Wiyum
Established
To be clear to others, I use the x100s in similar situations all the time with no complaint. I'm guessing the PDAF pixels make the difference, but I find AF with the OVF in low light party situations to be quite solid.
Can the Fuji x100s compare to a film Leica? Camera advice needed.
- Thread starter parasko
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 82
- Views 16K
To be clear to others, I use the x100s in similar situations all the time with no complaint. I'm guessing the PDAF pixels make the difference, but I find AF with the OVF in low light party situations to be quite solid.
thejameskendall
Established
If I had to choose between my M6 and my X100 I'd choose the X100 every time. I'm pleased I have the M6 and I love film, but the Fuji is so much more versatile. For a camera small and light enough to carry in nearly every situation there are few compromises (as long as you're happy with the 35mm FOV).
Sure, the focus could be better in very, very low light, but it's still easier and faster to focus in nearly every situation than a rangefinder (for me, at least). The main reason I hang onto my M6 is that it will work without batteries, something that I find reassuring.
My X100 is the best £300 I've ever spent on photographic equipment.
Sure, the focus could be better in very, very low light, but it's still easier and faster to focus in nearly every situation than a rangefinder (for me, at least). The main reason I hang onto my M6 is that it will work without batteries, something that I find reassuring.
My X100 is the best £300 I've ever spent on photographic equipment.
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
I bought my X100 with the intention of selling it later, when I realized that a digital RF is not the answer to my prayers.
However, I ended up keeping it because, while it's still NOT an answer, it's a decent stopgap measure or continuity solution to a silly problem: how to shoot a digital P&S as if it were a Leica M9.
All in all, I've continued using it despite its whims (as it was noted above, you cannot shoot it with the lens wide open at a fast shutterspeed, even if it's at a low ISO). It's decent, gets the job done and can be fun to use, but as Frank said, any of the breathmint-sized buttons gets in the way of your fingers (even if you don't mean it) and all hell breaks loose (like suddenly the camera goes from shooting only one still image at the time, to automatic bracketing in all shots; thus, when you depress the shutter release button, the camera takes three or four photographs, all but one bracketed).
Try the X100 yourself and get a used one or refurbished. Just don't give up the M7. Yours truly took his M5 and the X100 on a trip to Europe. I came back home and stashed away the Fuji, but the Leica kept on ticking... because I liked using it. And, BTW, there's no comparison in sharpness between the files you get from a Fuji and the ones from any decent dSLR (like, a Nikon D700 in my case).
Sorry if I repeated what others said. Best of luck! 🙂
However, I ended up keeping it because, while it's still NOT an answer, it's a decent stopgap measure or continuity solution to a silly problem: how to shoot a digital P&S as if it were a Leica M9.
All in all, I've continued using it despite its whims (as it was noted above, you cannot shoot it with the lens wide open at a fast shutterspeed, even if it's at a low ISO). It's decent, gets the job done and can be fun to use, but as Frank said, any of the breathmint-sized buttons gets in the way of your fingers (even if you don't mean it) and all hell breaks loose (like suddenly the camera goes from shooting only one still image at the time, to automatic bracketing in all shots; thus, when you depress the shutter release button, the camera takes three or four photographs, all but one bracketed).
Try the X100 yourself and get a used one or refurbished. Just don't give up the M7. Yours truly took his M5 and the X100 on a trip to Europe. I came back home and stashed away the Fuji, but the Leica kept on ticking... because I liked using it. And, BTW, there's no comparison in sharpness between the files you get from a Fuji and the ones from any decent dSLR (like, a Nikon D700 in my case).
Sorry if I repeated what others said. Best of luck! 🙂
FA Limited
missing in action
what are you implying here? the X100 is sharper than the dSLR 😉? i don't think sharpness from the X100 is a problem at all unless you're always shooting wide open
elshaneo
Panographer
I think it's unfair to compare digital vs film nowadays, because sadly 35mm films are getting very expensive to buy and process, that's why I sold almost all my Leica M film cameras I had, and I have to admit that I miss shooting 35mm film.
