Have you just walked away?

[dogbunny]

But plenty of people buy cars for decades, and possibly for life. They're just quite expensive (Bristol, Bentley, Morgan...)

Cheers,

R.

As someone who has spent time working on expensive cars, I can say with confidence that they are not built to last for decades. They are simply maintained, at an expensive price, for decades. They are usually weekend cruisers, or they spend most of their existence parked at the winter home on Palm Beach Island and driven a few times a year. Every time a Bentley or Rolls, or vintage Benz was dropped off to have something done to it--yet again, there was always the wife waiting with the daily driver to give the husband a lift back home.

If those British cars were meant to last surely they wouldn't have allowed Lucas, the Prince of Darkness, do the wiring. 😉

DB

 

[jarski]

They are simply maintained, at an expensive price, for decades.

which brings to mind how important the CLA is when buying M2 from eBay 😀

 

[btgc]

but when I buy (another) digital camera, I want it to be the last one I'll need/want to buy.

I think, this is wrong assumption to start with. Needs change also with film gear, add here short life cycle (normally) of digital devices and you have set up constraints no current camera can match. Any camera is compromise - we just have to choose between pluses and minuses we can accept. There is no perfect camera. Why one would expect X100 is perfect?

They are usually weekend cruisers, or they spend most of their existence parked at the winter home on Palm Beach Island and driven a few times a year.

My limited experience tells irregular use is source for a lot of problems with cars. Drive it daily, spend about same money on maintenance as driving it once a week (assuming conditions are similar) and it will be in better shape. Sounds right?

 

[Roger Hicks]

As someone who has spent time working on expensive cars, I can say with confidence that they are not built to last for decades. They are simply maintained, at an expensive price, for decades. They are usually weekend cruisers, or they spend most of their existence parked at the winter home on Palm Beach Island and driven a few times a year. Every time a Bentley or Rolls, or vintage Benz was dropped off to have something done to it--yet again, there was always the wife waiting with the daily driver to give the husband a lift back home.

If those British cars were meant to last surely they wouldn't have allowed Lucas, the Prince of Darkness, do the wiring. 😉

DB

Well, yes, maintenance is part of what it's about. A car that is designed to last for decades is also designed to be maintained. And yes, maintenance is expensive: it requires skilled labour which is often very hard to find.

If you can afford a Rolls-Royce or a Bentley, or better still a Bristol, you can almost certainly afford more than one car, so it's logical that when you drop one off for service, your wife accompanies you in another car.

When I look back, I've known quite a few owners of seriously expensive motor cars, and (with the exception of Ferrari owners) many have indeed used these cars the same way that someone else might use a Ford.

Cheers,

R.

 

[semilog]

Kiyatkin: sell the x100 and try the Nikon D7000. Amazing -- putatively far better -- high ISO image quality and for a dslr, quite small. with the AF 50mm 1.8 a coat-pocketable (maybe....) size. Or the AF 20mm or the 24mm or the Nikon 35mm DX 1.8 which is just an outstanding $200 lens. It glows. Superior viewfinder (though still not up to analog standards) and better in all respects. Just doesn't look like an old Leica. Other than that, better in every way. Really. Check one out. They're on display and everything.

Kumquats vs. footballs. I mean, really, what an utterly pointless comparison.

 

[DavidX]

The favorably impressed are people who are comfortable with focus and recompose, and who understand when to use zone and hyperfocal methods. They are people who want to hold the camera up to their face. They prefer the convenience of using a small, light camera without sacrificing performance. They are willing to sacrifice flexibility in angle-of-view. They either set up the X100 to work one way that is is compatible with how they work, or they figure out how and when to use the different combinations of EVF/OVF and focus modes to do what they need to do. They invest this level of effort because they routinely get excellent RAW or jpeg files without carrying a large, heavy, noisy camera, or having to spend at least twice as much to get a similar results. They are motivated to get the results they need and their efforts are rewarded.

Wow - that's exactly me. (I've been impressed by your posts before - willie 901) I was going to write something about what I like about the X100, how I use the MF etc, but you did it better than I could! Thanks!

 

[peripatetic]

When I was upgrading from a Canon 20D I was all set to get a Leica M8. Tried it in a shop and felt hugely disappointed. I had thought I would love it, but didn't.

Ended up getting a 5D instead, which I did like. Then a Zeiss Ikon, still love that. Canon 5D2 good tool, no soul.

Absolutely love my X100 though!

 

[dct]

Also depends on how old you are...
But plenty of people buy cars for decades, and possibly for life. They're just quite expensive (Bristol, Bentley, Morgan...)
Cheers,
R.

Not to forget the practical ones like "classic" Land Rovers or Jeep Models.
They were/are expensive too, but most repairs are worth it and that's how the things last for decades...

