lykaman Posted April 5, 2011 Share #1 Posted April 5, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) New X1 & Grip arrived to-day, Superb, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 5, 2011 Posted April 5, 2011 Hi lykaman, Take a look here Superb. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Allnm Posted April 5, 2011 Share #2 Posted April 5, 2011 Arent they though? Congratulations on the new arrival, now go out and have fun Allan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jippiejee Posted April 5, 2011 Share #3 Posted April 5, 2011 Is this my totally un-scientific observation, or has the whole X100 launch brought a lot of attention in the end to the X1 and led to a lot of new users? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lykaman Posted April 5, 2011 Author Share #4 Posted April 5, 2011 Hi, I have to say that when I saw the X100 I said to myself ‘At Last” On reconsideration it looks like a RF but it is not.. price wise if you think about it a $1000 camera cannot match a $2000 camera, build, electronics, lens & overall caché.... I agree a linked viewfinder is better than one fitted into an accessory shoe - BUT so many times I use my cameras without the vf..(D300/D3000-PanasonicT2) The DL4 & X1 user can easily adapt with an accessory shoe external VF. People have realized that the X1 is a camera of no compromise. It’s a little like an F1 racing car, stick it in Auto & you will get performance”” use it manually & you get the realization of just how much you can really achieve... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pvak Posted April 7, 2011 Share #5 Posted April 7, 2011 I must say, I too had been seduced by the marketing hype around the Fuji X100. As an X1 user for the last year, I confess, I started waiting for the X100 not unlike "the second coming" or at least as the camera that the X1 should have been. That, however, lasted only till the time that I actually got my hands on one to try out for a few days. It was then that I came to really appreciate just what a wonderful, intuitive, simple and well designed and built camera the X1 really is! Sure, the Fuji looks nice, recalling the classic Ms, but actually, in the hand, I think the X1 feels more solid and better built. The magnesium alloy top of the X100, although metal, looks and feels somewhat plasticky and not like the smooth silkiness of the X1. Ergonomically, I give the edge to the Fuji as it is a lot more sure and comfortable to hold than the bare X1 without the grip (or ThumbsUp). However the X100 cannot be really called a "compact" camera when compared to the X1. Much has been written about the Fuji's "hybrid" viewfinder. It is certainly innovative and I do wish we had a built in optical viewfinder in the X1. However, I have a Voigtlander viewfinder on the X1 which I find perfectly usable. It is nice to have the settings information in the viewfinder like the Fuji but then again, is it really necessary or just a needless distraction when framing the image? I was not blown away by any functional improvement of the Fuji's viewfinder over the Voigtlander on my X1. After working with the X1 and the external viewfinder I am instinctively able to compensate for both focus point and parallax error so these have not posed any problems. I did not like the EVF of the Fuji. Particularly the "freezing" of the image when focus is locked. I found that most distracting. The overall auto focus speed of the Fuji is faster than that of the X1, but not by much, now that we have V2.0. In fact, the X1 AF speed in good light is easily as fast as the Fuji, particularly on repetative shots of subjects at the same relative distance from the camera as you would encounter in street photography. Manual focus is definitely better now on the X1 than the Fuji. Even though the focus ring is "on the lens" for the Fuji, I find it fiddely and very slow, having to turn the ring awkwardly too many turns. I much prefer now the quick thumb wheel focus of the X1. I prefer the control dials, buttons and menu system of the Leica. It is a masterpiece of elegant simplicity and function. Everything you need is obvious, intuitive and on hand. No menu diving here. On the other hand, I found the Fuji X100's controls less than intuitive. Sure the aperture dial is "on the lens", but even with my not so large hands and fingers, I found it awkward to turn being so close the camera body. Having to switch to macro focusing for closer subjects and then to have to use the EVF added steps that interfered with my work flow. As far as IQ quality, I unashamadely admit that I prefer the X1. The Fuji burns highlights and needs about a -2/3 exposure compensation to have a good balance of highlight and shadow to work with. Its image files also do not have that smoothness and the "indescribable, indefinable" Leica look that the X1 images have. So, the bottom line; I was initially excited by the potential of the Fuji, even to the point of considering changing my X1 for it. But that lasted only as long as it took me to actually work with the X100. That was when I realized, actually, what a treasure we have in the Leica. Elegant, intititive, simple and in the hands of competent knowledgable photographers, capable of producing stunning images. What more does one need? Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted April 8, 2011 Share #6 Posted April 8, 2011 At the moment, the biggest lack with X1 is, obviously as you note an optical viewfinder. Leica surely sells one which is superb in terms of quality but it's very expensive at $350. So to compare both cameras you also have to add this component which will make the X1 very expensive. I believe Leica should lower X1s price a bit now Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allnm Posted April 8, 2011 Share #7 Posted April 8, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I dont think prices will come down, its still a very much in demand camera, and since the launch of the X100, many people will now come to the conclusion that the X1 is still the camera they want. There are many viewfinders on the market that can be used. I have had a Leintz Vidom and USSR turret finder. Both great but a little too big for me. I now have a Russian made 35mm finder that is both small and great to use, all for £16 ( about $20) Bearing in mind the X1 was designed as a viewfinder less camera ( I suspect adding a built in viewfinder would compete with the M series cameras), buying or using a VF is a matter of choice and shouldn't be added to the cost for comparison. The X1 is still a unique camera. If you want one you will pay the retail price, or get a used one, but I think prices of used X1's are still high and will stay that way now the X100 hasnt really lived up to expectations. Allan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecaton Posted April 8, 2011 Share #8 Posted April 8, 2011 I must say, I too had been seduced by the marketing hype around the Fuji X100. As an X1 user for the last year, I confess, I started waiting for the X100 not unlike "the second coming" or at least as the camera that the X1 should have been. That, however, lasted only till the time that I actually got my hands on one to try out for a few days. It was then that I came to really appreciate just what a wonderful, intuitive, simple and well designed and built camera the X1 really is!Sure, the Fuji looks nice, recalling the classic Ms, but actually, in the hand, I think the X1 feels more solid and better built. The magnesium alloy top of the X100, although metal, looks and feels somewhat plasticky and not like the smooth silkiness of the X1. Ergonomically, I give the edge to the Fuji as it is a lot more sure and comfortable to hold than the bare X1 without the grip (or ThumbsUp). However the X100 cannot be really called a "compact" camera when compared to the X1. Much has been written about the Fuji's "hybrid" viewfinder. It is certainly innovative and I do wish we had a built in optical viewfinder in the X1. However, I have a Voigtlander viewfinder on the X1 which I find perfectly usable. It is nice to have the settings information in the viewfinder like the Fuji but then again, is it really necessary or just a needless distraction when framing the image? I was not blown away by any functional improvement of the Fuji's viewfinder over the Voigtlander on my X1. After working with the X1 and the external viewfinder I am instinctively able to compensate for both focus point and parallax error so these have not posed any problems. I did not like the EVF of the Fuji. Particularly the "freezing" of the image when focus is locked. I found that most distracting. The overall auto focus speed of the Fuji is faster than that of the X1, but not by much, now that we have V2.0. In fact, the X1 AF speed in good light is easily as fast as the Fuji, particularly on repetative shots of subjects at the same relative distance from the camera as you would encounter in street photography. Manual focus is definitely better now on the X1 than the Fuji. Even though the focus ring is "on the lens" for the Fuji, I find it fiddely and very slow, having to turn the ring awkwardly too many turns. I much prefer now the quick thumb wheel focus of the X1. I prefer the control dials, buttons and menu system of the Leica. It is a masterpiece of elegant simplicity and function. Everything you need is obvious, intuitive and on hand. No menu diving here. On the other hand, I found the Fuji X100's controls less than intuitive. Sure the aperture dial is "on the lens", but even with my not so large hands and fingers, I found it awkward to turn being so close the camera body. Having to switch to macro focusing for closer subjects and then to have to use the EVF added steps that interfered with my work flow. As far as IQ quality, I unashamadely admit that I prefer the X1. The Fuji burns highlights and needs about a -2/3 exposure compensation to have a good balance of highlight and shadow to work with. Its image files also do not have that smoothness and the "indescribable, indefinable" Leica look that the X1 images have. So, the bottom line; I was initially excited by the potential of the Fuji, even to the point of considering changing my X1 for it. But that lasted only as long as it took me to actually work with the X100. That was when I realized, actually, what a treasure we have in the Leica. Elegant, intititive, simple and in the hands of competent knowledgable photographers, capable of producing stunning images. What more does one need? Peter Why don't you just say that you prefer the X1. Nothing wrong with that. I find it amusing how you try to twist even technical advantages of the X100 into disadvantages. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pvak Posted April 8, 2011 Share #9 Posted April 8, 2011 Why don't you just say that you prefer the X1. Nothing wrong with that. I find it amusing how you try to twist even technical advantages of the X100 into disadvantages. I think that I made it perfectly clear that I preferred the X1. I tried to give some credit to the Fuji where it was due but, honestly, when "technical advantages" are merely cosmetic and do not really improve functionality, they are not advantages. The beauty of the X1 is its unencumbered simplicity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.