£899 - Fuji X100

Lens Hood? I've not needed a lens hood on any currently manufactured modern digital lens. My 17-50/2.8 came with one but is very very rarely used, I doubt that the X100 will have flare problems to warrant a hood
 
I'm not buying one but I don't think this price is out of line when one considers that the lens is a 23mm F2. Quick check shows the Sony 24/2 goes for $1200. Good primes this wide and this fast are always pricey. As was the case with the fixed lens RFs from yesteryear that put nicely spec'd glass on their FLRF offerings - "the lens is worth the cost alone..." That was always the deal with fixed lens rangefinders, traditionally... Great glass at a price that beat the pants off similarly spec'd interchangeable lens cameras - be it rangefinder or SLR.

So, please remind these knuckleheads who are balking at the price that such spec'd primes are rare to begin with, and using the Sony "SAL" as an example go for about the same cost as the X100 - camera and body...

Sony SAL-24F20Z 24mm f/2.0 A-mount Wide Angle Lens by Sony
Buy new: $1,249.00
AMAZON
 
bigeye said:
PS - I would have bought the used SWC that just went for the same price in the classifieds.
Click to expand...

But see, that's my point. These are two totally different cameras. I could understand if you say something like for $1200 I can get a DSLR that I feel would be a better value. However, if you were never planning to buy the camera (or a digital camera) in the first place because you'd rather have a film camera... it makes me wonder why you visit the thread. That is what videogamemaker was getting at.

That said the SWC would be a whole lot of fun, so I understand. 🙂
 
Last edited:
videogamemaker said:
I was thinking something last night about when people complain about the high cost making the camera "not worth it". Why care enough to post about it, unless the camera has struck a "lust-nerve". If it was truly not worth it, wouldn't it be so easy to walk away as to not need discussing it? Caring enough to post in a derogatory manner gives away the individuals desire for the camera, which speaks to the value they've imbued into it.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I can't believe all the bad vibes here.🙁
 
How do we know the price will go down in 3 month? The 5D2, X1, D700, M9, aren't any cheaper than when they first came out. This isn't a Power Shot here that's going to be replaced in less than a year. Expect it to be $1200-1000 USD brand new until the replacement.
 
jsrockit said:
But see, that's my point. These are two totally different cameras. I could understand if you say something like for $1200 I can get a DSLR that I feel would be a better value. However, if you were never planning to buy the camera (or a digital camera) in the first place because you'd rather have a film camera... it makes me wonder why you visit the thread.
Click to expand...

It's entertaining? Having M8 owners believe they need this camera is a great study in the success of social media marketing.
 
Last edited:
NickTrop said:
I'm not buying one but I don't think this price is out of line when one considers that the lens is a 23mm F2. Quick check shows the Sony 24/2 goes for $1200. Good primes this wide and this fast are always pricey. As was the case with the fixed lens RFs from yesteryear that put nicely spec'd glass on their FLRF offerings - "the lens is worth the cost alone..." That was always the deal with fixed lens rangefinders, traditionally... Great glass at a price that beat the pants off similarly spec'd interchangeable lens cameras - be it rangefinder or SLR.

So, please remind these knuckleheads who are balking at the price that such spec'd primes are rare to begin with, and using the Sony "SAL" as an example go for about the same cost as the X100 - camera and body...

Sony SAL-24F20Z 24mm f/2.0 A-mount Wide Angle Lens by Sony
Buy new: $1,249.00
AMAZON
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more!

I'm not seeing how people could be stinging the price - I was expecting 1600-1800 at least. It's got a fantastic fast lens, it's made of metal, it has a real optical viewfinder supplemented by a new technology electronic viewfinder, and it has manual controls and style which probably means it's a niche product.

1200us is extremely reasonable!!
 
whitecat said:
I think ant decent point and shoot should have a flash.
Click to expand...

Which is, indeed, a powerful argument for the X100 NOT having one. Historically, 'serious' cameras don't have built-in flashes, and X100 wants to postion itself as a 'serious' camera.

If I didn't already use an M9, I'd consider the X100 very seriously indeed, as being the nearest digicam I've ever seen to the 1936 Leica IIIa I bought in 1969.

Even so, I'd want to be confident that it was reasonably close to my IIIa, e.g. no autofocus problems, and no unforeseen problems with the double viewfinder.

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Which is, indeed, a powerful argument for the X100 NOT having one. Historically, 'serious' cameras don't have built-in flashes, and X100 wants to postion itself as a 'serious' camera.

If I didn't already use an M9, I'd consider the X100 very seriously indeed, as being the nearest digicam I've ever seen to the 1936 Leica IIIa I bought in 1969.

Even so, I'd want to be confident that it was reasonably close to my IIIa, e.g. no autofocus problems, and no unforeseen problems with the double viewfinder.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Some cameras are able to use flash purely as a focus assist, but are able to be set not to fire for the actual exposure. A very convenient feature. (I know the canon 40D was able to do that). If this feature is included in the X100, it could be very nice indeed, in situations where a pre flash wouldn't be distracting or inappropriate.

At today's technology, it probably cost an extra 50 cents to include, and it doesn't make it any larger. It's kind of a "why not" feature at this point. I won't use it, but I don't count it against Fuji for including it.
 
Personally, I think the X-100 is following the lead of the Leica X1, and added the hybrid optical/electronic viewfinder. The X1 has a built-in flash, so the X-100 has a built in flash.

Personally, I would have preferred to see a clip-on flash such as that used on the Contax T.

I wonder how long it until the Leica X2 comes out.
 
A couple of online retailers have the UK price at £1,020. Good encouragement to keep on paying for b/w processing for the Hexar, for another six months or so.
 
videogamemaker said:
Some cameras are able to use flash purely as a focus assist, but are able to be set not to fire for the actual exposure. A very convenient feature. (I know the canon 40D was able to do that). If this feature is included in the X100, it could be very nice indeed, in situations where a pre flash wouldn't be distracting or inappropriate.

At today's technology, it probably cost an extra 50 cents to include, and it doesn't make it any larger. It's kind of a "why not" feature at this point. I won't use it, but I don't count it against Fuji for including it.
Click to expand...

Sure, I was just looking at it from a marketing viewpoint. I'd hope, though, that it could be disabled permanently as a menu option, not each time you turn the camera on (as was regrettably the case with many otherwise excellent film compacts). There are really very few situations in which I want a flash going off and saying, "Hey, look, folks, I'm taking pictures." Generally, for me, any flash, pre- or otherwise, is distracting or inappropriate.

Cheers,

R.
 
bigeye said:
It's entertaining? Having M8 owners believe they need this camera is a great study in the success of social media marketing.
Click to expand...

Huh? why? that's so silly to say. Perhaps I am sick of manual (zone) focus and don't feel the need to blow loads of money on incremently better Leica lenses.

I understand this camera isn't for everyone, but for people like me who like AF, like small cameras, and prefer to use a 35mm equiv 99% of the time, it appears to be perfect.

Even sillier than being "tricked" by social media marketing is hanging out in a thread about a camera that you don't like...
 
Roger Hicks said:
Sure, I was just looking at it from a marketing viewpoint. I'd hope, though, that it could be disabled permanently as a menu option, not each time you turn the camera on (as was regrettably the case with many otherwise excellent film compacts). There are really very few situations in which I want a flash going off and saying, "Hey, look, folks, I'm taking pictures." Generally, for me, any flash, pre- or otherwise, is distracting or inappropriate.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

They have specified the camera remembers all user settings after being turned off and on again. I am hoping the flash doesn't even try to come on unless you have it in a full auto mode (again, this is how the 40D worked). My guess is that it will need manually enabling for sure, except possibly with both dials in the Auto setting (shutter and aperture) but even then it might need to be turned on manually.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom