Paul T.
Veteran
I am not buying one. But I'm really happy for those who have. If this camera is a real hit, there will be more like it, which can only be a good thing.
Just fess up, immediate X100 owner ... yes or no!
- Thread starter Keith
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 171
- Views 3K
bigeye
Well-known
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
In some ways maybe ... the problem could be focusing in the dim light where often the contrast points available for the camera's autofocus will be edges of video screens and other weird things! 😛
The M8 had a lot of short comings with it's crappy high ISO performance and poor dynamic range but it was easy to focus ... easier than the Nikon actually! The Fuji's 3200 ISO performance seems brilliant and they claim this camera offers the best dynamic range of anything they've made ... if I can focus it consistently it will easily outperform the M8 IMO. 🙂
Spyro
Well-known
I'm not Keith but FWIW my opinion is that the x100 will be different not better or worse, ie cmos sensors are better at high iso but not as great as ccds at low iso (again, my opinion/preference). This diff in high iso will probably be exacerbated by the age of the M8. Also building a whole camera and sensor around only one lens is also an advantage that will probably have some bearing in IQ, specifically anything to do with corners, colour fidelity in funky light and other curve balls.
Then again, regardless of IQ, the m8 is a leica, it has a leica VF/RF, it's built like a leica and it changes lenses. If you absolutely need these things then they make all the difference in the world.
Then again, regardless of IQ, the m8 is a leica, it has a leica VF/RF, it's built like a leica and it changes lenses. If you absolutely need these things then they make all the difference in the world.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Very true ... if subsequent digital M's start to match Canon/Nikon etc in the high ISO stakes nothing could possibly be better in these types of low light situations. Price is the killer though!
Thardy
Veteran
That nex camera is much uglier.
Seriously, my vote is no for now. Too many cameras right now.
Last edited:
Spyro
Well-known
yeah, I reckon the key is using cmos. But we still havent seen full frame cmos with the lens so close to the sensor, so who knows what are the design challenges involved...
you know what would be really great for low light? Active infrared, like the Hexar AF or Fuji GA645. I never understood why this system disappeared... Dont know if you've ever tried it but it's mindblowing, you can lock yourself up in your closet and the AF will catch immediately in total darkness, no hunting no nothing. Puts any DSLR to shame.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Didn't Canon have some attachment for their DSLRs that projects an infra red net or something to allow them to focus virtually in the dark? I seem to remeber Pickett mentioning such a thing in a thread.
As an aside I can't help but wonder about Japan and it's shocked population and the general effect on industry as a result of this terrible earthquake and tsunami. I don't think anyone should be holding their breath for their X100 at the moment ... that obviously traumatised nation has other priorities! 🙁
f16sunshine
Moderator
Good luck to all you early adopters. 😀
I'll wait until Aperture and LR can import the x100 raw files. What sort of pos program did fuji ship with the camera to convert RAW? I remember waiting months for Adobe to update for my lumix lx3. What a pain to work only in jpeg or convert RAW in silkypix ( really a sh!t program).
I'll wait until Aperture and LR can import the x100 raw files. What sort of pos program did fuji ship with the camera to convert RAW? I remember waiting months for Adobe to update for my lumix lx3. What a pain to work only in jpeg or convert RAW in silkypix ( really a sh!t program).
Spyro
Well-known
Is it the same thing as the flashgun's red beam?. The one I'm talking about is invisible.
But yeah what happened in Japan and NZ freaked me out... I've been in dozens of earthquakes, including the '99 Athens one with 20 victims but never in anything so big. My thoughts are with them, I'd donate my x100 if it'd make any difference.
But yeah what happened in Japan and NZ freaked me out... I've been in dozens of earthquakes, including the '99 Athens one with 20 victims but never in anything so big. My thoughts are with them, I'd donate my x100 if it'd make any difference.
T
tedwhite
Guest
Speaking of infrared, when the Minolta Maxxum 7000 AF was introduced in about 1986 I bought one in St. Louis from City Photo Stock House (I think that was the name - owner was Jack Stroebel). He had me take one of his sales girls into their darkroom (hardly a bad idea), point the camera at her, activate the flash, then turn out the lights and release the shutter. Resulting in a perfectly focused photograph!
For pure bang for the buck and latest tech, it is hard to beat the Nikon and Canon stuff. However, ergomonics and a good comfortable user experience are important to many people and is why we prefer to deal with the M8 and / or the Fuji.
Roberto V.
