Frankie
Speaking Frankly
Who is Thom Hogan? A short paragraph saying mostly his taste and tripod socket location is not anything close to an useful opinion/report. Rather lazy I'd say, considering the money spent traveling.
[The best place for a tripod mount is at the lens perspective centre...impossible, The next best is in line with the optical axis...sometimes impossible. The worst is to the far right...like the Leica M3/4/6/7..., I don't hear anyone complaining. AND, no one will mount a tripod while doing street photo...]
$1000 seems to be the focus for most journalist and many others. What do you want...no charge? A team of optical/hardware/software engineers working for perhaps years cost a lot...and they need to eat too. I know, I was the paymaster and coach for such a team for 2 decades.
Whether one could afford it or not depends on one's financial focus and circumstances. For the have-nots, even $100 is too much...and you don't need no stinking [camera] when you are hungry. Want something...work for it. Don't want nothing, shut up.
Who cares whether the X100 will kill Leica-whatever or not. Leica knows it is enemy at the gates. They will sort themselves out or remain arrogant. The pricing of the M9T is arrogance personified..."let them shoot X100", says Herr Prof. Dr. Dipl.Ir von Somewhere, "I don't care". Didn't some French woman with that attitude lost her head a couple hundred years ago?
[The best place for a tripod mount is at the lens perspective centre...impossible, The next best is in line with the optical axis...sometimes impossible. The worst is to the far right...like the Leica M3/4/6/7..., I don't hear anyone complaining. AND, no one will mount a tripod while doing street photo...]
$1000 seems to be the focus for most journalist and many others. What do you want...no charge? A team of optical/hardware/software engineers working for perhaps years cost a lot...and they need to eat too. I know, I was the paymaster and coach for such a team for 2 decades.
Whether one could afford it or not depends on one's financial focus and circumstances. For the have-nots, even $100 is too much...and you don't need no stinking [camera] when you are hungry. Want something...work for it. Don't want nothing, shut up.
Who cares whether the X100 will kill Leica-whatever or not. Leica knows it is enemy at the gates. They will sort themselves out or remain arrogant. The pricing of the M9T is arrogance personified..."let them shoot X100", says Herr Prof. Dr. Dipl.Ir von Somewhere, "I don't care". Didn't some French woman with that attitude lost her head a couple hundred years ago?
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
Let them eat cakes you mean? 
ebino
Well-known
Hi everyone I'm new, but i have been lurking around this forum after searching rangefinder cameras. But anyway, the excitement of this camera made me finally register because even though this camera is everything I have hoped for, like most others; however lately I'm beginning to have some doubts.
I have to say a fixed lens camera for a $1000 is a little hard to justify especially when there is no information about lens quality, sensor quality and general performance of the camera. A lens adopter over the existing lens has been around for P&S cameras but still its glass-over-glass no matter how negligible the image quality degradation. But most importantly changing of a lens is not usually about focal length, more often it is upgrading to a better quality lens, which in case of a fixed lens camera is impossible.
Then there is the sensor itself which I'm certain will be of the same quality as other DSLR sensors of this price range. But then again Canon G10/11/12 have shown that even their tiny sensors could perform very well compared to those larger sensors at base quality ISO, in other words the size of the sensor is also not really the deal breaker here, its performance will have to be judged, but then again its performance will be as good as the lens.
Finally there is the viewfinder, which is the cause celebre of this camera. As much as I know the pleasure of a large optical viewfinder like the one on Bessa R3M, I'm also aware that a great viewfinder does not mean anything if focus is dependent on auto focus. In other words while with a DSLR its possible to point accordingly if AF is searching, with an optical viewfinder that will be a hassle. So you may point and shoot at the right decisive moment, but if you have no control over focus then it can be just frustration if af keeps trying to lock on... As far as manual focus is concerned, first of all I'm not sure how it will be integrated in the optical viewfinder, but if it means for MF one has to use the EVF then the whole rangefinder feeling is gone -at least imo... one could use a viewfinder on many of the top-end P&S cameras or micro 4/3 cameras, which really helps with shooting on the street in a rangefinder-style. So, the question becomes should one go for a G10/11/12/ micro 4/3 camera with an extra viewfinder or this camera for $1000?
But the beauty of X100 is undeniable, it will be sold on its looks alone. But even there I'm not so sure about the brass top. had it been completely black (which they might issue later on) then no doubt it will be very subtle and discreet on the street. however, the way it looks right now, it will be conspicuous imo.
I'm really excited about x100 like most of you, but is it the digicam to finally provide a decent replacement for film rangefinders? I don't think so. The fixed lens, uncertainty about its focus and especially manual focus, not to mention the quality of its lens and sensor adds up to a lot of variables that could stop it from attaining that ideal spot... imo unless nikcanon don't put their experience and resource into this niche market, we'd have to wait for a long time before finally there would be no reason to shoot film other than film itself.
I have to say a fixed lens camera for a $1000 is a little hard to justify especially when there is no information about lens quality, sensor quality and general performance of the camera. A lens adopter over the existing lens has been around for P&S cameras but still its glass-over-glass no matter how negligible the image quality degradation. But most importantly changing of a lens is not usually about focal length, more often it is upgrading to a better quality lens, which in case of a fixed lens camera is impossible.
Then there is the sensor itself which I'm certain will be of the same quality as other DSLR sensors of this price range. But then again Canon G10/11/12 have shown that even their tiny sensors could perform very well compared to those larger sensors at base quality ISO, in other words the size of the sensor is also not really the deal breaker here, its performance will have to be judged, but then again its performance will be as good as the lens.
Finally there is the viewfinder, which is the cause celebre of this camera. As much as I know the pleasure of a large optical viewfinder like the one on Bessa R3M, I'm also aware that a great viewfinder does not mean anything if focus is dependent on auto focus. In other words while with a DSLR its possible to point accordingly if AF is searching, with an optical viewfinder that will be a hassle. So you may point and shoot at the right decisive moment, but if you have no control over focus then it can be just frustration if af keeps trying to lock on... As far as manual focus is concerned, first of all I'm not sure how it will be integrated in the optical viewfinder, but if it means for MF one has to use the EVF then the whole rangefinder feeling is gone -at least imo... one could use a viewfinder on many of the top-end P&S cameras or micro 4/3 cameras, which really helps with shooting on the street in a rangefinder-style. So, the question becomes should one go for a G10/11/12/ micro 4/3 camera with an extra viewfinder or this camera for $1000?
But the beauty of X100 is undeniable, it will be sold on its looks alone. But even there I'm not so sure about the brass top. had it been completely black (which they might issue later on) then no doubt it will be very subtle and discreet on the street. however, the way it looks right now, it will be conspicuous imo.
I'm really excited about x100 like most of you, but is it the digicam to finally provide a decent replacement for film rangefinders? I don't think so. The fixed lens, uncertainty about its focus and especially manual focus, not to mention the quality of its lens and sensor adds up to a lot of variables that could stop it from attaining that ideal spot... imo unless nikcanon don't put their experience and resource into this niche market, we'd have to wait for a long time before finally there would be no reason to shoot film other than film itself.
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
Let them eat cakes you mean?
And a Chinese emperor with the same attitude lost his head 1500 years ago..."No rice? Why not eat pork congee?
cam
the need for speed
Let them eat cakes you mean?
cake, singular, and she really meant brioche -- which is quite yummy and filling.
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
Brioche, my favourite. I wonder why they took her head off.
Paul T.
Veteran
No, it isn't a direct replacement. But it's the biggest leap forward since the R-D1 (which inspired the M8). It's not just the viewfinder - it's the analogue control of aperture, shutter speed and exposure comp, all of whcih are trciky with rivals like the GF1. Of course questions remain about the lens, and the autofocus; but in the former case Fuji have a good, even great, pedigree, while in the second, they know what they have to beat.
I don't think anyone is saying this camera is perfect. But lots of people are saying it's good enough.
