Why I sold my X100

[bhop73]

Originally Posted by photomoof

You cannot set the focus without turning on the camera and looking at one of the finders, since the focus ring has no distance scale on it. My street habits always required setting focus before raising the camera to my eye. I walk into focus, or let the subject walk into focus.

I get it -- of course one can make the bloody thing work, I can make my Samsung TV with its 80 button control work, but I don't like it much.

You can turn it on, look at the focus scale that exists on the rear lcd to set it, then turn it off again.. there you go, pre-set with a lot less fiddling than a Samsung TV remote.

[jsrockit]

photomoof... you're not going to win this one... you're better off not coming to this thread...for your health.

I get exactly what you mean... by the way.

[paulfish4570]

but you weren't in charge, 'moof, just like i wasn't in charge. if you want it, you want it; if you don't, you don't. i'm no snap shooter, so it is fine by me. you are a snap shooter, so it is not.
but i do like your style and passion. perhaps someone out there is seeing these posts ...

[eurekaiv]

Hi new here and just found this thread. As someone who recently sold their x100 I figured I'd chip in. My sale was 2/3rd for financial reasons and 1/3 becuase I found the camera frustrating to use in the types of situations I wanted to use it in most. I still really liked the camera as it gave me some absolutely stunning photographs—many some of my favorites ever—but my results in poor light showed banding and were very often missing the moment do to focusing issues. So instead of holding onto a 1K investment (money I could use to buy xmas gifts for the family) I decided to abandon digital almost totally and go back to the old Pentax UC1 P&S and extensive Nikon SLR kit I used in the 90s. Now I'm getting not only a larger number of keepers then I ever did shooting digital, I'm also spending less time fiddling with them in PS (which is what I already do for a living) trying to make them look like a nice film shot. And since I'll always have my D80 around for when I need a quick well lit result for a sale ad or something, I have yet to miss the x100 one bit. Good camera though I think, even despite its shortcomings.

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by eurekaiv

Now I'm getting not only a larger number of keepers then I ever did shooting digital, I'm also spending less time fiddling with them in PS (which is what I already do for a living) trying to make them look like a nice film shot.

I'm curious... which film are using that you are getting better results in low light than the X100?

[eurekaiv]

I'm not really shooting film in low light as of yet and have been shooting a variety of different films in all sorts of situations. I bought the x100 hoping to do more photography in less then ideal lighting. Outside of banding on a lot of the ISO1600 and above photos, I was generally pleased with the results I got. The comment you quoted is more a general thought regarding the number of photos I might like out of a given shoot. For example, the last two 36 exp. rolls I ran through my MF Nikon SLRs (an FE2 and FG) yielded about 30 shots I really liked. Typically I would find that I was getting 5 or 6 out of the Fuji even after having taken 100 photos. Now there's all sorts of reasons why that might be but for me personally, I think it's becuase with film, I take more time to stop, think and compose the shot visualizing in my head what I want and expect it to look like and then try and do my best with the equipment to end up with that result. With digital, I tended to just point the camera and shoot pretty much everything and anything and then weed through the results later and use Photoshop to create a photograph I liked. So as it stands right now, I'm really enjoying just taking my camera out and trying to make the best photos I can, and frankly, I appreciate the simpler and more mechanical feel of the equipment as well.

[gavinlg]

Interesting... I've never seen banding on photographs from my x100. And I've used it up to iso 5000 in super dark concert environments.

For instance:

iso5000

[celluloidprop]

I've seen banding if I heavily push 'fill light,' but only at absurd levels.

[peripatetic]

Originally Posted by eurekaiv

—but my results in poor light showed banding and were very often missing the moment do to focusing issues.

That's very odd. I have never heard of anyone complaining of X100 banding. May I ask what monitor and calibration tools you use? A large percentage of banding issues are monitor related, and not present in the image itself.

Or perhaps you just had a defective camera.

[35mmdelux]

I almost got an X100, then as I was about to pull the trigger I decided to throw down for the Nikon F6, an incredible machine.

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by eurekaiv

For example, the last two 36 exp. rolls I ran through my MF Nikon SLRs (an FE2 and FG) yielded about 30 shots I really liked. Typically I would find that I was getting 5 or 6 out of the Fuji even after having taken 100 photos.

30 out of 72 shots were keepers?

5 or 6 out of 100 sounds more reasonable to me...

[viramati]

used it the right situation the x100 is one of the best cameras out there. I use it continually in conjunction with my M9 when I want totally silent operation and autofocus shooting from the hip. If you learn how to use this camera it will become your best friend. like any camera it has it's limitations, learn them and appreciate the camera for what it can do that others can't. I really can't understand modern photographers who think their cameras should also make the tea and cook the breakfast. Have a look at my flickr and 500px work and you will see what this little gem can do. I love it