Why are you so excited?

[videogamemaker]

I never said it was out of my budget just that it's at a too high price point for hype. Maybe in fact it will live up too everyones expectations but it's still too high.
I may buy it if it delivers and if it doesn't, than of course I wouldn't. The price is being fixed by the pre-orders. They have no reason to bring it in at $1000.00 if it's already selling for $1200.00.
That's my point. I bought 2 M8's on release and had the biggest letdown ever. I've been a Leica shooter for over 40 years and those cameras broke my heart. I'm not setting myself up again nor will let anyone else either...
Don

Being willing to wait and see because of past burns have nothing to do with a product being too expensive. The "hype" has nothing to do with the cost point. It was never going to come in at 1,000. "Some dude" at the fuji booth said something that was blogged, tweeted, and posted on forums as gospel, getting people's hopes up, it was never announced at that cost. I personally took it to mean "around 1,000, and not 2,000 like the X1" and it was accurate in that regard.

As someone who has worked at a company where we make price points for new products, it just doesn't work the way some of you think it does. The price point was decided long before anyone on the internet has heard about it. The only psychological aspect taken into mind is the general price points for products.

There is no product even remotely similar coming in at 1,000, not even feature wise, and that discounts the construction and new technology.

• X1? more expensive with less features
• Nex? no 35mm f/2 equiv with autofocus, and even getting 35mm f/2 drives the price over the x100 and makes it much larger/heavier with still no viewfinder.
• m4/3? smaller sensor with less dynamic range, more noise, and if you add in the viewfinders and fast lenses takes the price up to parity with the x100
• P&S are all inferior sensor size and DR noise, and only a select few have an f/2 lens at 35mm equiv, none of which have usable optical viewfinders

All this talk of dynamic this at that, a great photo is a great photo and a little noise in the shadow areas will not change that. Sure, some of us may go 'ooh nasty' but the other 99.99% will still go 'ooh pretty'. There is a point where everyone turns something into something else, and we are all guilty of turning photography in a tech fest based around numbers and not enough shooting great pictures. I'm guilty of this.

No one is going to disagree with you that a great photo is a great photo regardless of technical merits. The question is, if you could have two revisions of an otherwise identical camera, one with huge amounts of dynamic range to work with, and one with neutered dynamic range, which would you prefer?

Some of us enjoy the digital darkroom as much as the act of taking photos, and having a strong, high quality image file that can withstand massaging is important to those of us like that. If I didn't care, I would be fine with a canon point and shoot, as their out of camera files are fine if you don't do anything to them. I want a large sensor specifically for the inherent-to-larger-sensors-at-this-point-in-technology aspects. In all likelihood this means the x100 will have a great image quality for the sheer basis that it uses an aps-c sized sensor, so you're right we are maybe getting too hung up on this aspect, but dynamic range is important when choosing a tool to go out and make those hopefully great photos.

 

[Paul T.]

Being willing to wait and see because of past burns have nothing to do with a product being too expensive. The "hype" has nothing to do with the cost point. It was never going to come in at 1,000.


There is no product even remotely similar coming in at 1,000, not even feature wise, and that discounts the construction and new technology.

• X1? more expensive with less features
• Nex? no 35mm f/2 equiv with autofocus, and even getting 35mm f/2 drives the price over the x100 and makes it much larger/heavier with still no viewfinder.
• m4/3? smaller sensor with less dynamic range, more noise, and if you add in the viewfinders and fast lenses takes the price up to parity with the x100

IN the UK, the fact the price has gone up over £1,000 makes it less attractive. You can get deals on the GF1 for under £500 now (it was £650, complete with the 20mm, a few weeks after launch). It's still a great camera, but over £1,000 will make it more of a niche product.

 

[videogamemaker]

IN the UK, the fact the price has gone up over £1,000 makes it less attractive. You can get deals on the GF1 for under £500 now (it was £650, complete with the 20mm, a few weeks after launch). It's still a great camera, but over £1,000 will make it more of a niche product.

Here in Iceland it will probably be even more than that, but vagaries in smaller markets (I know it hurts, brits, but you're not the economic super power you once were) isn't really something you can ding Fuji HQ for.

Isn't there a thread in this very forum quoting £899? Where are you seeing over 1,000?

I agree though, that after a certain point it becomes a bit ridiculous till prices come down. I think maybe I fall into the more dollars than sense category someone was mentioning earlier, as I'm in regardless of launch price.

 

[Leigh Youdale]

Well, it should remind you of child-like excitement. There is nothing wrong with anticipation and having a bit of fun while waiting for something you want. Far too many adults have killed every aspect of fun in their lives.

As for "saving you from endless speculation" you can do that yourself very easily by not reading this forum till after the launch date. Interesting how that works, no? Unless you're also here because you're excited and want to see if there is new information, in which case you're not only being condescending, but also a hypocrite.

Well, I can agree with the first paragraph, but the second one seems a trifle aggressive in a thread where people have been asked several times not to make personal attacks. No I'm not excited, just interested and somewhat amused at the way the thread develops which is my reason for reading it. As for the rest of your response, I'd prefer to ignore it.

 

[Paul T.]

Here in Iceland it will probably be even more than that, but vagaries in smaller markets (I know it hurts, brits, but you're not the economic super power you once were) isn't really something you can ding Fuji HQ for.

Well done on keeping the atmosphere friendly and positive!

 

[videogamemaker]

Well done on keeping the atmosphere friendly and positive!

It was meant in a light hearted way. Text is hard to convey that, my apologies if you took offense. The point still stands though. They set prices based on major markets, America, Japan, Germany/euro-zone, etc on down the line based on purchasing power. The fact of the matter is, they probably didn't consider UK prices as their top priority and allow the Fuji UK division decide it based on exchange and market costs. That's assuming even that it is over 1,000 pounds.

 

[videogamemaker]

Well, I can agree with the first paragraph, but the second one seems a trifle aggressive in a thread where people have been asked several times not to make personal attacks. No I'm not excited, just interested and somewhat amused at the way the thread develops which is my reason for reading it. As for the rest of your response, I'd prefer to ignore it.

So, comparing those of us excited (of which there are obviously several) to "pre-pubescent boys" isn't aggressive or insulting?

 

[Roger Hicks]

So, comparing those of us excited (of which there are obviously several) to "pre-pubescent boys" isn't aggressive or insulting?

Well, there are 'early adopters' and 'premature adopters'...

Fortunately there's a great deal of humour and gentleness (not to say gentillesse) on RFF, so most people, most of the time, tend to put the most charitable interpretation upon posts at which others take offence.

We can all be thin-skinned at times, but if we stop and think "What do they probably mean", it's often easier to put up with apparent arseholes. And for real arseholes -- well, that's why there's an 'ignore' option.

Cheers,

R.

 

[GSNfan]

DXOmark lists these cameras as having better DR than the Canon 5d:

D80
alpha 100
canon g12
40d
s95
d40x
k200d
km
d60
50d
d200
500d/t1i rebel
60d
k10d
gh1
d300
d90

I've had personal experience with some of these, and there's no way that they even get close to 5d DR in real life. Some - in particular the canon g12 powershot and s95, and also the older dslr models like the d80, k10d, d200, 40d, d60, d40x & alpha 100 are just laughable...

At DXO sensor chart both Leica M9 and Sony NEX score 66. Now that is something to be upset about.

 

[GSNfan]

To the question of dynamic range, Kodochrome had a DR of 8 EV. So, technically its surpassed by almost every digi p&s.

 

[former member]

Well, fair to say that my excitement over this camera has been compared with the Minolta Hi-Matic 9. I bought it in 1969, when i was 12. Spent the whole Summer mowing lawns for $80 to get it. Back when mowing a lawn netted less than a dollar per yard.

So, the statement about being excited like "pre-pubescent boys" is accurate in my case. I am sure that is why the person stated it. It feels kind of good, recapturing that feeling.

Think I'll load up the Hi-Matic 9.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Well, fair to say that my excitement over this camera has been compared with the Minolta Hi-Matic 9. I bought it in 1969, when i was 12. Spent the whole Summer mowing lawns for $80 to get it. Back when mowing a lawn netted less than a dollar per yard.

So, the statement about being excited like "pre-pubescent boys" is accurate in my case. I am sure that is why the person stated it. It feels kind of good, recapturing that feeling.

Think I'll load up the Hi-Matic 9.

Elegant, Brian!

But I hadn't realized I was 7 years older than you. In 1969 (at 19) I got my first Leica: £30 ($72 at the then exchange rate) for a 1936 IIIa. Though I'd first handled a screw-mount Leica in a shop at 16 or 17, and a school friend had had one when I was 17 or 18.

Cheers,

R.

 

[tapesonthefloor]

Well, fair to say that my excitement over this camera has been compared with the Minolta Hi-Matic 9. I bought it in 1969, when i was 12. Spent the whole Summer mowing lawns for $80 to get it. Back when mowing a lawn netted less than a dollar per yard.

So, the statement about being excited like "pre-pubescent boys" is accurate in my case. I am sure that is why the person stated it. It feels kind of good, recapturing that feeling.

Think I'll load up the Hi-Matic 9.

This is such a good post.

 

[kevin m]

And for real arseholes -- well, that's why there's an 'ignore' option.

Does the expression "pot, meet kettle" mean anything on that side of the pond?

 

[M4streetshooter]

Being willing to wait and see because of past burns have nothing to do with a product being too expensive. The "hype" has nothing to do with the cost point. It was never going to come in at 1,000. "Some dude" at the fuji booth said something that was blogged, tweeted, and posted on forums as gospel, getting people's hopes up, it was never announced at that cost. I personally took it to mean "around 1,000, and not 2,000 like the X1" and it was accurate in that regard.

As someone who has worked at a company where we make price points for new products, it just doesn't work the way some of you think it does. The price point was decided long before anyone on the internet has heard about it. The only psychological aspect taken into mind is the general price points for products.

There is no product even remotely similar coming in at 1,000, not even feature wise, and that discounts the construction and new technology.

• X1? more expensive with less features
• Nex? no 35mm f/2 equiv with autofocus, and even getting 35mm f/2 drives the price over the x100 and makes it much larger/heavier with still no viewfinder.
• m4/3? smaller sensor with less dynamic range, more noise, and if you add in the viewfinders and fast lenses takes the price up to parity with the x100
• P&S are all inferior sensor size and DR noise, and only a select few have an f/2 lens at 35mm equiv, none of which have usable optical viewfinders

Well, I'm sure your right and I admit that I must be wrong. Regardless, as uninformed as I am, it's still too much $ at $1200.00 USD.
All I do is make photos. This camera has the potential for me as it maintains my NATURAL FOV. I could use it forever and never feel the need for another focal length...but it's still too high.
I was told that it would come in at $999.95 by a Fuji Distributor.

To keep peace on the forum, as Brian is a great guy, I'll rest at this point and stay a gentleman!

 

[former member]

You collect enough old cameras, collect old brochures, and are just plain old...

I chose the Polaroid Land Cameras, the 100 series. New technology, pack film instant prints! 1965 prices.

When new, my Model 180 Polaroid without Flash listed for $190. Beautiful Zeiss finder corrected for field-of-view and Parallax, Seiko Shutter, 114mm F4.5 Tominon lens- 4-element glass, all manual exposure.

As per the online inflation calculator:
What cost $190 in 1965 would cost $1278.48 in 2009.

Now my Polaroid 180 has the filters, close-up lenses, flash, fitted leather system case, CDS shoe-mounted meter, and cable release. We're talking over $250 in 1965 era money. Is it a fair comparison? Top notch fixed lens, great viewfinder, full manual control, instant pictures. Then and now.

 

[Latecomer]

Seems reasonable, but the Hexar AF might correspond even more closely in function. Can anyone calculate the price corrected for inflation?

 

[gavinlg]

Apparently the Hexar AF was £600 in 1998. According to the inflation calculators that brings it up to about $1260-1300us in current money, which is really very comparable to the fuji x100.

edit: Especially so when you consider the limitations of the hexar - it's shutter tops out at 1/250th, there's no full manual mode, and it's essentially just a light box - the x100 has a sensor in it.

 

[ZeissFan]

Back in the day, a lot of people used to buy stereo gear purely on specs. While Klipsch by far were the loudest speakers I'd heard, I didn't feel that they were great speakers, which it came to reproducing music with accuracy.

And among the Japanese, Yamaha made the best speakers, distantly followed by the others, which I think you could categorize as crap: Sony, Sansui, Kenwood, JVC, Pioneer, Aiwa, Technics (Panasonic), etc. But they sold a lot of them. To be fair, I'd never listed to any Nakamichi speakers, so perhaps they shouldn't be tossed into the "crap" pile.

I preferred American speakers. At the time (1979-80), I went for a pair of Infiniti Quantum Jr. over Bose 901s, which I thought were overrated. My roommate had some Advents, which were very good for two-ways. He eventually ditched those for a honking big pair of Dahlquist panel speakers, which were two feet wide and about six inches deep.

So what's the point of this babbling nonsense? I think we should judge the final product by the images that it makes and not get too worked up over specs. Certainly, it should be a good camera, but it's still just a camera. Just like a vendor that shows up at your company doorstep, pitching their software that will revolutionize the industry, once that check is signed and the luster has worn off, it might not be as great as that 10-minute demo in the conference room.

And the marketplace will judge whether the price is too high and whether the image quality matches the hype.

Regardless, this is like the early days of digital with an extreme amount of pre-release hype that probably will be followed by post-release anticipation of the successor model.

 

[Catto]

...I think we should judge the final product by the images that it makes and not get too worked up over specs.

Crazy talk! Then we'd have to rant about politics & religion instead, and where would THAT lead...
R!