Fuji 100S acquisition?

[TX400]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I like the Ricohs a lot. I'd like to try out the new GR. I used the GR1 film camera in the past and I liked the shape and build quality.

 

The new GR isn't quite yet available (I think this week maybe) but here's a seemingly balanced review from a long time Ricoh user: Review: The 2013 Ricoh GR (digital V) – Ming Thein | Photographer

 

It's nice that he has the temerity and the integrity to be honest and upfront and not take his own preferences as a kind of status or something. He doesn't say things like "however for the person out to capture photos" or "an inconspicuous producer rather than a toy." I like that he spells out both the pros and cons rather than posting an editorial about himself (which so many reviewers seem to be doing these days.) He also doesn't say things like, "I wanted an image producer, not jewelry or something to admire over coffee..."

 

Indeed, a specific camera as a useable tool is always going to be a subjective choice. However that subjectivity shouldn't be emphasized in a supercilious manner. Discussing a commodity while taking oneself out of the equation can be difficult to do. But unfortunately it tends to become a way for many people to define themselves over others.

 

It bothers me that you are comparing my statement to this affiliate link review guy and suggesting that the style of my discussion is somehow less valuable than his. Taking value from an account of subjective personal experience does take more effort than reading a pro-con list, but it goes to a deeper level by providing context about the author's reaction to the subject.

 

I only skim the affiliate link reviewer reviews these days. They are so sterile—so few of them have the guts to forgo the pre-order-link revenue frenzy and pony up their own cash for their own (non-pre-) production camera. Fewer still take the time to shoot with the thing over a ownership-long period of time on an appropriate project. I didn't even do this—as I got rid of it as soon as I knew it wasn't for me—but my intent was to have a camera and my analysis was secondary.

 

I think if we want to have others opinions to reflect on we need to invite them rather than crap on them.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[CalArts 99]

If you don't understand the implications that you were making in your "review" then I'm not sure I know what to say.

 

Is there really a need to say that the product is a "toy" or that it's not for the "person out to capture photos" (implying again that it's a plaything.) Or that it's not an "image producer" but simply "jewelry to admire over coffee."

 

What you're actually doing is saying those who use this tool or those who feel it's a tool with potential are simply fools. It's the same thing that "Leica haters" do in their "reviews" of Leica cameras. They gloat as to how they see it as a "toy for the rich" and a piece of "jewelry to admire." It no longer becomes about the camera itself but instead becomes an editorial about themselves and their personal world view.

 

Why try to elevate yourself over others by implying that only you are "a producer of serious imagery" and hence the camera is of little value to you. And that apparently only you can recognize a "toy" over a viable tool. You have no knowledge of other people's backgrounds here (it was even your very first post.)

 

A "review" like that is generally made to elevate the reviewer in the minds of others. You could have very easily left out all those innuendos. The other reviewer I cited was gracious enough not to engage in that sort of behavior despite that he didn't "have the guts to forgo the pre-order-link revenue frenzy and pony up their own cash for their own (non-pre-) production camera." However "gutless" that person is, they did provide worthwhile information without any oblique and disparaging remarks. And that's the sign of a good reviewer.

[TX400]

If you don't understand the implications that you were making in your "review" then I'm not sure I know what to say.

 

Is there really a need to say that the product is a "toy" or that it's not for the "person out to capture photos" (implying again that it's a plaything.) Or that it's not an "image producer" but simply "jewelry to admire over coffee."

 

What you're actually doing is saying those who use this tool or those who feel it's a tool with potential are simply fools. It's the same thing that "Leica haters" do in their "reviews" of Leica cameras. They gloat as to how they see it as a "toy for the rich" and a piece of "jewelry to admire." It no longer becomes about the camera itself but instead becomes an editorial about themselves and their personal world view.

 

Why try to elevate yourself over others by implying that only you are "a producer of serious imagery" and hence the camera is of little value to you. And that apparently only you can recognize a "toy" over a viable tool. You have no knowledge of other people's backgrounds here (it was even your very first post.)

 

A "review" like that is generally made to elevate the reviewer in the minds of others. You could have very easily left out all those innuendos. The other reviewer I cited was gracious enough not to engage in that sort of behavior despite that he didn't "have the guts to forgo the pre-order-link revenue frenzy and pony up their own cash for their own (non-pre-) production camera." However "gutless" that person is, they did provide worthwhile information without any oblique and disparaging remarks. And that's the sign of a good reviewer.

 

You are putting quotes around things I didn't write. I suggest re-reading what I wrote because despite you not liking what I wrote we appear to be in violent agreement that it's not a review.

[iedei]

TX400: i thought your review was very well written and full of valid points----most of which I agree with after my experiences with the camera. Don't let others discourage you by pseudo-intellectually dissecting your reviews.....you have every right to express yourself here and have done so well.

 

oh and welcome to the forums!

[CalArts 99]

You are putting quotes around things I didn't write. I suggest re-reading what I wrote because despite you not liking what I wrote we appear to be in violent agreement that it's not a review.

 

Well, it is what you wrote. It's quite easy to read and quite easy to read between the lines, too.

 

I simply feel that there is really no reason to say things like "toy" and "jewelry to admire." And, "for the person out to capture photos".... "it doesn't deliver." This implies that anyone using the camera is not serious and can never be serious about 'capturing photos' (those sort of comments do have an affect and which tend to reveal more about the person saying them than about the object itself.)

 

That is what's bothersome. Your opinion of the camera's functions doesn't bother me. In fact you mentioned some of the issues I also have. (I'd like to hear more, but without any of the innuendo.) It's simply the way you said it. And that is indeed what can make or break an opinion/review in respect to its overall credibility. When the author tosses in some smug remarks, people tend to recognize that right away and will often dismiss the opinion altogether. And as someone here mentioned already, unfortunately there seems to be always two camps on forums: either it's the best or it's rubbish sort of diatribes. And it's rampant on camera forums/car forums/audiophile forums/watch forums, etc.., i.e., most all 'commodity discussion' forums. It too often ends up like school yard chatter. It's a weird phenomenon.....

 

This isn't about specific cameras. It goes way beyond that. And your post just brought it all out, I suppose. But if you don't get it, then you simply don't get it. And we'll leave it at that.

 

Cheers.

[zlatkob]

I'm finding the X100s to be a viable tool -- definitely an "image producer". I feel that it's strengths easily outweigh its weaknesses. It doesn't work like a manual camera, so it can be unsatisfying for someone who wants it to work more like a manual camera. However, in some ways it works better than a manual camera. For example, it can be set to instantly bring up a magnified view when focusing manually. And it can instantly switch between electronic and optical viewfinders, so parallax need never be an issue.

 

There is a bit of analysis paralysis in the beginning, as there is with many good cameras. There are enough settings that one can keep tweaking the X100s for a while. However, that feeling of paralysis goes away with intensive usage and familiarization.

[NZDavid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I had a chance to play with one -- as well as just about every camera now on the market -- in a store in Tokyo recently. My impression was that all of the Fuji retro-style cameras felt the most Leica-like. The X100s felt especially nice. But proof of the pudding is actually using it for a while, which is why in-depth reviews are helpful. Check out DPreview, Luminous Landscape (on the X100), and Steve Huff, as well as readers' reviews at BH Photo and Amazon.

 

Meanwhile here's more on the specs from Fuji: FUJIFILM X100S | Fujifilm Global

 

It would also be interesting to compare the Leica X2 as a companion for the M9-P.

[MPJMP]

I have been shooting an X100S for about two months now (got one from the first batch shipped). I am a film Leica MP user and initialy thought the X100S would be a great digital companion, as I can not justify the cost of a digital Leica M (even used).

 

In use and operation the X100S comes closer to a Leica M than any other digital camera I have tried thus far. Close, but not exactly the same. It's probably more like using a Contax G, which is the camera system I used before coming to the Leica M about 10 years ago.

 

The X100S provides a psuedo-rangefinder experince when used in the OVF mode. The photos at larger aperatures have a very "Leica-esque" look to them. Again, not exactly the same, but in the same general ball park.

 

I've been faced with a dellima lately. While I love my Leica MP, film photography has become less and less appealing to me in recent years as other things compete for my time (family, work, etc.). The last roll of film I shot took over a month to develop, and then another week or two until I found the time to scan it. I had scratches on several scanned frames. By then, however, I was too worn out to spend the additional time to fix them in LR4.

 

The sheer convenience and expedited work-flow of digital capture is starting to make more sense to me. The digital Leica Ms are expensive. In my case, prohibitively so.

 

Right now, the Fuji X series is the only digital camera that can come close to a Leica M as a rangefinder substitute. The prices and upgrade path are substantially less expensive, as well.

 

While I originally thought the X100S would be a compliment to my MP, I now feel the opposite is happening and that I am being tempted away from Leica (and film) and toward either using the X100S as my primary camera, or going full-out and replacing everything with an X-Pro 1 rig.

 

Not sure what I will do. Time will tell.

[Guest rivercityrocker]

For what it's worth, I ended up with a Leica M8 via X100s > X-Pro1. I hated both of the cameras. I found myself being tripped up by too many bells and whistles. The hybrid viewfinder which I initially thought was genius is horrible. It kept switching from optical to EVF all the time. I never could figure out what the hell that camera was up to (and I write camera guides for a living, so figuring out cameras is what I do). It made taking photographs much more work than even with a DSLR. I wanted this system to be easier, not more difficult.

 

In the end the simplicity of the digital M system won me over and I haven't given a second thought to the Fuji X system again.

[bill]

Should have tried the X-E1... I found the X-Pro unbalanced for me - too light for the bulk. I went instead for the EVF-equipped X-E1 and found it to be the nearest I have ever found to a modern Digilux 2. I subsequently bought an X100 and like you found the hybrid viewfinder disorienting and - again, for me - unusable. If the Mini is a Leica version of the X-E1 Leica may just have a winner on their hands...

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

Sent from another Galaxy

[NZDavid]

The new soon-to-be-announced Leica M Mini sounds intriguing.

[douglasf13]

I've been shooting the X100s for a couple of months, and it is a nice improvement over the X100...except for X-trans, which, while being fantastic in low light, is still having all kinds of issues with all of the raw converters out there, in terms of watercolor, chroma artifacts, etc. Of course, whether this will bother you depends on your output size (and how picky you are.)

 

Aside from X-trans, after moving from an M9+35/2 ASPH to the X100s, there is a noticeable "flatness" from the smaller sensor in good light, comparatively. Now, I don't need super shallow depth of field all the time, or anything, but f2 on full frame is fantastic for portraits, and I miss it. The X100s gives you about the equivalent of f3.2 on fullframe, which isn't quite enough for me. I just ordered an RX1 and plan on selling the X100s.

[@bumac]

I have a X100 and I like it as an every-day-camera. Even a do asignements with it. Great results. Really. I use it beside my M9 and it is very good. Great low-light performance. Have a look: M-Impresión

[Archiver]

@martha - I've had a X100 (black version) for over a year and I've had a lot of fun with it. It's not an M9 replacement for me, but it does a good job in most conditions. Appropriately, as I type I have the M9, X100, X10 and the new Ricoh GR sitting beside the keyboard. Everything has a place and purpose.

 

The M9 is for when I want 'ultimate' image quality, the use of rangefinder lenses, and the rangefinder shooting experience. The X100 is for when I want something lighter with autofocus and good high ISO capabilities. The X10 is a fun camera with good zoom range and beautiful jpeg rendition, and the GR succeeds my beloved GRD III as take-everywhere pocket camera.

 

I don't find the X100 difficult to navigate at all, although I own many digital cameras and I'm used to fiddling with different menu systems. But once you set up the X100 the way you want, you only need to touch the shutter, aperture and exposure dials, and nothing else.

 

I agree that the shallow depth of field provided by a full frame sensor and fast glass is attractive and sometimes necessary to achieve a certain effect, which is why I'd never ditch the M9 and Nokton 35/1.4, Summicron 50 or Zeiss Sonnar 50/1.5. The X100, and by extension X100s, just won't have as shallow a depth of field.

 

@MPJMP - if you are considering the move to an all X-Pro setup, you might like to wait until Fuji releases a new version. I was going to buy an X-Pro 1, but I was waylaid by the Olympus OM-D, which has much faster and more accurate autofocus. I realized that the X-Pro 1, for all of its positives, would not be adequate for me in that incarnation. But if a future X-Pro model ticks those boxes, well...

[MPJMP]

@MPJMP - if you are considering the move to an all X-Pro setup, you might like to wait until Fuji releases a new version. I was going to buy an X-Pro 1, but I was waylaid by the Olympus OM-D, which has much faster and more accurate autofocus. I realized that the X-Pro 1, for all of its positives, would not be adequate for me in that incarnation. But if a future X-Pro model ticks those boxes, well...

 

Yes, if I do go with an X-Pro it will be the "2" and not the current model. I also wouldn't make the jump until the 23mm (35mm equiv.) lens is available in the US.

 

As of today, for the first time in over a decade, I am no longer a Leica owner.

 

My MP and Summicron lenses are on their way to new owners. I finally just ran out of steam when it came to dealing with the limitations of film photography, the endless scanning, the rising cost of film, and the increasingly limited options for processing. I will miss the MP and the beautiful pictures it produced for me, but I am really, really happy with the X100S and feel that with it I am moving on to the next generation.

 

What is impressing me about the X100S is the sheer versatility it offers and the feeling that limits on my photography are being removed. With the OVF, it can successfully simulate the rangefinder experience. You see your subject through a clear window, not through a tube. But, switch over to the EVF and it can instantly simulate an SLR experience for those times when you really need the capability to see through the lens (such as macro shots or to preview DOF). Then, you can switch over to rear LCD screen live view for a quick video or to hand the camera off to a friend or spouse so they can be the photographer for a few minutes. As a result of all these new options in how to view your subject, I' getting a lot of shots now where previously I would have had to simply put the camera down or just fired away and hoped for the best.

 

Another thing I am really happy with is all the money I now have in my bank account! I used my Leica gear for 10 years and actually sold it for a profit! From a practical, financial point of view, when I looked at how much money I had tied up in one camera and two lenses it became much harder for me to justify keeping it when something like the X100S is giving me the results it is.

 

No regrets (yet!)

[stephen.w]

Yes, if I do go with an X-Pro it will be the "2" and not the current model. I also wouldn't make the jump until the 23mm (35mm equiv.) lens is available in the US.

 

As of today, for the first time in over a decade, I am no longer a Leica owner.

 

My MP and Summicron lenses are on their way to new owners. I finally just ran out of steam when it came to dealing with the limitations of film photography, the endless scanning, the rising cost of film, and the increasingly limited options for processing. I will miss the MP and the beautiful pictures it produced for me, but I am really, really happy with the X100S and feel that with it I am moving on to the next generation.

 

What is impressing me about the X100S is the sheer versatility it offers and the feeling that limits on my photography are being removed. With the OVF, it can successfully simulate the rangefinder experience. You see your subject through a clear window, not through a tube. But, switch over to the EVF and it can instantly simulate an SLR experience for those times when you really need the capability to see through the lens (such as macro shots or to preview DOF). Then, you can switch over to rear LCD screen live view for a quick video or to hand the camera off to a friend or spouse so they can be the photographer for a few minutes. As a result of all these new options in how to view your subject, I' getting a lot of shots now where previously I would have had to simply put the camera down or just fired away and hoped for the best.

 

Another thing I am really happy with is all the money I now have in my bank account! I used my Leica gear for 10 years and actually sold it for a profit! From a practical, financial point of view, when I looked at how much money I had tied up in one camera and two lenses it became much harder for me to justify keeping it when something like the X100S is giving me the results it is.

 

No regrets (yet!)

Sad to hear about the MP! Still, these decisions should finally be about the pictures, and it sounds like that it was right decision for you. After trading my X1 in towards another lens earlier in the year I have memory cards but nothing to put them in. But I have missed having a digital camera for low light and colour, and the X100s ticks a lot of boxes that the X1 (and X100) did not. The other option is the new Ricoh, but for me 28mm is just too limiting as a single focal length.