Anyway if we are talking about digital only, I think that the Fuji X100S is the much better value for what you get, and of course, the Leica M digitals are certainly much much better in terms of build quality, they better be since they are much more expensive than the Fujis.
My own Fuji X100 is certainly a great compromise to when I was shooting 35mm film with my Leica M cameras. My recommendation is to go to your local camera shop and try it first, and I think for the money you're going to pay, you'll be more than happy with it in the end 🙂
I also think that the current selling price of the Fuji X100 with the latest firmware update is even more better value compared to the Fuji X100S 😀
Anyway if we are talking about digital only, I think that the Fuji X100S is the much better value for what you get, and of course, the Leica M digitals are certainly much much better in terms of build quality, they better be since they are much more expensive than the Fujis.
My own Fuji X100 is certainly a great compromise to when I was shooting 35mm film with my Leica M cameras. My recommendation is to go to your local camera shop and try it first, and I think for the money you're going to pay, you'll be more than happy with it in the end 🙂
I also think that the current selling price of the Fuji X100 with the latest firmware update is even more better value compared to the Fuji X100S 😀
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
I meant to say the opposite. And I did compare shots done with my Nikon AF-S 24-70 wide open at f2.8 and the Fuji... and I found more detail in the Nikon images. Yes, I was pixel-peeping for a while. And, yes, I like shooting wide-open most of the time. Why? As joe, our celebrated forum monitor says, "sharpness is a bourgeois concept."
Or was it capital letters? 🙂
Hope this clears out the misunderstanding.
Richard G
Veteran
...and the flash is very good, slow sync and fill flash in daylight in particular.
Flood
Established
What makes you say that? I just took a test shot at 1/4000s at f/2 without a problem.
om.ch
Member
You can turn the dial to 1/4k but if the aperture is f/2 it will be shooting at 1/1k anyways. It's just the design of the leaf shutter. Hence the built in ND filter.
om.ch
Member
While I like having a fill flash always at the ready, it must be noted that if you have the lens filter add-on installed there will be a slight "dent" in the flash coverage area.
Harry S.
Well-known
I used to be a staunch advocate of the Fuji X cameras, but now not so much...I still like the cameras but In my experience they fall a bit short on image quality when used to modern FF DSLR's and medium format.
I used to think these cameras were great in this regard but in my experience they really tend to smear detail in an ugly manner, especially with green foliage.
IMO.
I used to think these cameras were great in this regard but in my experience they really tend to smear detail in an ugly manner, especially with green foliage.
IMO.
willie_901
Veteran
At this point in time I have no problems with detail from Xtrans cameras. In fact, the X-PRo 1 with XF lenses delivers a bit more detail than my D700 with Nikon's best glass. Some of the detail is due to 16 MP vs 12 MP.ANd the D700 is a dinosaur. But the Fujifilm raw files are a bit better. Of course the rendering parameters I used for these comparisons were quite different and I used LR 5.2. LR 5.3 is even better.
______
Well-known
It is after all an APS-C sensor, so you would not reasonably expect the same performance as FF or medium format.
IMO.
FA Limited
missing in action
i was just poking fun at you cuz you didn't actually say which one was better 😛 ... i agree w/ Harry S, to me there is a step up in quality and detail in a FF sensor.
blackfriday
Member
I'm coming from Zeiss Ikon Rangefinders, film SLRs, Nikon DSLRs to Fuji X-Pro and X100.
When a friend of mine lend me his X100 over a weekend I gave it back to him with mostly negative comments. I simply could not manage the AF, didn't like the focus by wire (having the consistency of dough), didn't understand the logic behind the menues and detested the sound of the shutter. But... there were some really good frames...the focus spot on, magic in the lights and shadows... and this thing was so damn small...
To make a long story short, 3 month later I bought a used X100 - just to find out that the AF is much much better than I thought once you understand it and get used to it, that manual focus has been improved a lot by the latest firmware updates and that this weird shutter sound can be switched off completely 🙂 The X100 is my every day camera now and I never, never would sell it.
As some of you already said the X100 is a camera you have to get used to. Then you will be rewarded with excellent image quality. Playing with it for some minutes in a camera store may lead to a decision you may regret.
When a friend of mine lend me his X100 over a weekend I gave it back to him with mostly negative comments. I simply could not manage the AF, didn't like the focus by wire (having the consistency of dough), didn't understand the logic behind the menues and detested the sound of the shutter. But... there were some really good frames...the focus spot on, magic in the lights and shadows... and this thing was so damn small...
To make a long story short, 3 month later I bought a used X100 - just to find out that the AF is much much better than I thought once you understand it and get used to it, that manual focus has been improved a lot by the latest firmware updates and that this weird shutter sound can be switched off completely 🙂 The X100 is my every day camera now and I never, never would sell it.
As some of you already said the X100 is a camera you have to get used to. Then you will be rewarded with excellent image quality. Playing with it for some minutes in a camera store may lead to a decision you may regret.
Andrea Taurisano
il cimento
ALL cameras are to get used to. And that is the very problem with GAS: we spend more and more money trying to achieve what the gear we already have could easily have given us, if only we had spent more time (with it) instead.
om.ch
Member
Reminds me of this quote from Alec Soth: "This is the same problem I have with digital photography. The potential is always remarkable. But the medium never settles. Each year there is a better camera to buy and new software to download. The user never has time to become comfortable with the tool. Consequently too much of the work is merely about the technology. The HDR and QTVR fads are good examples. Instead of focusing on the subject, users obsess over RAW conversion, Photoshop plug-ins, and on and on. For good work to develop the technology needs to become as stable and functional as a typewriter."
blackfriday
Member
I totally agree. This is the reason why we should stay with a camera we love.
emraphoto
Veteran
i have spent very long periods shooting M cameras and x100s (2 original x100). i have worked on both and as per image quality/file quality the x100 is absolutely ok with me. some might say i have low standards in the pixel peeping/corner sharpness/bokeh department and honestly they are right. that said, i have had work run regularly in print etc. from the x100 with no editor complaining. i have also made gallery prints regularly at 16x24 from jpeg files and again, no complaints. horses for courses as they say.
what i can talk about is the user interface with an M and the x100. i have yet to shoot an x100s. as mentioned, the 'buttons and dials' end of things leaves some very frustrated and at times, myself included. what really bothers me about this is that solid, simple interfaces and the logic that goes into them is not fresh as of the digital camera inception. why something like a compensation dial being loose or easily moved is overlooked when the camera is launched, baffles me. as well, the buttons and the ability to press them and quickly make changes/move thorough the menus on the x100 seems to have slipped under the radar prior to release. these things really should be unacceptable at this stage and i can't get past the WTF? point when i start thinking about them.
the af performance of the x100 is acceptable to me. i have, in the past shot nikon v1 cameras as they are blazing fast, and in the field that can be a real relief. the x100 is nowhere near as capable in this regard. it often stumbles badly if you make the mistake of letting it go to sleep. i have a well entrenched habit of constantly working the release to make sure my cameras are ready to go but again, why are we still battling this core issue? the reason many photojournalists use big pro cameras is because they are fast, very well thought out in the interface and intuitive. so, yeah... with the x100 i work around the 'speed of response' issues by carrying many batteries and keeping the camera awake.
i work around the comp dial by taping my cameras up a lot. not for stealth per say... more to keep settings where they are and covering any lights. i remember the canon g cameras i was using for a while needed 4 or 5 pieces of tape just to cover all the stupid lights. bloody christmas tree.
manual focus on the original x100 was a disaster from the start. why the camera came on the market with the manual focus concept it did is once again, beyond me. this isn't 1st generation stuff solely dependent on sensor tech. in my opinion, if a compact camera isn't equipped with peaking in one way, shape or form, a mistake has been made. another small change could have helped the camera out and it is as old as the hills. dof scales on the lens. or at least a dof representation on the manual focus scale of the optical finder.
