fuji x100

<p>That there are shortcomings to be found in the x100, is a fair statement, and the price is pretty steep unless having a fine viewfinder and simplicity of operation are priorities. I decided to order one to see for myself if it was going to be worth it.<br>

Before the x100 arrived, though, it turned out to be good idea to have read the DPReview article, and mainly the appendix (!) which lists all the various (and justified) criticisms. It tipped me off to the pitfalls, and helped to learn how to use the camera with less difficulty.<br>

Good things have been reported about the camera technically; no need to repeat them. Nontechnically, the experience of using it is like seeing through a rangefinder, as well as a through-the-lens, and in addition, the playback and menu options can be seen inside the viewfinder so that the LCD screen on the back needn't be used. These features work remarkably well. In practice, the viewfinder system is more effective in the sun or in dim light, or darkness for that matter, than any camera film or digital I've looked through. There's little or no need to look at the camera to operate it, after some practice. It's a relatively simple camera (the manual is not thick and full of fine print). I liked using the camera almost instantly. I never warmed up to any of the digitals I've owned--Nikon, Canon, and Olympus--none of which was cheap, all of which were frustrating. <br>

Hooray for the little guy.</p>

<p>Brian, </p>

<p>The problem is that some people want the small technical troubles - and lets be honest, almost every digital camera has some - to completely out weigh the basic requirements of a camera, which are in my opinion;</p>

<p>1. Big and bright viewfinder. After all, it's photographs we're making, not menu reviews. <br>

2. Solid feel and ergonomics. We're holding the thing all the time, might as well feel right. <br>

3. Unobtrusive and small enough to carry around, all the time. <br>

4. Quality lens. <br>

5. Image quality. I put this one last because a film camera will meet this if it has good optics, etc. </p>

<p>If these criteria are met, then it's a good camera. The fact that it has technical issues in the menu is important, but should not trump everything else. Furthermore, the reviews about the issues seem to be divided. Some people simply acknowledge them, adjust and learn, and move along. Others seem to get completely lost in them. </p>

<p>Any predictions on whether Nikon or Canon will try to follow this trend? So far they're still making them too big for me (DSLR) with tiny viewfinders and plastic bodies/parts. </p>

<p>J</p>

<p>Prediction? Moi? I guess Nikon and Canon won't want to cut into their sales of high-profit mass produced and very popular, and capable, equipment. But with iPhones coming on strong in the P&S side, maybe they'll have to do something different.</p>

<p>This is only anecdotal...</p>

<p>Most of my photo friends have DSLRs. They produce great images, and some of them are great photographers. However, most of them still shoot their small film cameras, and we've had many discussions about the incumbent size of DSLRs today. Granted, they seem to be getting a bit smaller these days, but their overall "feel" is that they're quite large, and a lot of this has to do with the newer lens designs. For example, the new Nikkor 24mm F1.4. It's a stunning lens, but it's quite massive. Add that to a D3 body and it's a BIG camera. </p>

<p>It seems that there is a whole generation of photographers that want to always have their camera with them. This includes myself. Everytime I go for coffee, I slip my FM2n in my pocket. It's second nature. No bag, no other lens - just one small camera. I could never do that with my D90, and that's a smaller DSLR compared to the pro models. </p>

<p>I have a feeling that we're not the only ones wanting small "everyday" cameras that have excellent image quality. Most DSLR consumers are not studio pros. Nikon and Canon will eventually make smaller cameras with great image quality. </p>

<p>I think the Fuji X100 comes close to being my "dream" digital camera. Small. Manual operation. Solid feel. Excellent IQ. Simple aesthetic. The menu problems are an issue no doubt, but it seems that quite a few people are taking photographs even with said issues. </p>

<p>In the age of online reviews, technology overload and detailed spec sheets, I get the feeling we're often missing the point. Nobody ever talks about the viewfinder anymore. Why is that? It's 90% of a camera to me. If I can't see big and bright, it's a bad camera regardless of its ease of menu navigation etc. </p>

<p>I'm curious to see Leica's response in the next few years. What's next after the M9? Is the X line going to become a Leica standard like the M? Will they have a VIEWFINDER on their next model? </p>

<p>Somewhere and in the near future, one company is going to come out with a knock-out camera at the right price (read; under $2000). Who will it be? Is the Fuji X100 just a preview?</p>

<p>J </p>

<p>Prediction? Moi? I guess Nikon and Canon won't want to cut into their sales of high-profit mass produced and very popular, and capable, equipment. But with iPhones coming on strong in the P&S side, maybe they'll have to do something different.</p>

<p>hi to all again am sorry for so late response i will put the link of my blog for you guys to see the photos ,, thank you for all your comments , my idea in the begining was to save in off money to buy a leica m8. i could not wait so i ended up buying a fuji x100.</p>

<p>There is a client for whom I need as silent a camera as I can get, they pay really well and are very demanding of the caliber of images I make. Previous shooters of this client in years past have been Ernst Haas and Henri Cartier Bresson, the current CEO is a former publisher of Time Magazine. I do a lot of the shooting with my D700 / D3's but they are too loud in many cases of this genre.</p>

<p>Subjects are often people like past presidents of the US among many other people of this level of politics, science and the arts.</p>

<p>Last year, I rented an M9 to shoot some of these events with, the client happily covered the cost of the rental and was thrilled with my low profile and the resulting imagery. The M9 did really well in it's silent mode, the image quality was great up until about ISO 1,600. On the down side, the frame lines were tilted a bit so my images were too, had to be corrected. The write times were not so great but since I rarely blasted these people with multiple frames, it was not that big of deal.</p>

<p>I entertained the idea of getting the $7,000 M9 specifically for this client, but at that price and given all the reliability issues my fellow professionals have had with the camera, I decided to pass on it.</p>

<p>So this year, I am approaching this client with a different camera, the X100. I have had my X100 for a few days, have it dialed in to where I want it and have already shot an assignment with it.</p>

<p>In short, this brilliant little camera has fully killed any desire I had for the M9 unless the price dropped immensely. My only complaints are the silly fact that the ISO is not consistent across modes, Auto-ISO is not an option on the ISO selection scroll and the buttons are a tad fiddly. Other than that, I find using this camera to be amazing in terms of both in the field and the resulting imagery.</p>

<p>I use it in silent mode full time, manual focus as it is really quick and easy to use the AF lock button, then hit the command dial for a quick verification of focus which is rarely needed. Once I got this thing dialed in, everything became quick and easy, not nearly as bad as the reviews out there would have you believe.</p>

<p>So this $1,200 marvel is going to be simply awesome for that silent shooting of big wigs I need to do, well worth the money and better at high ISO than the far overpriced M9.</p>

<p>And my wife loves it so much that she keeps reading the manual, teaching me things about the camera..:-)</p>

<p>I have to wonder about the intended purpose of the individual mode ISO settings as well. However turning auto-ISO on and off is not such a huge inconvenience once the exact position is the settings is memorized. I'm leaving it on as a result to give it a try for a while and see what it can contribute.<br>

In general, assuming the camera is as durable as the swiftly outdated digitals that clutter my storage, this one promises to be useful for many years due in large part I think to its relative simplicity and versatility. Just as with quality film cameras.<br>

Possibly, the reviewers were covering their posterior parts by mentioning as many things as they could in order to ward off the inevitable, merciless thrashings they would suffer at the hands of the nitpicker brigades. The snarling tone of discussion boards would have brought forth an even more violent torrent of invective. Experts would have assailed each others' opinions, and launched personal attacks, with venom, if not biting sarcasm... </p>

<p>Brian,</p>

<p>I can barely read online reviews these days - seems it's more about menus than it is about the things that really matter, such as;</p>

<p>1. Image Quality<br /> 2. Viewfinder (big, bright, real, etc)<br /> 3. Ergonomics and feel (metal dials)<br /> 4. Size. Sorry DSLRs - you're too big. Get it right.</p>

<p>I'm pretty sure all the menus work, with some of them more complicated than others. But when we start basing a camera's "performance" on this, we're missing the point and entering the realm of gadgetry and not photography. Clearly, some people - through the use of pure genius - have figured out the menu and made it work for them. It's a miracle really, considering some of the lengthy criticisms of the menu system.</p>

<p>Thank you, Julian, it's not every morning I wake up to being considered quite in that league based on my having not been deterred by the complexities of the x100's menu. Your encouragement is refreshing. Whether comfort with the menu system is due to any degree of ingenuity or talent, let alone intelligence or hard work, however is far from the case. Closer to the point, it's likely more the experience of some truly awful menu systems in combination with feature overload, and incomprehensible owners' manuals. I'll refrain from adding any more sarcasm, however. :-)</p>

<p>Dear Bob, I could find the comparison between M8/M9 and x100 at Dxomark.com. Would you please show me the exact link? Or if somebody is kind enough to show photos by the above two/three for comparison. I don't have anyone of them... Thanks and regards.</p>