Fuji X100, who is planning ahead?

<p>Other than a recent thread on the X100 viewfinder technology, there hasn't been much barstool chit-chat at P.net about anyone going forth with the future purchase of this camera when it's released in a few months. Speaking for myself, I'm in lust, fixed lens and all. Sure, interchangeable would be great, too, and who knows what they'll do with it in the future. But this puppy could turn me into a photog that always has a camera in hand.</p>

<p>But, how many folks are putting serious, committed thought toward the purchase of this camera? That $1000 (if that's what it actually is) is a difficult pill to swallow for such limitations with the lens, and I'm planning a near-future DSLR body upgrade, too. Would love it if the shipping box contained both cameras.</p>

<p>Argh!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I for sure am getting one the day it comes out. I am not looking at a Camera with a fixed lens, but as a lens that has a cool camera fixed to it. :) <br>

I have been following this guy for a while and it appears the coming out price is going to be $799.00. A few folks have reported this over at serious compacts and even here on P.net.<br>

Even if it comes out at $1000.00, I am in. I like that the lens is perfectly matched to the sensor. I am also expecting fantastic high ISO results that Fuji is also known for. Should be good. </p>

<p>I have no interest in buying an X100; I just read about it. As far as I can tell, it's a cute digital camera that looks like a vintage rangefinder without actually having a rangefinder. All the articles about its exciting new viewfinder tech are interesting to me as a technologist but not as a photographer.</p>

<p>Javier- $800 ya say, eh? This does not help my cause at all. At least $1000 made it easier to resist. $799 may be too tempting to resist.</p>

<p>Craig- I see your points. The cosmetics/architecture of it captured my heart ('twas lust at first sight), and I'm not one that would normally put form before function. As for the faux rangefinder aspect, this is okay with me, for I've never used a rangefinder before, and the likelihood of me ever owning a real digital rangefinder is somewhere between slim and none, unless good alternatives that are affordable come to market. I guess the rangefinder function is not one that is important to me at this point. From the technology standpoint, knowing (or at least putting some faith in the marketing) that the entire package was designed as a stand-alone system does have credence with me- the parts were made to go together. Yeah... I can't change the lens. Yeah... I have to zoom with my feet. But the challenges this design poses compel me. Seems to be photography (digital, anyway) in a more pure, simplistic form, and I find that appealing.</p>

<p>Cripes, makes it sound like I'm sold on it.</p>

<p>Steve, I agree with u 100%. I too have never used a real range finder and am going for the looks myself. It is just plain cool looking and I no doubt it will perform better. </p>

<p>IDK. definite cool factor, but the GFI is a system camera, the X100 is a stand-alone. there's pros and cons to both. maybe it depends on how great the lens is. fuji says dont expect miracles at f/2. i'd like to see it do well, just because it's an innovative idea, but i'm not drinking the kool-aid just yet. also holding off on a GF1+20/1.7 just yet, so maybe i'm eyeing the Kool-Aid but not sipping. or something to that effect, ya know?</p>

<p>I'll buy one as soon as I can. This looks like what I've been wanting since leaving film.</p>

<p>I am down for one.....looking forward to it too.....Robert</p>

<p>I have interest, having used a couple of Fujis in the past and been quite satisfied. Problem is I just bought an Olympus EP2 and stuck my wonderful Panasonic (I call this hybrid my Olympasonic) 20 1.7 lens on it. So I already have a big sensor, rangefinder-like, sorta compact carry around all the time, fixed lens camera. The Fuji viewfinder would be the only real upgrade for me so it doesn't seem worth $800.</p>

<p>But I am looking forward to the P-net opinions when people start using the Fuji - I can always change my mind.</p>

<p>I have always loved rangefinder cameras, but not for the rangefinder. The viewfinder is just how I visualize an image. An slr just doesn't compare. I can live with autofocus as long as I am able to compose the picture as I want. If the viewfinder is as good as I hope, I will have the X100 soon. </p>

<p>Back in the 70s, the heyday of the fixed-lens rangefinders, they offered state of the art features that many top of the line cameras did not- like auto exposure and electronically timed shutters. The best offered very high quality lenses.</p>

<p>The medium SLR bodies with a 50/1.7, like the Minolta SRT101 might cost $200, at a time when a new graduate engineer might earn $10,000-12000 USD per year. The fixed-lens rangefinders offered a much cheaper alternative for only around $100.</p>

