Can the X100 be considered 'professional grade'?

[dreilly]

I'm considering it for professional use: photography of restaurants (busy kitchens and dimly-lit dining rooms). The focal length is about the sweet spot and if the AF and high ISO performance is better than my m43 camera, I think it would work out quite well. In terms of quality of image...I have no doubts it will produce images on a par with other crop-sensor cameras within its spec'd limitations, that is, in the 35mm equivalent focal length. It focuses pretty close which also helps me with food macros, which aren't bug close. So I'd consider it "pro" in that sense (This all depends as I've said a few times already on high iso performance AND AF speed being up to the task).

When I hear "pro body" however like the rumored Olympus m43 pro body, I do think of weather sealing, among other things. The X100 doesn't have that or we'd have heard about it.

 

[gavinlg]

Yes it will certainly be used by other pros for high level output I'm sure. The thing you have to ask is wether you're happy using only the 35mm focal length. I wouln't give up the 5d - that's for sure.

 

[shashinka-ichiban]

I define a professional camera based on its intended use. Example, I have an old D2Hs with 150k on the shutter, I can consistently fired off that camera every day a hundred plus times a day for seven years without fear of failure. I can smack a protester over the head with the bottom fop the camera without fear of mech failure. I do not think the same could be said for a Nikon D40. I can't see being able to shoot 500 frames a day for a year, nor can i see it holding up the first time the pentaprism gets a quick snap to the head bumping in to a door frame.

 

[rxmd]

I look at the X100 and it's a winner for me. I like viewfinders, external flashes and large sensor/smallish body cameras - X100 ticks the boxes so I'll get it.

But I'm also wondering if it's quality could be good enough to replace my 5dmk2 as my go to pro camera for most jobs.

You should have a pretty clear idea whether a fixed-lens 35mm-equivalent camera is sufficient for you. As far as the quality is concerned, I think the way you phrase your question (the quality "could be" sufficient, rather than "is" sufficient) already says enough. I suggest you wait until the thing is actually on the market, and then you'll be able to answer that question for yourself and for your own field of work, instead of hanging around and reading hearsay threads based on unpacking videos and demo pictures posted on blogs in Norway and Korea.

I think a professional is someone who doesn't agonize about what stuff might do for him that isn't really on the market yet, but considers the bottom line. Just wait a few months and the question will take care of itself, and before those few months have passed you couldn't use the camera professionally anyway.

 

[former member]

In the 1970s, I knew several wedding photographers that kept a fixed-lens RF in the bag with the SLR's. Great for low-light, moderate wide-angle fast lens, auto-exposure. Great for informal shots, especially at the receptions. As stated, "Professional camera" is one that you get paid to use.

 

[leicashot]

Seeing how manufacturers are making professional products more so for amateurs than 'actual (working) professionals' I think any camera can be considered as 'professional grade' as long as it's being 'used' in professional hands. I certainly plan on using this for my professional work, but couldn't care less how Fuji or users label it.

Besides, isn't everyone a professional these days? That designation in the photographic industry is no loger a valid term, as it's easily applied to anyone who ends their name with 'photography', and is paid more than $0.01c per assignment (or volunteers their work). Add a .com or flickr account and it's a fully fledged business.

 

[shashinka-ichiban]

Seeing how manufacturers are making professional products more so for amateurs than 'actual (working) professionals' I think any camera can be considered as 'professional grade' as long as it's being 'used' in professional hands. I certainly plan on using this for my professional work, but couldn't care less how Fuji or users label it.

Besides, isn't everyone a professional these days? That designation in the photographic industry is no loger a valid term, as it's easily applied to anyone who ends their name with 'photography', and is paid more than $0.01c per assignment (or volunteers their work). Add a .com or flickr account and it's a fully fledged business.

Unless something in America has changed over the past few years, to claim one was professional, you had to claim 80% of your annual income coming from photography. Part-time professionals was in the 50-80% range. I beleive the actualy definitons and income bracket comes from the Department of Labor. I can't speak for Europe or oz.

 

[Neare]

Once upon a time 6mp's was more than enough, magazines haven't gotten any bigger.

 

[PKR]

Well... a 14 x 44 billboard only requires a 6mp camera for the optimal printer resolution (the printers are really low resolution)....

Only a jerk of a client cares what camera you use. Not saying they don't exist, but the ones who do are the low-end crappy ones.

If I can make a good image, Outside or Esquire or Pentagram or the biggest ad agencies really don't care.

As for "pro support" hahaha as if Canon or Nikon really care. Maybe they show up for Sports Illustrated type stuff but you're not solely using an X100 for that are you?

I spoke with a photographer recently who was using one of the newer Phase One 40MP backs on a 2 1/4 camera. We have a P25 in house and it's over kill for most situations. I asked him why he was using the 40, he kind of rolled his eyes and said the client (IBM) wanted it. We both agreed that 24MP will satisfy the most demanding end use. I get by with 14 in FX and less in DX. No problems so far. Properly scanned 35mm film is usually good for 24MP. The pixel race is getting to be a joke. The camera manufactures need to address the bandwidth issue. The new Sony APS-C sensor used in the Alpha and D7000 has better bandwidth than many of the FX sensor cameras (from all the popular makers) at a fraction of the cost. Digital cameras are becoming a disposable item, like a laptop. Ignore all the marketing BS and buy what will work for you, Test the camera. Be careful of listening to owners who have their ego tied up in their choice of hardware. Look at the image results. A better camera is just a few months away.. like a laptop.

And I must add that Frank dispenses very good advice on these topics. He works with the gear and doesn't seem to be emotionally attached to most of his cameras (we all have our old favorites). He's concerned with the output in the real world.. not a marketing Spec. sheet, produced by the camera company's Ad agency.

 

[leicashot]

Seeing how manufacturers are making professional products more so for amateurs than 'actual (working) professionals' I think any camera can be considered as 'professional grade' as long as it's being 'used' in professional hands. I certainly plan on using this for my professional work, but couldn't care less how Fuji or users label it.

Besides, isn't everyone a professional these days? That designation in the photographic industry is no loger a valid term, as it's easily applied to anyone who ends their name with 'photography', and is paid more than $0.01c per assignment (or volunteers their work). Add a .com or flickr account and it's a fully fledged business.

Law is one thing, and self-promotion is another. No one really cares about reality, only perception, especially the manufacturers marketing products to amateurs claiming to be professionals. The more manufacturers can make products that empower amateurs to feel like pros, then they are indeed succeeding - especially when you consider that a 'pro' such as Mr McNally can promote the use of TTL flash when all pros know that for commercial professional shoots, you MUST shoot in manual for exposure consistency and accuracy. No advanced TTL system can ever know how to achieve such accurate and consistent results as manual operation in skilled hands.....but everyone is buying into it.

Thank god for Leica sticking to their guns.....for now.

 

[PKR]

Law is one thing, and self-promotion is another. No one really cares about reality, only perception, especially the manufacturers marketing products to amateurs claiming to be professionals. The more manufacturers can make products that empower amateurs to feel like pros, then they are indeed succeeding - especially when you consider that a 'pro' such as Mr McNally can promote the use of TTL flash when all pros know that for commercial professional shoots, you MUST shoot in manual for exposure consistency and accuracy. No advanced TTL system can ever know how to achieve such accurate and consistent results as manual operation in skilled hands.....but everyone is buying into it.

Thank god for Leica sticking to their guns.....for now.

One of my favorite quotes:

"If people believed in fact, there would be libraries as big as Disneyland"

John Barbour, Television Producer

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Depends on the professional.

Some "professional" photographers use a Holga. It's "professional grade" for that grade of professional.

 

[dreilly]

I think of the word "pro" in different terms. I can't claim 80% of my income from photography, not even close. without a solid day job I'd be really struggling. I'm not the only one. Photography as a profession is really changing. One of the places I shoot for, a museum, had a staff photographer for years. Now they just use freelancers like me.

I'm pleased I get to do one of the things I love and get paid for it. Who knows where it will lead. The part of "professional" that I concentrate on isn't gear or income but how I carry myself and my results. I'm deadly serious about my photography, and I'm always trying to improve. I act confident even if I'm experimenting and going out on a limb. I've found that if you act like a pro, other people take you quite seriously. Of course, it helps to have output that resonates with people. I did a job with an E-P1. Nobody blinked (except when I was taking their photo!) 🙂 Maybe when I put it on the end of a monopod, set the self timer, and shot them cooking from above they got an idea why a small camera can be useful!

Pro is as pro does. The tools fit the job.

That said, if I was a camera manufacturer I would market certain cameras as "pro". They would have: double card slots (and the ability to write to both), weather-proofing, easy access to changing all key parameters (including WB and ISO), a great LCD screen that is movable, and a quality 100% VF. Note I didn't say it had to be an SLR, optical viewfinder, interchangable lens, ff format. It would be a tough, reliable, serious tool. And those parameters are idiosyncratic to me.

The X100--I wouldn't market it as "pro". But as a pro (or someone who plays one on TV) I wouldn't hesitate to use it if it fit the job. I'm excited to try this camera in a restaurant kitchen and see what it does.

 

[jsrockit]

Maybe when I put it on the end of a monopod, set the self timer, and shot them cooking from above they got an idea why a small camera can be useful!

That's a very good idea...