Fuji x100

Messages
28
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
Yes
#1
It looks as if the price of this camera will be £1000 when it goes on sale next month; any guesses what the price might be in six or twelve months time?
 
Messages
23,099
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
#2
I heard $1200 or 1000Euros, so probably £800-900. And I would expect to pay full price and probably have to wait. And it's not the kind of camera that gets discounted at all :(

If you want one, I would put my name down now and pay full whack, possibly through gritted teeth :D

Edit: I see it is available for pre-order at £999 at various UK retailers (Park Cameras, Warehouse Express).
 
Last edited:

Danny133

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,576
Name
Daniel
Edit My Images
Yes
#5
oh lol i did wonder!!!

not a fan though .. its more than a 7D which is twice the camera!
 
Messages
941
Name
Matt
Edit My Images
Yes
#9
A spec sheet is not going to tell you how it performs. You are also comparing it with a camera that has nothing in commen with the X100.
 
Messages
1,070
Name
Adam
Edit My Images
No
#10
Obviously never used a rangefinder type camera... seriously, if i did weddings, I'd use a second hand Leica M8 and a 35mm equiv lens for more candid shots. People are much less aware of you being around them, and thats why we love 'em.

This thing IS very expensive for what it is, but it has a few innovative features that are clearly bumping the price up a bit. If I can get one for £600 then I'd be happy to buy one.
 
Messages
23,099
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
#11
I don't think it's expensive at all. You can't really compare it to anything else, as there's nothing else like it. Classic style, cutting-edge tech, jewel-like precision engineering, fine materials, gorgeous lens. Cartier-Bresson would kill for one!

I don't think it will sell many, because a grand is a lot of money, but that's not the same thing. For those that want what it offers (and I'm sure it will perform superbly, Fuji are good at left-field high-end stuff) I think they'll consider it a bargain.

IMHO it's a miniature classic in the making. I'm beginning to get that rather guilty I want one for completey illogical reasons feeling :eek: With that beautiful brown leather ER case please (£90) :D

Edit: if you feel you might want one of these cameras, but don't have a grand lying around, don't click on this link http://www.finepix-x100.com/
 
Last edited:
Messages
7,771
Name
Stuart
Edit My Images
Yes
#12
I have to say that is a nice piece of photographic beauty!
I love the vintage look of some camera's, very nice indeed.

Kind of makes me regret selling my old Zeiss Ikon medium format camera :(
 
OP
OP
P
Messages
28
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
Yes
#13
Having not entered the digital field yet but being a luddite with a film camera, it's very appealing to me. One day I think to hell with the money I'll buy one, next day I'm considering what else I could get, secondhand, with that sort of money. I suspect that once I go to a shop and handle one the decision will be made.
 
Messages
1,460
Name
Lloyd
Edit My Images
Yes
#14
I'll be getting one (not on launch day but a few months down the line), but I'm interested to see what Canikon will be offering in terms of EVIL cameras (I know Nikon are developing one, it would be amazing if they did a modernised version of their S series rangefinders). Though my film set up might be complete by then!
 
Messages
16,755
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
Yes
#18
Ken Rockwell slates it on his site - as we know he does speak a lot of rubbish but some of what he says is good advice. I think it will sell ok, but more of a luxury additional camera.
 

Radiohead

Mine sucks
Messages
3,838
Name
Guy
Edit My Images
No
#19
He's an arse though isn't he.

He's not even held the camera, yet he's saying it's going to be rubbish, before slating it compared to a $6000 Leica M9.

The usual nonsense about driving traffic to his site and over-saturating every single phot he takes.
 
Messages
5,288
Edit My Images
No
#20
It has to be said it does look like the poor man's Leica. Looking at KR's site he does seem to be on the button about the samples not being particularly impressive, but maybe worth judging it when more people have access to it.
 

Radiohead

Mine sucks
Messages
3,838
Name
Guy
Edit My Images
No
#21
I'd say the Leica X1 is the poor man's Leica :D

But as I've yet to see any good official samples from any manufacturer I'm not overly bothered until I see what photographers can do with the X100.
 
Messages
23,821
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#22
It has to be said it does look like the poor man's Leica. Looking at KR's site he does seem to be on the button about the samples not being particularly impressive, but maybe worth judging it when more people have access to it.
A bit harsh I think but using the same logic I wonder what some could say about the rebadging of Panasonic's LX range and what it says about people who pay £100's more for a badge?

If I didn't already have a GF1+20mm f1.7 I'd be looking at the X100. Even if ignoring it's retro design it looks like a good camera for someone looking for that sort of thing.
 
Messages
836
Edit My Images
No
#23
It is very cool, but im wondering where it fits in the general sceme of things. Its the same(ish) size as a gf2/Pen and only an f2 lens, I'm sure the view finder is very good, but is it better than Panasonic's evf?
I think it will be very niche, like a Leica, but unless they can knock £400 of the price I don't see it as a big seller.
 
Messages
23,099
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
#24
Our Ken knows what he's talking about, ie he usually gets his facts straight, but the way he sometimes interprets them... :eek:

How can you compare the X100 to a Leica? M9 is five grand without a lens! 50mm f/2 is another £1300. Leica M8 was so appallingly bad they had to modify it, twice, then withdrew it! The new Leica X1 is potentially so good, but falls short in key areas - no viewfinder, rubbish AF, poor screen, only f/2.8 lens - and even that costs £1350.

Fuji X100 is a niche product for sure, but it looks to fulfill that niche rather well, and better/cheaper than anything else. I can't believe that the image quality will be anything less than any other top end APS-C digital, ie pretty damn good, but it's not full frame. That's like saying a Nikon D300 is not as good as a D700 - of course it's not!
 

Andysnap

<span class="poty">POTY (Film) 2015</span>
Messages
15,819
Name
Andy Grant
Edit My Images
Yes
#25
oh lol i did wonder!!!

not a fan though .. its more than a 7D which is twice the camera!
Rangefinder plus points :

Compact
Quiet and practically vibration-free
Very bright, aperture independent viewfinder
Superb wide-angle and normal lenses
Maximum optical quality at f/4-5.6, while excellent at maximum apertures
Short shutter lag

Admittedly SLR's have their advantages as well (I have a D90 and a D300 which I love) but a rangefindercan and more often will take as good if not better pictures.

Andy
 

Andysnap

<span class="poty">POTY (Film) 2015</span>
Messages
15,819
Name
Andy Grant
Edit My Images
Yes
#27
It's a digital rangefinder, at least that's what its described as in all the reviews I've seen.

Andy
 
Messages
387
Edit My Images
No
#28
This camera looks sexy! If the price is alright, I'm definitely buying one! And I saw some test shots in some forums, the performance ain't bad!
 
Messages
4,017
Name
Allan
Edit My Images
No
#29
It's a digital rangefinder, at least that's what its described as in all the reviews I've seen.

Andy
I think its described as rangefinderesque! Its not a rangefinder, it just looks like one.
Allan
 
Messages
2,024
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
No
#32
I'm going to wait and see what the production reviews are like, from people that have actually used one, rather than spouting off based on numbers.

If the IQ and ISO is even a small improvement over my G1 + 20mm, the bigger sensor and more DoF possibilities may be enough for me to justify it....especially as it would replace my G1 + 20mm + 14-15 + 45-200, I never use the zooms anyway.

I have to agree with Ken on the sample gallery though.....what idiot produced them? soft and low-contrast. Hopefully it is just poor PP.
 
Messages
8,382
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
No
#33
I have had a fiddle with some of the images in Photoshop and they come up lovely!
 
Messages
8,382
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
No
#35
Pre-ordered mine last week. Hopefully they're going to meet the March delivery targets.
oooooh! Please do a report after you have played with it a bit. I'm sure there will be many people who are interested in what this camera is like to use and the results.

BTW.....You lucky lucky b........:D
 
Messages
16,755
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
Yes
#36
Well, after buying a S95 and still after a 24-70 lens, I hope people report back that its a total dog!!! Otherwise the S95 may be on the for sale thread!!!
 
Messages
1,592
Name
Dan
Edit My Images
Yes
#37
Anyone that compares specsheets is only getting half the story, and on that basis alone the Canon 350D would beat the hell out of a Leica M9 on focus points and AF accuracy, and the G12 would beat a Phase One or Leaf based on high ISO capability. Time to turn off the internet when it gets that bad, IMHO.

Instead, I'm really interested in this because it offers that timeless design, on-body control and solid build. Aperture, for example, is surely more natural when the dial that controls it sits around the lens...

However, there is one problem, and it's the price, but not for the reasons most fear. £1000 is very little in the world of photography, really, and we all know it - many of you have lenses that cost double that.

Instead, for about another £750-1000, you can get a used Leica M8. The M8 has the same timeless design, the on-body control, but has the backup of the interchangeable lens system, that leica glass, and a feeling that you just bought the real thing, rather than a nicely dressed and well-specced impostor.

If you can afford £1000 for a compact, then in reality you can probably find the extra, even if it's just a few months longer wait. So, the real question is - do you invest £1000 in this now [and I'm sure it'll reward in spades..] or are you putting off the inevitable yet again? If you want an M, and you get what they're all about, then eventually you'll get one. Might as well buy it early....
 
Messages
23,099
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
#38
Dan, there is a reason why the M8 is 'only' £2k used...

Seriously, if you want the Leica experience, the M9 makes a decent fist of it in digital terms. Sure it's crazy expensive and users report some quite serious issues, but it does what it does pretty well.

Frankly, the M8 is an ill-conceived, poorly executed and fundamentally flawed disgrace (n) Apart from those minor details, it's great! :LOL:

TBH I don't think the X100 is a Leica me-too at all (it can't be, because I want one and I don't want a Leica!). Similar in terms of picture taking concept, but completely different design, despite appearances. Leica M9 is an interchangeable lens rangefinder camera; X100 is more like a fixed lens film compact, Olympus 35RC or Canonet QL series (scroll down here http://www.dpreview.com/previews/fujifilmx100/ ). I used a 35RC quite a lot in the 80s, great little camera.
 
Messages
1,592
Name
Dan
Edit My Images
Yes
#39
Hoppy, I see exactly what you're saying. I know that I'll still end up with an M at some point, though. I'd specifically like to see how the x100 lens performs. For me, leica glass gives that remarkable subject separation that can't be replicated by fast reflex glass: the rangefinder bokeh is less clean and clinical.
 
Messages
23,821
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#40
Your clean and clinical as negatives are another persons crisp and well defined positives.

There's room for all but on the whole I can't see why the X100 is being compared to a Leica range finder when it isn't a range finder. It may bare a resemblance to one but it also bares a resemblance to non range finder compacts too.
 
Top