The only difference between this camera and any recent APS-C camera is that:
1. It looks like a classic rangefinder
2. No interchangeable lens capability/fixed lens
3. About $500.
I'd argue against that by saying that just like a Leica M9, whilst it's always going to be a sizable purchase, to someone who wants exactly what the Leica gives, especially versus the alternatives, it's a cost you pay, if not gladly, at least with acceptance.
For me my 'perfect' camera is a digital Contax G2 - full frame, interchangeable lenses and smallish body with auto-focus as I've got thick glasses/weak contacts to build my eyes up or neither in, so either way I can't rely on my own eyes to focus manually and quickly.
The X100 isn't perfect, but for me it's a big step in the direction I want my camera purchase to be as it provides a large sensor, not full frame but large enough for HQ images with dof/creative control. It also gives me a viewfinder which is another big plus and it gives a separate hot shoe as I like to use a flash a lot.
I've tried all the alternatives currently out and none of them worked for me.
The NEX-5 was good quality but I couldn't use a flash except the awful sony one and the lens selection was poor. I had a Voigtlander lens on it but again manual focus isn't my thing at this stage.
I tried Sigma DP2S which took beautiful pictures but was awful to use and couldn't focus well so I sold it and bought a 20 quid Mji II heh.
I tried but didn't buy a M4/3 but felt the IQ wasn't quite good enough and I didn't like the fact you could only get an EVF and so I couldn't use my flash.
Put simply, none of the X100's competitors (and I know the X1 is also there but I couldn't afford it) could stand up to what I wanted and I found flaws with them all sufficient that I didn't buy the camera or sold it as I'd find myself reaching for me GRD3 more than any of the others, mostly because the Ricoh is fast/snappy and lots of fun to shoot with.
The X100 for me gets the closest to what I want because it gives me quality, a viewfinder and a seperate hot shoe. For me it ticks more boxes than any other 'professional' camera currently announced.
The fact it's in a cool body is a nice touch but mostly the fact it's not a DSLR is a plus also b/c I come from a music video background where due to small budgets I've found myself basically doing everything these days which not only stresses me but keeps me away from talking to the band, which kinda defeats the point.
So photography wise I'm all about small, minimal gear that lets me connect with people, regardless of that's at the expense of tech/gear. In that sense, a smaller non-dslr camera will help my connect more than a big beast of a camera imo.
Basically the X100 is not perfect, but it ticks more of my boxes than anything else out there and so although I don't want to pay a lot of money (currently in the UK £899 is the amazon price), it's value considering the alternatives and what I want from the camera.
