Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Fuji X Series > Fuji X-100 Series

Fuji X-100 Series This forum is for fans of the rangefinder retrostyled Fuji X Series of digital cameras.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 01-17-2011   #41
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 5,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by GSNfan View Post
Now the question is if the boost to ISO 100 is as good as the D90 and hits the max DR of the sensor I would have no complains but for that we have to wait and see... All Fuji had to do was release some sample images, but i guess thats still not possible less than two months from release.
You're basing assumptions upon assumptions upon assumptions.

What I know:
1. Fujifilm have said this camera will have the highest DR of any of their cameras they've made. If it's higher than an s3/s5 it's going to be very good.
2. DXOmark is NOT the be all and end all of camera performance. Their 'test' results don't match real world results, and I have seen this firsthand.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange

Last edited by gavinlg : 01-17-2011 at 15:48.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-17-2011   #42
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,837
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranchu View Post
How hard would it be to clone the leica III in a puck of *solid* plastic? 10 mpx and 45mm and a rangefinder, tiny screen for the histogram and durable buttons? 400 bucks and a decent raw converter, end of story.
$400? Keep dreaming.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-17-2011   #43
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,581
The sad thing about this camera is that once it hits the shelves and multiple RFFers have it in their hands all this obsessive fun will be over!

What's next I ask?
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-17-2011   #44
bigeye
Registered User
 
bigeye's Avatar
 
bigeye is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 1,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
So, why are you in this thread again?
To brighten your life with my extraordinary wit and humor?

.
__________________
I bought a new camera. It's so advanced you don't even need it. - Steven Wright
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-17-2011   #45
Ranchu
-
 
Ranchu is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
$400? Keep dreaming.
Okay. (3 years, maybe 2)
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2011   #46
Leigh Youdale
Registered User
 
Leigh Youdale is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,629
All this "excitement" reminds me most of the excitement pre-pubescent boys have when they get their first look at a girlie magazine and then let their imaginations take over. The reality is usually far removed from what they wish it or expect it to be.
Wait until you can get your hands on something real and save us the endless speculation.
__________________

Fuji X10
Leica M6
Bessa R4A
Rolleiflex (3): E3 Planar 2.8, WA & Tele
Nikkormat FTn (2)
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2011   #47
videogamemaker
icelandic_photographer
 
videogamemaker is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Reykjavik, Iceland
Posts: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by fdigital View Post
You're basing assumptions upon assumptions upon assumptions.

What I know:
1. Fujifilm have said this camera will have the highest DR of any of their cameras they've made. If it's higher than an s3/s5 it's going to be very good.
2. DXOmark is NOT the be all and end all of camera performance. Their 'test' results don't match real world results, and I have seen this firsthand.
DXOmark isn't the be all, end all, but it's consistent between sensors, and I trust their methodology more than anyone else on the internet, save myself. I personally haven't seen any real world results in my equipment or borrowed equipment that has gone against it. I don't make purchasing decisions solely on DXOmark, but I like the work they do and find their measurement's interesting. I certainly trust their un-biased measuring tools more than a person's fallible and most likely biased tests. Can you show an example of a measurement they have gotten wrong?

As for point 1, that's what makes me think maybe it's not the d90 sensor. The problem is that the d90 maintains great dynamic range all the way to ISO 3200. Several of these new cameras that have crazy dynamic range at base ISO drop off far too quickly for my tastes. So the x100, if it has a different sensor than the d90, might indeed have 15 stops of DR at iso 100, which would be beautiful, but I want to still have 10 at iso 1600 like the d90 sensor.

I don't care much at all about noise, I'm fine with a grainy image. I want to be able to lift shadows, increase volume via contrast, and see into highlights, even when I need to boost the ISO dial. Greedy? yes. Possible with a few sensors on the market right now? Certainly. I just want to know how it stacks up against those others.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2011   #48
videogamemaker
icelandic_photographer
 
videogamemaker is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Reykjavik, Iceland
Posts: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leigh Youdale View Post
All this "excitement" reminds me most of the excitement pre-pubescent boys have when they get their first look at a girlie magazine and then let their imaginations take over. The reality is usually far removed from what they wish it or expect it to be.
Wait until you can get your hands on something real and save us the endless speculation.
Well, it should remind you of child-like excitement. There is nothing wrong with anticipation and having a bit of fun while waiting for something you want. Far too many adults have killed every aspect of fun in their lives.

As for "saving you from endless speculation" you can do that yourself very easily by not reading this forum till after the launch date. Interesting how that works, no? Unless you're also here because you're excited and want to see if there is new information, in which case you're not only being condescending, but also a hypocrite.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2011   #49
btgc
Registered User
 
btgc's Avatar
 
btgc is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by wgerrard View Post
I don't expect it to attract many rank amateur DSLR buyers.

Why they would consider X100 as alternative?

It haven't got impressive 18-55 zoom, and it doesn't look like a serious camera like DSLR does. With DSLR it's possible to use the best lenses on market (even if kit zoom is all one will ever use). We all know those tricks trying to fool potential buyers with fake retro design!
And finally, DSLR has pop-up flash which is better than next-to lens as on X100. Yeah, I've read raised flash is way better! It doesn't matter it's still positioned directly at subject.

When time to shell out good chunk of dollarettes comes, many say - wait, should I? Personally I know feeling how highly desired photographic piece of gear transforms into "just camera/lens". So far I haven't experienced strong buyer's remorse, but you get idea
__________________
MyFlickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2011   #50
Arjay
Time Traveller
 
Arjay's Avatar
 
Arjay is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Munich, Germany
Age: 69
Posts: 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by videogamemaker View Post
...

So the x100, if it has a different sensor than the d90, might indeed have 15 stops of DR at iso 100, which would be beautiful, but I want to still have 10 at iso 1600 like the d90 sensor.

I don't care much at all about noise, I'm fine with a grainy image. I want to be able to lift shadows, increase volume via contrast, and see into highlights, even when I need to boost the ISO dial. Greedy? yes. Possible with a few sensors on the market right now? Certainly. I just want to know how it stacks up against those others.
All of this sounds nice, but is somewhat contradictory in itself:

DR is defined by two limits - saturation (one of the color channels at a value of 255 in an 8-bit file) at the upper end and a certain - excessive - S/N value at the lower end (this is where digital noise overrides any available shadow detail). So, DR is essentially is dependent on the definition of the acceptable S/N ratio at the lower end. This also explains the various and contradicting DR values one can read in different reviews.

Apparently you don't mind noise in the shadows - this makes me think you have little experience with digital cameras: Digital noise looks very much different from analog grain (different distribution in location, size and structure), and once you'll be confronted with it, I'm sure you won't like it. I usually add simulated film grain (noise) in Photoshop whenever I have noisy shadows. It goes without saying that this goes at the expense of shadow detail and thus DR.
__________________
FujiFilm X100, Fuji X-Pro 1, Konica Hexar RF, Hexanon & CV glass & Nikon Coolscan V ... plus a big, bad DSLR

My RFF Gallery, My Flickr, My Ipernity, all presenting different bodies of work

Last edited by Arjay : 01-18-2011 at 01:47. Reason: corrected typos and grammar mistakes
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2011   #51
X-100
-
 
X-100 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlos M View Post
A quality compact with a bigger than compact sensor.
A quality fixed lens, pancake.
At last a decent viewfinder!
And with all the manual control possibilities.

Yes. I'm excited!
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2011   #52
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 5,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by videogamemaker View Post
DXOmark isn't the be all, end all, but it's consistent between sensors, and I trust their methodology more than anyone else on the internet, save myself. I personally haven't seen any real world results in my equipment or borrowed equipment that has gone against it. I don't make purchasing decisions solely on DXOmark, but I like the work they do and find their measurement's interesting. I certainly trust their un-biased measuring tools more than a person's fallible and most likely biased tests. Can you show an example of a measurement they have gotten wrong?
DXOmark lists these cameras as having better DR than the Canon 5d:

D80
alpha 100
canon g12
40d
s95
d40x
k200d
km
d60
50d
d200
500d/t1i rebel
60d
k10d
gh1
d300
d90

I've had personal experience with some of these, and there's no way that they even get close to 5d DR in real life. Some - in particular the canon g12 powershot and s95, and also the older dslr models like the d80, k10d, d200, 40d, d60, d40x & alpha 100 are just laughable...
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange

Last edited by gavinlg : 01-18-2011 at 02:16.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2011   #53
videogamemaker
icelandic_photographer
 
videogamemaker is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Reykjavik, Iceland
Posts: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by fdigital View Post
DXOmark lists these cameras as having better DR than the Canon 5d:

D80
alpha 100
canon g12
40d
s95
d40x
k200d
km
d60
50d
d200
500d/t1i rebel
60d
k10d
gh1
d300
d90

I've had personal experience with some of these, and there's no way that they even get close to 5d DR in real life. Some - in particular the canon g12 powershot and s95, and also the older dslr models like the d80, k10d, d200, 40d, d60, d40x & alpha 100 are just laughable...
It shows them as having higher DR.... wait for it... at iso 100. Even at ISO 200 the pocket cameras already fell behind, and by 800 the rest (save the d90) trail behind as well. This is possible and believable with newer sensors. I shoot with a 5D, trust me. I love the sensor and wouldn't trade it for any of the above cameras purely because of how flat the DR curve is as the ISO goes higher. I still trust their measurements. I had a 40D before the 5D, and I found it to compare to the 5D exactly how their curve displays. similar at iso 100, less at 800 and 1600. This went from "I've experienced the inaccuracy in real life" to "there is no way these inferior cameras are as good as mine". That's the bias that makes me distrust the other review sites, and trust DXOmark's measurements via machine, cold, calculating, uncaring, brand agnostic, machines.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjay View Post

DR is defined by two limits - saturation (one of the color channels at a value of 255 in an 8-bit file) at the upper end and a certain - excessive - S/N value at the lower end (this is where digital noise overrides any available shadow detail). So, DR is essentially is dependent on the definition of the acceptable S/N ratio at the lower end. This also explains the various and contradicting DR values one can read in different reviews.

Apparently you don't mind noise in the shadows - this makes me think you have little experience with digital cameras: Digital noise looks very much different from analog grain (different distribution in location, size and structure), and once you'll be confronted with it, I'm sure you won't like it. I usually add simulated film grain (noise) in Photoshop whenever I have noisy shadows. It goes without saying that this goes at the expense of shadow detail and thus DR.
I've only shot with digital, but I've been spoiled by having a 5D. Lifting shadows is not a problem. Pixel peeping might make the noise look ugly, but in print it's fine. For example I have printed this shot (iso 1600) at a size of 90x120 cm on canvas and the noise is inoffensive to me, and I did a fair bit of shadow lifting and highlight adjustment for maximum dynamic range to fit into the readable image.

There is no use mentioning 255 values unless speaking of jpegs. Raw files have far, far more than 255 levels per channel, closer to 64,000 values if I remember correctly. Useless difference till you start adjusting curves and exposure masks, dodging and burning, etc. But since I do lot of that, I care about DR in the raw files.

All I know is that the 5D scores well on DXOmark, and my personal experience using the files at all ISO's lines up with their score. And when comparing the files shot from other, more poorly scoring cameras, I notice their lack of DR, particularly at higher ISOs.

This is neither here nor there, as we don't know what sensor is in the X100, and even if we did, we don't know if their particular implementation is better or worse than Nikon's with the d90. I will have the camera in hand far before DXOmark gets around to testing it, but at that point I'll look at how my experience lines up with their scores. I expect it to line up quite well.

Last edited by videogamemaker : 01-18-2011 at 03:16.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2011   #54
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 5,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by videogamemaker View Post
It shows them as having higher DR.... wait for it... at iso 100. Even at ISO 200 the pocket cameras already fell behind, and by 800 the rest (save the d90) trail behind as well. This is possible and believable with newer sensors. I shoot with a 5D, trust me. I love the sensor and wouldn't trade it for any of the above cameras purely because of how flat the DR curve is as the ISO goes higher. I still trust their measurements. I had a 40D before the 5D, and I found it to compare to the 5D exactly how their curve displays. similar at iso 100, less at 800 and 1600. This went from "I've experienced the inaccuracy in real life" to "there is no way these inferior cameras are as good as mine". That's the bias that makes me distrust the other review sites, and trust DXOmark's measurements via machine, cold, calculating, uncaring, brand agnostic, machines.
Well, not that it will make any difference to your view, but I've owned and used the d300 and have used a work-friends d90 regularly, as well as a g11 powershot, and IMO none of those have the same DR, even at base ISO, even if you compare iso 100 (base iso) on the 5d to iso 200 (base iso on the nikons). It's not a case of bias, otherwise I'd probably be using the other cameras instead. I really value DR.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2011   #55
videogamemaker
icelandic_photographer
 
videogamemaker is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Reykjavik, Iceland
Posts: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by fdigital View Post
Well, not that it will make any difference to your view, but I've owned and used the d300 and have used a work-friends d90 regularly, as well as a g11 powershot, and IMO none of those have the same DR, even at base ISO, even if you compare iso 100 (base iso) on the 5d to iso 200 (base iso on the nikons). It's not a case of bias, otherwise I'd probably be using the other cameras instead. I really value DR.
You're right, it doesn't make a difference. Because it's individual observation with a single body of each, it could be those were faulty samples, it could be you look for more DR in shadows and they have more in the highlights or vice versa, or it could be bias you're unaware of. D'Nile is not just a river in Egypt.

Short of buying or borrowing a copy of every new camera that comes out, one needs to rely on online reviews at least in small part, to determine performance. The DXOmark review site is consistent and professional, and I've yet to see anyone demonstrably prove with examples their inaccuracy. Until I do, it remains far more important to me than someone assuring me it's incorrect from personal anecdotal and unscientific observation. They also work with the raw files only, vs the heavy weighting DPreview gives to jpegs (though they are getting better about showing raw results).

Now for yourself, I absolutely advise you to pay attention to your own opinion more than mine, not that I need to say that, really. I'm just saying I'm going to stick with DXOmark and my own personal observations.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2011   #56
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 5,069
My original statement was you can't properly quantify IQ with number measurements, thats all. If you disagree, thats cool - we're both probably just as excited for this camera to come out, and for the same reasons. My intention wasn't/isn't to call you out on your opinions.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2011   #57
videogamemaker
icelandic_photographer
 
videogamemaker is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Reykjavik, Iceland
Posts: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by fdigital View Post
My original statement was you can't properly quantify IQ with number measurements, thats all. If you disagree, thats cool - we're both probably just as excited for this camera to come out, and for the same reasons. My intention wasn't/isn't to call you out on your opinions.
I agree with this post completely.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2011   #58
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,837
Quote:
Originally Posted by fdigital View Post
My original statement was you can't properly quantify IQ with number measurements, thats all.
Wait, you mean we are supposed to go out and photograph instead?
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2011   #59
M4streetshooter
Tourist Thru Life
 
M4streetshooter's Avatar
 
M4streetshooter is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Philadelphia, Pa 19111
Age: 69
Posts: 604
I never said it was out of my budget just that it's at a too high price point for hype. Maybe in fact it will live up too everyones expectations but it's still too high.
I may buy it if it delivers and if it doesn't, than of course I wouldn't. The price is being fixed by the pre-orders. They have no reason to bring it in at $1000.00 if it's already selling for $1200.00.
That's my point. I bought 2 M8's on release and had the biggest letdown ever. I've been a Leica shooter for over 40 years and those cameras broke my heart. I'm not setting myself up again nor will let anyone else either...
Don

Quote:
Originally Posted by videogamemaker View Post
It might be out of your budget, but it's objectively not out of line when compared to similar products and it's feature set plus R&D costs.

Pre-ordering simply means you're in line to get the first ones in case there is too much demand. You put your name, and sometimes money, down, and you get yours before someone who saunters in the day of launch. It's neither a new concept, nor a complicated idea.

The price is not affected by people proclaiming interest online. That's now how this kind of thing works. If you're curious about it, you can take a marketing class, but the only thing that we as customers can do to affect it, is to keep buying it at MSRP which will prolong the time before street price drops. Forum posts are not going to "drive up costs".
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2011   #60
_larky
Registered User
 
_larky's Avatar
 
_larky is offline
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 631
All this talk of dynamic this at that, a great photo is a great photo and a little noise in the shadow areas will not change that. Sure, some of us may go 'ooh nasty' but the other 99.99% will still go 'ooh pretty'. There is a point where everyone turns something into something else, and we are all guilty of turning photography in a tech fest based around numbers and not enough shooting great pictures. I'm guilty of this.

So, back to the X100. It excites me because it's going to be a small, well-made, stunning looking camera which will finish my collection. I shoot with my DSLR on the street and never have a problem with people getting ticked off, so imagine how close I can get with something that looks like it came from the 60's. I'm very excited, and anything that gets me back to the streets is perfect in every way as far as I'm concerned, and the shadow noise wont stop me.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #61
videogamemaker
icelandic_photographer
 
videogamemaker is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Reykjavik, Iceland
Posts: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by M4streetshooter View Post
I never said it was out of my budget just that it's at a too high price point for hype. Maybe in fact it will live up too everyones expectations but it's still too high.
I may buy it if it delivers and if it doesn't, than of course I wouldn't. The price is being fixed by the pre-orders. They have no reason to bring it in at $1000.00 if it's already selling for $1200.00.
That's my point. I bought 2 M8's on release and had the biggest letdown ever. I've been a Leica shooter for over 40 years and those cameras broke my heart. I'm not setting myself up again nor will let anyone else either...
Don
Being willing to wait and see because of past burns have nothing to do with a product being too expensive. The "hype" has nothing to do with the cost point. It was never going to come in at 1,000. "Some dude" at the fuji booth said something that was blogged, tweeted, and posted on forums as gospel, getting people's hopes up, it was never announced at that cost. I personally took it to mean "around 1,000, and not 2,000 like the X1" and it was accurate in that regard.

As someone who has worked at a company where we make price points for new products, it just doesn't work the way some of you think it does. The price point was decided long before anyone on the internet has heard about it. The only psychological aspect taken into mind is the general price points for products.

There is no product even remotely similar coming in at 1,000, not even feature wise, and that discounts the construction and new technology.
  • X1? more expensive with less features
  • Nex? no 35mm f/2 equiv with autofocus, and even getting 35mm f/2 drives the price over the x100 and makes it much larger/heavier with still no viewfinder.
  • m4/3? smaller sensor with less dynamic range, more noise, and if you add in the viewfinders and fast lenses takes the price up to parity with the x100
  • P&S are all inferior sensor size and DR noise, and only a select few have an f/2 lens at 35mm equiv, none of which have usable optical viewfinders


Quote:
Originally Posted by _larky View Post
All this talk of dynamic this at that, a great photo is a great photo and a little noise in the shadow areas will not change that. Sure, some of us may go 'ooh nasty' but the other 99.99% will still go 'ooh pretty'. There is a point where everyone turns something into something else, and we are all guilty of turning photography in a tech fest based around numbers and not enough shooting great pictures. I'm guilty of this.
No one is going to disagree with you that a great photo is a great photo regardless of technical merits. The question is, if you could have two revisions of an otherwise identical camera, one with huge amounts of dynamic range to work with, and one with neutered dynamic range, which would you prefer?

Some of us enjoy the digital darkroom as much as the act of taking photos, and having a strong, high quality image file that can withstand massaging is important to those of us like that. If I didn't care, I would be fine with a canon point and shoot, as their out of camera files are fine if you don't do anything to them. I want a large sensor specifically for the inherent-to-larger-sensors-at-this-point-in-technology aspects. In all likelihood this means the x100 will have a great image quality for the sheer basis that it uses an aps-c sized sensor, so you're right we are maybe getting too hung up on this aspect, but dynamic range is important when choosing a tool to go out and make those hopefully great photos.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #62
Paul T.
Registered User
 
Paul T.'s Avatar
 
Paul T. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by videogamemaker View Post
Being willing to wait and see because of past burns have nothing to do with a product being too expensive. The "hype" has nothing to do with the cost point. It was never going to come in at 1,000.


There is no product even remotely similar coming in at 1,000, not even feature wise, and that discounts the construction and new technology.
  • X1? more expensive with less features
  • Nex? no 35mm f/2 equiv with autofocus, and even getting 35mm f/2 drives the price over the x100 and makes it much larger/heavier with still no viewfinder.
  • m4/3? smaller sensor with less dynamic range, more noise, and if you add in the viewfinders and fast lenses takes the price up to parity with the x100
IN the UK, the fact the price has gone up over 1,000 makes it less attractive. You can get deals on the GF1 for under 500 now (it was 650, complete with the 20mm, a few weeks after launch). It's still a great camera, but over 1,000 will make it more of a niche product.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #63
videogamemaker
icelandic_photographer
 
videogamemaker is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Reykjavik, Iceland
Posts: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul T. View Post
IN the UK, the fact the price has gone up over 1,000 makes it less attractive. You can get deals on the GF1 for under 500 now (it was 650, complete with the 20mm, a few weeks after launch). It's still a great camera, but over 1,000 will make it more of a niche product.
Here in Iceland it will probably be even more than that, but vagaries in smaller markets (I know it hurts, brits, but you're not the economic super power you once were) isn't really something you can ding Fuji HQ for.

Isn't there a thread in this very forum quoting 899? Where are you seeing over 1,000?

I agree though, that after a certain point it becomes a bit ridiculous till prices come down. I think maybe I fall into the more dollars than sense category someone was mentioning earlier, as I'm in regardless of launch price.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #64
Leigh Youdale
Registered User
 
Leigh Youdale is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,629
Quote:
Originally Posted by videogamemaker View Post
Well, it should remind you of child-like excitement. There is nothing wrong with anticipation and having a bit of fun while waiting for something you want. Far too many adults have killed every aspect of fun in their lives.

As for "saving you from endless speculation" you can do that yourself very easily by not reading this forum till after the launch date. Interesting how that works, no? Unless you're also here because you're excited and want to see if there is new information, in which case you're not only being condescending, but also a hypocrite.
Well, I can agree with the first paragraph, but the second one seems a trifle aggressive in a thread where people have been asked several times not to make personal attacks. No I'm not excited, just interested and somewhat amused at the way the thread develops which is my reason for reading it. As for the rest of your response, I'd prefer to ignore it.
__________________

Fuji X10
Leica M6
Bessa R4A
Rolleiflex (3): E3 Planar 2.8, WA & Tele
Nikkormat FTn (2)
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #65
Paul T.
Registered User
 
Paul T.'s Avatar
 
Paul T. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by videogamemaker View Post
Here in Iceland it will probably be even more than that, but vagaries in smaller markets (I know it hurts, brits, but you're not the economic super power you once were) isn't really something you can ding Fuji HQ for.
Well done on keeping the atmosphere friendly and positive!
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #66
videogamemaker
icelandic_photographer
 
videogamemaker is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Reykjavik, Iceland
Posts: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul T. View Post
Well done on keeping the atmosphere friendly and positive!
It was meant in a light hearted way. Text is hard to convey that, my apologies if you took offense. The point still stands though. They set prices based on major markets, America, Japan, Germany/euro-zone, etc on down the line based on purchasing power. The fact of the matter is, they probably didn't consider UK prices as their top priority and allow the Fuji UK division decide it based on exchange and market costs. That's assuming even that it is over 1,000 pounds.

Last edited by videogamemaker : 01-19-2011 at 01:59.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #67
videogamemaker
icelandic_photographer
 
videogamemaker is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Reykjavik, Iceland
Posts: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leigh Youdale View Post
Well, I can agree with the first paragraph, but the second one seems a trifle aggressive in a thread where people have been asked several times not to make personal attacks. No I'm not excited, just interested and somewhat amused at the way the thread develops which is my reason for reading it. As for the rest of your response, I'd prefer to ignore it.
So, comparing those of us excited (of which there are obviously several) to "pre-pubescent boys" isn't aggressive or insulting?
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #68
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by videogamemaker View Post
So, comparing those of us excited (of which there are obviously several) to "pre-pubescent boys" isn't aggressive or insulting?
Well, there are 'early adopters' and 'premature adopters'...

Fortunately there's a great deal of humour and gentleness (not to say gentillesse) on RFF, so most people, most of the time, tend to put the most charitable interpretation upon posts at which others take offence.

We can all be thin-skinned at times, but if we stop and think "What do they probably mean", it's often easier to put up with apparent arseholes. And for real arseholes -- well, that's why there's an 'ignore' option.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #69
GSNfan
-
 
GSNfan is offline
Join Date: Dec 2010
Age: 39
Posts: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by fdigital View Post
DXOmark lists these cameras as having better DR than the Canon 5d:

D80
alpha 100
canon g12
40d
s95
d40x
k200d
km
d60
50d
d200
500d/t1i rebel
60d
k10d
gh1
d300
d90

I've had personal experience with some of these, and there's no way that they even get close to 5d DR in real life. Some - in particular the canon g12 powershot and s95, and also the older dslr models like the d80, k10d, d200, 40d, d60, d40x & alpha 100 are just laughable...
At DXO sensor chart both Leica M9 and Sony NEX score 66. Now that is something to be upset about.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #70
GSNfan
-
 
GSNfan is offline
Join Date: Dec 2010
Age: 39
Posts: 644
To the question of dynamic range, Kodochrome had a DR of 8 EV. So, technically its surpassed by almost every digi p&s.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #71
Brian Sweeney
Registered User
 
Brian Sweeney's Avatar
 
Brian Sweeney is offline
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 14,912
Well, fair to say that my excitement over this camera has been compared with the Minolta Hi-Matic 9. I bought it in 1969, when i was 12. Spent the whole Summer mowing lawns for $80 to get it. Back when mowing a lawn netted less than a dollar per yard.

So, the statement about being excited like "pre-pubescent boys" is accurate in my case. I am sure that is why the person stated it. It feels kind of good, recapturing that feeling.

Think I'll load up the Hi-Matic 9.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #72
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Sweeney View Post
Well, fair to say that my excitement over this camera has been compared with the Minolta Hi-Matic 9. I bought it in 1969, when i was 12. Spent the whole Summer mowing lawns for $80 to get it. Back when mowing a lawn netted less than a dollar per yard.

So, the statement about being excited like "pre-pubescent boys" is accurate in my case. I am sure that is why the person stated it. It feels kind of good, recapturing that feeling.

Think I'll load up the Hi-Matic 9.
Elegant, Brian!

But I hadn't realized I was 7 years older than you. In 1969 (at 19) I got my first Leica: 30 ($72 at the then exchange rate) for a 1936 IIIa. Though I'd first handled a screw-mount Leica in a shop at 16 or 17, and a school friend had had one when I was 17 or 18.

Cheers,

R.

Last edited by Roger Hicks : 01-19-2011 at 07:57.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #73
tapesonthefloor
Registered User
 
tapesonthefloor's Avatar
 
tapesonthefloor is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Sweeney View Post
Well, fair to say that my excitement over this camera has been compared with the Minolta Hi-Matic 9. I bought it in 1969, when i was 12. Spent the whole Summer mowing lawns for $80 to get it. Back when mowing a lawn netted less than a dollar per yard.

So, the statement about being excited like "pre-pubescent boys" is accurate in my case. I am sure that is why the person stated it. It feels kind of good, recapturing that feeling.

Think I'll load up the Hi-Matic 9.
This is such a good post.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #74
kevin m
Registered User
 
kevin m is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 2,210
Quote:
And for real arseholes -- well, that's why there's an 'ignore' option.
Does the expression "pot, meet kettle" mean anything on that side of the pond?
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #75
M4streetshooter
Tourist Thru Life
 
M4streetshooter's Avatar
 
M4streetshooter is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Philadelphia, Pa 19111
Age: 69
Posts: 604
Quote:
Originally Posted by videogamemaker View Post
Being willing to wait and see because of past burns have nothing to do with a product being too expensive. The "hype" has nothing to do with the cost point. It was never going to come in at 1,000. "Some dude" at the fuji booth said something that was blogged, tweeted, and posted on forums as gospel, getting people's hopes up, it was never announced at that cost. I personally took it to mean "around 1,000, and not 2,000 like the X1" and it was accurate in that regard.

As someone who has worked at a company where we make price points for new products, it just doesn't work the way some of you think it does. The price point was decided long before anyone on the internet has heard about it. The only psychological aspect taken into mind is the general price points for products.

