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

Opinion piece on the X100
Old 02-01-2011   #1
TMP
Registered User
 
TMP is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: London
Posts: 20
Opinion piece on the X100

Hello everyone!

Following my last piece, here is a new one concentrating on Fujifilm's upcoming X100. -- As always, C&C are most welcome.


Photographers using reflex cameras had theirs for a while now. You know, a digital camera, with the same body, controls, ergonomics and feeling that a reflex loaded with film gave you.

Admittedly, the best camera I ever had was a Voigtländer Bessa R3A rangefinder with a 40mm f1.4 lens. Since then, I have been struggling to somehow find an affordable digital “equivalent”.

It is within this context that I recently bought a Panasonic GF1 with its 40mm-equivalent f1.7 kit lens along with a Voigtländer 40mm bright line finder. After waiting for years and following months of deliberations and hesitations, I finally got what I was looking for; or so I thought. Indeed, I soon discovered that the bright lines of my new finder were sideways, and when I mean sideways, I mean you cannot properly frame an horizontal line indoors…

That’s when it hit me. I should have waited for Fujifilm’s X100. Its sensor is bigger. Its body has the ergonomics of an actual camera and it is made out of magnesium. While not a 40mm f1.7, its 35mm f2 lens is close enough and, finally — ! —, it has an integrated electronic as well as optical finder. Most importantly, it is all made to work together.

While Fujifilm seems to have found a way to reach photographers with similar requirements to mine, we can only hope that its engineers give the required attention to features such as metering, autofocus and overall reactivity. Indeed, if Fujifilm botch the aforementioned aspects, the X100 could become the year’s biggest disappointment despite its innovations.

On the other hand, if successful, the Japanese company could deliver the first ever non-reflex digital camera. Moreover, its market could become substantial, including single-lens Micro Four Thirds users, not to mention Leica’s X1 users and potential buyers. Accordingly, this might push other manufacturers to follow Fujifilm’s success and, subsequently, allow a new market to emerge. Regardless, the ball is in Fujifilm’s court. In the meantime, I have one and only request: Fujifilm, please, do not screw up… ♦


Again, you will also find this opinion piece on my website, The Monthly Page. Feel free to check it out and, again, C&C are most welcome =0)
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #2
kully
Happy Snapper
 
kully's Avatar
 
kully is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: England
Age: 40
Posts: 2,532
Use the GF1, it's great. There's always something better around the corner, but whatever it is does not make what you have worse.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #3
Snapper_uk
Registered User
 
Snapper_uk's Avatar
 
Snapper_uk is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: East Sussex, UK
Posts: 202
So what's wrong with the R3a + 40mm? Is it broken?

You have a far superior set up there than the X100 is likely to be.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #4
TMP
Registered User
 
TMP is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: London
Posts: 20
Kully -- It is a great camera indeed although the finder issue is bothering me a lot as I often use it. As I am currently in Lebanon, exchanging it will be difficult (it clearly is deficient).

Snapper -- I sold it. The main reason was that I only was able to use it in a cost-efficient way while I had access to the facilities at school (developing, printing and scanning).
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #5
kshapero
Press the Shutter
 
kshapero's Avatar
 
kshapero is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida, USA
Age: 69
Posts: 9,813
Lately I believe if you are film person that finding the right film is more important that what camera you use. The different types of film have more individual personality than the different types of camera. IMHO.
__________________
Akiva S.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kshapero

Cameras, Lenses and Photos
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #6
TMP
Registered User
 
TMP is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: London
Posts: 20
Despite working in digital, I agree with you although it is a question of finding the right filters. Now, I'll have to add the focal length to that.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #7
Lss
Registered User
 
Lss is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,799
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMP View Post
On the other hand, if successful, the Japanese company could deliver the first ever non-reflex digital camera.
Seeing that you used to own a Bessa R3A and base your evaluation on that camera, it is worth noting that it was pretty much replicated for the digital domain with the release of Epson R-D1 already in 2004.
__________________
Lasse
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #8
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by kshapero View Post
Lately I believe if you are film person that finding the right film is more important that what camera you use. The different types of film have more individual personality than the different types of camera. IMHO.
Wait, weren't you just making threads about your M3's soul?

With regard to the OP, the GF1 is great... use it for awhile, sell it, buy the X100 once it is released and you are sure it is what you want. Problem solved.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #9
ruby.monkey
Registered User
 
ruby.monkey is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: The Garden of England
Age: 49
Posts: 4,555
Quote:
On the other hand, if successful, the Japanese company could deliver the first ever non-reflex digital camera
You must have a *very* restrictive definition of what makes a camera, because pretty much every company out there has already managed this.

If, on the other hand, you mean 'the first ever digital equivalent to the fixed-lens rangefinders (often trying hard to ape the looks of the M3) that were popular until the SLR became widely affordable', then you could well be right.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #10
TMP
Registered User
 
TMP is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: London
Posts: 20
Lss -- Good point although I remember that it was pretty expensive.

