Fuji x100

Looks fantastic to me, I'd like to see a high res of that if possible (not a Lok stalker, merely interested in the image quality!)

Honestly when this camera was first announced, I was incredibly excited to pick one up as a travel camera. But as it draws closer to release, I'm having my doubts. Some people have expressed concern about the IQ, the fact I have to go into menu's to change the ISO is a bit of a negative, and lack of interchangable lenses is a real shame. I'm going to need some convincing that it's not just a good point and shoot in an absolutely beautiful rangefinder body, with a very impressive optical/electronic viewfinder.
 
HoppyUK said:
Leaf shutters don't open fully instantly. They start with a small opening from the centre and progress outwards, which means they act 'somewhat' like an aperture diaphragm during the opening and closing phases.

At very high speeds, the proportion of time they spend partially open/closed is significant relative to the total exposure, and at low f/numbers that is sometimes visible in the bokeh which has a combination of blurred and sharper areas within it.

I've seen it with Hasselblads at wide apertures, though I guess we won't know for sure about this new Fuji because it's restricted. But I can't think of any other reason why they should limit it to 1/4000sec only at apertures of f/5.6 and higher, and go to the trouble of fitting an ND filter instead (handy though that may be for other things too).
Click to expand...

:ty:

Allan
 
guys- don't get me wrong, I fully agree with you, they certainly do look 'OK', for a grand my standards dictate something better than OK. I've seen canon kit lens pictures as good than those:wacky:

to re-iterate, I'm still gutted as I wanted one
 
Last edited:
Radiohead said:
You sure about that?

Assuming 10 feet from subject your 7D has a DOF of 5.45ft at f4 and 8.28ft at f5.6.

The X100 at 23mm and f2 has a DOF of 4.83ft.
Click to expand...

Quite.

It would be wonderful if the lens was 1.4, but again that would change the concept and make the camera bigger/heavier/more costly. I think they'd struggle with the leaf shutter too if it had to open even wider. You just end up with a different camera.
 
Wuffstuff said:
I do believe that if I (or any other photographer) feel 100% OK with the camera (any camera) then that improves my chances of a good picture.

It's what works for you.
Click to expand...

That's got to be the most sensible thing I've ever read on a forum - any forum! Well said! :)
 
HoppyUK said:
That is the main reason why SLRs were invented. And that is the only reason I have ever given.



Are those claim you have just made any more substantiated than anybody else's?



Leica's long history of finanical difficulties is well documented fact. Whether they can turn that around and survive is a matter of conjecture. Personally, I don't think they can or will; they have had too many chances in the past and failed.

Leica's persistent refusal to look the world in the eye without a pair of very large rose tinted spectacles has frustrated me for decades. I have said as much to their face at the factory, to which they respond with yet another batch of limited edition specials finished in gold and snake skin at even more ridiculous prices. Ernst and Oscar would turn in their graves.

Looking forward, their present product line up is too little, too late, or just way off beam. It is crazy to expect to survive long term with the digital M-series with an out-moded design of necessarily limited appeal costing £5k without a lens. The X1 is spot on, but fails to deliver and actually performs less well than cameras costing half the price. Most new potential customers these days have never heard of Leica (as the sales guy in John Lewis told me).

The S2 is an act of utter madness - £17k for the body only - but worst of all it is an extremely niche product, and that niche is getting smaller every day. In a nutshell, Leica does not have the technology to cut it in the modern market - being good at optics and mechanical engineering is just not enough. They are weak on the electronics, which are now right at the heart of a modern camera, and hopeless at economic manufacture. That doesn't add up to a rosy future to me.
Click to expand...

I sincerely hope you're wrong and that come the end of the decade you're forced to eat your words with a large helping of humble pie.

Sadly, I think you've hit the nail. There may well be enough Leica enthusiasts to keep them going as a niche manufacturer for a while but for how long? Most new entrants to the hobby/profession will never, ever, expose a roll of film; to them the Leica heritage, experience, gravitas will mean absolutely nothing.

I hope I'm wrong, too, and I'll willingly help you with that pie!
 
py6km said:
I'd be pretty p***ed off if I dropped a grand on anything and then found out that the shop had been letting people play with it willy nilly beforehand. I bet they also spent a fair amount of time rattling images off with it themselves. Well out of order, irrespective of whether it's someone you know - wonder how many other members of the general public had their grubby mits all over his one thousand pound camera before he bought it.
Click to expand...

Err, how else do you get to handle a new camera and see what it feels like? Or are you one of those who buys on spec and test reports alone? Never tried on a pair of shoes before you buy? :)
 
danbroad said:
I do. Unlike film, ISO is a highly dynamic variable, that I can change as I need. If I can't get shutter speed to where I'm going with a different aperture, then ISO goes up [or down]. ASA 1600 looked an awful lot worse than ISO 1600 does, even on my compact.

The counter argument to this is 'why, given that we can change ISO as dynamically as we can change shutter and aperture, don't we think of our exposure in three-axes [T, A, I] rather than two[T, A]?' I just don't get it, because I embraced this particular advantage of the digital medium long ago.

I respect that some photographers might want to shoot everything on ISO 50 and use aperture alone to regain shutter speed, but folks should at least acknowledge that this is a sort of 'film-thinking'. Nothing wrong with that [it's how I have to think when I shoot the XR], but there's more than one way of getting to an exposure these days.
Click to expand...

Just a thought, if you like to keep ISO so fluid in balancing your exposures, why not shoot in manual (giving complete control over shutter speed and aperture) and set auto ISO? Manual then becomes a semi auto mode with ISO the only variable. Works a treat. :)
 
goldenlight said:
Err, how else do you get to handle a new camera and see what it feels like? Or are you one of those who buys on spec and test reports alone? Never tried on a pair of shoes before you buy? :)
Click to expand...

Shops typically have demonstrations models for this purpose, not ones which are handled and tested by all and sundry and then sold as new. John Lewis will sell the demo models at a reduced price (but marked as ex demo) when the line ends etc for example. It doesn't matter how you try and square it, it's not on.
 
I was thinking of getting this camera but to be honest I find it a tad limiting for 1k . I understand flexibility is not its purpose but even so...
 
Look at it this way... If you could buy one of these for £1k tomorrow you could probably sell it on for a small profit. Viewed like that it's a bargain.
 
Perhaps you've got a layer of dust on your monitor giving that soft focus effect :D
Seriously they look fine to me on my imac, would like to see originals mind and not just web images.
I'd love to have this camera (or its successor lol) as a walkaround but atm finances just aint there :crying:
 
Personally I hope any of you that have pre-ordered decide you don't like it and cancel...

Then I might get mine quicker.

As for the rest of you that just don't like it...

Good, keep it that way :LOL:
 
I notice this thread seems to have gone quiet recently. Has anybody bought one and likes it? I mean really likes it after spending £1K?
I ask because my Dad has been thinking about one for a while but since reading through the dpreview Fuji x100 forums is having second thoughts. It seems all that pre announcement hype doesnt add up to a very useable camera, going by the number of complaints, cameras sent back and wishlist of firmware updates / bug fixes seen on that forum.
I know the camera was in short supply since the unfortunate events in Japan but I think shipping has started again.
Allan
 
I played with one at Park Cameras and it was just SOOOO nice!!! Really felt nice in the hand and if i had the spare I would not hesitate! The VF/EVF is superb also. Shame it's fixed lens but really it is the perfect focal length for most of what i take.
 
After I found out that the size of the AF box cannot be changed (made smaller) in OVF mode, I had second thoughts. My Amazon order is still in place, but I may cancel as there seem to be issues with the camera (the above, the parallax issue, and the wonky VF in some [all?] first batch cameras). I played with one, and the AF box size in OVF mode is a problem for me - it's very big and was the first thing I noticed. It would be difficult to get critical focus at f/2 etc using it. X1, LX5, GF1 etc all allow a 'spot' AF, which I tend to use all the time unless in MF.
 
Met a guy yesterday who had an M9 and X100....had a play with both of them. I have to say that for the kind of street shooting I do with my G1 + 20mm, I'd rather have the X100. The M9 is a beast! Feels great in the hand mind, but I liked the lightness of the X100, and manual controls. The guy said the X100 was a very good, not as good as the M9, as you'd expect, but still good.

The lack of noise at ISO 3000 was enough to make me seriously want to ditch the G1 + 20mm and upgrade! That and it looks fantastic!
 
Yes found his comments a bit generic and not very helpful. Would like some pictures and a bit of concrete evidence on how they all compare.

I like the thought of the X100 mainly because I really need an OVF, could not get on with the electronic one of the GF1/2 (the accessory). Then again you I give up an extra £500+ (over GF1/2 + 20mm) and the flexibility of interchangeable lenses. So frankly I am still waiting for a camera with an OVF, in the shape and size of the GF2, with swappable lenses. I know I will go back to my bed and keep on dreaming.

If I had a lot more cash available I'd get both but I don't so I will have to make a choice eventually.
 
vrapan said:
So frankly I am still waiting for a camera with an OVF, in the shape and size of the GF2, with swappable lenses. I know I will go back to my bed and keep on dreaming.

If I had a lot more cash available I'd get both but I don't so I will have to make a choice eventually.
Click to expand...

Olympus E-PL2!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top