There is no product even remotely similar coming in at 1,000, not even feature wise, and that discounts the construction and new technology.
  • X1? more expensive with less features
  • Nex? no 35mm f/2 equiv with autofocus, and even getting 35mm f/2 drives the price over the x100 and makes it much larger/heavier with still no viewfinder.
  • m4/3? smaller sensor with less dynamic range, more noise, and if you add in the viewfinders and fast lenses takes the price up to parity with the x100
  • P&S are all inferior sensor size and DR noise, and only a select few have an f/2 lens at 35mm equiv, none of which have usable optical viewfinders
Well, I'm sure your right and I admit that I must be wrong. Regardless, as uninformed as I am, it's still too much $ at $1200.00 USD.
All I do is make photos. This camera has the potential for me as it maintains my NATURAL FOV. I could use it forever and never feel the need for another focal length...but it's still too high.
I was told that it would come in at $999.95 by a Fuji Distributor.

To keep peace on the forum, as Brian is a great guy, I'll rest at this point and stay a gentleman!
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #76
Brian Sweeney
Registered User
 
Brian Sweeney's Avatar
 
Brian Sweeney is offline
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 14,912
You collect enough old cameras, collect old brochures, and are just plain old...

I chose the Polaroid Land Cameras, the 100 series. New technology, pack film instant prints! 1965 prices.

When new, my Model 180 Polaroid without Flash listed for $190. Beautiful Zeiss finder corrected for field-of-view and Parallax, Seiko Shutter, 114mm F4.5 Tominon lens- 4-element glass, all manual exposure.

As per the online inflation calculator:
What cost $190 in 1965 would cost $1278.48 in 2009.

Now my Polaroid 180 has the filters, close-up lenses, flash, fitted leather system case, CDS shoe-mounted meter, and cable release. We're talking over $250 in 1965 era money. Is it a fair comparison? Top notch fixed lens, great viewfinder, full manual control, instant pictures. Then and now.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #77
Latecomer
Making up for lost time
 
Latecomer's Avatar
 
Latecomer is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Age: 80
Posts: 56
Seems reasonable, but the Hexar AF might correspond even more closely in function. Can anyone calculate the price corrected for inflation?
__________________
Jack
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #78
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 5,069
Apparently the Hexar AF was 600 in 1998. According to the inflation calculators that brings it up to about $1260-1300us in current money, which is really very comparable to the fuji x100.

edit: Especially so when you consider the limitations of the hexar - it's shutter tops out at 1/250th, there's no full manual mode, and it's essentially just a light box - the x100 has a sensor in it.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange

Last edited by gavinlg : 01-19-2011 at 17:31.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #79
ZeissFan
Registered User
 
ZeissFan is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,211
Back in the day, a lot of people used to buy stereo gear purely on specs. While Klipsch by far were the loudest speakers I'd heard, I didn't feel that they were great speakers, which it came to reproducing music with accuracy.

And among the Japanese, Yamaha made the best speakers, distantly followed by the others, which I think you could categorize as crap: Sony, Sansui, Kenwood, JVC, Pioneer, Aiwa, Technics (Panasonic), etc. But they sold a lot of them. To be fair, I'd never listed to any Nakamichi speakers, so perhaps they shouldn't be tossed into the "crap" pile.

I preferred American speakers. At the time (1979-80), I went for a pair of Infiniti Quantum Jr. over Bose 901s, which I thought were overrated. My roommate had some Advents, which were very good for two-ways. He eventually ditched those for a honking big pair of Dahlquist panel speakers, which were two feet wide and about six inches deep.

So what's the point of this babbling nonsense? I think we should judge the final product by the images that it makes and not get too worked up over specs. Certainly, it should be a good camera, but it's still just a camera. Just like a vendor that shows up at your company doorstep, pitching their software that will revolutionize the industry, once that check is signed and the luster has worn off, it might not be as great as that 10-minute demo in the conference room.

And the marketplace will judge whether the price is too high and whether the image quality matches the hype.

Regardless, this is like the early days of digital with an extreme amount of pre-release hype that probably will be followed by post-release anticipation of the successor model.
__________________
-Mike Elek
PhotographyToday.net
More about cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2011   #80
Catto
Photographer
 
Catto's Avatar
 
Catto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, NSW Australia
Posts: 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeissFan View Post
...I think we should judge the final product by the images that it makes and not get too worked up over specs.
Crazy talk! Then we'd have to rant about politics & religion instead, and where would THAT lead...
R!
__________________
Robert Catto, Photographer
Sydney, NSW Australia
My Site / Facebook / @robertcatto

Fuji X-Photographer / Kage Collective / ACMP Board Member
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:46.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.