dougi
Established
You could also easily overlay blown highlights or whatever in the OVF as well as part of it. It doesn't sound so far that is included though. No mention of stabilisation either is there?
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
^--- No stabilisation for you!
It will be like shooting a 35 eq. prime on any Canon or Nikon or Panasonic, or on a Sony or Samsung mirrorless camera.
It will be like shooting a 35 eq. prime on any Canon or Nikon or Panasonic, or on a Sony or Samsung mirrorless camera.
Last edited:
Tin
Well-known
Now the following is just speculation:
Perhaps the 0.5X magnification design of the OVF is the way to allow for using the physical outer edges of the viewfinder to represent the field of view of the WA converter lens.
Perhaps the 0.5X magnification design of the OVF is the way to allow for using the physical outer edges of the viewfinder to represent the field of view of the WA converter lens.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
Kinda off the main discussion going on here, but it just occurred to me how cool it would be if Fuji paired the release of it's X100 with a film version of the camera. It would be great to have two bodies, one film one digital, that are really exactly the same. An X100D and an X100F (really X100FF, for Fujifiulm).
user237428934
User deletion pending
Wouldn't work because as we all know a film camera has a larger sensor
So at least they needed a different lens.
user237428934
User deletion pending
The difference is perhaps that I can hold longer times with my 5DII with a 35mm lens because it's heavier and has this nice soft release button.
__--
Well-known
Spirit of the Fuji X100 designers
Spirit of the Fuji X100 designers
There are two interesting videos here, one, an interview with the X100 designers, and, another, of the anouncement of the camera at Photokina. My first reaction to the videos was that it's highly likely that this camera will be as good as many people here assume; and my next thought was, "how could a small company like Leica possibly bring the range of skills and experience that Fuji has to such a project, which includes not only lens design but also sensor design, color film rendering experience, etc. — not to speak of the financial resources.
—Mitch/Bangkok
Bangkok Hysteria Book Project
Spirit of the Fuji X100 designers
There are two interesting videos here, one, an interview with the X100 designers, and, another, of the anouncement of the camera at Photokina. My first reaction to the videos was that it's highly likely that this camera will be as good as many people here assume; and my next thought was, "how could a small company like Leica possibly bring the range of skills and experience that Fuji has to such a project, which includes not only lens design but also sensor design, color film rendering experience, etc. — not to speak of the financial resources.
—Mitch/Bangkok
Bangkok Hysteria Book Project
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
That's why the Fuji has a threaded tripod socket. So you can put in one of Tom A's soft releases. And it has a centered tripod socket. So you can use a 1/4"-20 bolt to screw lead plates onto the bottom of the camera.
Those Fuji guys thought of everything!
Last edited:
Wouldn't work because as we all know a film camera has a larger sensor
So at least they needed a different lens.
Could be that APS is coming back...
doolittle
Well-known
After talking to my dad yesterday I can see another big potential market for this camera: the over 70s. The people who started out on fully manual cameras back in the day, maybe later on aperture priority cameras, but now just have a digital compact with no viewfinder, and really have problems seeing the screen most of the time. Something reasonably small, with a decent viewfinder and semi-automatic would be ideal. Even better if it looks familiar and the control systems works the way 'they used to'. The lack of interchangeable lenses or zoom is an advantage for many too.
Last edited:
__--
Well-known
Thom Hogan's take on the X100
Thom Hogan's take on the X100
Tom Hogan's views on the X100 are less positive then most seen here. Maybe I should be a bit less enthusiastic about this camera than I was when I saw the video of the interview with the designers (post #1220). In any case, I would want to wait to see this camera before buying it.
—Mitch/Bangkok
Barrier
Thom Hogan's take on the X100
Tom Hogan's views on the X100 are less positive then most seen here. Maybe I should be a bit less enthusiastic about this camera than I was when I saw the video of the interview with the designers (post #1220). In any case, I would want to wait to see this camera before buying it.
—Mitch/Bangkok
Barrier
Spyro
Well-known
Hogan says:"there are numerous design flaws I see in just looking at the prototype. Indeed, the front looks overly retro, but the back looks like a very busy and poorly thought out kludge between digital and retro rangefinder. Little touches, like the tripod socket and flash shoe being offset from the center of the lens shows that the engineers who designed it don't actually shoot much or think about what users might be interested in. 35mm f/2 is also a relatively conservative choice that isn't exactly where the sweet spot of the market would be, either (either wider or 50mm would do better)
Yes that makes sense, I will gladly go back to a viewfinder-less digicam, just to make sure my flash and tripod socket are aligned ...
tonyjuliano
Wooden Indian
Im glad to see Tom Hogan is not enthusiastic about this...
IMO, he's consistently "off" in his opinions anyway.
cam
the need for speed
Hogan says:"there are numerous design flaws I see in just looking at the prototype. Indeed, the front looks overly retro, but the back looks like a very busy and poorly thought out kludge between digital and retro rangefinder. Little touches, like the tripod socket and flash shoe being offset from the center of the lens shows that the engineers who designed it don't actually shoot much or think about what users might be interested in. 35mm f/2 is also a relatively conservative choice that isn't exactly where the sweet spot of the market would be, either (either wider or 50mm would do better)
Yes that makes sense, I will gladly go back to a viewfinder-less digicam, just to make sure my flash and tripod socket are aligned ...
LOL!
nor do i take much stock in what Thom seems to think about the back... all the dials you'd ever need are on the top and the side... i see a Luigi case in the future. who gives a fig about the back?
and 35mm is a beautiful place to start, not conservative at all, a rather perfect focal length. step back if you want wider, a few steps closer if you want longer. none of the distortions you get with a wider lens, none of the limitations of moving up due to it's ability to focus up close... sheesh! i sometimes wonder if today's photographers have legs any more?
doolittle
Well-known
v_roma
Well-known
I guess it's fair to say there's a good deal of excitement surrounding this camera, myself included. However, I think I need to temper my excitement because there are still many ways that this camera can be screwed up. I'm assuming, until proven wrong, that the image quality will be good based on the sensor and lens. So, that aside, the deal-breakers for me would be the following:
- Slow shutter lag/overall responsiveness (an obvious one but something that seems to plague the other compact APS-C cameras in the market)
- Bad manual focus implementation. Not so much how you focus manually, which is also important (though peaking is good news on that front) but whether it allows for usable range focusing. I know the photos show a distance scale in the VF, which is promising, but I'd also like to have a way to lock the focus distance. Particularly, since the camera seems to have an electronic focus ring and it's really easy to accidentally change the focus with those types of focus rings. For me, the gold standard of manual focus implementation (other than not having a focus ring, of course), is the Ricoh GRD, with its many manual focus options, including snap focus.
- Slow shutter lag/overall responsiveness (an obvious one but something that seems to plague the other compact APS-C cameras in the market)
- Bad manual focus implementation. Not so much how you focus manually, which is also important (though peaking is good news on that front) but whether it allows for usable range focusing. I know the photos show a distance scale in the VF, which is promising, but I'd also like to have a way to lock the focus distance. Particularly, since the camera seems to have an electronic focus ring and it's really easy to accidentally change the focus with those types of focus rings. For me, the gold standard of manual focus implementation (other than not having a focus ring, of course), is the Ricoh GRD, with its many manual focus options, including snap focus.
Spyro
Well-known
You're not alone either
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1890&highlight=one+focal+length
Frank Petronio
Well-known
Thom is right about the menu system and potentially lousy interface. But all the Japanese digicams are awful compared to the Leica in that regard, and Leica doesn't get enough credit for having the most intuitive, minimal yet functional menus and controls in the entire market.
I recently went back to using a G1 after a year away and, while there a lot of things to like, I'm freaking out at all the menu options and how easy it is to find yourself shooting with the settings changed but being unaware... with an M8 that doesn't happen.
I recently went back to using a G1 after a year away and, while there a lot of things to like, I'm freaking out at all the menu options and how easy it is to find yourself shooting with the settings changed but being unaware... with an M8 that doesn't happen.
But with most of your key functions as dedicated buttons, switches, or dials, one can surely deal with a covoluted menu system ...since you won't have to access it much.
Paul T.
Veteran
I don't think Hogan makes any incisive points - indeed, by comparing it with the X1 and GF1 he seems to entirely miss the significance of the camera. Neither example has a decent optical viewinder like this - and as any compact camera fan (whether autofocus or rangefinder) will tell you, the viewfinder is a crucial part of the experience. So in that respect, he's made a category error.
AS to whether 50mm would have been a better focal length, it's a purely subjective question but historically, Zeiss, Konica, Leica and Olympus have all made similar choices, of 35, 38 or 40mm on their compact cameras, with very successful results.
AS for his opening point, that we have to wait until we see if they deliver on the concept, that's entirely valid. But of course we could say that about any new concept.
AS to whether 50mm would have been a better focal length, it's a purely subjective question but historically, Zeiss, Konica, Leica and Olympus have all made similar choices, of 35, 38 or 40mm on their compact cameras, with very successful results.
AS for his opening point, that we have to wait until we see if they deliver on the concept, that's entirely valid. But of course we could say that about any new concept.