Jump to content
🇩🇪 Neu: Leica SL3 Reporter ×
🇺🇸🇬🇧 New: Leica SL3 Reporter ×

Sean Reid Fuji X100 review - with X1 comparisons

Paul Hart

By Paul Hart
in Leica X

Recommended Posts

Paul Hart

Paul Hart

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sean Reid has published a review of the X100 on his website. It's based on a production model from a camera store, not a pre-production example.

 

It's a very long and typically thorough review, though not yet complete. Naturally it draws some comparisons with the X1.

 

Based on a quick scan of the article, the firmware is very buggy, and while it's a very competent camera, nobody need fear that it will knock the X1 out of the ring.

 

Sean Reid's website is well worth the modest annual sub, in my view, and this is a very useful article.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply
h00ligan

h00ligan

Posted
Posted

Just to balance for anyone new who has not subscribed to reidreviews. I totally disagree. Huge waste of money if you aren't an m shooter (still questionable), long detailed articles sure..overly verbose (he needs to edit as photos are culled). Not the greatest sample pics, and the all flash format is horrible, takes forever to load, is made for web browsers from 2001.

 

I appreciate your posting that he has reviewed the camera , but I subscribed on the rec of forum members and it was a complete waste. I doubt I'll even log in to read this review. I get a bit weary of what seems like his own personal ad campaign on this forum...this article barely warrants mention in this forum let alone its own thread IMO.

 

For every opinion, there's a counter. I do appreciate this was posted with good intent, I just want those who haven't spent the $30/yr to realize not everyone thinks his site is valuable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest badbob

Guest badbob

Posted
Posted

Thanks for that tip. Sean gets a boost from the Luminous Landscape people, who have their own peculiar vision, and I think he keeps his reviews in general conformance to their expectations. The X100 will be a success if Fuji supports it well and issues some firmware updates. A big part of that success will be the price difference compared to an X1 with grip and viewfinder. And the X1 will enter its second year of general availability with no competitors in its body size/sensor size class.

Link to post
Share on other sites
barjohn

barjohn

Posted
Posted

While Sean and I sometimes disagree, I find that his reviews are among the best published. They are more thorough and include good examples. I too do not care for the use of flash and would prefer that he offer images for down load but those are his choices. The accompanying images give a better idea of what the camera is capable of doing in the right hands than any other review site. Since the review is not complete I don't know what the final outcome will be but I do know it will be fairly reported. I have found the first part exceptionally detailed and full of useful information for a prospective owner and a current owner.

Link to post
Share on other sites
zlatkob

zlatkob

Posted
Posted

I disagree with Edward. The flash format is annoying, but the articles are very thoughtful and written from the perspective of a working photographer. A lot of work goes into the articles & reviews and it shows. I think they have real value. You can view the entire index of articles before you subscribe, so it is easy to see whether the articles will be relevant to your shooting style and photo gear interests. This latest article helped me realize that I would not like the X100 as much as I thought I might, and helped solidify my decision to pass on it. The article probably saved me $1,200, which is not small change. :) For someone buying the X100, the article will help them get up to speed with the camera more quickly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kyler.

Kyler.

Posted
Posted
Just to balance for anyone new who has not subscribed to reidreviews. I totally disagree. Huge waste of money if you aren't an m shooter (still questionable), long detailed articles sure..overly verbose (he needs to edit as photos are culled). Not the greatest sample pics, and the all flash format is horrible, takes forever to load, is made for web browsers from 2001.

 

I appreciate your posting that he has reviewed the camera , but I subscribed on the rec of forum members and it was a complete waste. I doubt I'll even log in to read this review. I get a bit weary of what seems like his own personal ad campaign on this forum...this article barely warrants mention in this forum let alone its own thread IMO.

 

For every opinion, there's a counter. I do appreciate this was posted with good intent, I just want those who haven't spent the $30/yr to realize not everyone thinks his site is valuable.

 

I have to agree with h00ligan on this one. I subscribed due to many people recommending him and was thoroughly disappointed. I find his website unorganized, the flash is annoying, the whole site seems very primitive. The reviews are meh in my opinion. Again, I'm sure some people love them, this is just my opinion.

 

Thanks,

Kyle

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ecaton

Ecaton

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Whether or not one likes the design, lay out, functionality of Sean's web page is one thing. His reviews are not entertaining, funny or exciting. But they are thorough, methodical, highly competent, unbiased, an excellent place to learn. And lastly highly ethical since there is no brand sponsoring going on. Sean approaches a Sigma camera or CV lens the same way he deals with products of more glorified makes. The only site I based M-mount lens purchases on. Worth every cent to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
diogenis

diogenis

Posted
Posted

I also agree with most already said.

Sean Reid needs a total redesign of his web site. Adobe's flash is old news and the whole site is really slow. If one wants to browse its articles he is limited to some sort of slow scrolling which makes it real hard to browse fast. Then the article itself, for example the one about X100 take loads of time minutes, to fully load, with photos loading last.

Obviously flash overuse ban right away all the modern tablets that are mostly designed for such reading.

I jut don't get it why he insists on using this kind of format.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lightwrangler

Lightwrangler

Posted
Posted
I jut don't get it why he insists on using this kind of format.

 

It's simple: copyright issues! Writing nowadays is not considered by the majority to be real work and worth paying for. The everything-for-free-internet-culture makes it hard to stay objective, put a lot of work into some project and be able to make a living out of it for a considerable space of time. All those other free websites posting camera comparisons and insights are heavily ad-financed and therefore not objective.

 

So you have to choose: Cope with Mr Reids suboptimal flash-format or read articles for free where you don't know who paid for.

 

I wish people would appreciate that and stop beating on him.

 

Mike

 

P.S. I know flash is not a real protection against copyright breeches, but it seems to raise the bars enough for most of the average surfers to keep them from copying his writing and putting it to some other webpages and/or forums.

Link to post
Share on other sites
UliWer

UliWer

Posted
Posted
Whether or not one likes the design, lay out, functionality of Sean's web page is one thing. His reviews are not entertaining, funny or exciting. But they are thorough, methodical, highly competent, unbiased, an excellent place to learn. And lastly highly ethical since there is no brand sponsoring going on. Sean approaches a Sigma camera or CV lens the same way he deals with products of more glorified makes. The only site I based M-mount lens purchases on. Worth every cent to me.

 

I fully agree with you!

 

As I havn't read Sean Reid's article on the X 100 my opinion is not based on what he thinks and writes about this special camera.

 

All I know is that his site is the most competent and reliable source for information and evaluation for products I am interested in. Different than many other similar sites on the web his approach is not just opinionated but revealing what he himself found out and leaving the readers freedom to come to their own conclusion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
mjh

mjh

Posted
Posted
i only trust a reviewer if he is able to take great pictures...

That’s a bad heuristic … Great photographers can make lousy reviewers, and vice versa. There’s next to no correlation between those two talents.

 

Anyway, while I cannot vouch for Sean Reid’s website (I’m not a subscriber), whenever he has been posting excerpts of his findings here, he came across as a highly competent reviewer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
*Mark*

*Mark*

Posted
Posted

would you trust a sportscar reviewer who is not able to drive a fast lab?

 

ps. this reminds me on the last posting from putts about craftmanship vs. profesionalism, ( i dont know if putts is a great photograph :-) )

Link to post
Share on other sites
stunsworth

stunsworth

Posted
Posted
Just to balance for anyone new who has not subscribed to reidreviews. I totally disagree. Huge waste of money if you aren't an m shooter (still questionable), long detailed articles sure..overly verbose (he needs to edit as photos are culled). Not the greatest sample pics, and the all flash format is horrible, takes forever to load, is made for web browsers from 2001

 

I was a subscriber but didn't renew. The reason was mainly that after the first few weeks where I read the reviews that I was interested in there wasn't really enough coming out, that I was interested in, to justify renewing the the subscription - for me at least, others may differ.

 

Also, while the reviews were lengthy and detailed I found myself skipping over the sample photographs and just reading the last paragraph or two.

 

I'm not sure why Sean persists in using Flash, I know the reason he gives is intellectual theft, but Flash doesn't prevent that, it just makes it a little more difficult to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
*Mark*

*Mark*

Posted
Posted
That’s a bad heuristic … Great photographers can make lousy reviewers, and vice versa. There’s next to no correlation between those two talents.

 

Anyway, while I cannot vouch for Sean Reid’s website (I’m not a subscriber), whenever he has been posting excerpts of his findings here, he came across as a highly competent reviewer.

 

A good photographer should care about color - he overlooked the ir problem in his first m8 review - i find this very funny for myself and yes i am guilty i payed for one year some time ago... :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
andym911

andym911

Posted
Posted

I stopped going to Sean's site a year or two ago and never renewed my subscription.

 

Mainly down to the fact that I find it rather a punishment wading through his website than a pleasure....bit like jogging through a river of honey...

 

Each to their own...

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites
timd.

timd.

Posted
Posted
Subscribing to Sean's reviews has proved cost effective and has helped me choose additional lenses I might not have considered.

 

dunk

 

you call something that makes you buy additional lenses you wouldn't have missed otherwise cost effective? ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...