Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
From my experience f8 is not an area where the 35mm X100 Fujinon excels, it was optomized for wide open shooting IMO ... and I think with the price limitations Fuji would have had to consider to design and manufacture this camera within a budget, the lens was probably an area where a few corners may have been trimmed.
Not to mention for the price of an ASPH Summicron alone you can buy three X100's!
Last edited:
DamenS
Well-known
LOL - Not quite. The Hexar AF has an intelligent Program mode (biases towards user requested aperture) which is great, but the main difference would be the active IR focus system. This is blazingly fast and works in total darkness !!
Essentially, imagine a Fuji X-100 (with its amazing 6,400 ISO capability) with a blazing fast Autofocus system which does not slow down at all in the dark - this would be a low-light photographer's dream camera ... and the Fuji is so close !!
(also if, as I requested we were able to get a full-frame sensor or at least APS-C without Anti-aliasing filter, these features would be beyond the current Fuji).
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Why have more manufacturers not gone with IR focusing? Is it price or a feasability problem within certain designs?
It would be a blinder on the X100 I agree.
It would be a blinder on the X100 I agree.
DamenS
Well-known
I don't know why they don't use it - one of the problems with it can be due to parallax errors etc, the beam not hitting the right thing (especially if it is very thin), but this would actually be LESS of a problem now that we have LCD screens and electronic viewfinders for pre-shot confirmation of focus. I know the Contax G2 used to use a combination of Active and Passive autofocus methods, so I don't see why such a system could not be used today (best of both worlds) other than that it would add slightly to the cost of the camera (but no - IR af systems are not expensive - it is the system many cheap film compact cameras used) !
Mattikk
Well-known
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors
According to the DxO test, the X100 sensor is better than M9 or even 5D.
OVERALL
Fuji X100: 73
Canon 5D: 71
Leica M9: 69
COLOR DEPTH:
Fuji X100: 22.9
Canon 5D: 22.9
Leica M9: 22.5
DYNAMIC RANGE:
Fuji X100: 12.4
Canon 5D: 11.1
Leica M9: 11.7
LOW-LIGHT ISO
Fuji X100: 1001
Canon 5D: 1368
Leica M9: 884
According to the DxO test, the X100 sensor is better than M9 or even 5D.
OVERALL
Fuji X100: 73
Canon 5D: 71
Leica M9: 69
COLOR DEPTH:
Fuji X100: 22.9
Canon 5D: 22.9
Leica M9: 22.5
DYNAMIC RANGE:
Fuji X100: 12.4
Canon 5D: 11.1
Leica M9: 11.7
LOW-LIGHT ISO
Fuji X100: 1001
Canon 5D: 1368
Leica M9: 884
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Which confirms that in Steve Huff's comparison it is indeed the lens that is the difference in the crops at f8. Obviously the ASPH Summicron is a hell of a lens!
The dynamic range of the Fuji sensor is impressive!
DamenS
Well-known
LOL - Steve Huff !!! Why would you use a biased (and I'm sure he would admit, technically limited when it comes to knowledge or setting up accurate comparisons) source to support any viewpoint without expecting a deluge of critisism ? Steve Huff is an admitted and unabashed Leica "fan" who runs a site he would like to suggest is not a Leica fan site (as that would limit his audience and hamper his viewpoints from being adopted).
NickTrop
Veteran
I can understand your fond memories from years past. However, the aperture control on the lens was due to form following function. In those days it's where it had to exist mechanically. If you wanted to change aperture setting on the fly, you had to take your eye away from the viewfinder, select the aperture, etc. After years of practice, you could guess what aperture you're at by counting clicks.
But c'mon - DSLRs show you exactly what aperture you're set at clearly visible right in the VF. You eye never has to leave the VF while you're composing to change aperture settings. The thumbwheel that controls it is conveniently located, ergonimcally perfect and you have greater control with more "between aperture" settings.
Further, the aperture rings on the lens barrel were sometimes too narrow, or too close to the focusing ring. Over time they'd get stiff. Some had no click stops and would be easy to mess up.
It's just better to have the aperture setting on a thumbwheel with the setting visible in the VF. I don't see why anyone would prefer this setting on the outside of the lens barrel.
Last edited:
DamenS
Well-known
Dude - please don't use an isolated short quote before going on at length about whatever morose "pet theory" you wish to propogate. Read what I have said over my posts. The main gist in my argument is that the Fuji IS a case of nostalgia, RATHER than a current "form following function" - and my main point was that a wheel on the camera makes far more sense to change aperture than an aperture ring on the lens (for one-handed use etc), yet here you are thinking you are arguing against me, whilst supporting my very point !! ... Jeepers.
Anyway, now that you've opened yourself up to critisicm with your erroneous sweeping statements about mechanical cameras and the way they used to be used, here goes ... you are not telling the whole truth about aperture use in mechanical lenses or "old fashioned" film cameras either - many of which had what came to be called an "ADR" (at least in Nikon parlance) - look it up - you'll find out something useful to counteract your recent argument (which was actually a similar argument to the one I made in the first place). Also, there is no more reason for a mechanical aperture ring to fail than a thumb wheel (see what you are making me do - I'm actually almost arguing against my original statements now just to counteract you), nor is there necessarily any greater control over aperture settings with a thumbwheel than with a mechanical aperture (most electronics let you choose between a half and 1/3rd of a stop - Leica have half stops on their mechanical lenses and Zeiss have 1/3rd stops on theirs).
Please try reading more than half of one post in an ongoing dialogue before responding or quoting out of context next time. :bang:
Last edited:
Mattikk
Well-known
Btw. If it's unclear for anyone: the X100 shows you the aperture in the OVF, the EVF, the LCD and it's on the aperture ring too.
But I agree. It would be better for one-handed operation to have a thumbwheel. Otherwise I prefer the ring around the lens.
But I agree. It would be better for one-handed operation to have a thumbwheel. Otherwise I prefer the ring around the lens.
Last edited:
NickTrop
Veteran
Actually, I've read this entire thread and my "take" on your opinion is that you reluctantly acknowledge that electronic aperture is superior, then cite reasons why it may not be, while saying your preference is mostly due to nostalgia. I have no issues with reading speed or comprehension either - both higher than the average bear. Have you considered the possibility that it's your writing or thinking that's unclear? In any event, alls I was saying - not being a kid and having owned many more film cameras than digitals, and having used all manner of lenses - from click-stopped ones to ones with delimiter rings (that I like, actually) like the FSU J9... like most posters here...that in my opinion being able to select aps at 1/3 stops using a thumb wheel where you can see the selected aperture in the VF and not have to take your eye off your composition or fiddle with sometimes too loose, or too stiff, aperture ring... is such an ergonomically vastly superior way of doing things (even if the ap setting is displayed in the VF), that I find it hard to fathom someone's preference for said lens barrel aperture ring over the modern thumbwheel/VF system incorporated by DSLRs, even if one admits that this preference is based on an admitted irrational nostalgia.
However, getting all huffy over such a ridiculous topic as "thumbwheel vs aperture rings" on cameras is remarkably silly - no?
Here...
http://www.anger-management-techniques.org/
Just trying to help ya out, sport
" :bang: "
Last edited:
DamenS
Well-known
Where have I RELUCTANTLY acknowledged that electronic aperture is superior ??
Your english comprehension or the care with which you have read is most definitely "off". Try reading my posts again, a courtesy you clearly afforded on neither your first post quoting me, nor your subsequent post - PLEASE don't "skim read" this time. What might help is if you try to quote any area where my acknowledgement of electronic aperture being superior is "reluctant", prior to your initial post quoting me (when I chose to point out some of your erroneous assertions such as the "requirement" to take your eye from the viewfinder with a mechanical aperture - an incorrect statement of yours you have just reasserted, clearly "skim reading" again, without understanding what ADR means; it was what I asked you to look up in the previous post and what would clearly show you you are wrong to make an unqualified assertion that you have to take your eye from the viewfinder with a mechanical aperture ring). I promise you will be unable to do so.
However to simplify it for you, I will quote myself here:
I then argued against the OP who stated that an aperture ring around the lens is a clear case of "form following function":
ie. I am saying aperture around the ring is more expensive than electronic thumbwheel which = not good.
Then in response to Spyro stating that having apertures controlled electronically through a thumbwheel would make the lens AF, bigger, have greater battery draw and be constructed of cheap plastic, I argued that that was not the case (meaning I argued FOR electronic aperture adjustment on the camera):
I'm not getting huffy over the topic itself (which would be silly), I am getting huffy at being misquoted and having the opposite of my position being attributed to me, by someone who has read with neither care nor comprehension. Having words put in your mouth or to be ascribed a viewpoint to which you don't subscribe is reason enough for a firm response.
Here ...
http://www.pascalpress.com.au/ABC-Reading-Eggs-My-First-Comprehension-p/9781742151656.htm
LOL - now I actually DO feel better. Thanks for the help !!
Your english comprehension or the care with which you have read is most definitely "off". Try reading my posts again, a courtesy you clearly afforded on neither your first post quoting me, nor your subsequent post - PLEASE don't "skim read" this time. What might help is if you try to quote any area where my acknowledgement of electronic aperture being superior is "reluctant", prior to your initial post quoting me (when I chose to point out some of your erroneous assertions such as the "requirement" to take your eye from the viewfinder with a mechanical aperture - an incorrect statement of yours you have just reasserted, clearly "skim reading" again, without understanding what ADR means; it was what I asked you to look up in the previous post and what would clearly show you you are wrong to make an unqualified assertion that you have to take your eye from the viewfinder with a mechanical aperture ring). I promise you will be unable to do so.
However to simplify it for you, I will quote myself here:
I then argued against the OP who stated that an aperture ring around the lens is a clear case of "form following function":
ie. I am saying aperture around the ring is more expensive than electronic thumbwheel which = not good.
Then in response to Spyro stating that having apertures controlled electronically through a thumbwheel would make the lens AF, bigger, have greater battery draw and be constructed of cheap plastic, I argued that that was not the case (meaning I argued FOR electronic aperture adjustment on the camera):
I'm not getting huffy over the topic itself (which would be silly), I am getting huffy at being misquoted and having the opposite of my position being attributed to me, by someone who has read with neither care nor comprehension. Having words put in your mouth or to be ascribed a viewpoint to which you don't subscribe is reason enough for a firm response.
Here ...
http://www.pascalpress.com.au/ABC-Reading-Eggs-My-First-Comprehension-p/9781742151656.htm
LOL - now I actually DO feel better. Thanks for the help !!
Last edited:
Things like this are subjective... there is no right or wrong or better way.