X100 users - what other cameras?

X100 users - what other cameras?

  • A Canon 5D (MkI or MkII) or Nikon D700

    Votes: 37 28.7%

  • A Canon 1D or Nikon D3

    Votes: 8 6.2%

  • Another APS-C DSLR

    Votes: 35 27.1%

  • A film rangefinder camera.

    Votes: 81 62.8%

  • A digital rangefinder. (M8,M9,RD-1, etc)

    Votes: 41 31.8%

  • Medium or large format film or digital.

    Votes: 41 31.8%

  • A digital P&S

    Votes: 33 25.6%
  • Total voters
    129
  • Poll closed .
I'm now selling my 5D kit now which is my only digital camera besides iPhone 4 and X100. When I have paid shoots, I'll just rent equipments. Besides that and iPhone camera, my digital camera use is very limited X100 can cover all. My companion camera to X100 are film rangefinders and MFs. I took my MP + 50mm and X100 for a weekend walkabout, and I could almost feel I was choosing the camera for a shot based on the focal length I want.
 
Big and small :)

Big and small :)

Just got my x100 and still exploring. Specifically got it for street photography. Got tired of heavy DSLRs hanging from my shoulder.
Really focusing on two formats these days. Take my 4x5 Shen Hao or Hasselblad into the woods or the x100 to the streets. Seems like a nice balance ;-)
 
peripatetic said:
My suspicion is that the X100 is particularly attractive to two groups of DSLR users:

Those who own a Canon 5D(2) and Nikon D700.

Why? Because they share the characteristic of tremendous image quality in a relatively small package. Some compromises are made in terms of features compared to their 1D or D3 counterparts.
Click to expand...

The people I know who own full frame DSLRs have no interest in using a camera that is anything other than a full frame DSLR. I realize that the few people I know doesn't make a large enough data set to draw any meaningful conclusions. However it is interesting that they all turn their noses up at anything other than a full frame DSLR.

I happily sold off my DSLR kit a week before my X100 arrived. I'm down to an M8 and the X100.
 
Perfect Imposter said:
The people I know who own full frame DSLRs have no interest in using a camera that is anything other than a full frame DSLR. I realize that the few people I know doesn't make a large enough data set to draw any meaningful conclusions. However it is interesting that they all turn their noses up at anything other than a full frame DSLR.

I happily sold off my DSLR kit a week before my X100 arrived. I'm down to an M8 and the X100.
Click to expand...

Haha I love how people hate each other because of the gear they use. All I shoot is a full frame DSLR and a digital point and shoot. I have only shot one roll of film in my life and never plan to shoot film again, yet I enjoy reading the RFF forum, especially the P&S subforum.
 
I think jsrockit summed it up nicely ... if the lens is matched to the sensor full frame becomes unimportant. It's pretty unlikely that a camera like the Fuji or any of the other similar offerings out there would ever go full frame but for a DSLR that has the capability of using heritage lenses it's definitely desirable.
 
Pretty much digital

Pretty much digital

All digital cameras, except for my Zeiss Ikon which I love but don't use (anymore).

I have an M9, and that's what it is. I also have a GF1 with the 20/1.7. Which is a fantastic camera. I like the X100 better (so far), so I might just let my wife take exclusive control of the GF1. I was occasionally taking the GF1 out at night from time to time. She'll be happy it's hers now.

The X100 is %#@!ng great. The OVF/EVF is really a pleasure. Especially considering the only EVF I owned was the GF1's accessory EVF. Barf.
 
I "main" kit is a D7000 with a beat-up old D90 as backup. I use this for the paid work I do and mostly everything else and frankly, the IQ and latitude in the D7000's RAWs killed off most of the lust for a FX camera. The D7k is fine, even excellent at ISO3200 for most applications and can do ISO6400 with some careful processing and initially good exposure. The secret is good, perhaps even better color retention than the D700/D3 at higher ISOs and noise primary of the luminance variety which is easy to deal with in post processing. Slap on some high quality glass and have the grip lying around for extended vertical/portrait sessions and it's a combo hard to beat in terms of IQ, price and versatility. I do shoot a little film with ancient rangefinders and SLRs too.

Now the X100. With all the hubbalooh over the various bugs and firmware quirks, I feel many fail to realize the camera actually works!!! and have a very very good lens and sensor. To be honest it's very close to the D7000 in many ways and I struggle to find lenses of similar quality at that focal length, would have to be the Nikon 14-24 2.8, the 24 1.4 or the Zeiss 21 2.8 perhaps (none of the older Nikon Ai or AF-D 24mm primes are all that great), all of which cost as much or more than the X100. If I was shooting FX of course, there'd be many excellent 35mm lenses to choose from but that means a body weighing over 1kg + minimum 400-500 grams for a really good 35mm prime like the Zeiss 35 2.0.

One indicator of what IQ-potential a camera have can be the size of the RAW files. A D7000 with it's 16mp sensor set to 14-bit uncompressed RAWs produce files of 18 to 20mb. The D90 with the good 'ol Sony 12mp sensor produce 12-bit RAWs in the 9 to 12mb range sizewise (some compression at play). The 12mp X100's RAWs are arund 18-19mb. I don't know if they are 12 or 14-bit though, guessing at 12-bit uncompressed combined with a fine-tuned AA-filter and lens-combo capturing a lot of detail.

Gentlemen, the IQ of the X100 is very much state-of-the-art and it's likely to improve slightly with new firmwares and tuned RAW-converters (ACR etc). For me personally it means I can pick up a light, easy to carry camera that got a viewfinder (I for one never got on terms with LCDs in sunny conditions) and give me excellent files to drool over and abuse in PS.

Then again, the X100 isn't everyone's cup 'o tea considering the fixed focal length, price and clearly less than ideal for stuff like sports ;) Still, it works and makes images and it's not really hard or difficult to use, you just need to spend some time fiddling and getting used to it, like with any camera I've ever used.


Mac
 
I would have liked to have seen the MFT/mirrorless systems added to the poll. I think a big percentage of users of those systems are in the X100 target audience.


/
 
Scary experience: for the first time since getting the X100 two weeks ago I just picked up the M5 with the C Sonnar on it to take a photograph and found that the aperture ring is numbered in reverse. Better shoot some film tomorrow.
 
Richard G said:
Scary experience: for the first time since getting the X100 two weeks ago I just picked up the M5 with the C Sonnar on it to take a photograph and found that the aperture ring is numbered in reverse. Better shoot some film tomorrow.
Click to expand...

For me it is the opposite. I'm so used to my M that I cannot get used to the X100's ring. :bang:
 
Perfect Imposter said:
The people I know who own full frame DSLRs have no interest in using a camera that is anything other than a full frame DSLR. I realize that the few people I know doesn't make a large enough data set to draw any meaningful conclusions. However it is interesting that they all turn their noses up at anything other than a full frame DSLR.

I happily sold off my DSLR kit a week before my X100 arrived. I'm down to an M8 and the X100.
Click to expand...

You could also replace all instances of "full frame DSLRs" with "Leica rangefinders". ;)

/sarcasm
 
I got a D700 for paid work and some candid, X100 for everyday use due to size and the discrete nature of the camera. As a full frame-fanatic, I can still appreciate the X100 for three important reasons: The focal length, 35mm eqv. which is unusual on crop. Combined with the huge aperture. And finally, the way it handles high ISO values. The D700 still has its place however. A full frame sensor does give a more pleasing look to the photos to my eyes, because of highlight-shadow relationships, thinner depth-of-field, colour rendition. Having gone through numerous crop and full frame cameras, this is something I'm sure of.
 
My paid work is all done on a 5DmkII and a 1DmkIII along with a set of L lenses and Zeiss ZE lenses. I won't be giving those up anytime soon, but they are heavy and cumbersome.

When it's just shooting for fun or for my own special projects I work with a EOS 1N (I have the BP-E1 which took a while to find and it makes it the most comfortable 35mm SLR I've ever used, even more than my beloved T90, I also have the PB-E1 booster drive, but I hardly use it, Unless I'm using my larger L lenses on the camera)

I also of course shoot with my Bessa R2 which lives in the bag with my X100, those two pair together very nicely :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom