Finally, fullsize, v1.0 Fuji samples

[ebrandon]

And they're breathtaking.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fotois/5492794545/

[EDIT] This is an easier link ... takes you right to the samples, instead of the "unboxing"

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fotois/sets/72157626059913905/

 

[tedwhite]

Beautiful camera. First time I've seen it up close.

 

[archeophoto]

I have to say I'm looking forward to this camera as well. But what do you think is "breathtaking" about those photos?

And they're breathtaking.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fotois/5492794545/

 

[Keith]

I'm underwhelmed!

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

 

[gavinlg]

I have to say I'm looking forward to this camera as well. But what do you think is "breathtaking" about those photos?

Look in that flickr user's actual photostream - he has first photos taken with the x100 up

 

[Keith]

Ok ... didn't see those!

Breathtaking is stretching it a little though ... I think the fans of this camera are seeing what they want to see. Nothing I've seen so far has been distinctly eyeball rattling! 😀

 

[gavinlg]

Ok ... didn't see those!

Breathtaking is stretching it a little though ... I think the fans of this camera are seeing what they want to see. Nothing I've seen so far has been distinctly eyeball rattling! 😀

Ahh but it's all relative remember... You'd be naturally comparing them to your d700 - probably a very similar quality too. What you've got to remember is that the x100 is the size of an OM and costs only $1200 as opposed to the 3000ish body only d700 or 5d.

In total terms it's just another good digital camera, in relative terms it's a veerrry impressive compact camera.

Could just be me thinking like that though...

 

[hausen]

Is breath takingly gorgeous though. Can't wait!

 

[ebrandon]

I have to say I'm looking forward to this camera as well. But what do you think is "breathtaking" about those photos?

Don't judge the photos until you've downloaded them in "original" size and looked them over. The camera's image quality is really excellent.

What's "breathtaking"?

I have so overcomplicated my photographic life ...

I have several DSLRs with multiple lenses for each that I need to test & dial in "fine AF adjustment" before I can trust them.

I have rangefinders which are properly calibrated for some lenses and not others.

I have shelves full of "alt" lenses each of which I have to remember it's quirks and limitations -- this one works well on Canon, that one works well on m43, this one is "dreamy" wide open but great stopped down, that one has smeared corners. This one works well with brand A adapters but that one needs brand B adapters to reach infinity focus.

I have Contax G lenses I use on m43 which requires me to turn a poorly placed, microscopic wheel to focus, but I love the image quality.

I have optical viewfinders made for cameras with one aspect ratio that sort of work on cameras with a different aspect ratio.

I have lenses with image stabilization that I use on bodies with image stabilization and some lenses work better with the lens' IS, and others work better with the in-body IS.

The idea that I can just pick up an X100 and go TAKE PICTURES and it will just work and be of this quality, is "breathtaking".

 

[rxmd]

I guess everything suddenly becomes a breathtaking experience if you hold your breath long enough.

 

[cgiff]

Man, the lens looks quite well corrected wide open.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fotois/5492894277/sizes/o/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fotois/5493222091/sizes/o/in/photostream/

 

[Spyro]

I like how the lens handles colour aberrations in this photo, look at the silhouettes against the highlights:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fotois/5492996883/sizes/o/in/set-72157626059913905/
Detail and corners look good, could probably do with some sharpening. Bokeh and grain look neutral.

Not bad.

 

[skibeerr]

The original size photo of the chewing gum really is convincing me of the quality. I find the rest of the photography rather bland.

W

 

[ChrisN]

Is there a little purple fringing in that shot - edges against the sky (top left)? Certainly no worse than I've seen with some of my Pentax Limited lenses.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

Wow. I've never heard anyone say the words "breathtaking," even when describing images from the M9. Is this the camera that will finally kill Leica? A mass produced, digital P&S? Who would have figured.

 

[__--]

Dunno, but these "breathtaking" pictures look overwhelmingly ordinary and digital. But that doesn't say much as I don't know whether these are proceesed RAW files or simply JPGs. What I want to know is how the X100 RAW files compare in terms of image quality with those of the X1 and the GXR/A12-28mm — and that we won't really know until we see reviews from siome of the best reviewers like Sean Reid or try it ourselves.

—Mitch/Bangkok
Paris au rythme de Basquiat (WIP)

 

[viv]

Hardly breath-taking. I will just hang on to my M9.

 

[Moriturii]

The idea that I can just pick up an X100 and go TAKE PICTURES and it will just work and be of this quality, is "breathtaking".

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

 

[ChrisN]

Boy - tough crowd tonight! 🙂

 

[Moriturii]

Boy - tough crowd tonight! 🙂

Well yes. More and more people are starting to realize how utterly RIDICULOUS this material obsession is with buy "the new thing" and thinking it will make you a better photographer.

It's not BS when they say "just use the camera you have!". Buying the newest thing does NOTHING to make you a better photographer AT ALL but just putting a bigger hole in your wallet. Get over it!

The OP has confessed that he has a camera already, in fact, a whole mess of them, USE THEM.