Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Non Rangefinder Cameras > Digital Fixed Lens Advanced Compacts > Fuji X Fixed Lens

Fuji X Fixed Lens This forum is for fans of the rangefinder retrostyled Fuji X Series of digital cameras.

View Poll Results: X100 alternative focal lengths. Will it happen?
50mm equivalent 34 40.48%
85mm equivalent 7 8.33%
other. Tell us what you think below 27 32.14%
I used to be indecisive but I'm not so sure any more 21 25.00%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 84. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Old 09-26-2010   #51
bwcolor
Registered User
 
bwcolor is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: S.F. Bay Area
Posts: 2,313
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbg32 View Post
With so many different opinions, do we ever get what we want?
Yes, if they come through with what they have shown at Photokina.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-27-2010   #52
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is online now
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 41
Posts: 14,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbg32 View Post
With so many different opinions, do we ever get what we want?
Nope... despite hundreds of cameras being on the market at the same time, I never feel anyone gets it exactly right...
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-27-2010   #53
buzzkill58
Always learning...
 
buzzkill58 is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Jamestown, Ohio
Posts: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by MRohlfing View Post
Why not M mount?
I second that thought!
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2010   #54
schaki
Registered User
 
schaki is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzkill58 View Post
I second that thought!
There is already the Epson R-D1 with 1.5 multiplier. But yea, why not an other one, if Fuji can do it even better. The best would be FF then of course. I wouldn't be against a X100 with 28mm prime either.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2010   #55
Mephiloco
Registered User
 
Mephiloco is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: NOLA
Posts: 482
If the X100 does well I think Fuji would continue to do as they have done in the past with their Pro line of cameras. If they determine it'll be profitable, I'm sure they'll make a few models of different focal lengths, and maybe a ZI model with a zoom.

I think interchangeable lens is out of the question for the time being, it'd likely be a couple years down the road unless they'd already decided to create one regardless of how the X100 does.

Anyways, If they were to make an interchangeable body, what mount would it take? u4/3 is too small to cover the sensor, and pretty much everything else would be unnecessarily large and wouldn't balance well on the body. M-mount is an obvious no-no because they wouldn't stand to make money on the lenses, and by making it M mount you'd be dooming the camera to being a 'Leica alternative', thus alienating prospective buyers who dont already own Leica lenses or don't care for manual focus
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2010   #56
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
 
Frankie is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 755
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mephiloco View Post
If the X100 does well I think Fuji would continue to do as they have done in the past with their Pro line of cameras. If they determine it'll be profitable, I'm sure they'll make a few models of different focal lengths, and maybe a ZI model with a zoom.

I think interchangeable lens is out of the question for the time being, it'd likely be a couple years down the road unless they'd already decided to create one regardless of how the X100 does.

Anyways, If they were to make an interchangeable body, what mount would it take? u4/3 is too small to cover the sensor, and pretty much everything else would be unnecessarily large and wouldn't balance well on the body. M-mount is an obvious no-no because they wouldn't stand to make money on the lenses, and by making it M mount you'd be dooming the camera to being a 'Leica alternative', thus alienating prospective buyers who dont already own Leica lenses or don't care for manual focus
Designing or manufacturing a lens mount is not magic...despite fan clubs in each type. [I have even seen a 42mm screw mount home-made converted to bayonet by hand filing away alternate segments of thread [in body and lens]...just insert lens and twist a quarter turn.]

The issue is one of flange-to-sensor distance and business strategy:

Flange-to-sensor distance: SLR mounts are too far away...requiring thick body without a mirror box. The M-mount is 28mm, the u4/3 mount is 20mm and the NEX mount is 18mm. A shallower mount can be adapted to deeper mounts...essentially adding a metal shim ring. So, add 10mm for NEX and 8mm for u4/3 and the M-lenses will focus correctly.

I had carefully measured images of the X100 and had determined the flange-to-sensor distance to be 26mm.

Business strategy: If Fuji decides to make a new mount with diameter just smaller than the M...then an M-adapter is impossible, forcing new sales of Fujinon lenses. On the other hand, Fuji could easily made the mount diameter large enough so that a 2mm shim-ring adapter could be made...and Leica glass owners would be secretly very happy...but still denounce the camera.

Regardless, all in-camera automation would no longer function...and another round of M-fan criticisms.

If I were Fuji, I would simply make a new mount...and ignore the M-noises.

Last edited by Frankie : 10-09-2010 at 08:29.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2010   #57
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 20,449
The usual RFF fantasies: that they are going to sell a million of these cameras, and that a new line of telecentric lenses can be developed at no significant expense.

While I'd not be surprised to see a couple of variants -- ultrawide and short tele, 18 equivalent and 75 equivalent -- I'd be even less surprised if they don't appear. As for a 28 equivalent when there's already a 35 equivalent, well, dream on.

Purely commercially, imagine the expense to a dealer of stocking three slow-selling, expensive cameras instead of one. Why do you think Leica dropped the viewfinder magnification options, except la carte?

Cheers,

R.
__________________
Now even more free photography information on www.rogerandfrances.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2010   #58
Paul T.
Registered User
 
Paul T.'s Avatar
 
Paul T. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,775
Roger's telling us we're a very small tent. The cheek of it!
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2010   #59
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
 
Frankie is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 755
Careful measurement indicates the OVF could accommodate a 25mm equivalent FoV @ 90%. Wider yet if we accept 85% coverage...Leica style.

If longer focal lengths are offered, a screw-in eyepiece magnifier can be used. Adding a thread in the deep eyepiece well is simple enough...even Hong Kong suppliers offer Leica M-compatible 1.25X and 1.4X.

[I have not yet found a well-lit picture on the Internet showing the thread.]

In all cases, the EVF can take care of itself.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2010   #60
Tompas
Snarp-shooter
 
Tompas's Avatar
 
Tompas is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Ostfriesland - Northwestern Germany
Posts: 405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
The usual RFF fantasies: that they are going to sell a million of these cameras (...)
I bet they will. The uneducated masses, plagued by little boxes with tiny TV screens that marketing departments and press call cameras, will discover a revolutionary new technology: the viewfinder. And they'll buy. A lot. Of these cameras.

Call me a fantasist. I don't mind.

(I almost bought one of those boxen, too, a Samsung NX100 with a prime lens that I would have used with an optical viewfinder. As reported, Fuji's X100 -- notice the similarity of the names? -- will be less expensive than such a setup is. So I'll wait for the real thing.)
__________________
-- Thomas
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2010   #61
MRohlfing
Registered User
 
MRohlfing's Avatar
 
MRohlfing is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wien, Austria
Age: 60
Posts: 302
I own the 50 version of the X100 already

  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2010   #62
tlitody
Registered User
 
tlitody is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sceptred Isle
Posts: 1,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
The usual RFF fantasies: that they are going to sell a million of these cameras, and that a new line of telecentric lenses can be developed at no significant expense.

While I'd not be surprised to see a couple of variants -- ultrawide and short tele, 18 equivalent and 75 equivalent -- I'd be even less surprised if they don't appear. As for a 28 equivalent when there's already a 35 equivalent, well, dream on.

Purely commercially, imagine the expense to a dealer of stocking three slow-selling, expensive cameras instead of one. Why do you think Leica dropped the viewfinder magnification options, except la carte?

Cheers,

R.
Oh come on, these days delivery is so fast from importer to online retailer that online retailers don't need to stock. And since everyone is looking for a bargain they all buy online. They only use shops to look which is why they are all going bust except in major towns and cities. Pro cameras which are low volume items have always managed to sell in the past. And Canons and Nikons at twice or three the price are stocked and they aren't exactly fast selling items.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2010   #63
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
 
Frankie is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 755
There are camera maker[s] opening boutiques in places like West Palm Beach...and staffed with suck-up artists. The whole purchase experience is just ego-indulgence.

Then there are retailers who stock everything with demo models tethered on benches and let customers play with them...Tokyo mega-mart style.

Then there are Internet retailers who really are virtual store fronts drop-shipping goods when ordered.

Profit margins are different and old business models don't apply anymore.

Last edited by Frankie : 09-29-2010 at 05:00.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-24-2010   #64
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
 
rxmd's Avatar
 
rxmd is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Kyrgyzstan
Posts: 5,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie View Post
The issue is one of flange-to-sensor distance and business strategy
Flange distance is relevant only if they want to be able to adapt M-mount lenses. Speculating about flange distances is pointless, there is really no good business case M-mount - a lot of added complexity and cost, for the satisfaction of a very small group of customers, who also happen to be some of the most picky and easily-turned-off customers on the planet

Models with different focal lengths might be a possibility (Sigma did that), but as a number of people have pointed out the odds aren't good.

Live with it guys, in all probability it's not going to happen. Use sneaker zoom instead.
__________________
Bing! You're hypnotized!
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-24-2010   #65
damien.murphy
Damien
 
damien.murphy is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Waterford, Ireland
Age: 35
Posts: 505
My personal preference would be for a 50mm equivalent, and/ or a Tri-Elmar type effort of 28-35-50. I don't see the next Fuji variation (if there is one) of the x100 being an interchangeable model, as too much on the x100 has been tailored to the 35mm-equivalent lens, and most users would not be happy to see an APS-sensor model given that used M8's can be had for $2k.

I do think the profits from the x100 will make this a very buoyant segment for Fuji, and will provide a good baseline and warchest to pursue an interchangeable model, but given Fuji's preference in the past to shy away from interchangeable models I can't see them going down such a route with the x100.

Personally, I don't see why an interchangeable model is needed should Fuji produce fixed lens models to cater to most peoples needs. I know 35mm, 50mm, 90mm and/ or a tri-elmar wide model would not cater to ALL the market, but it would probably satisfy a good 80% of the market.

Frankly though, this is all presuming a lot, and who is to say Fuji will produce anything other than the x100, and my personal suspicion is that Fuji probably have not looked beyond the 35mm-equivalent x100 which will satisfy a decent chunk of the RF userbase.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-24-2010   #66
Naumoski
Registered User
 
Naumoski's Avatar
 
Naumoski is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 232
If the x100 concept is to be a fixed lens camera, than producing cameras with different focal lengths, for example - 24/35/50 etc, would mean producing 3 same bodies + 3 different lens. And would be less expensive for Fuji to produce 1 body with interchangeable lens mount, and it's less expensive to buy 1 camera + 3 lens, than 3 cameras + 3 lens, obviously.

We don't know their plans yet, or to which direction they want to focus - advanced P&S or cameras with interchangeable lens etc..?
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-24-2010   #67
J F Bland_Zeiss Ikon
Registered User
 
J F Bland_Zeiss Ikon's Avatar
 
J F Bland_Zeiss Ikon is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 6
Personal opinion - Fuji is kind of a fickle company. While they say they support film, they've used going green to cull the product line. While they manufacture film, their website no longer has film cameras, to the dismay of many. It feels like they've lost their way, or like many companies, they cater to their home market and pay lip service to their offshore satellites. The internal talk at Fuji is to press digital cameras, and they've been innovative with 3D models. As film sales have somewhat stabilized, they need digital to grow.

The EVF in the x100 looks like the heads up display in a fighter cockpit. This camera has a lot of innovations in it. The 35mm equiv. focal length makes a lot of sense, whether it's 40mm or 28mm can't make that much difference, but optimizing the system for image quality and utility does. With good optics, cropping and enlarging for the composition is a possibility.

Maybe we should look at this from Fuji's point of view. Filling a gap in the pro-sumer, pro line up. Charging a little more for convenience, nice features that cover a lot ground, light ,compact, dirt simple but almost a manual system and an aspirational price point. The early buzz is good. They know they were going to be compared to 4/3 and M mounts and opted to "perfect" the image chain to the majority of what they perceive as their target customers. Nobody really likes a Swiss knife approach, where everything works, but it's not optimal for anything. Here they said "x" marks and spot.

I say the x100 will evolve, but think that as others have stated, it may be individual focal lengths. There may be a lean way of doing the mfg. .

It's fun to watch.
__________________
James Frederick Bland Commercial Photography
Austin, TX
www.jamesfbland.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-24-2010   #68
Frank Petronio
Upwind of Rochester
 
Frank Petronio's Avatar
 
Frank Petronio is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Rochester, NY, USA
Posts: 1,905
Once they prove the concept, they'll probably use a similar viewfinder on a series of lower end zoom cameras that are more consumer friendly and profitable.

I've been off on this camera so far -- I called the price out at $2000 -- but my instinct is that these companies use their high-end cameras as beta test programs that guys like us will pay for, but what they are really aiming for is to sell 100x $500 cameras at Best Buy.

They probably figure that if they introduce the concept of a EVF rangefinder style to the consumer market, nobody will notice. By aiming at the more serious prosumer market they get proof of concept and lots of beta testers.

And sure, they know there is a pent-up demand for a camera like this, they'll sell out max production for the first six months unless the reviews are horrid.

Last edited by Frank Petronio : 10-24-2010 at 05:49.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-24-2010   #69
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 20,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Petronio View Post
Once they prove the concept, they'll probably use a similar viewfinder on a series of lower end zoom cameras that are more consumer friendly and profitable.

I've been off on this camera so far -- I called the price out at $2000 -- but my instinct is that these companies use their high-end cameras as beta test programs that guys like us will pay for, but what they are really aiming for is to sell 100x $500 cameras at Best Buy.

They probably figure that if they introduce the concept of a EVF rangefinder style to the consumer market, nobody will notice. By aiming at the more serious prosumer market they get proof of concept and lots of beta testers.

And sure, they know there is a pent-up demand for a camera like this, they'll sell out max production for the first six months unless the reviews are horrid.
Dear Frank,

They do? Where from? A few hundred people in places like RFF may say they'd buy one, of whom maybe 10% will find the money. Even if it's a few thousand with 10% sell-through, that's not many cameras by Fuji's standards.

I'm not saying the X100 is a bad idea. I'm hoping to get one for review. All I'm saying is that the excitement in some quarters may lead some people to hope for some things that are unlikely to happen.

Cheers,

R.
__________________
Now even more free photography information on www.rogerandfrances.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-24-2010   #70
wgerrard
Registered User
 
wgerrard's Avatar
 
wgerrard is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,513
The obvious answer to the question is that if initial X100 sales are high enough, Fuji might entertain the idea of releasing variant models. I'd guess that sales will reach that point only if Fuji can get mass market stores to carry the thing. I don't think they will because people will look at the camera and think "retro operation" as well as "retro look".

Many of the attributes most of us around here look for in a camera are precisely the attributes that turn off most consumers. That's why you won't see the X100 in very many of the big box stores. And that means the X100 will be invisible to the great mass of potential buyers.
__________________
Bill
-------------------------------------
This is my only legible signature.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-24-2010   #71
Frank Petronio
Upwind of Rochester
 
Frank Petronio's Avatar
 
Frank Petronio is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Rochester, NY, USA
Posts: 1,905
Why wouldn't the sales be at least as good as, say, a Canon G12? or a Leica X1?

My gut tells me that with 300,000 graduates of college photography programs in the USA alone, there is a large market of serious amateurs who would understand the advantages of this camera.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-24-2010   #72
tlitody
Registered User
 
tlitody is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sceptred Isle
Posts: 1,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by rxmd View Post
Flange distance is relevant only if they want to be able to adapt M-mount lenses. Speculating about flange distances is pointless, there is really no good business case M-mount - a lot of added complexity and cost, for the satisfaction of a very small group of customers, who also happen to be some of the most picky and easily-turned-off customers on the planet

Models with different focal lengths might be a possibility (Sigma did that), but as a number of people have pointed out the odds aren't good.

Live with it guys, in all probability it's not going to happen. Use sneaker zoom instead.
Why isn't it going to happen? They just released the GF670 and have announced the GF670W. Both will be lower volume sales than the X100 so why not the X100W or X100Tele ?
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-25-2010   #73
eddie1960
Registered User
 
eddie1960's Avatar
 
eddie1960 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 140
I don't think we'll see alternate models it fragments their market too much. Ultimately if it does well enough and the evil market continues to grow i could see it as a base for interchangeable lenses. I think this is just testing the waters myself. I do however imagine either fuji or an aftermarket chinese supplier will come up with converters to address the wide/tele market. I'm still interested as i think this could be a good walkabout camera if they get it right though i would have preferred a wider lens the 35 isn't bad (on my k10 i have an m 28 almost glued to it lately)
__________________
fed 5, Fed 4, 2x industar 61, jupiter 12, Konica EE ,Mamiya Super 23, Bronica etrsi, 4 lenses, Canon Z115 ($8 purchase), Lomo Fisheye 2,
K7, k10 w grip,ist ds, KM, MX, SV, 14 ass't lenses
Olympus E300 w the 2 lens kit
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-25-2010   #74
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
 
rxmd's Avatar
 
rxmd is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Kyrgyzstan
Posts: 5,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by tlitody View Post
Why isn't it going to happen? They just released the GF670 and have announced the GF670W. Both will be lower volume sales than the X100 so why not the X100W or X100Tele ?
Yours is about the only argument why it might happen, but my money is on accessory wide/tele converters. I wouldn't mind being wrong though.

Let them bring the thing to market first and then see how it actually sells.
__________________
Bing! You're hypnotized!
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-28-2010   #75
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is online now
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 41
Posts: 14,266
28mm version...
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:28.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.