Fuji x100

[capricorn]

Hi guys,

 

Is anyone thinking about getting one of those cute cameras?

 

 

I just love the old-fashioned Leica look this thing has and the 35mm f/2 lens is perfect for the kind of pictures I take (street photography, low light, people, some architecture and landscapes).

 

I've owned DSLRs, I currently have the new Nikon D5100 with the stock 18-55 VR lens and a 35mm f/1.8 as well, a camera I chose because of its smaller size and good image quality (on par with the D7000) but the sad thing is that although I don't mind carrying a camera bag when I'm out shooting landscapes, I just hate having to carry a big camera when I'm on a night out on the piss and looking for pussy. As a result, I end up taking most of my nights in Patts and girls shots with my phone camera

 

The x100 isn't really compact but it seems much more practical and discreet for people and street photography and can be easily carried in a man's purse.

[kopite]

I've played around with this and tbh for a £1000 it's not really all it's cracked up to be, or at least I don't think so anyway. If I was going to spend that much id get an SLR. There are far better options out there for half the price, eg sony nex, panasonic GF1/2, Olympus EPL/EP....

 

If you are after that retro look then check out some of the the Olympus micro 4/3 system cams.

 

 

 

[jojo90]

I've been thinking about getting one for a few weeks now. I have a GF1 + 20mm f1.7 & a zoom however anything above ISO 400 doesn't look great. Also the dynamic range on the GF1 is poor compared to a DSLR. I started looking at some X1 user groups on flickr and the thing that bugs me is a lack of decent bokeh from the lens. At that aperture/focal length you need to be reasonably close to the subject to get a nice blurry background. Sure bokeh isn't the be all and end all of photography but none the less it is an important creative tool. I then looked at images shot with my Nikon primes and came to the conclusion that the 35mm f1.8 is much better . It's not really all that portable not in the S90/95 league at all. There is a new Olympus compact out with a low aperture zoom that looks very interesting.

 

Have said all that I'll probably still buy one because it's pretty .

 

EDIT: Just to add it's a 23mm f2.0 lens, yes I know 35mm equivalent on full frame, but in terms of lens characteristics it's a 23mm f2.0 hence poor bokeh!

Edited June 18, 2011 by jojo90

[kopite]

Jo jo have you seen the sony nex5? Gotta be the best bang for buck APS-C camera out there right now. Good for bokeh too, although my gripe with that is no physical mode dial. As far as low light performance goes I don't think there is anything else in the micro 4/3rds or compact system cam that can match it. I loved the GF1 but Panny seems to be dumbing things down for consumers. Less buttons and dials, more i auto mode BS for lazy point and shoot customers. On the GF2 they took out the dial and put in some shoddy excuse for a touch screen. The GF3 doesn't seem any better either so I think im going to abandon them altogether given the route they are taking.

 

I think my next camera will be either the nex5 or Samsung NX100 follow up model.

 

BTW The Oly XZ-1 is also a decent choice. Point and shoot but full manual control good depth of field too. f1.8 I think. Although video is shyte.

[jojo90]

Jo jo have you seen the sony nex5? Gotta be the best bang for buck APS-C camera out there right now. Good for bokeh too, although my gripe with that is no physical mode dial. As far as low light performance goes I don't think there is anything else in the micro 4/3rds or compact system cam that can match it. I loved the GF1 but Panny seems to be dumbing things down for consumers. Less buttons and dials, more i auto mode BS for lazy point and shoot customers. On the GF2 they took out the dial and put in some shoddy excuse for a touch screen. The GF3 doesn't seem any better either so I think im going to abandon them altogether given the route they are taking.

 

I think my next camera will be either the nex5 or Samsung NX100 follow up model.

 

BTW The Oly XZ-1 is also a decent choice. Point and shoot but full manual control good depth of field too. f1.8 I think. Although video is shyte.

 

Hiya! Yes I thought about the NEX5.. and as soon as Sony releases a decent prime for it I'll likely buy .

[The Mentalist]

What's a mans purse?

 

Men don't carry purses.

[capricorn]

What's a mans purse?

 

Men don't carry purses.

 

We fashionable metrosexual Europeans do

 

Something like this:

 

[Harlequin]

I've got the X100 - love it! Yes, its expensive, but I've found it turns out some amazing shots (particularly in low light at high ISO) - the in camera rendering of the JPG is very very good - I shot a batch in RAW+JPG and ran them through Aperture - to be honest it took a lot of effort to better the JPG (with the exception that I still think I get better contrast in the RAW). However, as the RAW processor in Aperture and most other programs at the moment seems to be laking some refinement I'll wait and see what later versions of the RAW engine do to the picture. At the moment the high dynamic range that the X100 can shoot doesn't seem to be rendered properly by Aperture - and you need to play with the exposure, contrast, shadows, etc to get it nicely balanced. But this is all software - if I look at the quality from a normally lit shot I think it rivals the Leica X1, plus I get a decent view finder.

 

Its not a camera for everyone - but with this lens its a great photo-journalist tool - captures scenes beautifully (puts you in the picture so to speak).

 

I still have the 5D2 when the heavy artillery is required and - 'no' the X100 doesn't stand up to the 5D2 with 70-200 on it (unless you happen to be shooting at ISO 200+ - then, maybe)