Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 4 votes

The Fuji X100


  • Please log in to reply
75 replies to this topic

#61 aerobat

aerobat

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 541 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 03 August 2012 - 20:29

Hi Luc,

I also think the X100 will soon be replaced with an X200. The concept is great but the X100 was too much of a prototype for me.
I bought the X10 which is already improved upon the X100 in various areas. So the X200 should be great.
Let's hope they can improve the AF as well as the flare resistance of the lens.

Regards, Daniel

#62 Alan7140

Alan7140

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 5,327 posts
  • LocationTasmania, Australia
  • Edit my pics?:Ask Me

Posted 03 August 2012 - 22:15

Given that I cut my photographic teeth on my Father's Leica IIIc, I guess I eventually came to look at the X-100's idiosyncrasies with the same "get used to it" philosophy that the old Leica demanded as a matter of course. I've actually come to like its quirky behaviour and see no reason to hanker after an X-200, unless of course they plonk the X-Pro1's sensor in the replacement camera. That could be a deal maker.
  • BillM likes this

#63 Luc de Schepper

Luc de Schepper

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 1,751 posts
  • LocationHolland
  • Edit my pics?:Ask Me

Posted 04 August 2012 - 19:26

Optimist... :D

Did you look at the Xpro?, If yes, what did you think of it?

I didn't handle or shoot one but looked at zillion pics on the web. I'm tempted to buy one, but will probably wait for the second generation. The 35mm and 60mm lenses look great, that's for sure.

#64 aerobat

aerobat

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 541 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 04 August 2012 - 20:20

Hi Fred,

I'm spoilt as I grew up on a Nikon FM-2. A very simple and reliable non quirky camera. I've still got it toghether with my first photo teaching book. I'd still like an X100 with the bigger sensor than my X10. So if the X200 will be announced this autumn I guess my whishlist for xmas is already prepared.

Regards, Daniel

Given that I cut my photographic teeth on my Father's Leica IIIc, I guess I eventually came to look at the X-100's idiosyncrasies with the same "get used to it" philosophy that the old Leica demanded as a matter of course. I've actually come to like its quirky behaviour and see no reason to hanker after an X-200, unless of course they plonk the X-Pro1's sensor in the replacement camera. That could be a deal maker.

Attached Images

  • _DSC9603_NX_web.jpg

Edited by aerobat, 04 August 2012 - 20:51 .


#65 Luc de Schepper

Luc de Schepper

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 1,751 posts
  • LocationHolland
  • Edit my pics?:Ask Me

Posted 04 August 2012 - 20:24

Hi Luc,

I also think the X100 will soon be replaced with an X200. The concept is great but the X100 was too much of a prototype for me.
I bought the X10 which is already improved upon the X100 in various areas. So the X200 should be great.
Let's hope they can improve the AF as well as the flare resistance of the lens.

Regards, Daniel

Hi Daniel, rumors are the X200 will have a new sensor and improved buttons a la X-Pro1 so it should be an improvement over which is already a great camera. We'll know in September I quess (Photokina).

#66 aerobat

aerobat

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 541 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 04 August 2012 - 20:44

Hi Luc,

Thanks for the informations. Last week I shot a whole evening with an X100. To me the AF isn't the biggest problem and I could live with it. But I don't like the rendering of point lights by the lens.
Here an example: http://www.flickr.co...ol-1622174@N25/

As I like to shoot at night this is quite important to me. Is this an effect which can be often seen in pancake lens constructions?

Regards, Daniel

Hi Daniel, rumors are the X200 will have a new sensor and improved buttons a la X-Pro1 so it should be an improvement over which is already a great camera. We'll know in September I quess (Photokina).



#67 Alan7140

Alan7140

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 5,327 posts
  • LocationTasmania, Australia
  • Edit my pics?:Ask Me

Posted 05 August 2012 - 01:58

I can't reproduce that ghosting/double imaging of bare globes in a dark environment (my darkroom - yes, I still have one of those :) ) here with my X-100. Are you using a UV (or plain glass protective) filter? If yes, try taking it off in these situations.

Other than that I'll have another go here at night to see if I can reproduce this with my camera at more distance, but I've never noticed it before so I'm thinking it's something local to your camera.

Edited by Fred Nirque, 05 August 2012 - 02:00 .


#68 aerobat

aerobat

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 541 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 05 August 2012 - 20:24

Hi Fred,

Thanks for your test - much appreciated. I guess you're right. I never ever use any protective filter on my DSLR lenses, but all X100 I could try from friends had a protective filter on. This would explain the issue with the ghosting. I know that many X100 owners have a protective filter and leave the lenshood on all time. This may explain why also many shots on flickr show this kind of ghosting.
I'll try without filter the next time I can.

Regards, Daniel

#69 Luc de Schepper

Luc de Schepper

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 1,751 posts
  • LocationHolland
  • Edit my pics?:Ask Me

Posted 05 August 2012 - 20:43

I've collected my X100 images in this Flickr set
Maybe this helps anyone interested in this great little camera.

#70 Alan7140

Alan7140

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 5,327 posts
  • LocationTasmania, Australia
  • Edit my pics?:Ask Me

Posted 06 August 2012 - 02:06

No guarantees, Daniel, just a guess.

I have the vented lens hood attached to my camera all the time, and as this precludes using the lens cap without removal I've gone against a lifetime rule of always replacing the cap after use. Surprisingly after nearly a year I've never had to wet-clean the lens through inadvertently touching it or raindrops/drizzle hitting it. Seems that the lens is small enough and the hood big enough that nothing gets near the actual glass in normal use.

My other rule is to never use a filter unless there is no option (as with polarizers and other light-modifying filters). The UV filters are a hangover from film days when they actually served a purpose in cutting down UV light which B&W film was disproportionately sensitive to compared with what the human eye sees. Back then with uncoated or single-coated lenses this wasn't such an issue as a little extra flare or ghosting caused by the two flat glass surfaces didn't make much of a difference, however with all the modern advances in coating, putting anything - even a modern-coated protective filter - in front of all that technology is just asking for trouble IMO. I'd rather risk the occasional cleaning than have unpredictable things happen caused by a filter that really isn't included in the optical design spec of the lens.

These days there is no need for a UV filter of the old type on a digital camera anyway, which is why the marketing guys came up with the concept of "protective filter". Just a guess, but back then when it was mandatory to buy a UV filter with every lens, I can imagine that half or more of the filter sales would have been UV filters. Obviously the manufacturers were not going to give up that cash cow easily, so along came the "protective filter", which we all have to have (errr...not). :)

#71 pac

pac

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 450 posts
  • LocationUSA
  • Edit my pics?:Ask Me

Posted 06 August 2012 - 06:08

Sorry, accidental post. I answered my own question.

Dave

Edited by Fenwoodian, 06 August 2012 - 06:13 .


#72 aerobat

aerobat

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 541 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 07 August 2012 - 20:05

Thanks Luc for your wonderful pictures.
I guess any camera in your good hands would produce stunning images.
And yes the X100 is very attractive. I'll still wait to see if Fuji have an update.
In the meantime I enjoy my X10.

Regards, Daniel

#73 Luc de Schepper

Luc de Schepper

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 1,751 posts
  • LocationHolland
  • Edit my pics?:Ask Me

Posted 08 August 2012 - 06:12

Thanks Daniel, much appreciated.
Happy shooting with your X10, which is also a very nice camera!

#74 Luc de Schepper

Luc de Schepper

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 1,751 posts
  • LocationHolland
  • Edit my pics?:Ask Me

Posted 28 October 2012 - 21:23

X100, manual focus, f2.
Even wide-open this lens performs very good.

Posted Image

Edited by Luc de Schepper, 28 October 2012 - 21:24 .


#75 aerobat

aerobat

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 541 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 28 October 2012 - 22:41

Very nice Luc,

yes the lens is very good. Last week I was able to borrow an X100 from a friend and very much liked it. Coming from the X10 it was easy to operate.

Are you going for an X-E1 or do you keep the X100?

Regards, Daniel

#76 Luc de Schepper

Luc de Schepper

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 1,751 posts
  • LocationHolland
  • Edit my pics?:Ask Me

Posted 31 October 2012 - 13:54

Very nice Luc,

yes the lens is very good. Last week I was able to borrow an X100 from a friend and very much liked it. Coming from the X10 it was easy to operate.

Are you going for an X-E1 or do you keep the X100?

Regards, Daniel


Thanks Daniel.

For sure I will keep the X100, and keep on using it. Don't know about the X-E1 yet. At this time of year I go in "hibernation mode" from an active photographic point of view. More time spent on brushing up on photoshop skills and so. So I still have a few months to decide between a X-E1 of wait for the successor to the X-Pro1. I like the EVF/OVF combi so a forthcoming X-Pro2 would be nice.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users