now, with all the above, i still shoot the little things and most likely will upgrade when it is needed, to the x100s. the files are great when the light is good or bad and with some user work arounds it is a very capable little machine. hopeful FUJI will iron out these core concepts with the x100 line as they could be an absolute classic for documentary/reportage/journalism.
the M body is, as most already know, incredibly solid, simple and with a very well thought out approach to user interface. with very little practice and work, you can be quick as a hare. i don't shoot digital M as my experience with Leica service has not been good. i am not one of the types who considers a 2 month turn around on repairs acceptable. they are temperamental and buggy at times and service is a real consideration for a few working photographers i know. i suspect though, an M9 might be in my future and maybe this area has been improved upon at Leica.
so, different beasts entirely. but can the x100/x100s do the same job? well, if you are comfortable with workarounds and dealing with some of these issues then yes they can. buy yourself 4-5 batteries and fast cards. go to town.
what i can talk about is the user interface with an M and the x100. i have yet to shoot an x100s. as mentioned, the 'buttons and dials' end of things leaves some very frustrated and at times, myself included. what really bothers me about this is that solid, simple interfaces and the logic that goes into them is not fresh as of the digital camera inception. why something like a compensation dial being loose or easily moved is overlooked when the camera is launched, baffles me. as well, the buttons and the ability to press them and quickly make changes/move thorough the menus on the x100 seems to have slipped under the radar prior to release. these things really should be unacceptable at this stage and i can't get past the WTF? point when i start thinking about them.
the af performance of the x100 is acceptable to me. i have, in the past shot nikon v1 cameras as they are blazing fast, and in the field that can be a real relief. the x100 is nowhere near as capable in this regard. it often stumbles badly if you make the mistake of letting it go to sleep. i have a well entrenched habit of constantly working the release to make sure my cameras are ready to go but again, why are we still battling this core issue? the reason many photojournalists use big pro cameras is because they are fast, very well thought out in the interface and intuitive. so, yeah... with the x100 i work around the 'speed of response' issues by carrying many batteries and keeping the camera awake.
i work around the comp dial by taping my cameras up a lot. not for stealth per say... more to keep settings where they are and covering any lights. i remember the canon g cameras i was using for a while needed 4 or 5 pieces of tape just to cover all the stupid lights. bloody christmas tree.
manual focus on the original x100 was a disaster from the start. why the camera came on the market with the manual focus concept it did is once again, beyond me. this isn't 1st generation stuff solely dependent on sensor tech. in my opinion, if a compact camera isn't equipped with peaking in one way, shape or form, a mistake has been made. another small change could have helped the camera out and it is as old as the hills. dof scales on the lens. or at least a dof representation on the manual focus scale of the optical finder.
now, with all the above, i still shoot the little things and most likely will upgrade when it is needed, to the x100s. the files are great when the light is good or bad and with some user work arounds it is a very capable little machine. hopeful FUJI will iron out these core concepts with the x100 line as they could be an absolute classic for documentary/reportage/journalism.
the M body is, as most already know, incredibly solid, simple and with a very well thought out approach to user interface. with very little practice and work, you can be quick as a hare. i don't shoot digital M as my experience with Leica service has not been good. i am not one of the types who considers a 2 month turn around on repairs acceptable. they are temperamental and buggy at times and service is a real consideration for a few working photographers i know. i suspect though, an M9 might be in my future and maybe this area has been improved upon at Leica.
so, different beasts entirely. but can the x100/x100s do the same job? well, if you are comfortable with workarounds and dealing with some of these issues then yes they can. buy yourself 4-5 batteries and fast cards. go to town.
SausalitoDog
Well-known
The Leica, heavy but great interchangeable lenses.
The x100s, very light, hybrid VF, very fast auto focus (but adequate manual focus, fine zone focus) with a fixed lens that is terrific even in low light.
So there will be situations where either will be better than the other.
The x100s, very light, hybrid VF, very fast auto focus (but adequate manual focus, fine zone focus) with a fixed lens that is terrific even in low light.
So there will be situations where either will be better than the other.
