Chapter 3: Designers tell their X100 story

[igi]

Wait a minute...

So you people really think that the main point of the X100 is all about the craftsmanship of the camera and not its photo taking ability?

The only hype is here is the people who think Fuji's hyping the craftsmanship of the product when that page is just one of the few pages of an entire website.

IMO, the X100 is the least hyped camera with relation to it's innovations. I've seen P&S get better publicity than that...

 

[Frankie]

I have hard time to understand why on earth the camera does not directly accepts filters - 49 mm or whatever - why an adapter ???.
I hope the camera can at least accept a filter AND a lens hood at the same time. I am not going to add more to bashing of the "Design" chapter, but the filters, come on, Fuji !

Try to think in terms of front-mounted lens adapters for other focal lengths...likely a 2X first, easiest. Now look at the V-grove that is already on the front ring.

 

[Frankie]

Wait a minute...

So you people really think that the main point of the X100 is all about the craftsmanship of the camera and not its photo taking ability?

The only hype is here is the people who think Fuji's hyping the craftsmanship of the product when that page is just one of the few pages of an entire website.

IMO, the X100 is the least hyped camera with relation to it's innovations. I've seen P&S get better publicity than that...

All Fuji did was keeping the excitement warm...as is their right.

Many RFF members really don't like a "promised land" challenge to the "Let them eat cake M9/T" released at the same venue.

 

[jsrockit]

I have hard time to understand why on earth the camera does not directly accepts filters - 49 mm or whatever - why an adapter ???

One could argue that filters aren't as necessary with digital and they were trying to keep the lens as tiny and clean as possible.

 

[NickTrop]

It's a cool looking camera. At the end of the day, its output will be hardly any better or worse than any recent APSC sensor digital made by any of the major players and will fall within extremely narrow performance parameters. Buy it for the same reason you might choose an iPod over a generic MP3 player that's 1/3 the price and sounds exactly the same.

 

[videogamemaker]

It's a cool looking camera. At the end of the day, its output will be hardly any better or worse than any recent APSC sensor digital made by any of the major players and will fall within extremely narrow performance parameters. Buy it for the same reason you might choose an iPod over a generic MP3 player that's 1/3 the price and sounds exactly the same.

While it's true that most aps-c cameras have very similar performance these days, the form factor is what make many people excited, including myself. I have no problems with the output from my aging 5D, and I love the lenses, but it's huge and because of that I don't always have it on me. There are some nice smaller cameras, but none of them meet DSLR image quality save the Nex system which currently has no fast 35mm equiv, and no viewfinder.

I don't think a single person is excited only because they think the x100 will deliver amazing image quality.

 

[Richard G]

1. It looks good.
2. Also worried it can't be $1000.
3. The staged release of these extra pages, sometimes as abscure as software Easter eggs as initially not accessible from the main website, might be a first in marketing.
4. Nothing wrong with the word metaphor. It's certainly not synecdoche in that first paragraph. Homer using keel for the whole boat might have a modern equivalent here of using the shutter speed dial for the whole camera. In some ways the frequent use of 'glass' on this forum could be said to be synecdoche. A relevant metonymy might be the use of the stop bath for whatever might make me stop writing such a long paragraph on Greek grammar on a photographic forum, but that's not quite there either and is merely a metaphor. The darkroom standing for post processing is perhaps an example of metonymy.
5. I'm still going to get one.

 

[Dante_Stella]

I disagree. An 80A filter is just as valid for digital use and helps eliminate the serious blue-channel noise issue when shooting in incandescent lighting (though lowering the effective ISO). AWB doesn't add more blue light - and that's why tungsten shots are so noisy.

But the bigger issue - and this has nothing to do with optics - is that in that lens module (which looks just like a Hexar AF lens module...), you can see that the center part (containing the optics) is going to move in and out. Considering that you can't take the lens off to clean the sensor, having a lens tube into which you can screw a filter is an excellent way to prevent dirt from infiltrating its way to a (user-not-cleanable) sensor. If an adapter has good integrity (i.e., it screws on), it's better than nothing. If you have suffered through the GR Digital dust-on-the-sensor problems, you will know what I am talking about.

But really, was it necessary to cut 2mm of filter thread off? Putting it back on with an adapter that also accommodates a bayonet hood will require at least 4mm of extra depth.

And wasn't this supposed to be a 46mm filter? 49mm would be huge compared to the lens.

Dante

One could argue that filters aren't as necessary with digital and they were trying to keep the lens as tiny and clean as possible.

 

[hteasley]

There are some nice smaller cameras, but none of them meet DSLR image quality save the Nex system which currently has no fast 35mm equiv, and no viewfinder.

The X1 produces wonderful images that certainly meet "DSLR image quality", whatever that is.... its only issues, to my eyes, are in usability: slow AF and bad MF UI, primarily.

 

[videogamemaker]

The X1 produces wonderful images that certainly meet "DSLR image quality", whatever that is.... its only issues, to my eyes, are in usability: slow AF and bad MF UI, primarily.

DSLR image quality is quite easy to understand if one has worked with files produced by one. Wide dynamic range, low noise, files that can be massaged in post. Point and shoots and to a degree, m4/3rds have less of these aspects.

The x1 lacks both a viewfinder, and while f/2-f/2.8 isn't that much of a difference, I do a lot of low light work and it is a big plus for me. The x100 also doesn't have to extend the lens to take photos, the numbers aren't out yet, but I'll eat my hat if the on-button to first photo time isn't less on the X100 than on the X1. The other comparisons like AF speed/accuracy , and shutter lag will have to wait till it comes out to properly compare.

That and the X1 is much more expensive than the x100. One could buy the x100 and a flight ticket for a photo trip for the difference. I'm sure there will be plenty of X1 vs X100 head to head comparisons once it's out, and people who are not already decided based on physical aspects of the design, but are waiting on certain measurable statistics can decide then. It's a bit too early for an X1 vs X100 now though.

 

[btgc]

Nikon when announcing D3 the first thing they did was to post sample high ISO images. No fluff, no BS just concert evidence that why people should wait for their camera.

D3 and such is common DSLR like bunch of others. No craftmanship (except of photographer), no endless choices of designers how black blob finally will look. Why? Camera is just camera. It has to be more or less ergonomical and put out good pictures, yet have good battery life.

 

[Jamie Pillers]

If you've been waiting for YEARS for a camera like this, then the 'hype' is more than welcome! For all these years, all that's been available are the big black behemoth DSLRs and the little underpowered, over-menued compact cameras. And don't bother mentioning the Leicas... so over-priced for me that they never were a consideration.

 

[tapesonthefloor]

This has been discussed, but I finally have an answer to the question that's been floating around: Why did Fuji bother including an anemic little flash on the X100?

@fujiguys: "X100 external flash setting can be set to "commander" mode."

http://twitter.com/fujiguys/status/22146137708298241

(Again, this probably isn't news, but I have near-zero experience with beyond-available lighting, and light-trigger systems fascinate me.)

 

[jsrockit]

D3 and such is common DSLR like bunch of others. No craftmanship (except of photographer), no endless choices of designers how black blob finally will look. Why? Camera is just camera. It has to be more or less ergonomical and put out good pictures, yet have good battery life.

Well, Nikon went with IQ because they certainly can't talk about the camera's design. 😉 However, to me, IQ is a given on a high end DSLR...so posting pics taken in a controlled environment isn't proving anything to me.

Perhaps I'm a bit crazy, but a camera is not just a camera to me. Some are funner to use than others, some allow me to get different results than others, some work better than others in certain situations, some feel better in my hand than others, some are beautifully designed while others are ugly, etc. If I feel good about the camera, and I'm comfortable with it, then I have a better chance of making good photos.

 

[Keith]

Frankly speaking, and this might sound vain, but as a photographer I'm a little offended by Fuji's marketing. Its insulting to common sense and intelligence of an average photographer. Are we really that stupid to fall for that sort of product description? Its as if the tool itself is greater than what it does, namely taking photos. Not to mention all of this over a fixed lens APS-C digital camera.

Why not some sample images taken with the camera? why not some numbers for shutter lag, AF speed etc.

No ... we're smart enough and interested enough to put it aside and want the camera for what it is. I think that sort of blurb is for non photographers and it will sell a truckload of units to people who will use it to snap their kids and pets ... thus keeping the price down for the real shooters who want a camera this smart.

In some strange ways it's very similar to what Leica have done with the M9ti.

 

[Frankie]

This has been discussed, but I finally have an answer to the question that's been floating around: Why did Fuji bother including an anemic little flash on the X100?

@fujiguys: "X100 external flash setting can be set to "commander" mode."

http://twitter.com/fujiguys/status/22146137708298241

(Again, this probably isn't news, but I have near-zero experience with beyond-available lighting, and light-trigger systems fascinate me.)

This had occurred to me long ago. See: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1434759&postcount=59

 

[Frankie]

If you've been waiting for YEARS for a camera like this, then the 'hype' is more than welcome! For all these years, all that's been available are the big black behemoth DSLRs and the little underpowered, over-menued compact cameras. And don't bother mentioning the Leicas... so over-priced for me that they never were a consideration.

I am a long time Nikon user but I won't buy the D1, 2, 3... because of the bulk.

I won't consider the M8, 9, 10... because the pricing insults my intelligence.

I have a couple of old M's and an R-D1...but with all CV lenses. I purchased 5 CV lenses for the price of 1 Leica whatever. No one can tell me Leica glass is 5X better.

I won't buy the u4/3 or the APS-C NEX because I intensely hate arms' length operations. My 20/20 vision at infinity requires me to wear +5 reading glasses just to see within 8~10" of the poor LCD, never mind bright sunlight and all that. The additional costs of the OVF or EVF put those cameras on par with the X100.

Spending a couple thousand dollars is well within my means...but not for stupid designs.

 

[kermaier]

In some strange ways it's very similar to what Leica have done with the M9ti.

No, i'd go further -- it's what Leica have done with every camera offering, RF, P&S, film or digital, since the M6. They understand that, admit it or not, even many "real" photographers enjoy using a fine, luxury instrument in pursuit of their craft, as well as the associated cachet. And they certainly understand that a large part of the commercial viability of their products and their brand depends on continuing to attract well-heeled amateurs and collectors. The sense that there should be some shame in enjoying the finesse of such tools is a kind of reverse snobbery no better than the sort which insists that a Bessa R4M is somehow a lesser photographic tool than an M7. And as for those who are repelled by the marketing copy, I'll go out on a limb here and say that a good percentage doth protest too much. 😉

::Ari

 

[Jamie Pillers]

Well put. I agree completely.

 

[Jamie Pillers]

For you that think Fuji is going a bit over the top in their advertising campaign, you should search out old Leica ads on the web. You'll find that Leica likes to show you how their cameras are fit for battle correspondents and deep sea divers, and their cameras can bring you the Pulitzer!

Fuji's ads are commonplace and no worse. Look at all the ads for ANYTHING today... every product is capable of making you beautiful, popular, sexy, rich, famous... whatever. Get over it...or stop buying ANY of this cr*p if you think their advertising is overstated. Good luck with that!