View Full Version : Why are you so excited?
videogamemaker
01-17-2011, 01:10
I think it's clear to anyone who's browsed this new sub-forum that I have a serious case of the wants for the X100. I am addicted to checking the tweets, the youtubes, the rumor sites, and this forum multiple times a day. I can't remember a product in the past that has had me this excited, and I've been trying to think of why.
What has you excited about this particular product (if you are excited, that is)?
Obviously the first reason is at some subconscious level I think it will revolutionize my photography and enable me to reach a new level. Bull**** and hogwash, but I can't deny that every new trip, photo shoot, or photo product elicits a little twinkle in this gland, however unreasonable the thought may be.
The biggest reason is that I just don't carry my camera around enough. I prefer doing lit, planned photo shoots, and in those instances I have no problem schlepping around wheeled cases of lights, stands, tripods, multiple large lenses and a big honking dslr over my shoulder. Lately though, I've been wanting to do more casual walk around shooting. Capturing my home life, my friend's visits, the nights on the town, the little scenes around Reykjavik that I see as I drive and walk around. I've tried to make myself carry my dslr, but at some point it just becomes annoying. Too large to fit easily under the seat, heavy around my shoulder, bumping into things, etc. I tried buying a small ricoh film camera, and I've only shot 24 out of 36 exposures. The non-ability to suck off images as I shoot them is annoying, and film is ludicrously expensive here. (20 bux for a roll of provia 400x, 35 bux for processing to CD). I tried borrowing a friend's digital point/shoot, a canon s90. It was convenient, and I kept it on me, but I didn't like the quality of the files it produced, and I didn't like the everything-in-focus aspect of the tiny sensor. The X100 (and also the leica X1) seems to be the first camera that is both small enough to take with me everywhere, but will still deliver the image quality I am used to with my 5D, and give me shallow enough dof for the look I prefer. (something the Nex with it's slow, too wide for me lens cannot, and the m4/3 have too much dof and the image quality isn't quite what I'm after).
Less obtrusive. We don't have the scare level of the US or UK with the police and government demonizing Dslrs as tools of terrorists, but they still give off an air of intrusiveness. Someone is trying to take your photo for a serious purpose. A little of it is cowardice on my side, and a little is the extra guardedness on the subjects side, when I bring a large camera and lens up to cover my entire face to snap a photo. I'm sure many here are familiar with the benefits of both the small size of a rangefinder, with the fact it only covers half your face. I feel like it will give me more confidence, and evoke less suspicion from my subjects.
The hinted at 1/1,000 or even 1/4,000 sync speed. There are many times I'd like to balance my flash closer to the sun or ambient and with a top sync of 1/160 on the 5D with a skyport as the trigger, that leaves me only with ND filters, which are cumbersome and annoying. Being able to drop out ambient indoors completely, or tame the sun outdoors is going to open up a few creative looks I wasn't able to reach before.
There really isn't anything it will enable I can't do now with my current gear, which is why I know I'm projecting heavily, but I think it's still fun to talk about, to pass the time between website tidbits and the product release. If you think this is a dumb exercise, close the thread, move on, negative comments aren't needed.
... trust me not everyone is that excited
J. Borger
01-17-2011, 01:19
I am not excited at all myself but witness the hype..
I can only imagine 95% of the hype is based on the cool retro-look of the camera.
I'm not excited either. Digital technology caught up with 1970's camera design and managed to squeeze a viewfinder in a compact camera, big deal. When they catch up with the '80s it will be full frame, it will have a rangefinder and it will fit in a pocket. Olympus XA. woohoo.
robert blu
01-17-2011, 01:31
I think most of people are excited because in this moment the camera is only a project, a good one indeed. But as soon as the camera will be on the market they will start to complain for some (probably minor) issue, as it happened with most of the new cameras on the market (m9 and x1 included). A project, like a dream is always better than reality. But, I admit the x100 concept is a real interesting idea, specially for the RF lovers.
robert
Damn ... I hope this camera lives up to it's expectations or some people around here are going to need councelling! :p
videogamemaker
01-17-2011, 01:42
I'm not excited either. Digital technology caught up with 1970's camera design and managed to squeeze a viewfinder in a compact camera, big deal. When they catch up with the '80s it will be full frame, it will have a rangefinder and it will fit in a pocket. Olympus XA. woohoo.
How long before you think this will happen? I agree, and the thought is exciting, just curious if it's going to be 5 years or 10.
Also what's the viewfinder on the XA like?
Roger Hicks
01-17-2011, 03:36
It's a pretty little camera with proper controls, probably the nearest digital you can get to a screw-mount Leica. It's the only camera of its type (except possibly an X1) that I'd consider. But I don't understand the levels of hysteria it has generated, nor the way people call it a 'rangefinder', let alone fantasies about LCD rangefinder patches.
Cheers,
R.
A digital camera which doesn't look like it was made from used Kinder Egg components, which doesn't cost the Earth, which will hopefully have a great lens and sensor combo, which isn't a DSLR and so I wont get dressed in Orange Pyjamas and made to spread my legs for an anal cavity search. What's not to like?
Because it's a camera for people who sensibly realize that a Canonet will do 80% of what a Leica M will do, and have been waiting for a digital equivalent.
Well, I was a lot more excited about the x100, but I've just paid the property tax on my house. That has dimmed my desire a bit.
My excitement is that of a spectator than a potential buyer, at least initially. There is no doubt X100 would make shooting a real pleasure if it functions as promised. I can see almost all those amateurs who begun with DSLRs and then slowly lost interest coming back and carrying a X100. I also see a lot of film users finally converting. No doubt there is excitement in the air for those interested and those even on the fence.
I'am excited for the exact reasons you are but specially your second point. I hope the handling will be better than m4/3 cameras which STINK. In any case i'll only be a spectator at least for the first run of these cameras. Hopefully my finances will improve by the end of this year enough to get one. Being unemployed is no fun....
I am not really THAT excited anymore because there is simply too much time for me between the announcement and the real availability. All this heavy marketing stuff is not sufficient to keep me interested in a way that I will gladly open my wallet once the camera arrives. In the last weeks I started to shoot with my M6 more often instead of the M8 and do no longer feel a real need for another digital companion. Nevertheless the technical concept behind the X100 is still interesting.
Brian Sweeney
01-17-2011, 06:24
I'm excited because it is the equivalent of a fixed-lens Rangefinder camera brought into the digital age.
Like Kevin stated- A digital Canonet. Still a fun, carry around camera with a decent fast lens.
Brian, I can go with that. But, I don't understand the wild buzz for it.
(Then again I don't understand something like the Snooky phenomena, either).
It is obviously a quality compact, a niche that is historically likable and practical, but with compromises and a role as a 'second camera.'
(Personally, I believe the Pentax 645D and it's like are the most interesting right now, perhaps not as a configuration to purchase, but as a gauge of digital's ability to fully match film at a cost and function acceptable to demanding amateurs. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax_645d___a_first_review.shtml)
When the new crap can do better than my familiar old crap (at reasonable cost), I'll tune in.
- Charlie
Damn ... I hope this camera lives up to it's expectations or some people around here are going to need councelling! :p
Kieth, that's a given already.
wlewisiii
01-17-2011, 07:24
I'm excited because it is the equivalent of a fixed-lens Rangefinder camera brought into the digital age.
Like Kevin stated- A digital Canonet. Still a fun, carry around camera with a decent fast lens.
True enough with a decent finder and proper controls. Still, I'll save any excitement for a 50mm equivalent version though or if they can bring the cost down to what I paid for my A590.
jsrockit
01-17-2011, 08:07
Ok, well... I'm currently using a Leica M8.2, a Leica X1, and a Ricoh GXR. To me, this camera seems to be a cross between all of the features I love within all 3 of these cameras slapped into one nice, decently priced, camera.
Built in viewfinder? check. AF? check. Fast lens? check. 35mm equiv focal length? check. High ISO quality? (presumably) check. Good aesthetic quality? check. Small size? check. Aperture ring? check. Dedicated shutter speed dial? check.
jsrockit
01-17-2011, 08:08
Brian, I can go with that. But, I don't understand the wild buzz for it.
(Then again I don't understand something like the Snooky phenomena, either).
It is obviously a quality compact, a niche that is historically likable and practical, but with compromises and a role as a 'second camera.'
(Personally, I believe the Pentax 645D and it's like are the most interesting right now, perhaps not as a configuration to purchase, but as a gauge of digital's ability to fully match film at a cost and function acceptable to demanding amateurs. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax_645d___a_first_review.shtml)
When the new crap can do better than my familiar old crap (at reasonable cost), I'll tune in.
- Charlie
So, why are you in this thread again?
daveisbest
01-17-2011, 10:30
Because it's a camera for people who sensibly realize that a Canonet will do 80% of what a Leica M will do, and have been waiting for a digital equivalent.
Exactly. A reasonably compact, fully featured camera with a great lens, easy to use controls with dials/rings that aren't in stupid places and a good viewfinder with framelines.
The reason there is so much excitement surrounding this camera? Because it's the first digital camera to have all of these features at a reasonable price. And in terms of fixed lens digital cameras, it's the only one in it's class and the only one which comes close to replicating the fixed lens rangefinders of the past such as the Canonets.
M4streetshooter
01-17-2011, 11:26
I used to be really excited. I was in love I tell ya but it's like my ex's...
The longer I don't see it, the less I desire it. My GF1 is doing a heck of a job and with the LX5 as a constant carry around... the X100 is not that exciting to me anymore.
I dreamed like everyone but the price index here in the states...$1200.00, is way out of line. The problem really is that there's this crazy hype and now all this pre-ordering, whatever the heck that is...ya either order it or ya don't.
So, now due to the hype, the price index will be higher than wanted because the 1st responders jumped on it and showed that Fuji and the dealers can get away with a higher price...
So, again to answer the question, no I'm not that excited. I'm curious but not excited.
shooter
videogamemaker
01-17-2011, 11:34
I dreamed like everyone but the price index here in the states...$1200.00, is way out of line. The problem really is that there's this crazy hype and now all this pre-ordering, whatever the heck that is...ya either order it or ya don't.
So, now due to the hype, the price index will be higher than wanted because the 1st responders jumped on it and showed that Fuji and the dealers can get away with a higher price...
shooter
It might be out of your budget, but it's objectively not out of line when compared to similar products and it's feature set plus R&D costs.
Pre-ordering simply means you're in line to get the first ones in case there is too much demand. You put your name, and sometimes money, down, and you get yours before someone who saunters in the day of launch. It's neither a new concept, nor a complicated idea.
The price is not affected by people proclaiming interest online. That's now how this kind of thing works. If you're curious about it, you can take a marketing class, but the only thing that we as customers can do to affect it, is to keep buying it at MSRP which will prolong the time before street price drops. Forum posts are not going to "drive up costs".
I was excited because the X100 "was my idea".
jsrockit
01-17-2011, 12:33
The longer I don't see it, the less I desire it. My GF1 is doing a heck of a job and with the LX5 as a constant carry around... the X100 is not that exciting to me anymore.
Even though I quoted you, this is directed at you. I just wonder why so many keep saying they aren't excited anymore? It seems just as exciting as it was when it was announced. Nothing they have unveiled about the camera has been something that makes it less desirable. Perhaps many didn't see it as a tool, but were more enamored by its looks?
How long before you think this will happen? I agree, and the thought is exciting, just curious if it's going to be 5 years or 10.
Νo idea, I guess it depends on the manufacturer. There's a school of thought that says the aim is to make the product that makes you the most money, not necessarily the best product you can make. So even if you have the technology to make a camera that is 3 steps ahead of the competition, you shouldn't. You would milk your market way more efficiently if you do it gradually ie make something like the x100 now, then add full frame and call it an upgrade, then add a rangefinder and some megapixels, then make it pocket size and so on. This is the way of Canon.
Also what's the viewfinder on the XA like?
Sufficient. No parallax correction though.
Gentlemen never get overly enthusiastic, so I'm keeping my cool. ;) Everything I've read about the camera sounds interesting and promising. The little boy in me says 'gotta get that new toy, right now'; the adult in me says 'I first want to see pictures made with it and read first real-life reviews' before I'll definitely decide to buy.
But seriously, by being enthusiastic about the X100 and ruminating over it, we're doing Fuji's job of keeping the excitement up. If we do that even though Fuji doesn't make us do it, then that's viral marketing. Gooid job, Fuji.
Also what's the viewfinder on the XA like?
Minuscule, not very easily viewable for anyone with glasses, and doesn't have any parallax correction. It doesn't even come close to a Leica M or Hexar AF/RF viewfinder. I'm speaking of practical experience.
D90's sensor has a dynamic range of 12.5 EV. By pushing the default ISO to ISO 200, the sensor would lose almost 1 EV in dynamic range. Fuji's decision to push the default ISO from 100 to 200 was to hit max ISO of 12800 for spec sheets and bragging rights.
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/All-tested-sensors/Nikon/D90
This is definitely one of the reasons why I would hold on for sometime or maybe until X200. Also the reason for my loss of excitement.
As a b&w shooter dynamic range is everything for me.
jsrockit
01-17-2011, 14:08
Has it been confirmed anywhere that it is the same exact sensor as the D90? Also, there is nothing wrong with the sensor if it is that sensor... it's in the Leica X1 as well and all anyone ever says about that camera is that it has best in class IQ.
D90's sensor has a dynamic range of 12.5 EV. By pushing the default ISO to ISO 200, the sensor would lose almost 1 EV in dynamic range. Fuji's decision to push the default ISO from 100 to 200 was to hit max ISO of 12800 for spec sheets and bragging rights.
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/All-tested-sensors/Nikon/D90
This is definitely one of the reasons why I would hold on for sometime or maybe until X200. Also the reason for my loss of excitement.
As a b&w shooter dynamic range is everything for me.
While I agree that BW shooting benefits from high dynamic range, I think to believe that the D90 has a 12.5EV range is wishful thinking. AFAIK the D300 I use has the same sensor, and I'd say it delivers a 9.5 EV range, which is already pretty good.
Another fact to set straight: The D90's and D300's generic base ISO is 200. Reducing the lowest ISO value to ISO 100 in these cameras actually lowers their dynamic range (Nikon even states this openly in their operating manuals). So, let's just hold back a little about speculations on dynamic range and S/N ratio. Nobody has yet seen any pictures that are representative of the actual X100 performance.
While I agree that BW shooting benefits from high dynamic range, I think to believe that the D90 has a 12.5EV range is wishful thinking. AFAIK the D300 I use has the same sensor, and I'd say it delivers a 9.5 EV range, which is already pretty good.
Another fact to set straight: The D90's and D300's base ISO is 200. So, let's just hold back a little about speculations on dynamic range and S/N ratio. Nobody has yet seen any pictures that are representative of the actual X100 performance.
D90's base ISO is 100 and thats part of the dynamic range chart, so it means it was tested at ISO 100... And in the DXO ranking D90 sensor scores higher than D300s.
But then there is Nikon D7000 with a dynamic range of 14EV!
I'm past those stages of buying gear on a whim, now its serious business and i need to spend my limited funds very carefully... Had i been a color photographer, I'd get a GF1, but I'm a 100% b&w shooter and with film going the way of the dodo, i need to make my digital decisions more carefully.
Brian Sweeney
01-17-2011, 14:33
Brian, I can go with that. But, I don't understand the wild buzz for it.
(Then again I don't understand something like the Snooky phenomena, either).
SNOOKY: IS THAT A NEW LEICA ACCESSORY! What does it do!
Anyway, it's easy getting excited over stuff that you do not own, and it looks cool. The X100 has yet to prove its worth, but it certainly has set itself apart from the herd. Just the fact that it has a relatively Fast F2 Fixed-Lens makes it exciting for the "rest of us" that look beyond how many megapixels a camera has, and the Zoom factor of the lens.
videogamemaker
01-17-2011, 14:38
Has it been confirmed anywhere that it is the same exact sensor as the D90? Also, there is nothing wrong with the sensor if it is that sensor... it's in the Leica X1 as well and all anyone ever says about that camera is that it has best in class IQ.
No it hasn't, and even if it is the same sensor, the rest of the innards can have very different results. See the sony A900 vs the Nikon D3s, or the Pentax k-5 vs the Nikon d7000.
And I have yet to see a manufacturer alter the base iso of a sensor. If Fuji is setting it at 200, it's because the sensor's is 200. Nikon has done this, as have others.
And the D90's base sensitivity is 200. As per the DPreview spec sheet:
• Default: ISO 200 - 3200 in 1/3 EV steps
• Boost: 100 - 6400 in 1/3 EV steps
It's even listed on DXOmark's chart's that it's iso 200
wgerrard
01-17-2011, 14:47
I'm interested but not excited. That means I'll pay attention to the initial reviews, and more attention to actual user reports down the road.
It's good that it looks like cameras most of us here are accustomed to using. it will be much better if the controls are actually competent.
It's also good that the camera will apparently have a good viewfinder. Whatever technology makes that possible, however, won't be confined to Fuji for long.
I don't expect it to attract many rank amateur DSLR buyers.
No it hasn't, and even if it is the same sensor, the rest of the innards can have very different results. See the sony A900 vs the Nikon D3s, or the Pentax k-5 vs the Nikon d7000.
And I have yet to see a manufacturer alter the base iso of a sensor. If Fuji is setting it at 200, it's because the sensor's is 200. Nikon has done this, as have others.
And the D90's base sensitivity is 200. As per the DPreview spec sheet:
• Default: ISO 200 - 3200 in 1/3 EV steps
• Boost: 100 - 6400 in 1/3 EV steps
It's even listed on DXOmark's chart's that it's iso 200
Now the question is if the boost to ISO 100 is as good as the D90 and hits the max DR of the sensor I would have no complains but for that we have to wait and see... All Fuji had to do was release some sample images, but i guess thats still not possible less than two months from release.
jsrockit
01-17-2011, 14:55
Fuji can release all kinds of sample images, but they will all be under the best circumstances showing the camera in the best possible light. Really, I'd rather see review photos, since they are closer to reality.
videogamemaker
01-17-2011, 15:00
Fuji can release all kinds of sample images, but they will all be under the best circumstances showing the camera in the best possible light. Really, I'd rather see review photos, since they are closer to reality.
The only usefulness is possibly seeing corner sharpness, and the quality of the bokeh. The only aspects I would want to see before buying aren't going to be done till possibly months after, and that's DXOmark's analysis.
I wonder how one would go about finding out which sensor it is? Like how did people find out the Nikon D3s/x were the Sony a900/850 sensor? or the pentax k-5 using same as nikon d7000? Wish we could find out for sure if it's the d90 sensor or not beforehand.
This camera could be the ultimate street shooter until the other camera makers catch up, but that 'could be' is the problem.
I honestly don't understand either, seems like another wave of the usual hype. How many times have we seen this? Yes, it's *only* X currency units, but you still have to give them the money. How hard would it be to clone the leica III in a puck of *solid* plastic? 10 mpx and 45mm and a rangefinder, tiny screen for the histogram and durable buttons? 400 bucks and a decent raw converter, end of story.
berlincontemporary
01-17-2011, 15:32
... trust me not everyone is that excited
Heheee... :D Same here.
Now the question is if the boost to ISO 100 is as good as the D90 and hits the max DR of the sensor I would have no complains but for that we have to wait and see... All Fuji had to do was release some sample images, but i guess thats still not possible less than two months from release.
You're basing assumptions upon assumptions upon assumptions.
What I know:
1. Fujifilm have said this camera will have the highest DR of any of their cameras they've made. If it's higher than an s3/s5 it's going to be very good.
2. DXOmark is NOT the be all and end all of camera performance. Their 'test' results don't match real world results, and I have seen this firsthand.
jsrockit
01-17-2011, 16:16
How hard would it be to clone the leica III in a puck of *solid* plastic? 10 mpx and 45mm and a rangefinder, tiny screen for the histogram and durable buttons? 400 bucks and a decent raw converter, end of story.
$400? Keep dreaming.
The sad thing about this camera is that once it hits the shelves and multiple RFFers have it in their hands all this obsessive fun will be over! :D
What's next I ask?
So, why are you in this thread again?
To brighten your life with my extraordinary wit and humor?
.
$400? Keep dreaming.
Okay. (3 years, maybe 2)
Leigh Youdale
01-18-2011, 00:45
All this "excitement" reminds me most of the excitement pre-pubescent boys have when they get their first look at a girlie magazine and then let their imaginations take over. The reality is usually far removed from what they wish it or expect it to be.
Wait until you can get your hands on something real and save us the endless speculation.
videogamemaker
01-18-2011, 00:49
You're basing assumptions upon assumptions upon assumptions.
What I know:
1. Fujifilm have said this camera will have the highest DR of any of their cameras they've made. If it's higher than an s3/s5 it's going to be very good.
2. DXOmark is NOT the be all and end all of camera performance. Their 'test' results don't match real world results, and I have seen this firsthand.
DXOmark isn't the be all, end all, but it's consistent between sensors, and I trust their methodology more than anyone else on the internet, save myself. I personally haven't seen any real world results in my equipment or borrowed equipment that has gone against it. I don't make purchasing decisions solely on DXOmark, but I like the work they do and find their measurement's interesting. I certainly trust their un-biased measuring tools more than a person's fallible and most likely biased tests. Can you show an example of a measurement they have gotten wrong?
As for point 1, that's what makes me think maybe it's not the d90 sensor. The problem is that the d90 maintains great dynamic range all the way to ISO 3200. Several of these new cameras that have crazy dynamic range at base ISO drop off far too quickly for my tastes. So the x100, if it has a different sensor than the d90, might indeed have 15 stops of DR at iso 100, which would be beautiful, but I want to still have 10 at iso 1600 like the d90 sensor.
I don't care much at all about noise, I'm fine with a grainy image. I want to be able to lift shadows, increase volume via contrast, and see into highlights, even when I need to boost the ISO dial. Greedy? yes. Possible with a few sensors on the market right now? Certainly. I just want to know how it stacks up against those others.
videogamemaker
01-18-2011, 00:52
All this "excitement" reminds me most of the excitement pre-pubescent boys have when they get their first look at a girlie magazine and then let their imaginations take over. The reality is usually far removed from what they wish it or expect it to be.
Wait until you can get your hands on something real and save us the endless speculation.
Well, it should remind you of child-like excitement. There is nothing wrong with anticipation and having a bit of fun while waiting for something you want. Far too many adults have killed every aspect of fun in their lives.
As for "saving you from endless speculation" you can do that yourself very easily by not reading this forum till after the launch date. Interesting how that works, no? Unless you're also here because you're excited and want to see if there is new information, in which case you're not only being condescending, but also a hypocrite.
I don't expect it to attract many rank amateur DSLR buyers.
Why they would consider X100 as alternative?
It haven't got impressive 18-55 zoom, and it doesn't look like a serious camera like DSLR does. With DSLR it's possible to use the best lenses on market (even if kit zoom is all one will ever use). We all know those tricks trying to fool potential buyers with fake retro design!
And finally, DSLR has pop-up flash which is better than next-to lens as on X100. Yeah, I've read raised flash is way better! It doesn't matter it's still positioned directly at subject.
When time to shell out good chunk of dollarettes comes, many say - wait, should I? Personally I know feeling how highly desired photographic piece of gear transforms into "just camera/lens". So far I haven't experienced strong buyer's remorse, but you get idea :)
...
So the x100, if it has a different sensor than the d90, might indeed have 15 stops of DR at iso 100, which would be beautiful, but I want to still have 10 at iso 1600 like the d90 sensor.
I don't care much at all about noise, I'm fine with a grainy image. I want to be able to lift shadows, increase volume via contrast, and see into highlights, even when I need to boost the ISO dial. Greedy? yes. Possible with a few sensors on the market right now? Certainly. I just want to know how it stacks up against those others.
All of this sounds nice, but is somewhat contradictory in itself:
DR is defined by two limits - saturation (one of the color channels at a value of 255 in an 8-bit file) at the upper end and a certain - excessive - S/N value at the lower end (this is where digital noise overrides any available shadow detail). So, DR is essentially is dependent on the definition of the acceptable S/N ratio at the lower end. This also explains the various and contradicting DR values one can read in different reviews.
Apparently you don't mind noise in the shadows - this makes me think you have little experience with digital cameras: Digital noise looks very much different from analog grain (different distribution in location, size and structure), and once you'll be confronted with it, I'm sure you won't like it. I usually add simulated film grain (noise) in Photoshop whenever I have noisy shadows. It goes without saying that this goes at the expense of shadow detail and thus DR.
A quality compact with a bigger than compact sensor.
A quality fixed lens, pancake.
At last a decent viewfinder!
And with all the manual control possibilities.
Yes. I'm excited!
DXOmark isn't the be all, end all, but it's consistent between sensors, and I trust their methodology more than anyone else on the internet, save myself. I personally haven't seen any real world results in my equipment or borrowed equipment that has gone against it. I don't make purchasing decisions solely on DXOmark, but I like the work they do and find their measurement's interesting. I certainly trust their un-biased measuring tools more than a person's fallible and most likely biased tests. Can you show an example of a measurement they have gotten wrong?
DXOmark lists these cameras as having better DR than the Canon 5d:
D80
alpha 100
canon g12
40d
s95
d40x
k200d
km
d60
50d
d200
500d/t1i rebel
60d
k10d
gh1
d300
d90
I've had personal experience with some of these, and there's no way that they even get close to 5d DR in real life. Some - in particular the canon g12 powershot and s95, and also the older dslr models like the d80, k10d, d200, 40d, d60, d40x & alpha 100 are just laughable...
videogamemaker
01-18-2011, 03:04
DXOmark lists these cameras as having better DR than the Canon 5d:
D80
alpha 100
canon g12
40d
s95
d40x
k200d
km
d60
50d
d200
500d/t1i rebel
60d
k10d
gh1
d300
d90
I've had personal experience with some of these, and there's no way that they even get close to 5d DR in real life. Some - in particular the canon g12 powershot and s95, and also the older dslr models like the d80, k10d, d200, 40d, d60, d40x & alpha 100 are just laughable...
It shows them as having higher DR.... wait for it... at iso 100. Even at ISO 200 the pocket cameras already fell behind, and by 800 the rest (save the d90) trail behind as well. This is possible and believable with newer sensors. I shoot with a 5D, trust me. I love the sensor and wouldn't trade it for any of the above cameras purely because of how flat the DR curve is as the ISO goes higher. I still trust their measurements. I had a 40D before the 5D, and I found it to compare to the 5D exactly how their curve displays. similar at iso 100, less at 800 and 1600. This went from "I've experienced the inaccuracy in real life" to "there is no way these inferior cameras are as good as mine". That's the bias that makes me distrust the other review sites, and trust DXOmark's measurements via machine, cold, calculating, uncaring, brand agnostic, machines.
DR is defined by two limits - saturation (one of the color channels at a value of 255 in an 8-bit file) at the upper end and a certain - excessive - S/N value at the lower end (this is where digital noise overrides any available shadow detail). So, DR is essentially is dependent on the definition of the acceptable S/N ratio at the lower end. This also explains the various and contradicting DR values one can read in different reviews.
Apparently you don't mind noise in the shadows - this makes me think you have little experience with digital cameras: Digital noise looks very much different from analog grain (different distribution in location, size and structure), and once you'll be confronted with it, I'm sure you won't like it. I usually add simulated film grain (noise) in Photoshop whenever I have noisy shadows. It goes without saying that this goes at the expense of shadow detail and thus DR.
I've only shot with digital, but I've been spoiled by having a 5D. Lifting shadows is not a problem. Pixel peeping might make the noise look ugly, but in print it's fine. For example I have printed this shot (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mr_chompers/5278991260/in/set-72157625721185954/) (iso 1600) at a size of 90x120 cm on canvas and the noise is inoffensive to me, and I did a fair bit of shadow lifting and highlight adjustment for maximum dynamic range to fit into the readable image.
There is no use mentioning 255 values unless speaking of jpegs. Raw files have far, far more than 255 levels per channel, closer to 64,000 values if I remember correctly. Useless difference till you start adjusting curves and exposure masks, dodging and burning, etc. But since I do lot of that, I care about DR in the raw files.
All I know is that the 5D scores well on DXOmark, and my personal experience using the files at all ISO's lines up with their score. And when comparing the files shot from other, more poorly scoring cameras, I notice their lack of DR, particularly at higher ISOs.
This is neither here nor there, as we don't know what sensor is in the X100, and even if we did, we don't know if their particular implementation is better or worse than Nikon's with the d90. I will have the camera in hand far before DXOmark gets around to testing it, but at that point I'll look at how my experience lines up with their scores. I expect it to line up quite well.
It shows them as having higher DR.... wait for it... at iso 100. Even at ISO 200 the pocket cameras already fell behind, and by 800 the rest (save the d90) trail behind as well. This is possible and believable with newer sensors. I shoot with a 5D, trust me. I love the sensor and wouldn't trade it for any of the above cameras purely because of how flat the DR curve is as the ISO goes higher. I still trust their measurements. I had a 40D before the 5D, and I found it to compare to the 5D exactly how their curve displays. similar at iso 100, less at 800 and 1600. This went from "I've experienced the inaccuracy in real life" to "there is no way these inferior cameras are as good as mine". That's the bias that makes me distrust the other review sites, and trust DXOmark's measurements via machine, cold, calculating, uncaring, brand agnostic, machines.
Well, not that it will make any difference to your view, but I've owned and used the d300 and have used a work-friends d90 regularly, as well as a g11 powershot, and IMO none of those have the same DR, even at base ISO, even if you compare iso 100 (base iso) on the 5d to iso 200 (base iso on the nikons). It's not a case of bias, otherwise I'd probably be using the other cameras instead. I really value DR.
videogamemaker
01-18-2011, 03:35
Well, not that it will make any difference to your view, but I've owned and used the d300 and have used a work-friends d90 regularly, as well as a g11 powershot, and IMO none of those have the same DR, even at base ISO, even if you compare iso 100 (base iso) on the 5d to iso 200 (base iso on the nikons). It's not a case of bias, otherwise I'd probably be using the other cameras instead. I really value DR.
You're right, it doesn't make a difference. Because it's individual observation with a single body of each, it could be those were faulty samples, it could be you look for more DR in shadows and they have more in the highlights or vice versa, or it could be bias you're unaware of. D'Nile is not just a river in Egypt.
Short of buying or borrowing a copy of every new camera that comes out, one needs to rely on online reviews at least in small part, to determine performance. The DXOmark review site is consistent and professional, and I've yet to see anyone demonstrably prove with examples their inaccuracy. Until I do, it remains far more important to me than someone assuring me it's incorrect from personal anecdotal and unscientific observation. They also work with the raw files only, vs the heavy weighting DPreview gives to jpegs (though they are getting better about showing raw results).
Now for yourself, I absolutely advise you to pay attention to your own opinion more than mine, not that I need to say that, really. I'm just saying I'm going to stick with DXOmark and my own personal observations.
My original statement was you can't properly quantify IQ with number measurements, thats all. If you disagree, thats cool - we're both probably just as excited for this camera to come out, and for the same reasons. My intention wasn't/isn't to call you out on your opinions.
videogamemaker
01-18-2011, 03:46
My original statement was you can't properly quantify IQ with number measurements, thats all. If you disagree, thats cool - we're both probably just as excited for this camera to come out, and for the same reasons. My intention wasn't/isn't to call you out on your opinions.
I agree with this post completely.
jsrockit
01-18-2011, 04:31
My original statement was you can't properly quantify IQ with number measurements, thats all.
Wait, you mean we are supposed to go out and photograph instead? :D
M4streetshooter
01-18-2011, 15:13
I never said it was out of my budget just that it's at a too high price point for hype. Maybe in fact it will live up too everyones expectations but it's still too high.
I may buy it if it delivers and if it doesn't, than of course I wouldn't. The price is being fixed by the pre-orders. They have no reason to bring it in at $1000.00 if it's already selling for $1200.00.
That's my point. I bought 2 M8's on release and had the biggest letdown ever. I've been a Leica shooter for over 40 years and those cameras broke my heart. I'm not setting myself up again nor will let anyone else either...
Don
It might be out of your budget, but it's objectively not out of line when compared to similar products and it's feature set plus R&D costs.
Pre-ordering simply means you're in line to get the first ones in case there is too much demand. You put your name, and sometimes money, down, and you get yours before someone who saunters in the day of launch. It's neither a new concept, nor a complicated idea.
The price is not affected by people proclaiming interest online. That's now how this kind of thing works. If you're curious about it, you can take a marketing class, but the only thing that we as customers can do to affect it, is to keep buying it at MSRP which will prolong the time before street price drops. Forum posts are not going to "drive up costs".
All this talk of dynamic this at that, a great photo is a great photo and a little noise in the shadow areas will not change that. Sure, some of us may go 'ooh nasty' but the other 99.99% will still go 'ooh pretty'. There is a point where everyone turns something into something else, and we are all guilty of turning photography in a tech fest based around numbers and not enough shooting great pictures. I'm guilty of this.
So, back to the X100. It excites me because it's going to be a small, well-made, stunning looking camera which will finish my collection. I shoot with my DSLR on the street and never have a problem with people getting ticked off, so imagine how close I can get with something that looks like it came from the 60's. I'm very excited, and anything that gets me back to the streets is perfect in every way as far as I'm concerned, and the shadow noise wont stop me.
videogamemaker
01-19-2011, 00:48
I never said it was out of my budget just that it's at a too high price point for hype. Maybe in fact it will live up too everyones expectations but it's still too high.
I may buy it if it delivers and if it doesn't, than of course I wouldn't. The price is being fixed by the pre-orders. They have no reason to bring it in at $1000.00 if it's already selling for $1200.00.
That's my point. I bought 2 M8's on release and had the biggest letdown ever. I've been a Leica shooter for over 40 years and those cameras broke my heart. I'm not setting myself up again nor will let anyone else either...
Don
Being willing to wait and see because of past burns have nothing to do with a product being too expensive. The "hype" has nothing to do with the cost point. It was never going to come in at 1,000. "Some dude" at the fuji booth said something that was blogged, tweeted, and posted on forums as gospel, getting people's hopes up, it was never announced at that cost. I personally took it to mean "around 1,000, and not 2,000 like the X1" and it was accurate in that regard.
As someone who has worked at a company where we make price points for new products, it just doesn't work the way some of you think it does. The price point was decided long before anyone on the internet has heard about it. The only psychological aspect taken into mind is the general price points for products.
There is no product even remotely similar coming in at 1,000, not even feature wise, and that discounts the construction and new technology.
X1? more expensive with less features
Nex? no 35mm f/2 equiv with autofocus, and even getting 35mm f/2 drives the price over the x100 and makes it much larger/heavier with still no viewfinder.
m4/3? smaller sensor with less dynamic range, more noise, and if you add in the viewfinders and fast lenses takes the price up to parity with the x100
P&S are all inferior sensor size and DR noise, and only a select few have an f/2 lens at 35mm equiv, none of which have usable optical viewfinders
All this talk of dynamic this at that, a great photo is a great photo and a little noise in the shadow areas will not change that. Sure, some of us may go 'ooh nasty' but the other 99.99% will still go 'ooh pretty'. There is a point where everyone turns something into something else, and we are all guilty of turning photography in a tech fest based around numbers and not enough shooting great pictures. I'm guilty of this.
No one is going to disagree with you that a great photo is a great photo regardless of technical merits. The question is, if you could have two revisions of an otherwise identical camera, one with huge amounts of dynamic range to work with, and one with neutered dynamic range, which would you prefer?
Some of us enjoy the digital darkroom as much as the act of taking photos, and having a strong, high quality image file that can withstand massaging is important to those of us like that. If I didn't care, I would be fine with a canon point and shoot, as their out of camera files are fine if you don't do anything to them. I want a large sensor specifically for the inherent-to-larger-sensors-at-this-point-in-technology aspects. In all likelihood this means the x100 will have a great image quality for the sheer basis that it uses an aps-c sized sensor, so you're right we are maybe getting too hung up on this aspect, but dynamic range is important when choosing a tool to go out and make those hopefully great photos.
Being willing to wait and see because of past burns have nothing to do with a product being too expensive. The "hype" has nothing to do with the cost point. It was never going to come in at 1,000.
There is no product even remotely similar coming in at 1,000, not even feature wise, and that discounts the construction and new technology.
X1? more expensive with less features
Nex? no 35mm f/2 equiv with autofocus, and even getting 35mm f/2 drives the price over the x100 and makes it much larger/heavier with still no viewfinder.
m4/3? smaller sensor with less dynamic range, more noise, and if you add in the viewfinders and fast lenses takes the price up to parity with the x100
IN the UK, the fact the price has gone up over £1,000 makes it less attractive. You can get deals on the GF1 for under £500 now (it was £650, complete with the 20mm, a few weeks after launch). It's still a great camera, but over £1,000 will make it more of a niche product.
videogamemaker
01-19-2011, 01:24
IN the UK, the fact the price has gone up over £1,000 makes it less attractive. You can get deals on the GF1 for under £500 now (it was £650, complete with the 20mm, a few weeks after launch). It's still a great camera, but over £1,000 will make it more of a niche product.
Here in Iceland it will probably be even more than that, but vagaries in smaller markets (I know it hurts, brits, but you're not the economic super power you once were) isn't really something you can ding Fuji HQ for.
Isn't there a thread in this very forum quoting £899? Where are you seeing over 1,000?
I agree though, that after a certain point it becomes a bit ridiculous till prices come down. I think maybe I fall into the more dollars than sense category someone was mentioning earlier, as I'm in regardless of launch price.
Leigh Youdale
01-19-2011, 01:38
Well, it should remind you of child-like excitement. There is nothing wrong with anticipation and having a bit of fun while waiting for something you want. Far too many adults have killed every aspect of fun in their lives.
As for "saving you from endless speculation" you can do that yourself very easily by not reading this forum till after the launch date. Interesting how that works, no? Unless you're also here because you're excited and want to see if there is new information, in which case you're not only being condescending, but also a hypocrite.
Well, I can agree with the first paragraph, but the second one seems a trifle aggressive in a thread where people have been asked several times not to make personal attacks. No I'm not excited, just interested and somewhat amused at the way the thread develops which is my reason for reading it. As for the rest of your response, I'd prefer to ignore it.
Here in Iceland it will probably be even more than that, but vagaries in smaller markets (I know it hurts, brits, but you're not the economic super power you once were) isn't really something you can ding Fuji HQ for.
Well done on keeping the atmosphere friendly and positive!
videogamemaker
01-19-2011, 01:51
Well done on keeping the atmosphere friendly and positive!
It was meant in a light hearted way. Text is hard to convey that, my apologies if you took offense. The point still stands though. They set prices based on major markets, America, Japan, Germany/euro-zone, etc on down the line based on purchasing power. The fact of the matter is, they probably didn't consider UK prices as their top priority and allow the Fuji UK division decide it based on exchange and market costs. That's assuming even that it is over 1,000 pounds.
videogamemaker
01-19-2011, 01:53
Well, I can agree with the first paragraph, but the second one seems a trifle aggressive in a thread where people have been asked several times not to make personal attacks. No I'm not excited, just interested and somewhat amused at the way the thread develops which is my reason for reading it. As for the rest of your response, I'd prefer to ignore it.
So, comparing those of us excited (of which there are obviously several) to "pre-pubescent boys" isn't aggressive or insulting?
Roger Hicks
01-19-2011, 06:56
So, comparing those of us excited (of which there are obviously several) to "pre-pubescent boys" isn't aggressive or insulting?
Well, there are 'early adopters' and 'premature adopters'...
Fortunately there's a great deal of humour and gentleness (not to say gentillesse) on RFF, so most people, most of the time, tend to put the most charitable interpretation upon posts at which others take offence.
We can all be thin-skinned at times, but if we stop and think "What do they probably mean", it's often easier to put up with apparent arseholes. And for real arseholes -- well, that's why there's an 'ignore' option.
Cheers,
R.
DXOmark lists these cameras as having better DR than the Canon 5d:
D80
alpha 100
canon g12
40d
s95
d40x
k200d
km
d60
50d
d200
500d/t1i rebel
60d
k10d
gh1
d300
d90
I've had personal experience with some of these, and there's no way that they even get close to 5d DR in real life. Some - in particular the canon g12 powershot and s95, and also the older dslr models like the d80, k10d, d200, 40d, d60, d40x & alpha 100 are just laughable...
At DXO sensor chart both Leica M9 and Sony NEX score 66. Now that is something to be upset about.
To the question of dynamic range, Kodochrome had a DR of 8 EV. So, technically its surpassed by almost every digi p&s.
Brian Sweeney
01-19-2011, 07:49
Well, fair to say that my excitement over this camera has been compared with the Minolta Hi-Matic 9. I bought it in 1969, when i was 12. Spent the whole Summer mowing lawns for $80 to get it. Back when mowing a lawn netted less than a dollar per yard.
So, the statement about being excited like "pre-pubescent boys" is accurate in my case. I am sure that is why the person stated it. It feels kind of good, recapturing that feeling.
Think I'll load up the Hi-Matic 9.
Roger Hicks
01-19-2011, 07:54
Well, fair to say that my excitement over this camera has been compared with the Minolta Hi-Matic 9. I bought it in 1969, when i was 12. Spent the whole Summer mowing lawns for $80 to get it. Back when mowing a lawn netted less than a dollar per yard.
So, the statement about being excited like "pre-pubescent boys" is accurate in my case. I am sure that is why the person stated it. It feels kind of good, recapturing that feeling.
Think I'll load up the Hi-Matic 9.
Elegant, Brian!
But I hadn't realized I was 7 years older than you. In 1969 (at 19) I got my first Leica: £30 ($72 at the then exchange rate) for a 1936 IIIa. Though I'd first handled a screw-mount Leica in a shop at 16 or 17, and a school friend had had one when I was 17 or 18.
Cheers,
R.
tapesonthefloor
01-19-2011, 08:33
Well, fair to say that my excitement over this camera has been compared with the Minolta Hi-Matic 9. I bought it in 1969, when i was 12. Spent the whole Summer mowing lawns for $80 to get it. Back when mowing a lawn netted less than a dollar per yard.
So, the statement about being excited like "pre-pubescent boys" is accurate in my case. I am sure that is why the person stated it. It feels kind of good, recapturing that feeling.
Think I'll load up the Hi-Matic 9.
This is such a good post.
And for real arseholes -- well, that's why there's an 'ignore' option.
Does the expression "pot, meet kettle" mean anything on that side of the pond?
M4streetshooter
01-19-2011, 12:48
Being willing to wait and see because of past burns have nothing to do with a product being too expensive. The "hype" has nothing to do with the cost point. It was never going to come in at 1,000. "Some dude" at the fuji booth said something that was blogged, tweeted, and posted on forums as gospel, getting people's hopes up, it was never announced at that cost. I personally took it to mean "around 1,000, and not 2,000 like the X1" and it was accurate in that regard.
As someone who has worked at a company where we make price points for new products, it just doesn't work the way some of you think it does. The price point was decided long before anyone on the internet has heard about it. The only psychological aspect taken into mind is the general price points for products.
There is no product even remotely similar coming in at 1,000, not even feature wise, and that discounts the construction and new technology.
X1? more expensive with less features
Nex? no 35mm f/2 equiv with autofocus, and even getting 35mm f/2 drives the price over the x100 and makes it much larger/heavier with still no viewfinder.
m4/3? smaller sensor with less dynamic range, more noise, and if you add in the viewfinders and fast lenses takes the price up to parity with the x100
P&S are all inferior sensor size and DR noise, and only a select few have an f/2 lens at 35mm equiv, none of which have usable optical viewfinders
Well, I'm sure your right and I admit that I must be wrong. Regardless, as uninformed as I am, it's still too much $ at $1200.00 USD.
All I do is make photos. This camera has the potential for me as it maintains my NATURAL FOV. I could use it forever and never feel the need for another focal length...but it's still too high.
I was told that it would come in at $999.95 by a Fuji Distributor.
To keep peace on the forum, as Brian is a great guy, I'll rest at this point and stay a gentleman!
Brian Sweeney
01-19-2011, 14:41
You collect enough old cameras, collect old brochures, and are just plain old...
I chose the Polaroid Land Cameras, the 100 series. New technology, pack film instant prints! 1965 prices.
When new, my Model 180 Polaroid without Flash listed for $190. Beautiful Zeiss finder corrected for field-of-view and Parallax, Seiko Shutter, 114mm F4.5 Tominon lens- 4-element glass, all manual exposure.
As per the online inflation calculator:
What cost $190 in 1965 would cost $1278.48 in 2009.
Now my Polaroid 180 has the filters, close-up lenses, flash, fitted leather system case, CDS shoe-mounted meter, and cable release. We're talking over $250 in 1965 era money. Is it a fair comparison? Top notch fixed lens, great viewfinder, full manual control, instant pictures. Then and now.
Latecomer
01-19-2011, 16:48
Seems reasonable, but the Hexar AF might correspond even more closely in function. Can anyone calculate the price corrected for inflation?
Apparently the Hexar AF was £600 in 1998. According to the inflation calculators that brings it up to about $1260-1300us in current money, which is really very comparable to the fuji x100.
edit: Especially so when you consider the limitations of the hexar - it's shutter tops out at 1/250th, there's no full manual mode, and it's essentially just a light box - the x100 has a sensor in it.
ZeissFan
01-19-2011, 17:34
Back in the day, a lot of people used to buy stereo gear purely on specs. While Klipsch by far were the loudest speakers I'd heard, I didn't feel that they were great speakers, which it came to reproducing music with accuracy.
And among the Japanese, Yamaha made the best speakers, distantly followed by the others, which I think you could categorize as crap: Sony, Sansui, Kenwood, JVC, Pioneer, Aiwa, Technics (Panasonic), etc. But they sold a lot of them. To be fair, I'd never listed to any Nakamichi speakers, so perhaps they shouldn't be tossed into the "crap" pile.
I preferred American speakers. At the time (1979-80), I went for a pair of Infiniti Quantum Jr. over Bose 901s, which I thought were overrated. My roommate had some Advents, which were very good for two-ways. He eventually ditched those for a honking big pair of Dahlquist panel speakers, which were two feet wide and about six inches deep.
So what's the point of this babbling nonsense? I think we should judge the final product by the images that it makes and not get too worked up over specs. Certainly, it should be a good camera, but it's still just a camera. Just like a vendor that shows up at your company doorstep, pitching their software that will revolutionize the industry, once that check is signed and the luster has worn off, it might not be as great as that 10-minute demo in the conference room.
And the marketplace will judge whether the price is too high and whether the image quality matches the hype.
Regardless, this is like the early days of digital with an extreme amount of pre-release hype that probably will be followed by post-release anticipation of the successor model.
...I think we should judge the final product by the images that it makes and not get too worked up over specs.
Crazy talk! Then we'd have to rant about politics & religion instead, and where would THAT lead...
R!
tapesonthefloor
01-19-2011, 18:30
I really want to twist this thread into a conversation about golden-era high-volume prog-rock reproduction now. I spent many an evening growing up lying on the floor in front of my dad's Canadian-made Sound Dynamics 2-ways as he spun all the best of the decade's studio rock. But I won't. But I am blaming ZeissFan for almost throwing the thread off-track. Carry on.
Not excited, haven't read any specs and have no intention of getting it.
shashinka-ichiban
01-19-2011, 19:33
I'm excited by the X100 simply becasue I can finally get an auto focusing camera with an aperture ring and a speed dial.
Ok so while you wait.. you can look at it... or worst, put it on wallpaper.. ;-)
http://a.yfrog.com/img640/6249/nvizi.jpg
I preferred American speakers. At the time (1979-80), I went for a pair of Infiniti Quantum Jr. over Bose 901s, which I thought were overrated.
British speakers of that era were very good, too. I ended up with a pair of ADS L-810's but Mission made a similarly-speced speaker that was also very nice. I still have the 810's nearly 30 years later, so I guess it was money well-spent. :)
Brian Sweeney
01-20-2011, 06:48
What! "Fujinon Lens System" is a Two-Element Formula lens!
http://www.ziforums.com/picture.php?albumid=183&pictureid=1736
Now my Walz 35 shows a 7-element in 3 group Sonnar formula! Engraved right on the Top Plate.
I hope they engrave the Top Plate with the actual formula of the lens, for that really-retro 1950s look.
I was wondering why the X100 shutter button is so big and shiny? The on and off button is incorporated in it.
Edit: I need more coffee.
Every time I see this camera I just want it out. I need to hold it, a G1 with a sensor. I'm a happy boy. If I get the job I went for today I'll buy two. :)
TimothyHughes
01-26-2011, 19:03
The biggest reason is that I just don't carry my camera around enough. I prefer doing lit, planned photo shoots, and in those instances I have no problem schlepping around wheeled cases of lights, stands, tripods, multiple large lenses and a big honking dslr over my shoulder. Lately though, I've been wanting to do more casual walk around shooting.
Well said. I think the X100 will make a very cool walk-around and travel camera.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.