make an excellent 'off duty' camera, at least for my needs.

I'm also excited about the controls, the knurled dials, etched numbers, and the ability to change the aperture via the lens ring like on my old Olympus SLR's. It will be a big plus if we don't need to use the LCD to make setting changes, especially in bright light.

Curious what others think on this.

uaiomex · « **Reply #1 on:** February 18, 2011, 12:00:51 pm »

I was one of the earlier detractors of this camera and for the sole reason of its fixed prime. I've been looking for a small camera to carry to gatherings, on trips or for just plain joy of photography. My 5D2 with any lens is just too much of anything to be fun for these purposes.
So, I've been learning about the Canon 600D, S95, G12, Olympus Epl-1 and 2, EXZ1, Leica X1, the Panasonics, etc., etc.
So far no camera has everything I want. Portability but with human scale controls, great IQ, good hi-iso capabilities, price and multi focals.
Out of these 5 requirements, the only I can give up is having multi focal lengths, and the main reason is that I can sort of provide that with my feet. I know is cliché but in many instances walking is a good provision. For the others, none of them I can create.
In my earlier days as a photographer, before I went pro, I had a Nikon F2 with only one lens, a 24mm. It was so easy to carry all the time. With the years I acquired a whole bunch of equipment. "If I bought this new lens I should pack it too. If not, why in the hell I bought it?" Well, that was my own trap. My joy became pain and eventually I quit photographing for myself. This story of course is not as absolute as it sounds. It's to make a point.
So far in my quest for the best "non-work" camera the X100 is on top of my list. Funny enough, this camera is more "pro" than most digital cameras in existence.

If nothing better shows up soon, I'll be a first-time Fuji owner.
Eduardo

LKaven · « **Reply #2 on:** February 18, 2011, 01:01:31 pm »

This camera is an important example of a camera that is almost what /a lot/ of people want. But to be the camera that a lot of people want, Fuji would have had to go further. I think the camera as it is is one many people will want, but not the same people and not for the same reasons.

What I'd like is this:

- Body with compact form factor, pro quality build
- Optical viewfinder with /heads-up/ display superimposed, but mainly for the purpose of intelligent focus tracking and manual focus aid. Imagine focus points lighting up through the scene as you rack through the focus range. Imagine further that there is optional feature detection, that might favor, for example, the eyes for focus.
- Very high resolution LCD for live view shooting when needed.
- A modest range of interchangeable lenses (eg, 24-105) that /can/ be used with the optical viewfinder, with framelines superimposed intelligently via heads-up display.
- Specialty lenses (ultrawide, macro, telephoto) that can be used with live view
- FF chip

Something in this realm is a candidate for replacing the M series if the build quality is high enough. There are many nice things about the M series, but there is no need to be limited to its opti-mechanical rangefinder, the equivalent of a single focus point in the digital realm. How many times do we have to say we don't want to do "focus and recompose (and lean back)" any more?

Imagine if the heads-up display were (by setting) just barely visible. As you move focus back and forth, small marks appear over parts of the scene that are in focus. With feature detection settings tuned, a quick twist, and you know your portrait subject's eyes are in focus. No need to acquire through the center focus point, which already messes up the creative process.

This is the palmable camera I want. No bigger than a Leica M or Nikon F with no prism.

Plekto · « **Reply #3 on:** February 18, 2011, 01:45:15 pm »

I think it's certainly better than most of the competition at this point. This is supposed to be a mini DSLR, and that means some things are lost in the mix. The question is if it is acceptable and if the compromises are worth it. The lens appears to be a very good lens, though most people are going to want a zoom of some sort. Of course, the silly price is the real deal-killer.

The one that I think is best right now is the Samsung NX100. Half the price of the Fuji, essentially the same size sensor, and interchangeable lenses.

Steve Weldon · « **Reply #4 on:** February 18, 2011, 02:05:44 pm »

Quote from: uaiomex on February 18, 2011, 12:00:51 pm

I was one of the earlier detractors of this camera and for the sole reason of its fixed prime.

Good reasoning. Certainly every camera is a compromise in one way or the other.

I was first put off by the fixed lens and I suppose I still am to a point. Yet, I notice that I've taken to carrying the Sony NEX-5 with it's 16mm (24mm equiv) lens 99% of the time.. wishing it was a lot faster and just a bit longer and had less perspective distortion. You know what that sounds like.

LKaven · « **Reply #5 on:** February 18, 2011, 02:11:13 pm »

Quote from: Plekto on February 18, 2011, 01:45:15 pm

Of course, the silly price is the real deal-killer.

I wonder how far off the price is? A $1000 APS-c body and a $300 lens. For $1000, it certainly is a lot more body than a D5000 or a 600D. It would be easier to swallow if the body were $1000 and there were a range of interchangeable lenses available at /whatever/ price.

viewfinder · « **Reply #6 on:** February 18, 2011, 03:55:16 pm »

I think it's a designer camera and as such not really intended for actually taking photographs. If you question it's value for money and why it's about twice over priced, then it probably isn't aimed at you.

Unfortunately, I have several aquaintances who are prime candidates for owning the X100. None of them will balk at the price, question it's design, picture taking qualities, or indeed take any 'pictures' with one. I know that my dentist wants one and is looking forward to hanging it around his neck. From what he has said, I think he is hoping that it will make him look sexy and might just attract a woman. Of course, it's a long time since he took a picture, even longer since he looked sexy and a very, VERY long time since he had a woman........

.....He will no doubt tell me all about it with enthusiasm, but I won't be in a position to smile,...at least not for a while.

AlanPezzulich · « **Reply #7 on:** February 21, 2011, 02:52:26 pm »

This camers is optimized for street shooting. I have one on order. It would be nice to have a zoom lens but then you give up something else (size). It will make a perfect take along camera when I don't plan on taking photographs but I want something if the opportunity arises. I am interested in its ablitity to take night and indoor shots.

Steve Weldon · « **Reply #8 on:** February 21, 2011, 05:22:37 pm »

Quote from: AlanPezzulich on February 21, 2011, 02:52:26 pm

This camers is optimized for street shooting. I have one on order. It would be nice to have a zoom lens but then you give up something else (size). It will make a perfect take along camera when I don't plan on taking photographs but I want something if the opportunity arises. I am interested in its ablitity to take night and indoor shots.

I agree with all of this. Manual controls like this, the 35mm focal length, speed.. all lend themselves well to popular styles of street shooting. I often roam the nightlife areas and lately I've found my Sony NEX-5 useful for it's articulating LCD and its small size which everyone ignores. If I take one of my Canon 1d series or even a 5d2 to the same locations I risk the wrath of the punters and the possibility of being set upon by thugs employed by the bar owners.. I think this small x100, IF the low light capability proves decent, will be invaluable for this type of shooting.

tokengirl · « **Reply #9 on:** February 21, 2011, 06:49:43 pm »

Quote from: viewfinder on February 18, 2011, 03:55:16 pm

I think it's a designer camera and as such not really intended for actually taking photographs.

Are you sure you're talking about the same camera as everyone else in this thread?

uaiomex · « **Reply #10 on:** February 21, 2011, 07:13:29 pm »

I second this question.

Ed

Quote from: tokengirl on February 21, 2011, 06:49:43 pm

Are you sure you're talking about the same camera as everyone else in this thread?

BernardLanguillier · « **Reply #11 on:** February 21, 2011, 07:28:10 pm »

Quote from: viewfinder on February 18, 2011, 03:55:16 pm

I think it's a designer camera and as such not really intended for actually taking photographs. If you question it's value for money and why it's about twice over priced, then it probably isn't aimed at you.

Unfortunately, I have several aquaintances who are prime candidates for owning the X100. None of them will balk at the price, question it's design, picture taking qualities, or indeed take any 'pictures' with one. I know that my dentist wants one and is looking forward to hanging it around his neck. From what he has said, I think he is hoping that it will make him look sexy and might just attract a woman. Of course, it's a long time since he took a picture, even longer since he looked sexy and a very, VERY long time since he had a woman........

.....He will no doubt tell me all about it with enthusiasm, but I won't be in a position to smile,...at least not for a while.

Had a bad day?

Why on earth would you find unfortunate that somebody else buy a camera that you find irrelevant?

Cheers,
Bernard

Paulo Bizarro · « **Reply #12 on:** February 22, 2011, 04:34:32 am »

Hi think that Fuji are on to something here, and as a first generation product, the X100 will be a fine camera indeed. All that complicated hybrid viewfinder, and the high quality lens, is what probably justifies the high price? I also hope that the camera is fast, otherwise I fear it will go the same way of the Sigma DPeses cameras, or the way of the Dodo... hardly anyone ended up buying those...

The compromises of the fixed lens, are just that, compromises... photography is all about getting the right camera/tool for your photography, and accept some compromises on the way. For me, the X100 is too expensive, and I can get along with the Panasonic GF1 and 20mm pancake lens. Sure, I have to compromise on the lack of in-camera viewfinder, but I can accept that.

It is interesting, but I can not help thinking that the X100 is what the Leica X1 should have been in the first place.

viewfinder · « **Reply #13 on:** February 22, 2011, 04:39:49 am »

Because the x100 is not about photography it's about 'style culture'. If it succeeds in making any real money other makers will seize upon the formula and we will be deluged with styled cameras that offer vastly reduced potential for twice the price. The x100 is simply a styled expensive gadget,..there's nothing wrong with enjoying gadgets and personally, I LOVE to play with gadgets. The problem is that this is being touted as a serious camera which, to me it niether is, nor is intended to be. Having watched the digital scene hopefully for the last five or so years we have seen a distinct lack of design and originality prevaling, and now this is going in the wrong direction......

.........There's nothing wrong with a 'less is more' approach but this is going to attempt the stule icon category with a potentially detrimental influence for photographers looking for flexible modern systems. If x100 was in the two hundred quid bracket I would have one to keep in the car,...the trouble is it's FOUR times that price and is aimed a people who could'nt care less about photography.

Steve Weldon · « **Reply #14 on:** February 22, 2011, 05:27:01 am »

Quote from: viewfinder on February 22, 2011, 04:39:49 am

Because the x100 is not about photography it's about 'style culture'. If it succeeds in making any real money other makers will seize upon the formula and we will be deluged with styled cameras that offer vastly reduced potential for twice the price. The x100 is simply a styled expensive gadget,..there's nothing wrong with enjoying gadgets and personally, I LOVE to play with gadgets. The problem is that this is being touted as a serious camera which, to me it niether is, nor is intended to be. Having watched the digital scene hopefully for the last five or so years we have seen a distinct lack of design and originality prevaling, and now this is going in the wrong direction......

.........There's nothing wrong with a 'less is more' approach but this is going to attempt the stule icon category with a potentially detrimental influence for photographers looking for flexible modern systems. If x100 was in the two hundred quid bracket I would have one to keep in the car,...the trouble is it's FOUR times that price and is aimed a people who could'nt care less about photography.

I suppose this is one opinion, and I did ask for opinions.

Perhaps you'll find someone else who agrees with you, but maybe not on a photography forum.

tokengirl · « **Reply #15 on:** February 22, 2011, 06:43:03 am »

Quote from: viewfinder on February 22, 2011, 04:39:49 am

.........There's nothing wrong with a 'less is more' approach but this is going to attempt the stule icon category with a potentially detrimental influence for photographers looking for flexible modern systems.

I am willing to bet right now that the majority of people who buy this camera already own "flexible modern systems" and just want a small camera that produces good quality images without having to lug around their "flexible modern system".

If this camera is not for you, that's fine. But it sounds like you're crapping all over it because it's not what YOU want.

JohnBrew · « **Reply #16 on:** February 22, 2011, 06:58:31 am »

Just waiting for the reviews...

JBerardi · « **Reply #17 on:** February 22, 2011, 07:34:12 am »

Quote from: viewfinder on February 22, 2011, 04:39:49 am

the trouble is it's FOUR times that price and is aimed a people who could'nt care less about photography.

Ok, so that's why you don't like the iPhone, but what about the X100?

While they could have paired the button/feature soup back a little more if they wanted to really make a photographers camera, I'm not sure how you can look at the state of cameras today and come to the conclusion that the X100 is the one being marketed at people who don't care about photography. Honestly, at this point, any camera that doesn't have Baby Mode and Baby Mode 2 on the main dial easily qualifies as a photographer-centric design.

I do like the X100, but that viewfinder is going to have to work insanely well to keep me from going m4/3s... or the price is going to have to fall.

Ben Rubinstein · « **Reply #18 on:** February 22, 2011, 08:05:23 am »

Just too expensive, like almost double the price that it should be, I can see why Viewfinder thinks that it is going to be marketed specifically at the 'camera jewllery' crowd. For all that a Leica M camera may be an incredible picture taking machine, I'll bet most of those sold are hardly used 'in action' and given the Japanese market, that is who this camera, especially at that price, will be heavily marketed to.

Shame, with a 50mm equivelent lens and a more reasonable price, I'd be all over it. You can't even expect it to drop that much in price either, although the Epson RD-1 is ancient in pretty much every way, it's price on the 2nd hand market is still super inflated for what it is and I doubt it will be much different.

Steve Weldon · « **Reply #19 on:** February 22, 2011, 09:36:10 am »

Quote from: Ben Rubinstein on February 22, 2011, 08:05:23 am

Just too expensive, like almost double the price that it should be, I can see why Viewfinder thinks that it is going to be marketed specifically at the 'camera jewllery' crowd.

I think some people are basing what it 'should be' priced at, by comparing image quality and digital features as the pricing indicators. I think there is potential for this camera to offer much more. We won't know until the first ones are in the hands of trusted reviewers, but a 35mm F2 lens of quality just by itself could be worth the price difference not to mention the apparent (and previewed) build quality. But to say there isn't a market out there at this price point for a quality camera of this type.. or that 'real photographers' won't be using it.. is short sighted at best. We don't know yet, but it's looking like Fuji made the perfect blend of quality camera body, ergonomics, and digital capability into one sweet little box that will become a 'must have' camera. It will depend on the lens, image quality, and supporting electronics.. the areas which haven't yet been confirmed. The camera body itself looks good from here.

I wrote this about the x100 for fun. I hope it comes true. http://www.bangkokimages.com/Articles/Steves-Musings/entryid/964/Fuji-X100-A-Convert.aspx

Author Topic: Fuji X100 (Read 25604 times)