FujiFilm Announced: FinePix X100

Lovely looks and style but I don't know - it'll be basically a last gen sensor by the time it turns up on the market, it's £1000 (likely) and has no future potential other than depreciation. If I'd won the lottery I'd have one, if I wanted the retro look and feel I'd just shoot film on an FM2n or similar.
 
It depends largely on the response time of the camera. If it's rapid and "instant" in operation and shutter delay it will be the first useful compact camera I've seen to date. Fuji have vastly more experience with colour than Nikon and Canon (Who until the late 90's specialised in making glass and metal boxes), their S2, S3 and S5 proving that quite deftly. Fast compact with an APS, High dynamic range sensor? Yes please!
 
I've just noticed this camera and it looks very interesting.

It could provide what my M9 doesn't quite achieve. A truly portable, relatively lightweight yet creative camera. I'll be interested in its weight. That and body ergonomics are the M9's failings.
 
Bit OT but I take my M9 almost everywhere I go as it is small enough to fit in my everyday messenger bag. Yes its no lightweight as it is a Leica after all made from solid slabs of metal, but it is a full frame sensor inside the body so for what it is, I would say its pretty lightweight compared to what is available on the market.

For me the M9's failing is it's noise performance of it's sensor, it's easily at least 3 stops behind the 5D MK2.
 
mcc49 said:
Bit OT but I take my M9 almost everywhere I go as it is small enough to fit in my everyday messenger bag. Yes its no lightweight as it is a Leica after all made from solid slabs of metal, but it is a full frame sensor inside the body so for what it is, I would say its pretty lightweight compared to what is available on the market.

For me the M9's failing is it's noise performance of it's sensor, it's easily at least 3 stops behind the 5D MK2.
Click to expand...

I am sorry but that is utterly terrible for a FF sensor, that's before you even mention the price tag.
 
The thing is the M9 doesn't need to be that heavy. Why make the body out of magnesium alloy and then add a brass top and bottom plate? Doesn't make sense. Handling isn't great either, nor are the fiddly menu controls. Take a look at the Canon G10/11/12 for how it should be done.

The M9 sensor is superb (although not at high ISO) but in a side by side comparison there was surprisingly little difference in IQ between it and my 5D2.

I think I'll always own a DSLR, but I do like the concept of a compact relatively lightweight simple camera with good IQ and high ISO performance. The X100 certainly looks like it might provide exactly that.
 
Don't get me wrong, the M9 can produce IQ in a different league to my G10. There is also something very appealing about taking pics with a FF manual focus rangefinder camera. It forces you think a lot harder about your shots and that can help you become a better photographer.

But it is flawed and the painted finish just isn't robust enough. For me at least the cons outway the pros, so I'm putting mine up for sale shortly.
 
I think the reason they made it that heavy is to keep with their Leica tradition, for their die hard followers a Leica M isnt a Leica M unless its build like a tank. Personally I dont find weight an issue after being used to carrying a 5D, 24-70 and 35L around.

I actually quite like the ergonomics along with a wrist strap so different people have different preference.

Raymond, I do agree that it sucks a lot seeing noise at as low as 500 ISO especially coming from clean images @ 1600 ISO from a 5DM2, but a lot of the time when I do go out and carry the M9 around its usually in the daylight where I have enough light to go ISO 160/200 and for the dimmer situation I have the CV 50mm f/1.1 to help suck in light.

I'll find myself using my 5D more and more this year as I want to experiment and learn about off camera lighting and it's not as feasible with the M9.
 
Still a very interesting camera but I still don't buy it with a fixed lens at that price point, it's far too much of a luxury item, compare it to a GF2, all you gain is the retro look and physical controls - which I fully admit are incredibly appealing but you loose are any future potential and a heap of cash. In 2-3 years it's going to be out of date and you can't keep that fancy (and expensive) lens for a new camera, it's buy a new unit.

What I said before really - I'd have one in a flash if I won the lottery (and didn't have to justify such purchases to my other half) but in the real world I just can't see it making sense.

Then again, I fully accept dumping £1200+ on a DSLR body every 4 years or so which will be pretty much worthless at the other end so maybe that's not true. Then again that's part of a system where the £5k of glass endures through a new body...

Confusing.

I'm not sure which way I'd go given the choice with an M9 actually. Cost aside the M9 is better quality but neither can replace an SLR for me and the x100 is more practical.
 
Spie said:
Don't get me wrong, the M9 can produce IQ in a different league to my G10. There is also something very appealing about taking pics with a FF manual focus rangefinder camera. It forces you think a lot harder about your shots and that can help you become a better photographer.

But it is flawed and the painted finish just isn't robust enough. For me at least the cons outway the pros, so I'm putting mine up for sale shortly.
Click to expand...

Really? I'm still mega lusting after an M9. I love my M6 but the time it takes to go from pressing the shutter release to receiving the photos back takes ages and it's pretty expensive, especially when you haven't loaded the film properly (twice :o ) and get back reams of nothing after spending so much time setting shots up.. :mad:

The X100 looks good and may replace my GF1 depending on dynamic range and a few other things, I love the looks as well. However, I'll be hitting F5 to see if you put your M9 up Spie, the thought is already making me sweat. :)
 
mcc49 said:
For me the M9's failing is it's noise performance of it's sensor, it's easily at least 3 stops behind the 5D MK2.
Click to expand...

Interesting you say that. The noise levels are a known issue in the astrophotography world. To reduce the noise levels they cool the Sony CCD by using peltiers. To compensate for the additional noise, the majority of Kodak CCD cameras have dual Peltiers for an additional -10degC against ambient.
 
Last edited:
bigredshark said:
Still a very interesting camera but I still don't buy it with a fixed lens at that price point, it's far too much of a luxury item, compare it to a GF2, all you gain is the retro look and physical controls - which I fully admit are incredibly appealing but you loose are any future potential and a heap of cash. In 2-3 years it's going to be out of date and you can't keep that fancy (and expensive) lens for a new camera, it's buy a new unit.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure about that. Despite the M9's interchangeable lens I always ended up using the 35mm Summicron F2. I just seemed perfect for this type of camera. The fact that Fujifilm have chosen the same specification fixed lens speaks volumes.

Anyway, I'm having one as soon as they are available. I love the simplicity and the hybrid viewfinder looks like a real step-up from the M9 rangefinder. The X100 is a supplementary camera to my DSLRs, and for that purpose it should do well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom