v_roma
Well-known
I've seen peaking mentioned in this "first impressions review" (see page 4):
http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Fujifilm-FinePix-X100-First-Impressions-Review.htm
However, it's not clear to me if peaking is available in EVF, OVF, or both.
EDIT: On second thought and based on my understanding of peaking, I can't imagine how it would be possible in the OVF. How would the camera know where to highlight the edges with the level of precision required for focusing? I can understand how you can overlay an approximate and parallax-corrected frame line but highlighting edges of objects over an optical image seems to be asking too much.
http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Fujifilm-FinePix-X100-First-Impressions-Review.htm
However, it's not clear to me if peaking is available in EVF, OVF, or both.
EDIT: On second thought and based on my understanding of peaking, I can't imagine how it would be possible in the OVF. How would the camera know where to highlight the edges with the level of precision required for focusing? I can understand how you can overlay an approximate and parallax-corrected frame line but highlighting edges of objects over an optical image seems to be asking too much.
Last edited:
Paul T.
Veteran
That 'review' is shocking.
My guess - and it is just that, based on limited information about a not fully-realised prototype - is that manual focus will be done via the EVF, and autofocus will be Contrast Detection, as mentioned many times, hopefully quicker than some of the competition thanks to a fast refresh rate.
My guess - and it is just that, based on limited information about a not fully-realised prototype - is that manual focus will be done via the EVF, and autofocus will be Contrast Detection, as mentioned many times, hopefully quicker than some of the competition thanks to a fast refresh rate.
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
I said the same thing [for my dM-retrofit project] in a different way eon ago...and got busted by the Thought Police. Careful!
The M8/9 were not just high-margin, they were the last survival tools.
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
One of the favourate nay-saying in RFF is that the X100 is a "paper" camera. I tend to think profound ideas, on paper or not...never mind a tangible prototype...could have explosive outcomes. Many a Manifesto was just a paper at one time.
Every engineer had designs done on "the back of an envelope". I often done mine on a napkin...including the roll-film scanner that sent Leica/Zeiss/Wherli/Vexcel all back to the drawing board in 1993.
I understand Brian Sweeney's remarks about engineers...perhaps he has a few ideas that were ignored by management. I also understand management...they had to pay bills.
Leica lorded over the abandoned RF market [by Canikon ca. 1959] and had enjoyed relative peace. They had not improved the RF much [as evidenced by Leicaphile complains] in 50 years...until Zeiss hit them on the head in 2004.
Now that the barbarians are at the gate...and Leica could only show a lame excuse of a prototype of an re-badged Pany EVF on the X1?!?
I have now started thinking what if one adds an M-mount onto the X100 body?
You know: remove the lens assembly, clip the wires that drives the lens focusing motor, let the EVF does its thing in manual focusing mode, make up a menu-driven LUT for various focal length lens to be mounted [up to 25mm @ 85% coverage]...
Every engineer had designs done on "the back of an envelope". I often done mine on a napkin...including the roll-film scanner that sent Leica/Zeiss/Wherli/Vexcel all back to the drawing board in 1993.
I understand Brian Sweeney's remarks about engineers...perhaps he has a few ideas that were ignored by management. I also understand management...they had to pay bills.
Leica lorded over the abandoned RF market [by Canikon ca. 1959] and had enjoyed relative peace. They had not improved the RF much [as evidenced by Leicaphile complains] in 50 years...until Zeiss hit them on the head in 2004.
Now that the barbarians are at the gate...and Leica could only show a lame excuse of a prototype of an re-badged Pany EVF on the X1?!?
I have now started thinking what if one adds an M-mount onto the X100 body?
You know: remove the lens assembly, clip the wires that drives the lens focusing motor, let the EVF does its thing in manual focusing mode, make up a menu-driven LUT for various focal length lens to be mounted [up to 25mm @ 85% coverage]...
Last edited:
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
While I'm certain that the camera will incorporate CDAF, another poster helpfully linked to this article a couple of pages back. It indicates that Fuji has developed – and is already shipping – digicams with on-chip PDAF.
An interesting (and of course, unconfirmed) possibility for the X-100. That custom CMOS sensor may have been necessary for more than merely its eccentric microlenses...
Once again, the warm-fuzzy retro styling of this camera is not enough to hide the truly serious and creative engineering that underlies its design. Note that I am not yet saying it will be a great camera to use. It could well have serious flaws in its speed or interface that will not be exposed until cameras are shipping. But it is unquestionably a statement of engineering ambition and intent.
Last edited:
__--
Well-known
Then one simply negates the concept of the X100, which, apart from the hybrid viewfinder, is the optimization of lens and sensor without the compromise involved with interchangeable lenses, not to speak crop factor. But I take it you're thinking of a DIY project, to which my reaction is...this thread has gone on long enough...or DIY: [fill in whatever you want].
—Mitch/Bangkok
Tropical Light
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
I guarantee that this camera will not change much once it is introduced in March. The only thing I am scared of is that they never introduce it.