<p>The point is, the classic-look fixed-lens rangefinder was a cheap alternative for people who wanted to take nice pictures. Somehow, this is now upside down, and it will be more expensive than alternatives. Marketing is wonderful</p>

<p>At around $300-400 I would be very interested in this camera.</p>

<p>”… how many folks are putting serious, committed thought toward the purchase of this camera?”</p>

<p>I had planned on buying a second Canon G11. However, when Fuji announced the X100, I put my buying plans on hold. If the X100 lives up to its specs, I am committed to buying at least one.<br>

.</p>

<p>As much as I like the specs, I'll wait for the reviews much like any gear I buy. My camera lust days are over...</p>

<p>Now, if it has IBIS, bigger sensor, say, 1.3x and a swivel LCD...I would happily go in lust again:)</p>

<p>At Seriouscompacts.com, there is a report of pre-ordering in the UK for 999 pounds, as of early November.</p>

<p>Here in the USA, B&H acknowledges its existance but has no ordering/availability information. Adorama shows nothing about it, nor does Amazon. Time will tell.</p>

<p>Amazon actually does have it listed and you can sign up to be notified when they are selling it:</p>

<p>http://www.amazon.com/Fuji-X100-Digital-Fujinon-2-8-Inch/dp/B0043RS864/ref=amb_link_354102822_3?ie=UTF8&me=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=top-1&pf_rd_r=1711GHYM8JHH5W5YK380&pf_rd_t=301&pf_rd_p=1275869402&pf_rd_i=x100</p>

<p>I guess I missed the $1000 price tag when reading about it for the first time yesterday.<br /> the reason I didnt pull the trigger on the Panasonic G10 was its limited lens options and a bad review of the included 14-45 MM lens and they wanted 400 bucks for this camera. a few dollars more and i could have a Pentax KX.<br /> while I enjoy my K100D I loved my Kodak z612 because its sealed and dust does not affect the sensor and the mega zoom capabilities. the one thing that I didnt like was the tiny sensor.</p>

<p>I want a sealed body/lens camera 20X super zoom 18-600MM ( equivilent) and a 23X15 CMOS sensor in a slightly smaller than full size DLSR package under 350 bucks</p>

<p>:)</p>

<p>might just be getting that Pentax X90 to hold me over till they make my camera</p>

<p>lol</p>

<p>seems a crying shame to me that mega zooms are using 1/2.33 sensors. doesnt make any sense to me</p>

<p>Christopher-<br>

What you want sure isn't what the X100 is meant to offer.</p>

<p>And with the sensor size and megazoom lenses of the P&S compacts, it's all about crop factor to get that huge tele lens equivalent. The ASP-C DLSR's have a 1.5x crop sensor, so a 100mm lens gives an equiv. 150mm of tele. 4/3 cameras have a 2x crop factor compared to a 35mm film camera, so the 100mm lens would be equiv. to a 200mm lens on the 4/3 camera. Shrink that sensor down to something only partly the size of a human pinky fingernail and you can get a reasonable size lens to mimic that tele out to those ultra long tele equivalents. It's all about trade-offs-- can't have your cake and eat it, too.</p>

<p>Not that any of this has anything to do with my original question of the Fuji X100.</p>

<p>Steve</p>

<p>"It's all about trade-offs-- can't have your cake and eat it, too." </p>

<p>I know but I want it damn it! lol</p>

<p>"Not that any of this has anything to do with my original question of the Fuji X100."</p>

<p>not the second half but I am not willing to pop a G on the fuji.....</p>

 

<p>I think Dave Clark came the closest to my thinking. This camera is all about the viewfinder. While the X100 is not a rangefinder camera, viewing images through the viewing window is going to have the same effect as viewing through a rangefinder window like on the Leica M cameras. If the autofocus is good and fast, all I need to do is point at my focus spot, lock in focus and recompose, often using a zone focusing technique on the streets.</p>

<p>It just happens the X100 will offer a FOV that fits my eye and shooting style.</p>

 

<p >Famed National Geographic photographer William Albert Allard explains the differences between seeing with a Single Lens Reflex and a rangefinder camera better than anything else I've come across:</p>

<p ><em>“With an SLR, you are looking at your subject through the optic; you are literally seeing what the picture is going to look like. You have a device that will show you your depth of field, the area that will or will not be in critical focus. This is particularly true for me, because I’m often shooting at the maximum aperture of the lens, the aperture you actually view through. This helps you see how areas of color are affected. It can tell you if that blue has a hard edge, or if it’s somewhat soft and blended into something else.”</em></p>

