Fuji x100 in 2017?

[MV72]

I bought mine new but cheap in 2013 after the 100s came out, and fully knowing the shutter would soon clap out (and it did it, but I also knew Fuji would change it for free). No issues since (over 8000 actuations now) It gets a lot of use and turns out pictures I'm very happy with. So convenient and unobtrusive when travelling abroad.

 

[Gary Sandhu]

My Ricoh GR broke and using black x100 again (bought here). The OVF is nice. Focus is still faster than manual camera - when it works- and faster than a Nikon F4 at least 👏.
You can zone focus if you're in a hurry.
Overall, I think I'll be getting the GR repaired.

 

[OskaarF]

damn, just wrote a book and then mistakenly reloaded the page. all gone.
so, to keep it short:

bought one, sold one, bought one again, used it for years, recently found a black one at a good price, bought it, gave the second silver one to a friend for traveling middle America for two months, sold it to him after he didn't want to give it back, bought a Ricoh GR (V), am partly happy about it, now got an R-D1s and don't know why I'm always jealous looking at my black X100 in the hands of my girlfriend, she smiling.

Buy it! Colors are just great, noise rendering is beautiful and very usable up until ISO 1600. It's well made, it's a beauty, it's always there for you!

If you want to know what one can get with it, please have a look at my website, almost everything was shot on this camera (except obv. the Instax and the grainy b/w, that was misdeveloped Tri-X)! http://kevinkowalski.com

Regards

 

[Landberg]

Thanks!

Does the black version have problem with the shutter too? I have a Ricoh GR II, love that camera but i like to have a "35mm" and a viewfinder.

 

[willie_901]

The X100 is worth owning even in 2017. I really enjoyed using the OVF.

The X100 gives great raw files up to ISO 800. Above ISO 800 banding (fixed pattern noise) starts to appear. Shadow regions band first.

I found focus-and-recompose via the back-button method to be reliable and adequate. Focus box size can make a difference. As mentioned by others, this method uses AF to focus manually. Unlike the X100T, I never found highly automated AF to be reliable.

As with all X100 models, close-up work requires at least f 4 with f 5.6 recommended. At typical subject distances f 2 is fine.

The lens can impart halos around bright, point-source light sources. Over exposure makes matters worse. The artifact level is independent of aperture. The artifact level is highly dependent on angle.

Finally, make sure the camera has the most recent firmware. If it doesn't, update it.

 

[maggieo]

With the most recent firmware, my original X100 is still going strong. Its AF is often in a dead heat with my Pen-F and the OVF beats the pants off everything but a Leica.

I've printed (B&W), without up-resing, its files up to 11"x17" and they're stunning. They would easily print larger with a bit of tweaking.

FWIW, the sensor has a look all its own, and the original X100 is the only place you're going to get it.

 

[ptpdprinter]

I've printed (B&W), without up-resing, its files up to 11"x17" and they're stunning. They would easily print larger with a bit of tweaking.

FWIW, the sensor has a look all its own, and the original X100 is the only place you're going to get it.

The X100 12MP sensor size is 2848 x 4288. At the standard print resolution of 300dpi, the largest print that can be made without upsampling is 9.5"x 14.3".

 

[maggieo]

The X100 12MP sensor size is 2848 x 4288. At the standard print resolution of 300dpi, the largest print that can be made without upsampling is 9.5"x 14.3".

I could show you the print, but you'd have to come to my gallery. There may have been some up sampling done by the printer, but not in PS.

 

[benlees]

The X100 12MP sensor size is 2848 x 4288. At the standard print resolution of 300dpi, the largest print that can be made without upsampling is 9.5"x 14.3".

You're mixing up ppi and dpi. Depends on the printer. And of course what you want the picture to look like.

 

[ptpdprinter]

If you want to print an X100 image larger than 9.5"x 14.3" without upsampling, you have to lower printer resolution below 300 ppi.

 

[JoeLopez]

Ehhhhh, as someone who uses an X100s as a work camera, I would say at least get that generation (if not a T or an F). The original X100 was a middling camera when it was released and I find that it hasn't aged well.

Interesting. What are the specific items you are referring to?

 

[jsrockit]

Interesting. What are the specific items you are referring to?

AF speed for one.

 

[kuvvy]

Bought my original X100 the week it launched in the U.K. Done all the updates and it's a fine camera. The talk about slow focus never bothered me as you can follow through quickly on the shutter release and the camera will still go through its focusing routine without you having to press the button in two definite stages.
My camera is still in mint condition and has held up remarkably well and still produces the goods.
I held back from buying the S or T as I was never sure it was worth it as I was never disappointed with my results. However a couple of weeks back I got the X100T, only coz I got a good deal from the shop where I work. I can tell the AF is faster and certain additions like Wifi are an improvement but I'm not overwhelmed by them. Maybe a jump to the F might be a much bigger step.
I'm gonna sell my original X100, partly to pay for the T but I'm finding it hard as I think it's a great camera but it wil have to go.
Many of the negative comments about it are in my opinion a little nitpicking as I've never had an issue with it and I reckon it's still a great buy.

Paul

 

[maggieo]

If you want to print an X100 image larger than 9.5"x 14.3" without upsampling, you have to lower printer resolution below 300 ppi.

Huh. I did neither on my Epson 3880Pro.

I printed both of these on Hahnemühle Bamboo Fine Art Paper 11 x 17"
, using nearly all of the paper.

The one one the left is from the X100, the one on the right is Tri-X, scanned with my Nikon Coolscan V:


Dan On The Wall, April 18, 2013 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

 

[Scrambler]

Which left is which?

 

[maggieo]

FIXED!!!! Oops.😱

 

[jsrockit]

Huh. I did neither on my Epson 3880Pro.

If you printed it larger than the number he proposed then you effectively lowered the DPI. It's not a big deal though... it lowered it slightly.

 

[danielsterno]

hi- yes I am an x100 owner and had it 5/5.5 years, love it, has a certain mojo, only digital AND coincidently I am in the market looking at options, personally I do like the orig bayer sensor vs the Xtrans III but at 12 MP versus 24 you need to think about that, same lens on x100 vs x100f thus thats a push but the AF speed and fast time from wake up mode are the 2 biggies in my opinion for the roof and Acros JPEG though I do like silverxpress for PP- the x100f has a lot of features that is a little over kill but for the money spent in 5/2017; I would get the latest x100f IMO. BUT will I upgrade?? not sure for the $1300- here are my thoughts on the 100f versus Leica Q http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=160530 ...... good luck!

 

[maggieo]

If you printed it larger than the number he proposed then you effectively lowered the DPI. It's not a big deal though... it lowered it slightly.

At this point, I'm realizing that I printed those five years ago and have little memory of what, exactly, I did.

But hey, they looked great, so I reckon there's a process that will continue to make them look great, just like my old M8 files.

 

[jsrockit]

But hey, they looked great, so I reckon there's a process that will continue to make them look great, just like my old M8 files.

And that is all that matters in the end. I've made 20x30" prints with the X100 and it showed some softness. It still was ok though if you weren't looking up close. The newest X100f would probably do very well at this size.