A (brief) visit with the X100

[foolproof]

Holy specific questions, Batman! Um...compared to a camera I've seen but never used? It's, uh, realer.

It's definitely not as wide as an XPan; how about that?
R!

🙂 just thought it was reasonable to put it up against it as it is kinda the film version but if you aint used it well then..

Anything you could compare the viewfinder too in film rf form that you may have tried? Or even the viewfinder with digital view turned on compared to a dslr?

 

[bgb]

Nice to hear it's actually made it down to this part of the world.

Thanks for the info mate 🙂

 

[Catto]

Anything you could compare the viewfinder too in film rf form that you may have tried? Or even the viewfinder with digital view turned on compared to a dslr?

I think the best I could offer is that, comparing to my Epson R-D1, I didn't notice the viewfinder in either a good or bad way when I was handed the X100. That is, it didn't surprise me that it was so big, or so small, or so cluttered, or anything like that.

I guess it must be different though, as I could easily see the in the X100, where the 28mm (=42mm effective view) lines on the R-D1 are out to the corners of my field of view I've always found. So that would make the magnification...less than an R-D1? Did I get that right?
R

 

[foolproof]

I think the best I could offer is that, comparing to my Epson R-D1, I didn't notice the viewfinder in either a good or bad way when I was handed the X100. That is, it didn't surprise me that it was so big, or so small, or so cluttered, or anything like that.

I guess it must be different though, as I could easily see the in the X100, where the 28mm (=42mm effective view) lines on the R-D1 are out to the corners of my field of view I've always found. So that would make the magnification...less than an R-D1? Did I get that right?
R

I haven't used the RD-1, haha 🙄 Although from what I understand the rd-1's viewfinder is big (1:1 maybe) so mightn't be fair to compare.

Well if it didn't stand out immediately as being a squinty little distant peep hole then thats ok I suppose

 

[bgb]

Did they give you a price Robert? I have been told $1695 by Greg at P&V in Chch?

Sounds like it might be as good as we all hope it is .... Fuji will sell millions if it is 🙂

 

[Catto]

Did they give you a price Robert? I have been told $1695 by Greg at P&V in Chch?

Sounds like it might be as good as we all hope it is .... Fuji will sell millions if it is 🙂

As I mentioned in the blog, the official RRP is NZD$1999, so I'm a little surprised P&V are going that low right away. We'll see what happens by the time stock starts arriving, anyway!
R

 

[jsrockit]

I'd be interested to know what you can't do shoot with a 50mm Noctilux (or Summilux) at ISO1600 ?

Well, you do gain more depth of field with your lens stopped down ... sometimes f/1 or 1.4 is too shallow.

 

[Faintandfuzzy]

I'm not to worried about noise. As long as it's halfway decent, after running through Silver Efex for my Tri-X or Neopan 1600 settings, as long as the noise isn't too heavy, it won't interact with the grain layer at all.

Can't wait to get my hands on this.

 

[Catto]

I don't think anyone's going to find the noise on this beastie objectionable, frankly. The noise to price ratio (not to mention the noise to size-of-camera ratio) is a great big win, in my books. The size-of-camera to speed-of-operation ratio is also mighty fine!
R

 

[bgb]

I'm so sick of the constant teasing about this camera will Fuji please send them now or someone shoot me 🙂

AT least you have seen one in the flesh Robert so that makes you 100% ahead of us.

I wonder if i can live with only 35mm... everything else looks sweet as.

 

[Spyro]

Well, you do gain more depth of field with your lens stopped down ... sometimes f/1 or 1.4 is too shallow.

heresy! there's no such thing as too shallow depth of field!
this is the internetz, depth of field must always be as thin as possible until we're all drowned in a sea of bow-kay with only a quarter of an eyelash in focus 😀

Thanks for the write up Catto, things look promising 🙂

 

[Keith]

The more I read about this camera the more I'm beginning to think it could be the perfect weapon for shooting my low light gallery openings. ISO 6400 seems OK to me and a 35mm f2 lens is what I use exclusively on my D700 currently so that only leaves focusing which no matter what we hear will be proven when the camera is officially released ... in the field!

The only thing that worries me is that if I turn up at an opening with one of these is someone going to say to me ... "Where's your real camera?" 😛

It's ironic that news from my home town of Wellington has provided the impetus that just may have tipped me into actually buying a new one instead of hanging back and waiting for a used example!

Thanks ... I think? LOL

 

[Catto]

No worries! And thanks for all the positive comments everyone, I was kinda worried I'd be throwing myself to the lions starting any kind of post about this camera with qualitative judgements on look / feel / image quality involved. Guess I wrote enough to satisfy most people's tricksy questions!
R

 

[yanidel]

Well, you do gain more depth of field with your lens stopped down ... sometimes f/1 or 1.4 is too shallow.

I agree yet Eleskin stated he wanted to use "fast" Leica lenses at high ISO's. If depth of field was the issue, I guess he wouldn't need fast ones 😉

 

[Japan---Exposures]

Did you notice the flashing of framelines at half press and did that bother you?

I noticed that when you half-press the shutter the whole EVF display, lines and parameters, briefly disappear for a split moment (presumably focussing and metering) and I found this a little distracting.

 

[Catto]

Huh, really? I don't remember that at all - maybe I had a later version of the firmware than yours? That sounds like the kind of thing I would have noticed...
R

 

[Japan---Exposures]

The one I have seen was the first major public display in Japan to about 50.000 people last week. It probably had the latest FW.

But perhaps I am just easily irritated. :angel:

 

[jsrockit]

The one I have seen was the first major public display in Japan to about 50.000 people last week. It probably had the latest FW.

Jeez, 50,000 showed up to see this camera? Will it be 2012 before I get my hands on one. 😡

 

[jsrockit]

I agree yet Eleskin stated he wanted to use "fast" Leica lenses at high ISO's. If depth of field was the issue, I guess he wouldn't need fast ones 😉

Oops, I concede. Sorry sir.

 

[ChrisP]

heresy! there's no such thing as too shallow depth of field!
this is the internetz, depth of field must always be as thin as possible until we're all drowned in a sea of bow-kay with only a quarter of an eyelash in focus 😀

Thanks for the write up Catto, things look promising 🙂

If you really want to impress the internet with your thin DOF than just don't focus on anything! Throw the whole image out of focus and tell everyone it was shot with a 50mm f/0.5 on full frame (if you go somewhere other than RFF you can tell them its a special edition leica from 1981 and that only 12 and a half were made) and that the DOF is too thin to even see on downsized internet images. That will really get people's attention!