Yes, you are right. If you want to shoot film, no digital camera will replace a film camera (not even the M9). :bang:
dazedgonebye
Veteran
Paul keeps saying what I want to say but better and firster... :bang:
Well, come on, seriously? Of course you won't like this camera if you are into zoom lenses. By the way, is your G1 a point and shoot?
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
When in doubt, READ.
Even Hasselblad uses Fuji lenses, after 40 years exclusively with Zeiss, does that not say something?
Pixels need light. The larger the pixel, the more light it can gather...given a fixed instant of time. There is a reason why Kodak, Dalsa and many others spend decades to engineer larger chips while reducing pixel size. Recall a FF Contax dSLR 2000 x 3000 @ 12u?
There is a choice in auto OR manual focusing in FX100, via a sliding switch on the left side for MF, AF-S, AF-C. If MF is chosen, simply rotate the lens focusing ring...like any manual focusing lens.
No decent VF, no reliable views framed. OVF is fully developed...the only argument now is how bright and how wide. EVF is only two years old soon established. O/EVF combines the best of both worlds. Next is O/EVIL...O'EVIL.
There is no brass in the X100. It is cast magnesium. There will be no brassing whether the camera is black or not.
Even Hasselblad uses Fuji lenses, after 40 years exclusively with Zeiss, does that not say something?
Pixels need light. The larger the pixel, the more light it can gather...given a fixed instant of time. There is a reason why Kodak, Dalsa and many others spend decades to engineer larger chips while reducing pixel size. Recall a FF Contax dSLR 2000 x 3000 @ 12u?
There is a choice in auto OR manual focusing in FX100, via a sliding switch on the left side for MF, AF-S, AF-C. If MF is chosen, simply rotate the lens focusing ring...like any manual focusing lens.
No decent VF, no reliable views framed. OVF is fully developed...the only argument now is how bright and how wide. EVF is only two years old soon established. O/EVF combines the best of both worlds. Next is O/EVIL...O'EVIL.
There is no brass in the X100. It is cast magnesium. There will be no brassing whether the camera is black or not.
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
Right on, Paul T.
I would further say the R-D1 forced Leica's hand...and from poor cousin CV.
tonyjuliano
Wooden Indian
I agree with this, 100%.
Especially in regards to Fuji's optical track record.
tonyjuliano
Wooden Indian
I would further say the R-D1 forced Leica's hand...and from poor cousin CV.
I keep hearing things like this, over and over...
Truth is that CV supplied "shells" and the RF mechanism for the RD's, but NOTHING else.
Epson produced the guts, and did all the assembly themselves.
Mcary
Well-known
Can only speak for myself; but I'm not looking for something to replace my M6, rather I'm looking for something to use along side it for those times when I want to shoot color.
Also I love the design for the simple reason that I hate how the typical DSLR body feels in my hand as my bottom two fingers just feel like they're hanging there and much prefer how a non grip body like a M feels in my hands.
Last edited by a moderator:
reala_fan
Well-known
Seriously...
I didn't say I would not like the Fuji...I said I thought that one thousand dollars was a lot to pay for it...
.
ampguy
Veteran
D90/D300 specs getting old
D90/D300 specs getting old
I'd hope that by Q1/2011 their sensor is quite a bit better overall than the D90/D300 which is already getting old, and equaled by say the NEX already.
D90/D300 specs getting old
I'd hope that by Q1/2011 their sensor is quite a bit better overall than the D90/D300 which is already getting old, and equaled by say the NEX already.
aizan
Veteran
fujinons also tend to produce harsh bokeh at large apertures, both in large and medium format lenses. if this new lens is no exception, i'm pretty sure it will be downplayed!
cam
the need for speed
they said that the sensor was built specifically for this lens. i think it is fair to say that it has been updated.
(really laughing here, though, as my latest acquisition is an Oly E-1 to shoot in the rain... how old is that sensor? 2003? it's gorgeous, by the way.)
cam
the need for speed
fujinons also tend to produce harsh bokeh at large apertures, both in large and medium format lenses. if this new lens is no exception, i'm pretty sure it will be downplayed!
excuse my ignorance by what you mean by large -- wide open or stopped down?
i am really only personally interested at f/2. f/4 max.