My prediction: Fuji will introduce the X100 on schedule. The Japanese are big on "face"...believe me. They may ignore the naysayers in RFF, but not the CEO's of Canikon...or the Japanese public [the domestic market alone is half the size of United States].
All the unknowns to be worked out are in manufacturing...the only tangible we know is the "Made in Japan" markings in the camera. These days, it has as much meaning as "Made in Germany". Don't worry about it.
Firmware evolves and changes are far easier than designing a production line...ever watch "How it's made" on Discovery Channel?
Also, this is the first time I have ever known a manufacturer invites [anyones'] input...via their dedicated web site; and not just a few hand-picked "professionals".
Brain is right: it is all about us...didn't Fuji say that in the press release?
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
Thinking ain't cost nothing.
__--
Well-known
I didn't really mean that there shouldn't be more discussion or that this thread should end, although I do think it should continue in a new thread because it's gotten so long that it's difficult to search it. I was just reacting to what I saw as an idea of "taking a hacksaw" to remove the lens and embark on a DIY project.
—Mitch/Bangkok
Barrier
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
I would dearly love to start a new thread on X100 [known] technical specifications ONLY. I have been updating my camera specification post [938] since day 1.
I don't know of any tool member can just add data...and once a while someone could clean it up a bit.
It could, but I find that highly doubtful. They are getting so many (all?) of the design absolutely right, it would make little engineering sense to cripple it with poor speed or interface. They are building a photographer's camera, not an engineer's idea of what a camera should be.
Spyro
Well-known
But have you noticed the rear element of that fujinon? It's massive, much bigger than the front one. This is a very unusual lens, it seems customised for that specific sensor. I reckon these two would only work with eachother.
Japan---Exposures
Member
Perhaps a photographer designed it, but it's still built by engineers
Who knows, we might be witnessing the result of a battle between the camera people and the computer people in these types of manufacturers. The computer people really abused their rule for about a decade now, time to fight back.
Yeah, that leads me to believe there could be delays... if they are still requesting input.
ebino
Well-known
Just to go back to the question of the fixed lens and lens adopters.
If you install a lens adopter over the lens in X100, you would have to use an auxiliary viewfinder because the viewfinder on X100 is for 35mm only.
If you install a lens adopter over the lens in X100, you would have to use an auxiliary viewfinder because the viewfinder on X100 is for 35mm only.
Paul T.
Veteran
I did see that; I would guess that this technology will emerge in the X100's successors. SO, if the X100 is a success, the PD autofocus discussed might be a way of keeping a technological lead over imitators.
However, it seems to me that, given an optical viewfinder in one location, and a sensor in the second, one could produce a triangulating rangefinder for this camera simply via software engineering. Feasible? Or fantasy?
robbeiflex
Well-known
Perhaps a photographer designed it, but it's still built by engineers
As long as the engineering team is reporting to the photographer team.
That is also my wish.
PKR
Veteran
I really liked the DIY idea. Firmware is a big problem. I did an approved hack on a nikon p+s a year or so ago. After getting all the hardware changes planned, the removal of the the large cap. (that subs as a battery) for memory retention was necessary. Getting a copy of the firmware for a reinstall killed the project. (They used an eprom/prom for firmware storage. a good portion of code would disappear with power down). I'll be in the market for broken, un-repairable X100 cameras.
I suggest that the mechanical and electronics are doable. Hacking the code is another story. If the AF AE and other lens related feedback systems are removed, changes in the firmware will need addressing. I wonder if Frankie knows any engineers at Fuji? I'm in if Frankie wants to try this.. pkr.
Last edited:
tapesonthefloor
Well-known
Autofocus never factors into my photography. It doesn't exist to me. I'm holding on to a hope that this camera might still be a good, compact, digital street camera for someone like me, though I realize it's a faint hope.
Before the X100 was announced, I would spend hours agonizing over which dSLR body to compromise with, and I would weep softly the whole time. I still haven't bought into anyone's digital SLR system. I don't want to compromise. I don't want to haul around a big ******* dSLR body, or use big ******* Canon AF lenses (I mean, really... has anyone looked at these things objectively in awhile? They've become tree trunks. It's absurd.) I do want to use all my delicious old FD glass, and I would like to use it on a body that is built with a focus on manual. I need a big viewfinder. Digital did not kill the VF, in my opinion, but digital manufacturers did. I have my work D40 right here, which is a camera that does not have a live view of any sort, and still the viewfinder is a dark, narrow tunnel. What sort of photography is this built for? Certainly not mine. I...
...well, I'm rambling again, aren't I. Pardon me, folks. My point is, the X100 is one of the first new cameras I've seen in two decades that acknowledges multiple photography paradigms. I don't use autofocus. Ever. I don't want to look at pixels until they're on my Mac. I like happy accidents, and sometimes I like blurry subjects. I also have disposable income for a camera that will satisfy all these strange needs, and I can't be entirely alone in all this. Fujifilm! Is the X100 my camera?
Last edited: