How many M8 and M9 owners are considering the x100 and why

E

eleskin

Well-known
Local time
7:15 PM
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
1,080
I own 2 M8's, a 15mm super wide Heliar ,28mm Elmarit, 35mm Summicron,
35mm f1.2 Nokton, 40mm Nokton, 50mm Noctilux, 50mmSummicron, 90mm Tele Elmarit, 135mm Elmarit with eyes, and 280mm Telyt, and yet, the Fuji X100 has my attention. Why?

Well to be frank, it offers me not a replacement for my M stuff, but a tool to give me more capability for not that much money that satisfies my attraction to rangefinder like cameras. The X100 is not a true rangefinder like the M8/9, but it is Rangefinder like, and it does give a direct optical view while offering a view outside the frame lines to anticipate what is coming into the field of view. No DSLR or any other product is doing that except what Leica, Voigtlander, Zeiss, and now Fuji have offered. Another thing is sometimes I do not feel like hauling around my lens collection and 2 M8's and would prefer something I can take out for an evening out and not feel weighed down too much. M's can do this as well, but the Fuji has more capability. Let me explain. Although the M8/9 cameras offer excellent image quality, they suffer at high ISO unfortunatly. Test reports of the X100 suggest the high ISO is superior to the M8/M9.

Another option: Yes, autofocus. This is why many of us have DSLR's as well as M's. There are situations where fast autofocus is very helpful, and I know this very well, despite being able to handle a rangefinder very well.

Sometimes off camera flash is very useful, and being able to move the flash with one hand and the camera with the other is a great technique. Look at the work of Larry Fink and you will understand. Being able to operate a camera with one finger is a great technique, and the M camera jsut does not handle well for this. I have used a Pentax 645N with the Sunpack 622 "potato masher" with only one finger on the camera button. The X100 is even better in that it would be much lighter than the Pentax 645N or the average pro DSLR.

M cameras can shoot moving subjects, but when you start shooting wide at f1.4 or f1.0, it is a nighmare when subjects are moving away or towards you rapidly. From the tests I see, the X100 handles very well with focusing at subjects moving quickly towards or away from the camera. The M8,M9 are not well suited for this.

Many will say just buy a DSLR. I say that sometimes DSLR's are too bulky, and being a rangefinder user, the X1000 makes me feel more at home.

Will I use the X100 more and will my digital M's and lenses collect dust?
No. A Noctilux is what it is, and the X100 cannot replace that at all as well as Voigtlanders 15mm Super Wide Heliar, 50mm Summicron, etc,,,

What the X100 represents for me is another tool in my box with my M cameras and lenses. Thats it.
 
1) Autofucus (hopefully fast)
2) Small and Light
3) Viewfinder
4) Hopefully great high ISO
5) Cheap enough
6) Leaf shutter

I'm hoping it is a great cross between my M8 and my X1.
 
Now that I am seeing some pretty nice images from the camera, it does have me thinking.
My current kit is a D700, M8.2 and M6. (though i really don't shoot much film.)

I'm essentially wondering if I might trade out the M8 for the x100 - and rely more heavily on my M6 for my rangefinder fix.
While the X100 lacks the flexibility in lenses, it would definitely fit the role of compact camera that's easy to carry around.

The fate of this plan really depends on whether or not I'm successful at putting film back into my shooting. I've started experimenting with it in the studio and just need to see how it fits in my life.
 
It is just a point-and-shoot with an optical viewfinder, some viewfinder gimmcks and (in my eyes) kitschy retro-styling thrown in. I might consider it for my wife, who wants a compact AF camera - but after it has proven its performance.
 
jaapv said:
It is just a point-and-shoot with an optical viewfinder, some viewfinder gimmcks and (in my eyes) kitschy retro-styling thrown in.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, so auto-focus and the lack of a rangefinder makes a camera a point and shoot?
 
From
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/00-new-today.htm

Fuji FInepix X100
Forget the Fuji Finepix X100. I just looked at this sample gallery, and the images are soft, low-contrast, lower resolution, and boring compared to my D7000, much less the full-resolution samples I share in my new Route 66 Gallery from a LEICA M9. Who are Fuji trying to kid; children who think iPhones are cool? I love Fuji — Fuji Velvia 50! Now that's photography! When you can get this from a Fuji digital camera, wake me up.
 
jaapv said:
It is just a point-and-shoot with an optical viewfinder, some viewfinder gimmcks and (in my eyes) kitschy retro-styling thrown in. I might consider it for my wife, who wants a compact AF camera - but after it has proven its performance.
Click to expand...

Seems a little harsh. It may very well be a point-and-shoot. But it's a point-and-shoot that offers a lot more than most I've ever seen. It may very well be a wonderful tool for some jobs. If so, it's worth considering.
Still, I'm going to maintain some skepticism on that front. I need to see it's high ISO performance, etc.
And there is just no way that I'll be a beta tester for this one. Did that with the M8. Never again.
 
I have an M9, and use it almost every day. It's great. No complaints.

I have preordered an X100. I like cameras. In addition to my M9, I have a GF1 (that my wife has stolen) and a Zeiss Ikon (even though I haven't had film in my fridge in a year).

I'm getting an X100 because I think it will be fun to use, a new camera to learn and try myself with. And if that's not a satisfying enough answer, well, haters gonna hate.
 
I looked all the images shot with this camera and it can´t match my X1, so i guess i have to wait for a comparison between both x100 & x1.
I think the x1 will win by far in terms of image quality, but will be very nice to look for that test.:rolleyes:

I´ve read recently the x100 only can shot at 1/4000 at f8!
At f2 it can only make 1/1000!

I don´t think i´ll purchase that camera but i think it´s a terrific idea and will be a great selling product!

Bye
 
tbarker13 said:
Seems a little harsh. It may very well be a point-and-shoot. But it's a point-and-shoot that offers a lot more than most I've ever seen. It may very well be a wonderful tool for some jobs. If so, it's worth considering.
Still, I'm going to maintain some skepticism on that front. I need to see it's high ISO performance, etc.
And there is just no way that I'll be a beta tester for this one. Did that with the M8. Never again.
Click to expand...
Well, yes maybe I overstated a bit. But I have the impression its major sellingpoint will be that it looks like an M3, more or less. That is not why I buy cameras, unless they are M3s....
 
Nup. Not for me. M9 is pretty well perfect as far as I'm concerned. Besides, really don't need yet another camera. Think I need to put my money into going place and seeing things, and finding opportunities to shoot...
 
It's probably a very nice camera, but as I consider manual focus to be faster, more accurate and more reliable than autofocus for the sort of photography I do (I know others disagree) I can't really see any advantages. Once it's been reviewed -- maybe even if I review one myself -- I may of course change my mind, but right now, I'm pretty much on Jaap's side except that my wife doesn't use point-and-shoots.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Roger Hicks said:
It's probably a very nice camera, but as I consider manual focus to be faster, more accurate and more reliable than autofocus for the sort of photography I do (I know others disagree) I can't really see any advantages. Once it's been reviewed -- maybe even if I review one myself -- I may of course change my mind, but right now, I'm pretty much on Jaap's side except that my wife doesn't use point-and-shoots.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Roger, what kind of photography do you do?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I own an M8 and doubt I'll buy an x100, mainly because I much prefer to shoot film. I should really sell the M8 considering how little use it gets. For the same reason I have never been tempted to buy an M9. The x100 does look very nice though and I'll admit I'd like to own one but one thing puts me off. Video mode. I'm sure that most will disagree with me but cameras with video mode never seem like 'serious' cameras in my mind. I know I don't have to use it if I don't want to and it is all in my mind but the feeling remains. If I want to shoot video I'll buy a video camera. End of rant .....
 
I am looking forward to all the wonderful photos people will be posting when the X100 hits the streets as much as the wonderful photos now being posted by any camera. I feel it is too early to be overly harsh on the X100.

I know one thing. It will give many an affordable M like experience for those who cannot afford an M9 but want a similar type of camera. When I was a student in college, I wanted a Leica, but had to settle for a Yashica Lynx and Cannonet. The X100 is the Yashica Lynx of our time, and this camera will create more enthusiasm for rangefinders and classic camera design!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MIkhail said:
Roger, what kind of photography do you do?
Click to expand...

Magazine and book illustration (and of course my site), with a lot of travel; hence a desire for light, versatile cameras. I used to do (and may yet do again) much more studio photography, for which of course the X100 is even less use than an M. At least Ms take Visos.

Cheers,

R.
 
eleskin said:
I am looking forward to all the wonderful photos people will be posting when the X100 hits the streets as much as the wonderful photos now being posted by any camera. I feel it is too early to be overly harsh on the X100.

I know one thing. It will give many an affordable M like experience for those who cannot afford an M9 but want a similar type of camera. When I was a student in college, I wanted a Leica, but had to settle for a Yashica Lynx and Cannonet. The X100 is the Yashica Lynx of our time, and this camera will create more enthusiasm for rangefinders and classic camera design!
Click to expand...

Well, yes, for given values of 'M like' and 'similar type of camera'.

In the late 70s or early 80s I had a Lynx 14, and much as I wanted to love it, I was underwhelmed. But then, I'd already tried Leicas.

Likewise, as I already have an M9, I don't expect the X100 to be better, or as good -- which was, after all, the question originally posed.

All right, the X100 is more than a box camera -- but it ain't an M9.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom