Fuji X100: A digital M for less than 7k?

Discussion in 'Leica and Rangefinders' started by andrew_viny, Mar 6, 2011.

  1. So I (like many of you I'm sure) have been eyeing the new Fuji X100. It seems to me to be a very good digital M solution. It's lens is equivalent to 35mm (in 35mm) it has dials for aperture and shutter speed. It's also about the same size and shape as an analog M and the pictures from it look great. Especially in the comparison to the Leica X1 that is posted at Leica Rumors. My question is... How does the manual focus system work? Can you focus through the OVF or do you need to use the EVF or LCD? Anyone have strong feelings about this beautiful thing anyway?
  2. The X100 has very pretty cosmetics, and the viewfinder technology looks interesting. Beyond that I'm not much interested. If it were M-mount and actually had a rangefinder, maybe, but it isn't and doesn't.
    The X1 isn't an M solution either. It's just a digital P&S with a large sensor and an expensive luxury name on the front.
  3. It can't use an M mount lens so I would never call it a digital M. Besides the M8, M9, and Epson RD-1 you can mount M lenses on the upcoming M module for the Ricoh GXR, and the Micro 4/3 and Sony NEX cameras.
    Back to the Fuji, the optical viewfinder is always "in focus" just like a rangefinder viewfinder. There is no rangefinder spot. You do get a distance scale superimposed so if you know the subject is 10 ft away you can focus until it says 10 ft. The EVF is TTL so you'll see what's in and out of focus. Of course there is an AF system and most people will probably use that.
  4. @Craig. Using Leica glass on crop bodies is lame. The magnification factor really sucks. Using them on micro 4/3 is lame because its a huge magnification factor and theres no vf. I say "Digital M" because I think that if you use a 35mm lens always it could be the closest you could get in terms of user experience to shooting say an M2 with a 35mm lens on it without buying an M8 or M9. It might be an even more favorable solution for non-professionals than an M8 or M9. The M8 is very expensive for being so low tech. The 10mp sensor is very out dated and adding IR lenses and losing stops is expensive and annoying. An M9 is just really expensive. So when I say digital M I guess I don't mean digital M as much as I mean M experience in digital. It would be interesting to see if they could use the hybrid VF to make a digital RF spot in the VF that would really be a great feature.
  5. Not an M replacement, but it looks very much like the camera Leica should be making instead of the X1.
  6. I think shooting film and advancing it manually is an integral and irreplaceable part of the M experience. The M9 is as close as you're likely to get in digital, and yes, it is expensive. But anything else just isn't in the ballpark. The M8 is less expensive, but the crop sensor obviously changes things. 10 MP, however, is perfectly good resolution for many purposes.
  7. As I'm sure someone must have pointed out at some point, it's more like a digital Hexar AF, and it will probably end up enjoying a similar cult status. Maybe it will sell well enough to convince Fuji to produce a digital Contax G (i.e. an interchangeable lens version).
  8. Probably another nice little point and shoot camera. It does not appeal to me however.
  9. @Andrew I just wonder how could I lose stops adding UV/IR in front of my lens? the ff is 1.0. How stops are lost?
  10. Pongpeera - The poster is just wrong. There is no loss of light associated with the UV/IR filter. According to the Leica M8 FAQ:
    "The LEICA UV/IR filters limit only the infrared and ultraviolet light from passing through. The extension factor is 1.0, so you do not have to calculate any exposure compensation."
  11. For all intents and purposes it probably is going to be a great camera. Personally, I wish it had a rangefinder instead of autofocus, but from what I have been able to read about it (and yet to see personally), it is going to be a great little camera and I think their decision to stay with a fixed lens at 35mm was very, very smart. And have you seen the pre-production photos taken at 6,400 iso on dpreview.com? Amazing!
  12. Berg - that's what I think as well as there seems to be no light lost on mine
  13. My apologies. I supposed I was misinformed on that front.
  14. I got my hands on one at the CES show in Las Vegas. The viewfinder is fantastic. Manual focus is simple and easy. Anyone who thinks this camera is strictly a point & shoot is either mis-informed or doesn't know much about photography.
    Go here for endless discussions about it:
  15. Jim, what is the MF situation on the camera? Can you focus through the OVF? How does it work?
  16. With the OVF, you can manually focus using the scale at the bottom of the frame. Using this method, you can do a quasi zone focusing. Using the EVF, the subject is magnified for very precise focus. Either way works well because the viewfinder is big and bright. You can also use auto focus and then manually turn the focus ring to fine tune. That's the fastest...at least it is for me.
  17. I have a couple of well known pro friends who have been using it for about a week and are blown away...and they are M users. From what they are telling me of the camera, I have a feeling my getting this thing will pretty much kill off any desire I have to get an overpriced M9 ( which I rented for a week long job last year ).
    If you are like me and shoot a 35mm 90% of the time for discreet people work in professional situations, this camera with it's optics, speed, size, *silent* operation and incredible viewfinder not to mention close focus will make buying the M9 look foolhardy when the final resulting X100 image hits the printed page.
    I honestly think M digital users better brace them selves for what truly talented pros and amateurs actually pull off with this killer new camera, which is lighter and smaller than a M6 with a 35 Cron on it by the way...
  18. Daniel. Fair enough. But being confined to one focal length is limiting. I'd still go for the M9.
  19. Daniel, where did they get their cameras? To the best of my knowledge availability is still at least two to three weeks out.
  20. When I first handled the X1 two things struck me.
    First, it was overpriced.
    Second, why couldn't Leica come up with a digital CM at about the same price (I paid $1250 CDN for my CM)
    Well...Fuji's done exactly that.
    Hooray for them...Mine should be in my hands in about two weeks.
  21. OPK


    on 27th page of Fuji X100 manual states information which makes this camera completely useless for me. It will be unable to shot wide open on short shutterspeed :((((
  22. What do you mean?
  23. Not to dispute you, Martin, but I'm curious as to what you're shooting, and how often, at f2 at 1/4000th. Would the built-in ND filters help in this regard?
    This is one of the shortcomings of this camera if you're always at those extremes.
  24. Fuji has reported that demand has exceeded supply, so there will be delays on the availability of the X100.
    Link to article
  25. OPK


    I mean, due to shutter construction, this camera allows wide open shooting at max 1/1000th
  26. So what does the max aperture become past that? Is it graduated? By this I mean does the max aperture continue to shrink every stop past 1/1000?
  27. OPK


    something like that. 2.8 at 1/2000th, 4 at 1/4000th....so effective aperture is f4 at full shutterspeed
  28. Every time a new camera is on the horizon all the speculation and supposed magic potion'ness' comes along with it.Like suddenly, Photography has arrived and those lucky photographers to use it will finally start to make Photographs, unlike any that were or they ever made before. But then when it's there and when the "tests" have settled, when some have bought it and others didn't ( waiting out for the next new & improved one ) there's no real change, no groundbreaking redefinition of photography is being shown, no nothin' but a pixel peep picture here and a pixel - high noise - peep picture there, "WoW". And the ones that are a little interesting, interestingly enough, could have been made with any other camera way before it !
    ( That being said, I wouldn't mind taking snaps with one. : / )
  29. I understand what you're saying Phylo, but image quality aside, this camera gives us back the same type of mechanical feel and operation that was standard fare on even on the cheapest of cameras from the 50s & 60s. Everything old is new again.
  30. I guess I am a spoil sport. I think copying the Leica look is a cheap shot. The fixed lens thing does not appeal to me at all. It is to expensive and it has a crop sensor. I give the camera thumbs down.
  31. I think the hype and the obvious nods to Leica in the design are beside the point, and the DX/APS-C sensor size is exactly what you'd expect in a camera at this price (the same as in equivalent SLRs). What makes this one unique is that nobody else offers a half decent built-in optical finder in a digital camera, let alone one that also has a full set of direct traditional controls for aperture, shutter speed and focus (SLRs and true RF cameras like the M9 & Epson excepted). Making the finder a clever hybrid design with an EVF overlay is icing on the cake. Meanwhile, Leica and everybody else are busy eliminating optical finders altogether from most of their range, and burying key controls in menus - if you're lucky, you'll get a simple 1920s style clip-on optical finder with no data display, and maybe a shutter speed dial. More cameras like this one, please! The market is already saturated with bland 'luxury' P&S cameras that behave just like the cheaper models (designed to be held at arm's length, and used on full auto most of the time).

Share This Page