 

[---f]

I should add that I didn't like the look of the M9 either😱

I have to add to this. After JOnesing for months for an M9, i was fortunate to try out a colleagues and while the quality was amazing, I was dissapointed that I didn't get the same feel as I do when I shoot with my M2, Hasselblad or Cambo 4x5. With film I feel like I'm making my picture, with digital, I'm just a bystander. So, I picked up a used Canon 40D with grip, for $450.00 and the inexpensive 17-85 zoom. This will be useful for the times I need digital. But for film, it's the M2, the 500CM or the Cambo SC.

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

I believe the camera was designed from day one as an autofocus platform.... Fuji really screwed up by not making this clear from day one.

I thought that was clear. I kinda feel like anytime you buy an AF camera expecting to use manual focus, you should expect that the 'manual' aspect is sort of a 'second tier' feature. You get that option, but it's not going to be anything more than a last resort thing. Use it if you have to, but it's going to be implemented in a way that doesn't make it very palatable.

Same with the Hexar AF, Contax G2s and T2 and T3s i've had. I probably used manual focus less than a handful of times. Even with an SLR, if the screen was designed for AF, it's just not going to work as well with manual focus as a camera designed for manual focus.

How Fuji screwed up is that they designed for and marketed to the most persnickety photographic niche audience possible. An audience that clearly has a "Leica über alles" mentality. Anything by any other manufacturer is evaluated one way, and anything by Leica is worshipped...er, i mean evaluated in a different way.

 

[jsrockit]

I thought that was clear. I kinda feel like anytime you buy an AF camera expecting to use manual focus, you should expect that the 'manual' aspect is sort of a 'second tier' feature.

I agree completely.

How Fuji screwed up is that they designed for and marketed to the most persnickety photographic niche audience possible. An audience that clearly has a "Leica über alles" mentality. Anything by any other manufacturer is evaluated one way, and anything by Leica is worshipped...er, i mean evaluated in a different way.

I can't agree with this... I mean, saying Fuji screwed up when they still cannot keep this camera in stock is a bit harsh. Most companies would love to screw up so bad. 🙂

I would say that people had unrealistic expectations for this camera. By the way, I've met two commercial pros who said they use the X100 over their Hasslebalds now. That seems a little much, but they were adament about it.

 

[willie_901]

I agree completely

I agree completely

I thought that was clear. I kinda feel like anytime you buy an AF camera expecting to use manual focus, you should expect that the 'manual' aspect is sort of a 'second tier' feature. You get that option, but it's not going to be anything more than a last resort thing. Use it if you have to, but it's going to be implemented in a way that doesn't make it very palatable.

....

Unfortunately there are a significant number of people who thought otherwise.

I didn't expect the X100 lens would focus like a mechanical lens from day one. I was excited about the on-screen focus/DOF bar even though the displayed DOF is rather conservative. As an aside, the on-screen level has improved my framing too.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Not to forget the practical ones like "classic" Land Rovers or Jeep Models.
They were/are expensive too, but most repairs are worth it and that's how the things last for decades...

Well, yes. I've read (though never verified) that 50% of all 'proper' Land Rovers (Series + Defender) ever built are still on the road. I expect my 1972 Series III 88 inch to outlast me. I've spent a lot more on it than it's 'worth' (i.e. what I could sell it for), with a new chassis, rebuilt engine and gearbox, and so forth, but I've had it about 10 years; it's now 'worth' more than it was when I bought it; and the depreciation on any but the cheapest of new cars, plus maintenance, would have cost me as much or more. An ADAC guy once described the Land Rover to me as 'unkaputbar'.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Keith]

I think to be completely happy with any digital camera first of all you have to be completely comfortable with the medium itself. Seems to me that a lot of the people who haven't really taken to the X100 had expectations beyond what the camera is actually capable of.

 

[sojournerphoto]

I tried one in a shop and didn't buy it. It seemed nice enough, but I just preferred my M9. For what it's worth, I prefer my Ikons and MP to the M9 for using, but the digital is usefu too.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

How come everyone is underwhelmed or overwhelmed?

How many have just been whelmed by the X100?

'tis the law of "best ever" and "worst ever": superlatives are now used to express the slightest emotions. 'tis the way of the Intertoobes. I don't agree with it.


It's the strangest thing ever.

 

[bhop73]

I've been using mine for a few days now and have to say i'll be keeping it. Once you realize its limitations, it's really not half as bad as people seem to be saying. (unless they're pro-manual focus, which is a legit complaint)

 

[Snapper_uk]

"I want it to be the last one I'll need/want to buy"
oh come on.. how long has digital been around now? 15 years? time to get over the everything's changing so fast/I dont like the feel of the new stuff, rhetoric.. I remember very clearly before digital there was the same winging 'I want it to be the last one I'll need/want to buy' ..digital has nothing to do with it, its all down to you and your interest in the gear more then the pictures out of it.
See the cameras as for what they are not what you wanted them to have been..

You got me there. Let's just say I don't 'need' a digital camera, and I have other cameras to use. But to get me to shell out £1000 (which is still quite a lot of money in the impoverished United Kingdom these days), it would have to have something that would make me pick it off the shelf over my other (film) cameras. The X100 didn't have that for me - maybe there will be something else in the next few years, but I'm in no rush.