Three X100 Videos by Fuji Guys

GSNfan said:
I don't think its too complicated to figure out the appeal of such videos and X100 itself.

X100 is a digital affordable Leica, plain and simple. A Leica is desired because it was the camera of jet-setting, globe-trotting photographers of the past - HCB, Ralph Gibson etc... It represented the life-style of a refined and cultured man who had a good bank balance, and a taste for adventure. A Leica in your hand, lets say in 60s and 70s meant you were actually somebody, while during 80s it meant you were part of the successful nouveau riche.

That aura still prevails, and people buy into it, because people are the same. Throughout history there was Leica sort of things that man aspired to owning. It is all simply about social status and male territorial displays. How do you differentiate yourself from the countless horde? You buy a Leica, a Harley Davidson, a Porsche. When you can do that, you're a success.

However, the only problem is that these days any kid with a part-time job and a $1000 credit card limit can buy a Leica M body in pretty decent condition. Ebay is full of Leica cameras and lenses and so is the classified in here. Then why still the mystique? Its because a majority of Leica cameras are film cameras. Film is still associated with art photography and photographers of the past. Using a Leica M is connecting to the past of photography itself, that very idea makes a Leica still a status symbol, not materially but artistic.

Fuji wants some of that Leica action with this dinky little camera called X100, and they're doing everything to play into that irrational psyche of man that wants to differentiate himself from others by 'products'. Are they succeeding, yes they're. Even if X100 lags like hell and has major flaws people still will buy it, so they could put it on the table in their local Starbucks. or do one of those show-and-tell things in a 'get-togather'. If Sigma could sell its overpriced and under-performing DP1 and 2, why not Fuji can do the same with a much better looking camera?

These videos might seem annoying and silly to some, but in fact they're extremely clever and subliminal. The annoyance that people feel by watching these videos is simply because of their inability to do the tests themselves.
Click to expand...

You are describing only one type of customer. For every person that buys a leica for the status symbol, there is another that genuinely likes it for the functionality. It's easy to say these exact same things about Apple products, yet the few I have ended up buying have very nice hardware features and are made well. Is there marketing and hype and implied image? yes, but there is also a physical product present as well, and it is possible to also be a good physical product under that image.

A leica look means nothing to me. I've never had one, never shot with one, I don't particularly like many famous photographers known for shooting a leica. That said, I want an m9 because of it's size and the images it can make and the lens options you can mount on it. I don't buy it because I just don't want to sink that much money right now in a camera product.

The X100's design is secondary to it's size, built in viewfinder, and sensor size to a good many people. In fact I haven't seen on any forum, youtube comment, blog, or tweet someone raving over the design only.
 
It's going to be expensive. Not as expensive as the X1, but more expensive than a M4/3rds. Why isn't that good enough for everyone?

$1,300 is my stop pay number. I don't think it's going to be that high, but if it is, and it performs everything it says it will, then it will be still worth it. This camera will be a perfect compliment to my 5D2.

I can't wait. I don't see what the arguments are about, really. If you think this camera is too expensive go buy a D7000, D90, 60D, EP-2, or T2I... Oh wait, all these cameras are similar in price to the Fuji. This is what nice cameras cost! It's the pro camera price tag without the Leica premium.
 
I've re-decided that I'm very excited by this camera. In fact I'm off to the cashpoint to add to my wad of X100 release day cash.
 
videogamemaker said:
You are describing only one type of customer. For every person that buys a leica for the status symbol, there is another that genuinely likes it for the functionality. It's easy to say these exact same things about Apple products, yet the few I have ended up buying have very nice hardware features and are made well. Is there marketing and hype and implied image? yes, but there is also a physical product present as well, and it is possible to also be a good physical product under that image.

A leica look means nothing to me. I've never had one, never shot with one, I don't particularly like many famous photographers known for shooting a leica. That said, I want an m9 because of it's size and the images it can make and the lens options you can mount on it. I don't buy it because I just don't want to sink that much money right now in a camera product.

The X100's design is secondary to it's size, built in viewfinder, and sensor size to a good many people. In fact I haven't seen on any forum, youtube comment, blog, or tweet someone raving over the design only.
Click to expand...

Functionality limitation of RF cameras resulted in SLR introduction. So, anyone who pretends to buy a Leica for functionality is simply fooling themselves. Buying a Leica to make use of expensive Leica lenses can be a good argument but you can do that in film with other M mount bodies and in digital with Sony Nex, which has a far better sensor than M8/M8.2 and better ISO performance than M9.

Despite all of what I said, my dream kit still is a MP and 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH. Not because of functionality or even image quality but simply for its sheer indulgence and bragging rights. I consciously want that bragging right as a reward to myself and i think there is nothing wrong with that. had I been coy and pretended that i want that combo because of better pictures, functionality, stealth and so on then I'd be either ignorant or simply making excuses.


You want an M9 for its size? That is the best reason to own a $7000 camera, size? You see, its all goes back to that differentiation form the horde thing... But anyway, reading that Garry Winogrand interview in the other thread sort of was a reminder and a kick in the butt... Its not about gear, its about that photo of a gas station by Robert Frank, a photo of nothing, yet at the same time a perfect photograph.

Cheers. gtg
 
A camera is a camera. Its form factor evolved over a long time into the two or three dominant types today...RF or SLR.

