Fuji X100

[Berkins]

I was at Funan visiting one of my regular shop was told stock has already reached Fuji Singapore.

I guess in fuji singapore head office, not in shops, lol.

 

[jonmanjiro]

The official release date in Japan is 5th March. I'd be surprised if it was earlier than that anywhere else.

 

[airconvent]

i'm still weighing the scales on.. the rumored Alpha FF and this :think:

Bro, that's like saying you are looking at the Mitsubishi i but also waiting for the new Lexus. They are both premium models but in their respective categories. For the X100, should be comparing with NEX5, NX100, GF2, EP2 etc. And the X100 would be at the top of that category if not for its fixed lens. Maybe the x200 will come with interchangeable lenses. There's only so much you can do with 1 fixed lens no matter how good it is.

The official release date in Japan is 5th March. I'd be surprised if it was earlier than that anywhere else.

ooh....too bad I have no rich relatives or friends who would buy this as a birthday present for me..so I have to self manage if i choose to replace my NEX5 with this. Maybe the Totalisator Board can help.
Have already cleared all my Fuji PnS earlier to make way. :bsmilie: But if Sony comes out with a premium fast pancake lens, I may consider remaining with NEX for my grab-and-go config.

 

[eddiefoosn]

Ken Rockwell thinks otherwise...

See link below..

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/00-new-today.htm


.. I copied the comments..

Forget the Fuji Finepix X100. I just looked at this sample gallery, and the images are soft, low-contrast, lower resolution, and boring compared to my D7000, much less the full-resolution samples I share in my new Route 66 Gallery from a LEICA M9. Who are Fuji trying to kid; children who think iPhones are cool? I love Fuji — Fuji Velvia 50! Now that's photography! When you can get this from a Fuji digital camera, wake me up.

 

[Edlet]

Ken Rockwell thinks otherwise...

See link below..

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/00-new-today.htm


.. I copied the comments..

Forget the Fuji Finepix X100. I just looked at this sample gallery, and the images are soft, low-contrast, lower resolution, and boring compared to my D7000, much less the full-resolution samples I share in my new Route 66 Gallery from a LEICA M9. Who are Fuji trying to kid; children who think iPhones are cool? I love Fuji — Fuji Velvia 50! Now that's photography! When you can get this from a Fuji digital camera, wake me up.

I have downloaded some of the images, and they looked nothing like Ken RW's comments.

Image are soft?
Sharpness is uniform across the image. It looks like no Post Processing Sharpening, that's all.

Low Contrast?
Its already too contrasty. I would reduce the contrast. Have you seen real world objects look as contrasty those in the pics?

Low Resolution?
The resolution is that of a 12MP APS-C sensor. That's about as good as it gets. Want more res? Get FF and MF.

Boring?
That's subjective, and it's the photographer and the subject.
Not the equipment.

But well, its Ken RW. And we already know what to expect from him. :bsmilie:

 

[ghoonk]

Ken Rockwell isn't exactly the guy I'd take camera or photography advice from. If you go through his reviews, you'll find that he contradicts himself on many occasions - one moment lens X is the dog's danglies, and in another review he goes on to say that a cheaper and more inferior lens is 'better'. I started out reading his reviews and now completely dismiss them as a well-disguised effort for donationware and affiliate marketing.

Anyway, back to the X100 - bang me sideways, that isn't cheap by any standards. One could get a D3100 with a 35/1.8G (for a 50mm view) for less than the price of the X100, but it's just way too sexy to pass up. I love that it's compact, and old-school where looks, size (a la Leica/Canon rangefinders) are concerned, with the performance of an entry-level DSLR. And a viewfinder to boot

 

[Snooze]

I have downloaded some of the images, and they looked nothing like Ken RW's comments.

Image are soft?
Sharpness is uniform across the image. It looks like no Post Processing Sharpening, that's all.

Low Contrast?
Its already too contrasty. I would reduce the contrast. Have you seen real world objects look as contrasty those in the pics?

Low Resolution?
The resolution is that of a 12MP APS-C sensor. That's about as good as it gets. Want more res? Get FF and MF.

Boring?
That's subjective, and it's the photographer and the subject.
Not the equipment.

But well, its Ken RW. And we already know what to expect from him. :bsmilie:

I think K RW review is the direct opposite of what he said.. I went through all the Sample image and i find the Sharpness
just nice and contrast on my screen its ok. For colours.... Beautiful...Nothing like my D300 if its direct out of the camera.
I am thinking of getting one !!

 

[Poseidon88]

Ken Rockwell isn't exactly the guy I'd take camera or photography advice from. If you go through his reviews, you'll find that he contradicts himself on many occasions - one moment lens X is the dog's danglies, and in another review he goes on to say that a cheaper and more inferior lens is 'better'. I started out reading his reviews and now completely dismiss them as a well-disguised effort for donationware and affiliate marketing.