Le surrèalisme, c'est moi
I would definitely have one on order right now if Ricoh hadn't announced their plans to make an M-mount module for the GXR. I'll wait to see how that one turns out.
robklurfield
eclipse
I'm not buying one of these because I simply don't have the money and think it wouldn't add much to what I do. Nevertheless, I think they look cool and suspect that they'll be great fun to use.
So, here's my question: if the X100 didn't look as nice as it does (the designers did a great job from an aesthetic standpoint, I think ... the whole M-look is a great design conceit), but worked just exactly as advertised, would you still be buying one? What if it were just plain ugly? Would you buy it?
Just like a lot of folks here, I am simple-minded and easily enamored by shiny objects. If it looked truly awful, I probably wouldn't even be looking at any of these threads about it, as I'm happy with my gear and would probably (will probably) spend money on more film gear next.
My next question is, how many of you that are buying one would be disappointed if in a year if Fuji came out with an X200 that takes M-mount or LTM lenses?
Product life cyles these days are so short that it can make one either laugh or cry (an M8 owner, am I, who pined for a while when the M9 came out; but I'm still happy with the M8). I'm curious what others make of this phenomenon.
Anyway, the X100 looks cool. If I had gazillion bucks, I'd probably get one, but since I don't, I won't. For all those of you who are waiting for yours, I hope they're great fun.
So, here's my question: if the X100 didn't look as nice as it does (the designers did a great job from an aesthetic standpoint, I think ... the whole M-look is a great design conceit), but worked just exactly as advertised, would you still be buying one? What if it were just plain ugly? Would you buy it?
Just like a lot of folks here, I am simple-minded and easily enamored by shiny objects. If it looked truly awful, I probably wouldn't even be looking at any of these threads about it, as I'm happy with my gear and would probably (will probably) spend money on more film gear next.
My next question is, how many of you that are buying one would be disappointed if in a year if Fuji came out with an X200 that takes M-mount or LTM lenses?
Product life cyles these days are so short that it can make one either laugh or cry (an M8 owner, am I, who pined for a while when the M9 came out; but I'm still happy with the M8). I'm curious what others make of this phenomenon.
Anyway, the X100 looks cool. If I had gazillion bucks, I'd probably get one, but since I don't, I won't. For all those of you who are waiting for yours, I hope they're great fun.
Fenwick
Established
I have my name in for one
The local shop expect them to be here in 4 or 5 days
So by mid next week I should have a new toy🙂
The local shop expect them to be here in 4 or 5 days
So by mid next week I should have a new toy🙂
Last edited:
retnull
Well-known
It's a "no" for me.
But if it had 50mm lens, it would be a "YES PLEASE!"
But if it had 50mm lens, it would be a "YES PLEASE!"
Frank Petronio
Well-known
I wonder where they might be in the manufacturing and shipping process now that this major earthquake has struck?
A camera is not important in the big picture but it would be nice to know all the same. The impact of the quake is an important question: What will the economic impact be to Japan and the World's economy?
A camera is not important in the big picture but it would be nice to know all the same. The impact of the quake is an important question: What will the economic impact be to Japan and the World's economy?
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
The Japanese are very resilient people and their export trade is ultra important to them ... even more so now IMO. The speed at which they recover from this disaster wlll be a credit to them and a testimony to all that they have survived previously I'm sure.
raystinger
Storyteller
Just bought it 2 days ago and I have been very pleased with it so far. The handling is good and resembles a rangefinder to a large extent. I fell in love with the OVF as soon as I tried the demo set. There is no complains on the image quality too. Noise is pretty well controlled across the entire range up to ISO 6400. But do note that I'm someone who is rather tolerant towards noise considering that I do not hesitate using my GRD3 at ISO1600 when the situation calls for it. Initially I planned to buy the x100 to replace my GRD3. However, after a few days of trials, I decided to keep both since they serves different purpose in my opinion. The x100, while has excellent IQ and relatively good handling, it is no where as discrete as my all black GRD3 and I hope that Fuji will take a leave out of the GRD3's customization implementation and apply it to the next X100 firmware update. Till then, both cameras will have a place in my bag and I think I'm covered for most street photography with these 2 cameras. 🙂
chris00nj
Young Luddite
My two issues:
1. Despite the 35mm equivalency, it's still a 23mm lens, which means depth of field will always be very wide. Nice in some circumstances, but not so good for portraits.
2. Spending a $1,000 without ever being able to see it or handle it is a tough sell.
1. Despite the 35mm equivalency, it's still a 23mm lens, which means depth of field will always be very wide. Nice in some circumstances, but not so good for portraits.
2. Spending a $1,000 without ever being able to see it or handle it is a tough sell.