Finally, fullsize, v1.0 Fuji samples

[Pickett Wilson]

"You can't just define a Leica by the actual rangefinder mechanism"

Well, yes, you can. Because Leica M's use rangefinder mechanisms exclusively. The Fuji is not a Leica. Its shape only resembles one. That's not a value judgement, just stating the obvious.

 

[jsrockit]

But who cares if the Fuji is a Leica? It should be a good camera in its own right.

 

[Steve M.]

It takes nice digital, color photos. Unfortunately, so do dozens of other digital cameras, full frame or not. It's impossible for me to get a read on what the actual photos look like when they're downsized and displayed on a monitor, so I won't say anything about it's IQ. My desk hogging Trinitron CRT shows a different image than the newer monitors most people use today. And a lot depends on the lens they used. Slap a Leica APO R lens on it, then let's see how the images look. Isn't it just another expensive digital camera, w/ the same set of advantages and downsides that come with that?

 

[viv]

You're talking to a bunch of people who, if they're like me, will never be able to afford an M9. Fuji has just made available a camera that will have a similar user experience to Leica, and priced it for the masses who love photography. That to me is breathtaking enough. I'm glad that you can afford your forumla 1 Louis Vitton camera, but I can't. At least be happy for those of us who will stretch our wallets for the X100, and love it.

I'm new here, so I don't know to whom I'm talking. I actually like very much the look and ergonomics of the Fuji and was almost decided to buy it, but the quality of the images I have seen thus far makes me hesitate, I have seen nothing outstanding. However, I believe it is a better camera than the Leica X1.

Having said that, I will of course be happy for those who buy and enjoy the Fuji. I may yet buy it myself when I see more of what it can produce.

 

[viv]

"You can't just define a Leica by the actual rangefinder mechanism"

Well, yes, you can.

Well no you can't, the Leica X1 is not a rangefinder. The Fuji is a direct competitor to the X1 and probably a better camera.

 

[jsrockit]

I actually like very much the look and ergonomics of the Fuji and was almost decided to buy it, but the quality of the images I have seen thus far makes me hesitate, I have seen nothing outstanding. However, I believe it is a better camera than the Leica X1.

What were you expecting to see from the camera... magic? I'm not trying to be rude, but it seems many are expecting this thing to have the best IQ on the market (including full-frame DSLRs) and that simply is not going to happen.

 

[viv]

What were you expecting to see from the camera... magic? I'm not trying to be rude, but it seems many are expecting this thing to have the best IQ on the market (including full-frame DSLRs) and that simply is not going to happen.

No, not magic. But what I have seen so far could have come from a small-sensor compact in full auto mode.

As for the many to whom you refer, I do not know what they may or may not expect.

 

[jsrockit]

No, not magic. But what I have seen so far could have come from a small-sensor compact in full auto mode.

I would say you haven't looked hard enough then... there is no small-sensor compact that does 3200 or 6400 like the Fuji. Also, no small sensor compact allows for the Bokeh the Fuji does. Also, at large sizes, most P&S cameras do not hold up as well as any APS-C camera, much less the Fuji.

I mean, it is your choice what to do with your cash, but I feel the Fuji seems to be on par with all the other APS-C offerings at least. This camera is more about the ergonomics with any advances in IQ as just a bonus.

That said, I do see some jagged edges that I don't like on some Fuji images at 100%...

 

[gavinlg]

I don't really give a rat's ass about the rangefinder focusing system. Regardless of what people here say, I think of it as no better or worse than the focus method on an SLR. What I like about the M8, for instance, is what sper is describing: optical finder, physical dials, quiet shutter. The actual physical EV comp dial on the X100 is like some kind of miracle. I've been wanting this on a high-quality digicam for a long time...it's what I miss the most from the Contax G1/2. Indeed, I think of this camera more as a digital reincarnation of the Contaxes than of a Leica.

And yes, of course I like the style too. I prefer to use things that look and feel as though somebody put a lot of thought into them.

+ a hundred million.

The rest of the comments in this thread make little sense.

 

[sper]

"You can't just define a Leica by the actual rangefinder mechanism"

Well, yes, you can. Because Leica M's use rangefinder mechanisms exclusively. The Fuji is not a Leica. Its shape only resembles one. That's not a value judgement, just stating the obvious.

All I said in my original statement was that this camera will offer a similar user experience to Leica. Do you need a dictionary to understand the definition of similar? I never said it was a Leica so we appear to agree.

I don't however define the user experience of a camera system simply by how I focus it. I don't use my Toyo just because I feel like using a Loupe.

I can't understand why what I said was so inflamatory.

 

[gavinlg]

Even if this is the D90 sensor, the images should be a lot better than these low contrast and bland samples... But it could also be that the lens is low contrast and even softish.

So when people see clipped highlights and black shadows in a jpeg file, they go on about digital has no dynamic range, and then when they see a jpeg with large dynamic range and very little highlight clipping and deep shadows, they complain that it's flat and bland.

It's flat and bland because thats what professional photographers want from their cameras. They want the original picture to be a good base, retaining as much contrast and color detail as possible. As soon as you ramp up contrast and saturation you're throwing away information and potential to tune the image to exactly how you want it.

Exact reason PnS cameras are always oversaturated, but pro cams like the 1ds and phase one digital MF backs are ALWAYS muted and low contrast straight out of the camera.

 

[sper]

So when people see clipped highlights and black shadows in a jpeg file, they go on about digital has no dynamic range, and then when they see a jpeg with large dynamic range and very little highlight clipping and deep shadows, they complain that it's flat and bland.

It's flat and bland because thats what professional photographers want from their cameras. They want the original picture to be a good base, retaining as much contrast and color detail as possible. As soon as you ramp up contrast and saturation you're throwing away information and potential to tune the image to exactly how you want it.

Exact reason PnS cameras are always oversaturated, but pro cams like the 1ds and phase one digital MF backs are ALWAYS muted and low contrast straight out of the camera.

Yeah +1.

You want a low contrast base, you want this kind of performance. Tweak it anywhere from here,. that's an advantage.

 

[jamesjt]

So when people see clipped highlights and black shadows in a jpeg file, they go on about digital has no dynamic range, and then when they see a jpeg with large dynamic range and very little highlight clipping and deep shadows, they complain that it's flat and bland.

It's flat and bland because thats what professional photographers want from their cameras. They want the original picture to be a good base, retaining as much contrast and color detail as possible. As soon as you ramp up contrast and saturation you're throwing away information and potential to tune the image to exactly how you want it.

Exact reason PnS cameras are always oversaturated, but pro cams like the 1ds and phase one digital MF backs are ALWAYS muted and low contrast straight out of the camera.

Excellent point. I just grabbed some full sized jpegs off this flickr stream and pulled them in to lightroom. I'm quite pleased with results when I apply some of the presets I use on my M8 files.

 

[wjlapier]

I'm underwhelmed!

Partly because I can't damned well afford one ... but mostly because these public, ceremonial, salivating unboxings repulse me!

FWIW, I won't be taking pics, or video of my unboxing of the X100. Get the battery charged and go out shooting. Might even shoot and image or two RAW 🙂

 

[jsrockit]

 

[steveyork]

That's like saying a view camera is a ground glass. An SLR is a pentaprism. So what if you don't focus with a distance finding split image system?

It's got an offset optical viewfinder that allows you too see outside of the capture area, small form factor, discrete shutter and focusing sound, and simple dials for selecting aperture and shutter speed. You can't just define a Leica by the actual rangefinder mechanism, there are a lot of things about using these types of cameras that people enjoy. The simplicity of design for one, which the X100 has in droves.

So now I would actually counter by asking, how is it not a similar experience? The key word there being similar, which does not mean same.

You make good points. But much of what made Leica Ms unique has already evaporated in the digital world (e.g. small size, lack of mirror slap, superior low light capability , quiet, ect.). About the only area (in my mind) where Leica Ms still rule is the near instantaneous shutter. [Leaving the benefits of manual focus aside (which are many)]. My point is that much of the "Leica M attributes" you alluded to as being desirous have already been captured by other digital cameras. You state a few new ones, but that's hardly enough to justify all the clamor.

 

[sper]

You make good points. But much of what made Leica Ms unique has already evaporated in the digital world (e.g. small size, lack of mirror slap, quiet, ect.). About the only area (in my mind) where Leica Ms still rule is the superior optics and the near instantaneous shutter. [Leaving the benefits of manual focus aside (which are many)]. My point is that much of the "Leica M attributes" you alluded to as being desirous have already been captured by other digital cameras. You state a few new ones, but that's hardly enough to justify all the clamor.

Which digital cameras, at this price point? Name them. I can't think of any.

 

[tom in mpls]

My point is that much of the "Leica M attributes" you alluded to as being desirous have already been captured by other digital cameras. You state a few new ones, but that's hardly enough to justify all the clamor.

I will not speak for others. But for myself, the unique and compelling combination of characteristics that this camera promises is the reason that I am "clamoring" for it.

We all have things that we would like to see added or altered; that's true for every camera.

I clamor for the Fuji!

 

[Ronny]

Just pick up a camera and take pictures? It's called an M2 with a 35 lens.

I agree with Moriturii > M2+35

 

[tomtofa]

1600 ISO - not bad:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fotois/5494636938/sizes/o/in/photostream/