I guess it's human nature to try something new and not like it, then sell it ... but!

jsrockit said:
High priced compared to what at 50% of $1199?
Click to expand...

According to Sparrow (trust him, did not verify) B&H now lists the camera at $1399. - $1400 clams. To me, this qualifies as a high-price for APSC technology. I got a Nikon D5000 - granted it was refurbbed, from the same retailer with a 35mm 1.8 prime for $680. A Canon Rebel with kit lens - quick check, is $489 on Amazon. A quick peruse of Amazon shows this seems to be about the average price for other consumer APSC DSLR offerings that include a lens.

Sorry, this is APSC technology - nothing more, nothing less. In 2011 in my opinion no camera should cost more than 500-700 bucks. DSLRs are bigger than the Fuji but many are pretty compact these days and their size is not objectionable. You can also slap any lens you want on the things.

The IQ for all these things is around the same - which is very good. "Review" sites pixel peep, split hairs, and quibble. These cameras deliver consistent quality - you can't go wrong with any of them. No reason in my opinion to pay - as I've pretty much verified - twice as much for a "cooler" retro form factor with a gimmick-y viewfinder that isn't that much more conveient to carry around than a compact DSLR.

Like I said.

Silly.

And that's probably why so many are going up for sale. Very telling if true... Tried it, the size is no big deal, the retro styling appeal wore off, the view finder didn't help with anything from a practical stand-point (might even be annoying - too cluttered...), and the IQ was same ole, same ole APSC IQ quality, which is very good.

So folks bailed on it quick while they can still get (probably) 100% of their money back on the used market.
 
I think a lot of folks got all excited that a camera that kinda looks and kinda acts like a Leica could finally be had for $1,200. As you say, the IQ is pretty much on par with most other APSC cameras these days, so I'm thinking it's camera look and feel that is important to the buyers.

That's not a bad thing, particularly. Look and feel IS important in cameras. But it does come at a financial premium. And after a few days of use, some folks decide, I guess, that the premium isn't worth it.

I would pay $600 for an X100. But, at $1,200 or $1,300, my little T1i is a suitable substitute and I gave $400 for it.
 
Last edited:
NickTrop said:
According to Sparrow (trust him, did not verify) B&H now lists the camera at $1399. - $1400 clams. To me, this qualifies as a high-price for APSC technology. I got a Nikon D5000 - granted it was refurbbed, from the same retailer with a 35mm 1.8 prime for $680.
Click to expand...

Good luck finding an equivalent 24/2 AF Nikkor in your $680 budget.

There is only one person on RFF who can not sell his new X100 after playing with it for a couple of days .... right, Keith ? 🙂
 
NickTrop said:
Like I said.

Silly.
Click to expand...

If you cannot understand that people prefer the ergonomics of this type of design to a DSLR and why a bright and clear OVF / EVF is better to use than a small tunnel-vision DSLR (for some of us), then I say go for the DSLR, it is a better deal. What I don't get is why you are always jamming this point down everyone's throat? Yes, we get it... you are a bargain shopper that is immune to ergonomics and aesthetics. Good for you.

However, lets talk about a true DSLR alternative to the X100. How much is a 24mm lens f/2 with one of these DSLR bodies? 😀
 
jsrockit said:
=How much is a 24mm lens f/2 with one of these DSLR bodies? 😀
Click to expand...


Here's where I'll quote an old photographic adage (that I happen to agree with...)

- My $200 50/1.8 + 2 steps back.

And another answer to your question? If the body of the X100 is worth $700 "in reality". - Not $700 for a 24/2, since I'm "meh" on the 35mm focal length. Though I will concede that the speed and focal length of this lens - if that's your bag, is the most compelling reason to own the Fuji.
 
Last edited:
Pickett Wilson said:
I think a lot of folks got all excited that a camera that kinda looks and kinda acts like a Leica could finally be had for $1,200. As you say, the IQ is pretty much on par with most other APSC cameras these days, so I'm thinking it's camera look and feel that is important to the buyers.
Click to expand...

That wasn't the case for me. I wanted:

1. APS-C (ie. good IQ)
2. Fast lens (ability to have OOF)
3. Small form factor (D300s is too big to carry all the time)
4. OVF (sorry, I can't get into the whole compose by LCD thing)

If it looked like a brick, I'd still have bought it. 🙂

Jeff
 
Nick makes a good point re:value for money in absolute terms. You can get a low mileage used Canon 5D and 35 f2 for the same money as an X100 and the Canon is very very good - I know I've got one. However, even with a small prime the Canon is relatively bulky and a lot heavier, so it stays home more than the X100 will. However, value is more than just value for money. There are a whole range of other factors that come into play that have to do with what the individual wants. Some of these will make no sense to others and to try to rationalise them would lead to endless debate. I can't really rationalise why I like this camera but form factor and portability come into play. It is just as hard to rationalise why someone would decide to sell one after only a few hundred shots. I guess it is either for you or not and if its not you move it on.
 
jsrockit said:
I feel the same way, but some don't want any menus at all (like mechanical film cameras).
Click to expand...

One need not really dive into the menus at all on the M9- it comes as default shooting DNG & JPG, and the ISO is a dedicated button. I rarely do much else with it other than tell it what lens I'm using if it isn't coded. Digital doesn't get much simpler than that does it? No Nikon has an aperture ring or shutter speed dial anymore.
 
ferider said:
Good luck finding an equivalent 24/2 AF Nikkor in your $680 budget.

There is only one person on RFF who can not sell his new X100 after playing with it for a couple of days .... right, Keith ? 🙂
Click to expand...


Very true Roland and on the off chance that I did hate the Fuji I would probably set up some system where it got passed to another member who could really use it but was not in a position (financially) to be able to buy one. I'm still committed to that ideal!

That said I think my impulse buying days seem to be over thankfully and if I had scraped and saved and sold other gear to get the X100 I'd be making damned sure I got my money's worth out of it. I busted my gut to get the D700 and a couple of good primes because I realised it was the only way I was going to make any money at all from photography and to sell it on a whim would be incredibly counter productive ... even if I wasn't totally happy with it.

The bottom line is, in reality $1300.00 is bugger all money to anyone with a well paid job or a successful business and being able to try these new toys without it hurting you financially is harmless fun. I remember that feeling of having money in my pocket to burn and I definitely did that on many occasions ... particularly with motorcycles! 😀
 
I've had my X100 since yesterday, work has been hectic so I have had a limited time to play with it.

OVF/EVF Like them both, still fine tuning the information they display to my liking.

I spent a little while getting to know the menus and tweaking some of the settings as recommended here and have found the camera to be both fast & silent.

IQ seems good to me- the small % of shots I bolloxed up were my own damn fault.

I'll certainly take a little while longer to become completely comfortable with it but I sincerely doubt I'd sell it even though there seems to be a market well over MSRP (which I paid @ amazon) for the impatient.

I do think it can be very nearly as simple to use as one of my analog cameras since in most cases (for me anyway) my most frequently used settings can be accessed from the external controls after the initial menu diving on initial setup. I've mapped the FN to the ND filter, leave ISO on auto for the most part, manually set shutter speed & f stop and am very very pleased with this camera.

I'd be happier if the MF was faster but of course one can use the AF to get close and for me that is a perfectly acceptable workaround until Fuji hopefully fixes that via a firmware upgrade.

If only Aperture could read the raw files life would be very good indeed.
 
I haven't purchased one of these cameras yet, though I fondle them every time I go to a camera shop. Here in Tokyo there is no waiting, the X100 is in stock everywhere. It is not exactly flying off the shelves, and prices are already starting to come down, I'm sure the same thing will happen elsewhere in time. In regard to the price, I think it's fair, the X-100 is made in Japan where workers get paid $3000 or more dollars a month to assemble it. All lower priced cameras are assembled in China or Thailand where workers are paid only $200-$300 per month.

At least Fuji is making an effort to appeal to rangefinder photographers. When you consider the amount of time, effort, and expense Fuji spent in developing a camera for a rather limited market, it's understandable that it be priced to recoup these expenses. A Nikon D5000 and lens may be less expensive, but the D5000 will outsell the X100 by at least 1000 units to 1.

I'm simply waiting for my birthday, my girlfriend and I visited the Fuji museum in Roppongi last week, and I laid out some pretty strong hints while showing her the camera...
 
Keith said:
Very true Roland and on the off chance that I did hate the Fuji I would probably set up some system where it got passed to another member who could really use it but was not in a position (financially) to be able to buy one. I'm still committed to that ideal!

That said I think my impulse buying days seem to be over thankfully and if I had scraped and saved and sold other gear to get the X100 I'd be making damned sure I got my money's worth out of it. I busted my gut to get the D700 and a couple of good primes because I realised it was the only way I was going to make any money at all from photography and to sell it on a whim would be incredibly counter productive ... even if I wasn't totally happy with it.

The bottom line is, in reality $1300.00 is bugger all money to anyone with a well paid job or a successful business and being able to try these new toys without it hurting you financially is harmless fun. I remember that feeling of having money in my pocket to burn and I definitely did that on many occasions ... particularly with motorcycles! 😀
Click to expand...

I'm very much looking forward to your photos with the Fuji, Keith, and am sure you two will get along just fine.

You're right about motorcycles. Cameras are cheap .... and hurt less. 🙂
 
ferider said:
I'm very much looking forward to your photos with the Fuji, Keith, and am sure you two will get along just fine.

You're right about motorcycles. Cameras are cheap .... and hurt less. 🙂
Click to expand...


In the eighties when Harley finally gave us a motorcycle that would hang together without needing your own machine shop I developed quite a 'habit!'

An FXR, a 1200 Sportster, a Softail and finally a cream and signal red Heritage Softail that I still rate as the nicest motorcycle I have ever owned or ridden. I know you understand! 🙂
 
Ummm...motorcycles are cheap when you factor in 48 mpg versus the typical American commuter with 15-18mpg. But, then, when you visit the ER, etc. the costs can get out of hand. DAMHIK.:angel: It all has to do with a deer...a full moon on a beautiful Spring night...

OTOH, cameras can be very cheap, such as buying a Leica M, using it and selling for at least what you paid for it. Even better are lenses!😎

But, then, all is moot down here in the bottom-feeder layer of the lake. I am just waiting for the day when the used M9, a real digital rangefinder, is tossed in the lake and drifts down to me after several, hopefully, careful users decided they wanted the M16 with holographic 3D virtual reality lasers. Until then, my film Leicas will do just fine with the D40 filling in the digital needs.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom