Fuji X100 or DSLR with 35mm equivalent?

W

wanderingeye

Messages
22
Edit My Images
No
Hi everyone,
I like the images the Fuji x100 seems to produce and the idea of its manual controls.
But I am wondering for similar money could I produce the same results with a digital slr and a 35mm equivalent lens?
I dont need or want zoom so a fixed lens will be fine for now as thats the style I wish to work with for a bit.
I use to have a Canon 450d so use to using an slr but I am not sure how important having apature on the lens and shutter speed on a dial really will be.

Any thoughts please?
 
I don't think it really matters how you set the aperture and shutter speed. The point is that you can set them manually, although I personally use Aperture priority most of the time rather than full auto.

35mm equiv for your camera will be about 21mm so if you can budget it you could go for a 20mm f1.8. I have one (Sigma) and on my 20D it makes a nice 35mm equiv lens.

Although they're a little longer you could also have a look at 28mm f1.8's or maybe the excellent Sigma 30mm f1.4.
 
A review by prophet Rockwell http://www.kenrockwell.com/fuji/x100.htm

A very good or in fact better alternative might be something like 5D + 35/2.0 (or 1.4L if you've got the money). There are always Zeiss MF alternatives around, and the well reviewed fully manual samyang 35/1.4. You can always pick a different prime, something you can't do with x100 (but X pro 1 will).

A look and feel is a totally different matter. They are very different.
 
Can you produce the same quality of images as an X100 but using a DSLR and prime lens?
Of course, possibly even better depending on what lens and body you choose.

Will you do so when a DSLR equivalent might be twice as bulky as the x100, heavier and look like a piece of melted plastic?

Only you can answer that. I think that part of what's so great about the X100 is that I can carry it in a coat pocket and that it's so much fun to use, partly because it's so nice to look at.
 
I just got a X100, really really very pleased.

I sold off my 5D MKII to buy it, but I still have a 5D Mk1 for when I don't need to travel light/compact. Having said that I haven't used my 5D since I bought the X100!

Also it would seem last week's firmware update has improved AF quite a lot.
 
I'm very happy with my X100 but would hesitate to recommend it as a sole camera. It has limitations so whether or not it is the one for you depends very much on your style of shooting and what your subject matter tends to be.
What I miss most is zoom but I learn to live with that; I consider the ability to be able to carry it in my pocket to be sufficient to make up for this. I still have my D90 for when I need a longer lens.
 
travellingcello said:
Also it would seem last week's firmware update has improved AF quite a lot.
Click to expand...

This was my biggest gripe with the X100 - I don't see any mention of an AF improvement in the latest update (1.12/1.13)(?) Mine was updated to 1.11 (last Oct) and the AF remained very slow (and inaccurate).
 
brianwar said:
Can you produce the same quality of images as an X100 but using a DSLR and prime lens?
Of course, possibly even better depending on what lens and body you choose.

Will you do so when a DSLR equivalent might be twice as bulky as the x100, heavier and look like a piece of melted plastic?

Only you can answer that. I think that part of what's so great about the X100 is that I can carry it in a coat pocket and that it's so much fun to use, partly because it's so nice to look at.
Click to expand...

Thanks everyone for the helpfull replies.
I will be shooting a lot indoors and have lights too with a backdrop for shooting models for ebay and Asos webstore.
I think I will go the Slr route with a 32/37 mm prime lens.
Will a Canon d600 with a £250 to £300 lens be a good buy?
thanks.
 
wanderingeye said:
I think I will go the Slr route with a 32/37 mm prime lens.
Will a Canon d600 with a £250 to £300 lens be a good buy?
thanks.
Click to expand...

Probably best to go with the DSLR route.

A 20mm / 24mm will do the job I'm sure; I can't recommend a particular one for Canon though.
 
5.derry.gif

4.6993.gif

I appreciate your self-confidence a lot.
 
As already stated, to get the same field of view as an X100, you will need a lens in the range 20-24mm. The 30/1.4 will have an effective field of view of 48mm, longer than that of the X100.

Obvious options are the Canon 20/2.8 and 24/2.8 for EF primes. Or do what I do, save a few quid and buy a manual focus lens and an adapter. You could pick up a Nikon 24/2.8 for £100.00 or double your budget and get a 24/2.0 :)
 
manualfocus-g said:
As already stated, to get the same field of view as an X100, you will need a lens in the range 20-24mm. The 30/1.4 will have an effective field of view of 48mm, longer than that of the X100.

Obvious options are the Canon 20/2.8 and 24/2.8 for EF primes. Or do what I do, save a few quid and buy a manual focus lens and an adapter. You could pick up a Nikon 24/2.8 for £100.00 or double your budget and get a 24/2.0 :)
Click to expand...

If you want the best 24mm 2.8 prime at a cheap price the Olympus 24mm 2.8 is the one to get. About £100 if you look hard enough!
 
I think the main benefit of an X100 is it's compact size, but a DSLR is probably more versatile. On a canon 1.6x crop body you will be looking at 22mm to get the same angle of view as the X100 and a 22mm prime would not be cheap and I'm not sure it even exists. Perhaps a used 5D body (they sell for about £600) with a 35mm lens (either canon or a MF nikkor via an adaptor) might be a better bet in terms of flexibility.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top