Jsrockit -- That's the plan, I just want to wait for the first tests in order to make sure Fujifilm didn't botch anything

Ruby.monkey / JSU -- I firmly believe that this is down to the individual / photographer. As far as I am concerned, I am talking about a digital camera with the same body, controls, ergonomics and feeling that a film cameras gave you and, therefore, I do not agree with your statements. I think that we will have to agree to disagree

N.B. Italic text might not be clearly visible on the forum but my idea was to emphasise the word camera both at the beginning and the end of the text, echoing each other.

Last edited by TMP : 02-01-2011 at 04:44.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #11
tapesonthefloor
Registered User
 
tapesonthefloor's Avatar
 
tapesonthefloor is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 287
I think we all know that when TMP says camera he means a serious photo-taking device with an intuitive interface (whether analog or electronic) and well-placed manual controls. Cameras are tools for control freaks with good eyes. Misunderstanding him for the sake of semantic argument ("You must have a *very* restrictive definition of what makes a camera") isn't really advancing the conversation.

Besides, I have the same restrictive definition. Or, should I say, the same restrictive description has me. I have no vested interest in the digital camera industry. I don't need to spend well-earned money on a product that only half satisfies my needs, and that is programmed for obsolescence and designed to sell accessories. I actually like taking photos. I'll wait for the right camera. The ex-hundred forum is an excitable place because it seems to be the first right camera for a lot of people. I hope they're right!
  Reply With Quote

Opinion on the Opinion on the Opinion on the X100
Old 02-01-2011   #12
bwcolor
Registered User
 
bwcolor is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: S.F. Bay Area
Posts: 2,355
Opinion on the Opinion on the Opinion on the X100

ehhhhhhh ... let it rest At least get one in your hands. Pleasuring yourself without a camera should be illegal.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #13
videogamemaker
icelandic_photographer
 
videogamemaker is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Reykjavik, Iceland
Posts: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwcolor View Post
ehhhhhhh ... let it rest At least get one in your hands. Pleasuring yourself without a camera should be illegal.
You pleasure yourself with a camera? O_o
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #14
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
 
Frankie is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 753
There are now more than one party who has [had] the X100 in their hands, and at least one who had taken pictures with it. Firmware issues notwithstanding, I guess the naysayers would be quiet now.

I for one, had little issue with the X100 design. Although weaned in the old school of all manual mechanical cameras, I have no problem living with automation, so long it does not totally take over. Taking a picture the old-fashioned way has its own satisfaction.

I have long conceded AF is faster and more consistent than my matured eyesight most of the time. Many an old romantic picture taking ideas and practices need a revisiting. As soon as I had gleamed enough info out of the Internet, I have formed my MO in using this camera.

Like all my camera tinkering in the past, I have ideas borrowed from other fields that could make the X100 better...parallax-wedge RF focus aid is high on my list, but I am not hung up on it.

Chrome on magnesium is a good finish. Being both white metals, inevitable scratches won't be as noticeable.

In the scheme of things ~$1000 is not out-of-line.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #15
gekopaca
French photographer
 
gekopaca's Avatar
 
gekopaca is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Arles, France
Posts: 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMP View Post
Lss -- Good point although I remember that it (R-D1) was pretty expensive.
A second-hand R-D1 is about 1000-1200$, and you can use your Bessa's lenses.

The X-100 will cost certainly around, or a few more.

I don't understand you.
__________________
Gekopaca
French photographer
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gekopaca/sets/
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #16
tapesonthefloor
Registered User
 
tapesonthefloor's Avatar
 
tapesonthefloor is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 287
Quote:
You pleasure yourself with a camera? O_o
Well, he bought his M body before he could afford the lenses, like so many of us... and, well, it was just there. And the open M-mount so, so... enticing. Who among us hasn't even considered it? That's right. Let he without man-on-camera carnal sin throw the first incident-light meter...
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #17
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by gekopaca View Post
A second-hand R-D1 is about 1000-1200$, and you can use your Bessa's lenses.

The X-100 will cost certainly around, or a few more.

I don't understand you.
Perhaps the R-D1 is getting a bit long in the tooth?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #18
Griffin
Grampa's cameras user
 
Griffin's Avatar
 
Griffin is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 495
If I understand the circle of conspiracy correctly, an F2.0 on 1.5 crop is an F3.0 DoF (in 35mm world) with the light absorbing properties of an F2.0.

Just to put things a little into perspective. I still want one.
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #19
tapesonthefloor
Registered User
 
tapesonthefloor's Avatar
 
tapesonthefloor is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 287
Kudos on "circle of conspiracy". Both clever and catchy!

Carry on.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2011   #20
TMP
Registered User
 
TMP is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: London
Posts: 20
Gekopaca -- My Bessa and its lens are unfortunately both gone since a long time now. Moreover, I believe (but can be wrong) that the Epson R series is getting old. A lot of progress has been made since they have been released (e.g. in high ISO outputs) although I am among those who would keep a digital camera if I like (1) its output and (2) the actual camera.

Griffin -- I see this as a plus as I only shoot with available light. Ricoh's GR DIGITAL III 28mm-equivalant f1.9 lens and its small sensor allowed me to capture scenes I couldn't have captured with a 35mm camera. I don't really care to have a nose in focus without the rest of the face.
  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 15:08.


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.