<p ><em>“When you look through a rangefinder, though, everything is sharp. The rangefinder window is by and large a focusing and framing device that lets you pick a part of the subject you want to be in critical focus. The only real way you can tell how the rest of the picture is going to look is by experience, or maybe a quick look at the depth-of-field scale on the lens itself. I think the rangefinder frees you up in a certain way. You are probably going to work a little looser in a structural sense, because everything is clean, clear and sharp. When I look through an SLR, I think I’m a little bit more aware of compositional elements, of the structure of the image. With a rangefinder camera, I’m seeing certain spatial relationships.”</em></p>

<p ><em>– Page 41 of “</em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/William-Albert-Allard-Photographic-Photographer/dp/0821217356"><em>William Albert Allard The Photographic Essay</em></a><em>.”</em></p>

<p>Put me in the camp of people who have shot with rangefinder film cameras for more than 20 years, but simply could not plunk down several thousands of dollars on an M8/9 in an ever-changing technological landscape. Leica M's are expensive to purchase and repair and I don't have the greatest confidence in Leica when it comes to electronics.</p>

<p>I am not a fan of having to view on the LCD scene all the time, where Fuji is missing the boat on this camera is not having a tilting LCD like on the NEX-5 or a swivel one where the LCD could be turned inside for storing. Being able to hold the camera low or high and view through the LCD would add great flexibility. It also aids when using a camera in video mode.</p>

<p>The X100 will hopefully be my carry everywhere camera. A Leica M/35 FOV experience for ~$1K? Sign me up.</p>

 

<p>I'm in the same mode as Leslie: lets see how it performs. </p>

<p>I have a ga645zi that I love. For a moment I thought I might sell the film MF RF and use this instead. But I doubt it's a substitute. The ga645zi DOES have a nice lens for what it is. I love using it for street B&W and have taken some of my favorite film photos of all time with it. If the X100 lens is nearly as good as the ga645zi, that's going to tempt me.</p>

<p>I'm skeptical that the X100 shutter lag is as minimal as advertised. I gave up on the Canon G10 because it was fairly useless for fast snaps of my young son. If you were prefocused it was fine, but otherwise was horrible. I had hundreds of shots where I'd captured my son's head turned away a moment *after* the priceless look I'd hoped to capture, or with his back turned just a second after the (pardon the cliche) perfect Kodak moment between he and one of his cousins. Once, I captured him falling down right after the perfect moment where he went over and hugged our dog and the dog licked him on the face at the same time (right before knocking him on his butt). Too frustrating. At least I was able to sell it for nearly what I paid for it.</p>

<p>If the X100 lens is nice and performs well at f/2, I'm that much more sold. But I'm not going to buy it on the first day its available. Maybe after a few months and seeing some feedback from early adopters. Yet... early adopters were usually biased to love the technology to begin with, so maybe I'll wait 6-9 months and get the not-so-early-adopter feedback before deciding.</p>

<p>The X100 for me would be my P&S carry everywhere camera. Either the X100 or the LX5. I can't stand small sensors anymore, though. It almost literally causes me physical pain to see photos taken with crappy small sensors now. I really can no longer bear the horror of another 1/1.6 (or *gasp*, a smaller) sensor. Fingernails on a chalkboard would be preferable.</p>

<p> I intend to buy a quality 'compact-ish' camera sometime after the first quarter of 2011, so the expected release of this camera works well for me. I may wait a bit and see how the early adopters respond to the thing, but I am most definitely intrigued.<br /> At this point, if it isn't the X100, it will likely be the Canon G12. I have a G3 that I really like, so I am predisposed towards the Canon "G's". The Nikon P7000 looks interesting too, but the reviews trouble me some. I'm currently using an Olympus E30, and an E500, and those wonderful Olympus lenses, so I am aware of micro 4/3s. But I need an optical viewfinder more than I need interchangable lenses. $200 OVFs that prevent you from using external flash and can be lost, just don't 'float my boat'.<br /> I really have my heart set on an X100, if it turns out to be a dog, I will be most disappointed but would likely console myself with a G12.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Pre-ordered an X100 yesterday. Got DSLR and pocket teeny sensor Leica C-Lux. Need pocketable "real" camera in line with my dear, departed Contax T2.</p>