RF is a flat box...rounded ends Leica-styling notwithstanding. SLR is also a box...but with a bloated center and a big hump on top.

Fuji chose the RF box type for the X100...what is the big debate?

Famous-by-association is self-consciousness exemplified. So and so being called a "Leica Photographer" means what?...that he photographs Leica [stuff] only, that Leica employs him, or that his wonderful pictures can only be made with a Leica...... :rolleyes:
 
GSNfan said:
Functionality limitation of RF cameras resulted in SLR introduction. So, anyone who pretends to buy a Leica for functionality is simply fooling themselves. Buying a Leica to make use of expensive Leica lenses can be a good argument but you can do that in film with other M mount bodies and in digital with Sony Nex, which has a far better sensor than M8/M8.2 and better ISO performance than M9.

You want an M9 for its size? That is the best reason to own a $7000 camera, size? You see, its all goes back to that differentiation form the horde thing...

Cheers. gtg
Click to expand...

Yes I do want an M9 because of size. I do not buy it because of the price. How is that logically inconsistent? If it were 2,000, I would buy it, and it compares very nicely image wise with other cameras of that cost. That's not to say I don't have the money. I could have a porsche, a rolex, and an M9 and sip coffee in shops with them on display if I wanted to, but I put my priorities into saving, traveling, and other higher priorities. I think you are projecting your own mentality as a universal that everyone adheres to.

Trying to say a dslr does everything better than an RF and there is no reason to buy one other than bragging rights is ridiculous. Tradition, habits, favorite lenses, non-existent depreciation, already having a hand-me-down from dad, etc are all legitimate reasons to use an Leica. The Nex neuters the fov of lenses, bumping all those beautiful wide lenses into normals. It has a good sensor, but not that great of an interface, even with the new firmware you are diving into menus and using small buttons rather than physical controls. It's a good camera, but to say it's superior to the M9 in every way for every person is absurd.
 
Responding just to what the demos show . . .

1. You better be able to very easily disable that super-annoying shutter click beep.
2. Shutter lag seems very minimal.
3. Shutter seems very quiet.
3. Camera seems well built with positive clicks on the dials.
4. It's too bad that the aperture ring runs in the opposite direction of the Zeiss ZM and Leica lens that I use on my M6.

So mechanically, the camera appears well-built. Now what Fuji really needs to do is show some sample images at all ISO settings. Image quality will be the ultimate determiner if it's something that I would integrate into my everyday work.
 
GSNfan said:
But anyway, reading that Garry Winogrand interview in the other thread sort of was a reminder and a kick in the butt... Its not about gear, its about that photo of a gas station by Robert Frank, a photo of nothing, yet at the same time a perfect photograph.

Cheers. gtg
Click to expand...

Exactly.

The X-100 appears to have the attributes I want in an every day camera. This means I will make more photographs.

o easy to carry

o compatible with manual operation

o acceptable sensor size

o today's sensor technology means color images at ISO 800 should be clean and hold shadow detail (and ISO 1600 could be printable for B&W work)

o lens with an angle-of-view I enjoy

o acceptable lens speed

o Fuji has made great lenses in the past. This prior information and custom micro-lens design indicates (to me) a high probability of adequate image quality

o camera will not attract attention, so Winogrand-style fast operation is possible

I can't find much information that indicates the the X-100 will not be a great tool for many of my photography projects. It will replace the D200 I carry daily with a 28/2.8 AIS lens. It should do a much better job than the D200. (By the way, I don't use the 24/2.8 on the D200 because that lens flares too easily, but I would if it didn't). I realize my work has suffered with the D200 because it is just too large and heavy to wrestle out of the bag sometimes.

I love film and use it for one of my projects. However I believe that the growth of smart phone ownership will kill off the remaining outlets for retail film processing in my area. I sold all my quality film gear (ZM with Zeiss and CV lenses, Nikon F3) for this reason. I tried micro 4/3 for a year (G1) but I could not abide the RAW file quality (inadequate dynamic range and shadow detail) and large DOF. I missed the manual shutter speed and lens aperture controls. I did find the auto-zoom manual focus by wire though the best manual focus method I've tried so far.

I could care less about the marketing strategy. I only care about finally having an everyday camera that meets the majority of my needs. The more I enjoy the tools I use, the more work I do.

While it is possible the X-100 will have a significant flaw, I find no evidence right now to indicate it will. This is why I pre-ordered the X-100 through Precision-Camera.
 
I don't mind all the hype. It's kind of fun to see a company get this excited about a new offering. I think I'd really like to own one. But I don't see it happening - at that price point for a fixed lens camera.

If I didn't have an M8, I might think differently.
 
There doesn't seem to be 1/2 stop clicks unless I missed something.
I don't know do I. I'm sure that could be done digitally but to have a click on the aperture ring should do 1/2 stops.
 
M4streetshooter said:
There doesn't seem to be 1/2 stop clicks unless I missed something.
I don't know do I. I'm sure that could be done digitally but to have a click on the aperture ring should do 1/2 stops.
Click to expand...

Good observation. I think the in between stops might be available in A (auto) mode for the camera to choose from.

As someone who's never worked with a lens with manual aperture, is 1/2 clicks useful? I normally choose aperture in such a way I feel it's no problem, but I just don't know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom