What do YOU think of X100's pricing?

[wlewisiii]

Surprised me? No, but it's still far too much for what it is.

$250 & a 50mm equivalent lens and I'll consider it.

 

[Tompas]

Dirt cheap for a camera with a revolutionarily new type of viewfinder (that most likely everyone will copy).

Of course I will have to take this back should some elementary aspect just suck. But I don't expect to.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Maybe a fair question would be who gives more for the same price, and maybe a fair answer would be nobody... We'll have to wait and see the real thing...

Cheers,

Juan

 

[jsrockit]

Surprised me? No, but it's still far too much for what it is.

$250 & a 50mm equivalent lens and I'll consider it.

So it is worth no more than a cheap canon P&S? Not even the equivalent of a Canon S95?

 

[Thardy]

I voted too much, just because I'm irritated by the £100 UK mark-up.

Of course, if I see photos of Annie Liebovitz with one slung around her shoulders, I shall come back and vote "It's cheap for what it is."

But, in real life, when are we going to see how quick the AF is?

How much does it cost in the UK?

 

[Nikon Bob]

To me it is about what the market will support and relative to the price of the Olympus EP2 it is about right. With the X100 you loose inter changeable lenses but benefit from a larger sensor.

Bob

 

[Paddy C]

Everyone wants everything for less.

If you put this camera into some perspective (IE compare it with fixed lens, high-end, digital and film cameras of the past) I think the price makes sense.

The argument that it should be less because it is fixed lens is not actually logical IMO. This is an argument that asks for cost to equal some difficult to quantify utility, not actual production cost.

Think of the price of a GF1 with the 20mm lens. That kit is a fixed lens camera unless you buy another lens. And, until recent price drops, it wasn't cheap, especially when you compare it to the X100. In fact I still find that kit pricey.

 

[Paul T.]

How much does it cost in the UK?

It's £999. They've added the 20 per cent VAT - and another £100. THis kind of practice is falling out of fashion, even Apple have standardised prices. If I find the autofocus is OK and buy one, it will be from Germany.

(According to videogamer, x100 ambassador, who's from Iceland I believe, it's priced that way because the UK is not an important country)

 

[Soothsayerman]

If the build quality is all that it is hyped to be, and its output is typical fuji prime lens output, and the hybrid view finder is really as cool as it seems to be... then I think it is priced very fairly. But I guess we'll have to see...

 

[Roberto V.]

Just think about how much such a lens would cost in M-mount. I think the price is very fair, and I'll be getting either this or the Ricoh GXR with the M-mount module, time will tell.

 

[dbarnes]

Seems about right to me, if you want an optical viewfinder in a rangefinder-y digital camera and given the alternatives:

Leica M9 $7K-ish (full frame sensor)
Leica M8 $2K-ish
Epson RD1 $1.2K-ish (out of production, not many made, only 6MP)
Fuji X100 $1.2K-ish (non-interchangeable lens, hybrid viewfinder and not RF, autofocus)
Nikon P7000/Canon G12 $.4K-ish (tiny sensor, non-interchangeable lens with zoom, autofocus)

 

[dbarnes]

Not that I wouldn't have preferred something like $800. Given the larger sensor in the Fuji, twice the price point of the P7000 and G12 would have been reasonable. Especially if the viewfinder were conventional optics (like the P7000/G12) instead of hybrid.

I wonder how much the used market price of the RD1 influenced Fuji marketing's planning? The steady dribble of RD1 transactions shows that there's a market niche there. Even if very small, indicative of something.

But i doubt that it's coincidence that $1200 is pretty much halfway between the P7000/G12's price and the M8's.

 

[Rayt]

Remember the USD lost 30% of its value against the Yen these few years so I am sure that is partly to blame. The Canon G series are continuous improvements so less expensive to launch.

 

[robbiechad]

I paid £50 for a 10MP Fuji Digi P&S will this X100 give me 20 times better pictures? Its priced at what they think punters will pay..

 

[Wiyum]

Of course it remains to be seen how the camera feels in the hand and what the images look like. Still, based on early reports regarding the build quality, the viewfinder, and the overall performance of the camera, I think it is just about right. At $1000 I thought it was surprisingly inexpensive, so the $1200 price point feels about right. For $800 more you can get a similar Leica camera with no viewfinder, a slower lens, a worse LCD screen, and worse (to me, largely due to the placement of the aperture dial) ergonomics. Still, I don't recall seeing as much sound and fury over the X1 pricing.

The nearest downstream competitors also reinforce the fact that the X100 is well-priced. The Sigma cameras are a mess in terms of performance. The ergonomics of the NEX cameras are atrocious, and they lack viewfinders. Ditto the GF series cameras, which have better ergonomics but suffer in terms of image quality. The Olympus Pen series might be the best point of comparison, but even those suffer from ergonomic problems, and when coupled with the EVF and a 17 or 20mm prime cost nearly as much as the X100.

Interchangable lenses aside, I can't think of a single thing this camera appears to be doing wrong. It has a bright optical viewfinder (from early reports), a fast lens in a popular focal length, focuses extremely closely, is built to last (again based on early reports) and is rather attractive looking. It just feels like a camera that's meant to be carried around with you all the time. It feels like a thing that'll be kept for years and years. At least to me it does.

But like I said up top... until we get to hold one and shoot with one, there's no way to be sure.

 

[tonal1]

I think it's overpriced and fair at the same time. It should be $895, and eventually it will likely be. I'm more concerned that $1200 is an early adopter sucker price; that in three months it might be down to $995. If I buy this, I'll likely replace it in six months time, so I want to think about resale value.

I can't wait to get my hands on one and see if it's as great as it looks. The things is metal, but I have to say the finish looks somewhat cheap, like the chrome on a Yashica Lynx 14. The guts of this thing are plastic to be sure. Lens sounds promising though, and it is small! ....... Definitely a turning point for many people I think...

Fixed 35~ lens is a major positive AFAIC, btw....

 

[peripatetic]

UK price is going to be around £1000.

An obvious comparison is say: Olympus EP-L2 + 20mm f1.7 + VF2 = around £950.

Basically the same price and I prefer the X100.

Remember of course there is no such thing as a "fair price" or "too expensive" there is only where you happen to fall on the demand curve. I would probably go as high as £1500 for one of these. So for me it seems like a bit of a bargain.

 

[Arjay]

The guts of this thing are plastic to be sure.

Big deal. If it were made all out of metal, it wouldn't have any functioning electronics.

Wake up, this is an electronic camera. The times of cameras hand-lathed out of solid steel have been gone for at least 50 years.

 

[tmfabian]

for me, it all depends on how well it focuses...how much hunting goes on...how well it does in low light...the focus process itself (will it be as annoying as the olympus ep system)... If it focuses properly and quickly, i would say it's a fair price

 

[former member]

It is a fair price. An APS-C sensor with an Aspherical F2 lens, and high-resolution electronic viewfinder integrated with an optical viewfinder. It is certainly price-competitive with the Olympus EP2 with EVF and 17/2.8 lens. If Olympus had offered an f2 lens, the kit would easily be $1200.