Anyway, back to the X100 - bang me sideways, that isn't cheap by any standards. One could get a D3100 with a 35/1.8G (for a 50mm view) for less than the price of the X100, but it's just way too sexy to pass up. I love that it's compact, and old-school where looks, size (a la Leica/Canon rangefinders) are concerned, with the performance of an entry-level DSLR. And a viewfinder to boot

:thumbsup:

perfect

 

[Poseidon88]

..who is Ken Rockwell !!!!

he writes a lot of silly "old wife's tale"
better ignore his cheap fairy.

The X100 is a Prime Masterpiece with a very high IQ.

btw:

Low contrast is easily altered with minimum loss
...high contrast with blown highlights is dead in
the water stuff !!!!

 

[wiz23]

....I will buy this s u p e r b camera

Me too ... I will also buy the lens hood & adapter ring set, and I'm thinking of ordering the B+W 49mm MC filter from Amazon.com for USD38.50 ... Anyone has a better lobang? ;p

 

[ghoonk]

..who is Ken Rockwell !!!!

he writes a lot of silly "old wife's tale"
better ignore his cheap fairy.

The X100 is a Prime Masterpiece with a very high IQ.

btw:

Low contrast is easily altered with minimum loss
...high contrast with blown highlights is dead in
the water stuff !!!!

IMHO, people who shoot with an APS-C or larger shouldn't be shooting in JPEG anyway. Shoot in RAW, and do it old-school, just like how people would shoot on film, then head back to process it to get it to look the way they want. No point getting such a fancy piece of equipment and use it for snapshots when one could do the same with a GF/EP/S9x/P7xxx

 

[adamadam]

IMHO, people who shoot with an APS-C or larger shouldn't be shooting in JPEG anyway. Shoot in RAW, and do it old-school, just like how people would shoot on film, then head back to process it to get it to look the way they want. No point getting such a fancy piece of equipment and use it for snapshots when one could do the same with a GF/EP/S9x/P7xxx

I'm getting it to shoot snapshots in JPEG.

 

[ghoonk]

To each his own la

In my case, since I got to copy the files over to my Mac, crop before mailing or uploading, might as well do a bit of tweaking to get things the way I want them to look

I use iPhone for snapshots

 

[alexblessed]

yeah to each his own! In terms of IQ its def good enuff for real world applications. Im hoping the larger viewfinder makes shooting more fun, which at the end of the day is what really matters. The only question is price and AF accuracy/ speed.

 

[hkingx]

lol nice one. But Sickapore is full of rich kids, it's the adult that are poor.:bsmilie:

:cry::cryarent too nice, spent all their money on kids =(

 

[lightning]

I have downloaded some of the images, and they looked nothing like Ken RW's comments.

Image are soft?
Sharpness is uniform across the image. It looks like no Post Processing Sharpening, that's all.

Low Contrast?
Its already too contrasty. I would reduce the contrast. Have you seen real world objects look as contrasty those in the pics?

Low Resolution?
The resolution is that of a 12MP APS-C sensor. That's about as good as it gets. Want more res? Get FF and MF.

Boring?
That's subjective, and it's the photographer and the subject.
Not the equipment.

But well, its Ken RW. And we already know what to expect from him. :bsmilie:

Take Ken RW's comments with a pinch of salt....For me I just think that his comments are crap...he compare the X100 with D7000? What is he comparing? These two camera are from 2 very different category....People who wants to buy the X100 will not look at D7000. Those who wants D7000 will not look at X100....Sometimes he just says lots of rubbish.

 

[lightning]

Ken Rockwell isn't exactly the guy I'd take camera or photography advice from. If you go through his reviews, you'll find that he contradicts himself on many occasions - one moment lens X is the dog's danglies, and in another review he goes on to say that a cheaper and more inferior lens is 'better'. I started out reading his reviews and now completely dismiss them as a well-disguised effort for donationware and affiliate marketing.

Anyway, back to the X100 - bang me sideways, that isn't cheap by any standards. One could get a D3100 with a 35/1.8G (for a 50mm view) for less than the price of the X100, but it's just way too sexy to pass up. I love that it's compact, and old-school where looks, size (a la Leica/Canon rangefinders) are concerned, with the performance of an entry-level DSLR. And a viewfinder to boot

Totally agrees with you...that fellow is just trying to get money from people.....wonder who are the fools that actually donates to him....

 

[iJeff]

Check out the high ISO pics of the X100:

http://www.popco.net/zboard/zboard....&sc=on&select_arrange=headnum&desc=asc&no=564

ISO 6400 looks good. Even ISO 12800 looks useable! :thumbsup:

 

[blackreplica]

wow iJeff the quality of the pictures in that link is pretty stunning. Much better than the ones in the official photo gallery. Probably because they were better taken

I only wonder if the photos you posted we post-processed. If that is straight-out-of-cam quality. I am impressed. I don't see any visible shadow noise anywhere even at 1600iso! The size of the pic probably has something to do with it, but still. Noisewise it looks helluva lot better than my old 500D. It was almost unusable at 1600iso.

I can only see one small flaw. The quality of the bokeh with respect to out of focus highlights can appear a little nervous and overdone, in some situations.

 

[iJeff]

I am not too sure. Saw the link in dpreview forum. I too hope it's straight from the cam.